Tip for passing NCT

Pkiernan

Bring tape and tool box with you!

I failed the NCT this morning for an imaginary sharp edge on a reflector and for a loose fog lamp housing.

Took me 40 mins to get back home and 10 minutes to fix - could have done it in the NCT car park!

On a shyty note, the NCT was only renewed for 6 months. It had expired in March 2012, but I was out of the country for 18 months. Even though the car has passed it's NCT today, it will expire one year after the last renewal date.

This seems a bit stupid to me - what if my NCT was 2 years out of date (10 year old car)? Following their logic, I would have to NCT it for the first year, and then immediately afterwards for the second year.

Our man in Havana

Had you waited 3 months more you would have gained a 15 month cert.

I just love the DOE system. It is a year whenever you do the test.

CiniO

Pkiernan wrote: »

Bring tape and tool box with you!

I failed the NCT this morning for an imaginary sharp edge on a reflector and for a loose fog lamp housing.

Took me 40 mins to get back home and 10 minutes to fix - could have done it in the NCT car park!

They failed me once on "incorrect nut assy".
Just one of wheel nuts was put the opposite way. He said it was a visual retest only so no fees. I asked if I could fix it now (it wouldn't take me more than 1 minute job to do it). He said that now they are closed (I was the last customer) so I can come tommorow.
For the sake of him waiting for one minute, I had to drive extra 80 kms

On a shyty note, the NCT was only renewed for 6 months. It had expired in March 2012, but I was out of the country for 18 months. Even though the car has passed it's NCT today, it will expire one year after the last renewal date.

This seems a bit stupid to me

Not only to you. It's the same stupid to me.
NCT should be issued for a year (or two) from date of the test.

what if my NCT was 2 years out of date (10 year old car)? Following their logic, I would have to NCT it for the first year, and then immediately afterwards for the second year.

NCT always goes by DUE DATE. So if you missed the whole period you can get it for next one. Also you can always do test up to 3 months before due date (or 6 months before first NCT when car is 4 years old)
So f.e. in your case while you did test now you got it only till March 2013.
But if you waited till December 2012 and done your test then, then you would get test cert until March 2014 (or March 2015) depending on your car age.

Jimdagym

I don't mind the nct validity period myself. If it ran from date of issue, no one would put it through till they were stopped. There has to be done form of incentive to get it done on time.

CiniO

Jimdagym wrote: »

I don't mind the nct validity period myself. If it ran from date of issue, no one would put it through till they were stopped. There has to be done form of incentive to get it done on time.

Issuing it till due date, no matter when test is done, causes some inconveniences.
OP is perfect example. He was away, he didn't use the car, and now he comes back, pays full price for the test, and instead of 1 or even 2 years, he gets only 5 months.

Other example is when vehicle is to travel abroad for longer time before NCT expiry.
If you are f.e. planning to go abroad for 6 months, and leave 4 months before NCT due date, there is no physical possibility to do the test (as it's too early), and during your stay abroad your NCT will expire.

For those two reasons DOE way of doing it, is way better.

And in relation to your argument - in most courtries in EU vehicles tests work like this (they are valid for a year or two) from date of the test. In Ireland it's different and it's always valid till set due date.
But if you compare statistics, I could bet Ireland would be among countries where there is the biggest number of not-tested vehicles on the roads.
So as you see, this system doesn't help anyway. It casues inconvenience and problems for some drivers, while on the other hand it doesn't solve the problem of untested cars. Seemingly there must be some other way of reducing nottested vehicles on the roads, and I think it already started recently.
It's the insurers, which altered their policies to make them invalid in case accident happeneds when car was not NCTed. There is more and more of them, and probably soon all inurers will follow this practice. Hopefully this will help solving the problem of not-tested cars.

kasper

Our man in Havana wrote: »

Had you waited 3 months more you would have gained a 15 month cert.

I just love the DOE system. It is a year whenever you do the test.

if the op waited another 3 months the test would have been done 9 months late not 3 months earley

CiniO

kasper wrote: »

if the op waited another 3 months the test would have been done 9 months late not 3 months earley

Both.
And therefore, as every test done 3 months early, entitles for NCT cert valid for the next year or two, OP would get it until March 2014 or 2015 (depending how old is his car)

Our man in Havana

That's not how the NCT treat it. They see it as 3 months early for the next test.

Jimdagym

CiniO wrote: »

Issuing it till due date, no matter when test is done, causes some inconveniences.
OP is perfect example. He was away, he didn't use the car, and now he comes back, pays full price for the test, and instead of 1 or even 2 years, he gets only 5 months.

