Cleaning up the NCT, your ideas?

Atlantic Dawn

Rather than post at the end of the Prime Time thread I thought I would start a new one with ways the NCT process could be cleaned up.

The main issue to me seems to be that the current system allows for the tester to handpick what cars they wish to test and so can then pre arrange with the car owner that they will look after the test for them at whatever time it's booked in for. It is clear that there is more than one person in each test centre allowing the cars to be handpicked and so it may be from the top that the problem is. A system needs to be put in place where the cars to be tested each day are randomly assigned to a tester and on every NCT certificate issued it should say "Test Assigned To:" "Test Carried Out By:" where the details of those who the test was assigned to and who ran the test are issued and if a pattern of dodgy cars emerge it can be tracked back to the tester and also to the person who should have run the original test and it can be shown that a number of people in a test centre were on the fiddle.

Anyone got any other ideas?

Drummerboy08

The best thing that could ever happen to the NCT scheme is to allow any garage actually open an NCT centre, much like a DOE centre.

cianof

Make clocking illegal.

NCT by mileage not just year.

So every 2 years or every x,000 miles or which ever comes 1st. Just like in the haynes manual.

Current setup is a system to get the most amount of money out of the motorists pocket as possible.

TestTransmission

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

The best thing that could ever happen to the NCT scheme is to allow any garage actually open an NCT centre, much like a DOE centre.

surely that'd make things worse and open to more corruption

robtri

TestTransmission wrote: »

surely that'd make things worse and open to more corruption

i agree, there where huge issues in th UK with their MOT's when they did this... some seriously fecked cars where on the roads including cut and shuts and had valid MOT's

Drummerboy08

TestTransmission wrote: »

surely that'd make things worse and open to more corruption

If it's regulated properly I can't see it being a problem.

Any DOE centre I deal with will not even entertain the idea of letting a commercial through if it should go through, because they are regularly spot checked by inspectors.

Joey the lips

I dont know at the moment but considering the program i imagine they are going to be a lot more strict on failings for the next while.

Again the poor sould is hammered for the con artist.

I dont know if i agree with garages doing it and i certainly dont agree with performance stats.

alias no.9

Any car that is the subject of an attempt to obtain a corrupt certificate is crushed regardless of worth or condition

TestTransmission

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

If it's regulated properly I can't see it being a problem.

Any DOE centre I deal with will not even entertain the idea of letting a commercial through if it should go through, because they are regularly spot checked by inspectors.

Are the NCT currently spotchecked at all?

EL_Loco

A roaming inspector that will arrive, pull a passed car out of the group, retest it themselves. If the initial operator passed it but the inspector didn't, yellow card for that employee, happens again in subsequent random testing, they're out on their ear.

some variation of that, the inspector might always be present doing spot checks, so every day a few cars are getting 2 tests. Yes a little longer, but at least the cert itself is credible, and any law abiding driver will want a cert to be worthwhile.

Drummerboy08

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

If it's regulated properly I can't see it being a problem.

Any DOE centre I deal with will not even entertain the idea of letting a commercial through if it should go through, because they are regularly spot checked by inspectors.

The MOT in the UK is very much open to passing cars that shouldn't. Now not a serious issue safety wise but when I lived there a lad I worked with mot'd every year in his friends garage with a de-cat for instance no problem.

Doyler92

TestTransmission wrote: »

Are the NCT currently spotchecked at all?

I would say they are, but not near often enough.

listermint

Quite simple, retests should be carried out at random by a central tester / body. To assess a previous testers work. The retested vehicle could be a dud vehicle bought by the operator or could be a random vehicle whos owner is offered a free next NCT test in return for follow up.

This random testing is performed on every tester once a month / 2months.


This sort of scrutiny would near eliminate this sort of carry on.

slinky2000

They should just get tough with regular audits, and fine the garages that fail, like said above

evosteo

3 inspectors sacked today, RTE News at 6

Reloc8

listermint wrote: »

Quite simple, retests should be carried out at random by a central tester / body. To assess a previous testers work. The retested vehicle could be a dud vehicle bought by the operator or could be a random vehicle whos owner is offered a free next NCT test in return for follow up.