The OP is responsible for the upkeep of his car. He could have arranged for it to be tested in his absence. He didnt, No problem, but the consequence of that is a shorter NCT cert

CiniO wrote: »

Other example is when vehicle is to travel abroad for longer time before NCT expiry.
If you are f.e. planning to go abroad for 6 months, and leave 4 months before NCT due date, there is no physical possibility to do the test (as it's too early), and during your stay abroad your NCT will expire.

I am not sure whether in this case you are talking about bringing the car or not. If not, same as above, you can get it tested in your absence, if bringing the car, well its not the most sensible travel plans to bring a car on a 6 month trip abroad if it hasnt been tested for roadworthyness in a while.

CiniO wrote: »

For those two reasons DOE way of doing it, is way better.

I fully admit this way causes inconveniences, I just dont see them being big enough to merit a change.

CiniO wrote: »

And in relation to your argument - in most courtries in EU vehicles tests work like this (they are valid for a year or two) from date of the test. In Ireland it's different and it's always valid till set due date.
But if you compare statistics, I could bet Ireland would be among countries where there is the biggest number of not-tested vehicles on the roads.
So as you see, this system doesn't help anyway. It casues inconvenience and problems for some drivers, while on the other hand it doesn't solve the problem of untested cars.

You are only guessing here, same as I would be. I am not going to get drawn into it without figures.

CiniO wrote: »

Seemingly there must be some other way of reducing nottested vehicles on the roads, and I think it already started recently.
It's the insurers, which altered their policies to make them invalid in case accident happeneds when car was not NCTed. There is more and more of them, and probably soon all inurers will follow this practice. Hopefully this will help solving the problem of not-tested cars.

AFAIK the claims have been denied when the lack of NCT was a possible contributor to the accident, not just that the car wasnt certified, but either way, I applaud the measure. I also see this as the best way of reducing the number of untested cars. I would however like to see a grace period of say 4-6 weeks after the cert lapsed before insurers started washing their hands of claims, to allow for backlog of testing. With the 3 months early, this allows 4-4.5 months in which to test the vehicle, which is more than enough IMO.

I understand a lot of people disagree with me. Fair enough. Thats how I see it. I say this as a driver of an 11 year old car who pays for an annual test.

CiniO

Jimdagym wrote: »

The OP is responsible for the upkeep of his car. He could have arranged for it to be tested in his absence. He didnt, No problem, but the consequence of that is a shorter NCT cert

In saying that you are missing the whole point of car testing.
It's there to increase chances that no one is driving a complete banger on the road. If OP didn't use his car for a long while, there was no need for NCT.
Now he did the test which proved his car is roadworthy, and he should be treated like anyone else to get this test valid for a year (or two).
Unfortuantely because of stupid rules, he only got few months.
I've done the test last month and I got 15 months valid cert. He's done it now and he got 5 months. All that difference just because we did test in different time of the due-date calenar of our cars. That's not the fair system.

I am not sure whether in this case you are talking about bringing the car or not. If not, same as above, you can get it tested in your absence, if bringing the car, well its not the most sensible travel plans to bring a car on a 6 month trip abroad if it hasnt been tested for roadworthyness in a while.

Sorry, I should have specified - I meant case when someone is taking car abroad.
You say that it's not sensible travel plans to bring a car on a 6 month trip abroad if it hasn't been tested for roadworthiness in a while.
But that's what I was saying about. If someone is so unlucky to be leaving f.e. 4 months before NCT due date, you can't just do NCT. Earliest you can do it is 3 month. So in this case regulations generally prevent someone for going abroad with his car for longer than 3 months in the worst case.
And it actually not only applies to NCT. There is plenty of stupid things like that. F.e. driving licence can be renewed only 3 months before expiry. So if your licence is meant to expire in July, but you go abroad for a year in Januray, you will end up without a licence, as in Januray you can't renew it. Also (non-motoring matter but) EHIC (european health insurance card) is the same - you can renew is only 3 months before expiry date - so the same case for the document that you really need when you go abroad within EU.

My point is, that f.e. with DOE you can do it anytime, even if you old one is still valid.
So for example - you have your DOE expiring on May 2013. You are planning to drive abroad for 10 months on January 2013. So even though you DOE is valid until May, you go in January 2013 to DOE centre and do the test. And you get a cert valid until January 2014, which perfectly covers your travel plans.

You are only guessing here, same as I would be. I am not going to get drawn into it without figures.

I'm guessing indeed, but I also have direct comparision.
When I used to live in Poland, I wouldn't know anyone who would be driving without valid test. In Ireland I know plenty of people who do.
Even if you take a random walk through the city and look at the discs, there is plenty expired NCT ones.

AFAIK the claims have been denied when the lack of NCT was a possible contributor to the accident, not just that the car wasnt certified, but either way, I applaud the measure. I also see this as the best way of reducing the number of untested cars. I would however like to see a grace period of say 4-6 weeks after the cert lapsed before insurers started washing their hands of claims, to allow for backlog of testing. With the 3 months early, this allows 4-4.5 months in which to test the vehicle, which is more than enough IMO.

I think there is no need for any grace period, but NCT should be possible to do anytime, and always valid for a year (two) from date of test.

Jimdagym

I could reply but I dont think we will change each others mind. Anyway, there's no point talking to me, I am missing the whole point of car testing :pac:

Mar4ix

nct - money making rocket, wouldn't yous agree with that ? why op have to pay for nct after 5 months ? this is not about penalizing people driving without NCT tests, or buying car without test, and find themselves in such situations.... it is just the way get some MORE money. simply as that.

galwaytt

CiniO wrote: »

. Seemingly there must be some other way of reducing nottested vehicles on the roads, and I think it already started recently.
It's the insurers, which altered their policies to make them invalid in case accident happeneds when car was not NCTed. There is more and more of them, and probably soon all inurers will follow this practice. Hopefully this will help solving the problem of not-tested cars.

No they won't. A similar premise has been tested in court before, on the issue of claims involving unlicensed driver's, and the insurer's lost. Iirc the court ruled that once a Cert has been issued under the RTA, then the insurance can't be rescinded by the insurer. In the event of loss, the insurer has recourse to sueing, in a civil action, to recoup monies, but that's it. Iirc there was mention of not allowing people being open to prosecution for no insurance whilst holding a Cert irrespective of licence.

NCT, or the lack thereof would not be allowed to 'disallow' cover for the same reasons, I believe.

Our man in Havana

Correct.

Once an insurer issues a cert they are on the hook for all 3rd party claims. They can sue whoever they like for recovery afterwards.

CiniO

OK but it wouldn't make much difference for me then, whether I had to pay directly for third party for whatever damage I caused to them, or would my insurer pay and then recover this money from me.
I would end up the same bad.

Our man in Havana

Yes but without a criminal record for not having insurance.

CiniO

Our man in Havana wrote: »

Yes but without a criminal record for not having insurance.

True. I didn't think about that.
But to be honest I wouldn't worry that much about my criminal record if I had to fork out 200k for someone's claim:rolleyes:

mossiefitz

good idead for passing the nct test guys, really helpful

Yawns

CiniO wrote: »

True. I didn't think about that.
But to be honest I wouldn't worry that much about my criminal record if I had to fork out 200k for someone's claim:rolleyes:

Yeah as has been said the insurance company will need to re-coup costs from you in a civil matter. Generally they don't because they need to fork out money for solicitors etc which will be more of an added expense for a risk that they may not got anything. They simply decide it on a numbers basis and if it looks like it might drag out and cost a bomb, they won't bother pursuing you.

1 other point is, if they were allowed to void a policy due to lack of NCT, it wouldn't have ended there. Speeding, running red light, crossed a solid white line etc all soon would have fallen under a policy void clause. It was a very clever ruling that put an end to any ideas like that.

corktina

Mar4ix wrote: »

nct - money making rocket, wouldn't yous agree with that ? why op have to pay for nct after 5 months ? this is not about penalizing people driving without NCT tests, or buying car without test, and find themselves in such situations.... it is just the way get some MORE money. simply as that.

why is obvious...if they gave a full year every chancer in the country would be leaving it out of date for three months before every test, same as they do with the tax

Leopold.

Question about NCT expire date, if the NCT cert states 8 Jan 14,can you rearrange the test date to the 20 th of january?

Would you get into trouble with the law if caught in between these dates or could you say you are waiting for the test date.

mickdw

Leopold. wrote: »

Question about NCT expire date, if the NCT cert states 8 Jan 14,can you rearrange the test date to the 20 th of january?

Would you get into trouble with the law if caught in between these dates or could you say you are waiting for the test date.

You can book that now for any date you can get.
You could have booked it up to 3 months early too.
While you should have booked early to ensure you were never out of test, I can't see you having an issues if you have a date booked that is so close to the expiry date

biko

Old thread lock. Start a new thread if need be.