This random testing is performed on every tester once a month / 2months.


This sort of scrutiny would near eliminate this sort of carry on.

I don't think it would actually - in this format at least. The problem identified is bribery/corruption as I understand it. Re-testing an honest punters car or testing a planted dud would simply test competence (another days work).

In point of fact what they need to do is what every agency vulnerable to bribery/corruption/dishonest does - 'mystery shopper' types employed by the supervising agency who present vehicles and offer bribes.

The mere threat of such a thing coupled with a statement of intent to have offenders prosecuted would have a seriously chilling effect on NCT employees - the vast majority of which will of course prove to be honest and decent types -who might consider a back hander.

Idbatterim

the idea of random retest of car that has just passed is a good idea, also how about whistle blowers being financially rewarded, if their allegations are proved correct?

Squirrel

I haven't posted on Boards in a long, long time. I'm back :pac:

I think there should be a database highlighting things like the Civic failed at 8am and 6 hours later had a clean bill of health, just so someone else in the centre could follow up on it. The retest being done so soon should be a give away.

Maybe for retests they should get two inspectors? I know it doesn't stop dodgy people bribing their way to a first time pass, but any retest will definitely be done right with two testers. Especially on stuff like emissions where they can just pull the probe out early, or under vehicle inspection it could work

taintabird

TestTransmission wrote: »

Are the NCT currently spotchecked at all?

The aa and the rsa check them periodically but I dont think they have a clue either. They should hand the test over to vosa who run the doe.

taintabird

Heres a thought if every one maintained their cars correctly there would be no problem because they would pass if not first time certainly with very little work

People are focussing too much on retests I think.

Squirrel

RoverJames wrote: »

People are focussing too much on retests I think.

Only thing I can think of for the first time test is to remove the human input into the computer, but doesn't quite work for the under carriage, and can be gotten around by removing the probe say, or using hand/foot brake as they said on Prime Time.

Perhaps it should take average readings and instantaneous readings for the emissions test and there shouldn't be too big a discrepancy from each reading to the next with the car at idle, if there is a sudden drop off (indicating possibly removing the probe early) it signals for another attempt at it, by another tester say

Harrocks

Robots are able to build cars,so why not test them aswell.

Squirrel

Harrocks wrote: »

Robots are able to build cars,so why not test them aswell.

Where I see this falling down is the visual inspections, and that cars are different sizes and shapes and so they would need to be overly complicated to even just move around the car, unless they're manually moved. Huge cost will see the cost of the NCT rocketing

taintabird

Squirrel wrote: »

Only thing I can think of for the first time test is to remove the human input into the computer, but doesn't quite work for the under carriage, and can be gotten around by removing the probe say, or using hand/foot brake as they said on Prime Time.

Perhaps it should take average readings and instantaneous readings for the emissions test and there shouldn't be too big a discrepancy from each reading to the next with the car at idle, if there is a sudden drop off (indicating possibly removing the probe early) it signals for another attempt at it, by another tester say

The emission test isn't carried out at idle its carried out at 2500 rpm or a speed dictated by the manufacturers specification's and yes there would be a variation if the vehicle was left at idle for a while before testing.

staker

What I don't understand is there any company here in Ireland that could take on the whole contract rather than the set-up as it is?
Probably got to do with start-up overheads,but that infrastructure is already in situ now.

Delegate a "Michelin Star" type team where commendations would be awarded to the specific VTN centre and make this info available to the public.
As a customer I'd be taking my car to a higher graded test centre,provided the prices are uniform across the board.

The onus would be on the test centre to provide the best service possible.

Probably riddled with flaws,but if there were a competitive edge for business,that could only end up good for the punter imo.

Squirrel

taintabird wrote: »

The emission test isn't carried out at idle its carried out at 2500 rpm or a speed dictated by the manufacturers specification's and yes there would be a variation if the vehicle was left at idle for a while before testing.

I didn't know it was at a higher revs. I had meant a large variance over the readings with a sudden drop off as if taking the probe out as it was what the whistleblower had said could be done. The variance already there wouldn't hit the levels of the probe having being removed early, I think. Just trying to see if there's a way of automatically highlighting something that's a bit off, whether intentionally or not

Harrocks

Harrocks wrote: »

Robots are able to build cars,so why not test them aswell.

Squirrel wrote: »

Where I see this falling down is the visual inspections, and that cars are different sizes and shapes and so they would need to be overly complicated to even just move around the car, unless they're manually moved. Huge cost will see the cost of the NCT rocketing

The cost would be absolutely humongous.

Re the emissions test it should be quite easy to have the test done to that it is required for the probe to be reading a significant value for a set time after the test has been carried out, say 30 seconds, so the emissions are tested at set revs and once done the probe stays in the exhaust for another 30 secs after the car is returned to idle, if the probe is removed before that no test is actually logged. Wouldn't be a huge mission to set that up.

galwaytt

taintabird wrote: »

. They should hand the test over to vosa who run the doe.

VOSA ?

Wrong country, methinks.........

galwaytt

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

The best thing that could ever happen to the NCT scheme is to allow any garage actually open an NCT centre, much like a DOE centre.

Sorry, but no. Doesn't work in the UK, won't work here.

TestTransmission wrote: »

surely that'd make things worse and open to more corruption

I'm afraid so: all you need is one or two cowboys and the whole scheme is undermined. Wait, we already did that......... :rolleyes:

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

If it's regulated properly I can't see it being a problem.

Any DOE centre I deal with will not even entertain the idea of letting a commercial through if it should go through, because they are regularly spot checked by inspectors.

I admire your faith. But we ALREADY have an 'independant', ISO-audited, regulated test industry that can't cope with 46 test centres. And you think having 100's would work ? LOLOL.....

If ex-con's can keep their PSV licences on hardship grounds, what's the chances of a few very recently ex-NCT lads opening a garage and........voilá....becoming and 'independant' approved test centre......:rolleyes:

have we learned..........nothing ?

galwaytt

Idbatterim wrote: »

the idea of random retest of car that has just passed is a good idea, also how about whistle blowers being financially rewarded, if their allegations are proved correct?

So, your car is tested, and passes. 5 mins later some inspector re-tests.......and fails it. Can I have a 3rd go, and go for best-of-3 ?

What if.....your car is tested, and fails. Can I get a '2nd opinion' by having it re-tested by the 'inspector', and see if he concur's? And if it passes 2nd time around.......

.....will the Real NCT Cert please stand up.......... ?

Forget financial inducement for whistleblower's: protection, yes, reward, no, as motive for whistleblowing now comes in to play.

Capt'n Midnight

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

The best thing that could ever happen to the NCT scheme is to allow any garage actually open an NCT centre, much like a DOE centre.

how many garages have been caught clocking cars ?

do people trust the motor industry

how many people woud give the garage carte blanche to fix the car to get it through and how many garages wouldn't be tempted to milk that ?

jimmycrackcorm

One thing that would benefit would be to relax the criteria to pass the test to only that which truely affects the safety of the car and rigourously make sure that they are unable to to be bypassed.

taintabird

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

One thing that would benefit would be to relax the criteria to pass the test to only that which truely affects the safety of the car and rigourously make sure that they are unable to to be bypassed.

If they relax the criteria to pass the test any further they might as well abandon it altogether, if a car passes its test just on the limits set by the nct it is a long way from being in top condition. As for the argument against haveing a set up like the current doe system which is heavenly regulated and from experience of having had vehicles put through that system works very well I personally think that would be a much better arrangement. I think its perfectly clear to every one that the nct is a joke ant the front line program just highlighted that and unfortunately when you have human input there will always be the possibility of corruption at some level. But here's a thought why not maintain your cars properly as per the manufacturers recommendations and you wont have a problem with the nct, regular servicing that's the key and should be done when due not every two years for the for the test.

inforfun

I actually like the idea of independent test centres like they are here.
Where i am from it is the garages that do the testing and you ll be lured in with offers of a free test when servicing your car.
That for me i way more open for screwing the not so car savvy customer.



Thing is though there are still people at work at the test centres and people can "bought".
I dont think there is a way to get rid off fraud in NCT centres completely. It should be made impossible though for testers to handpick cars they test.