NCT a money racket?

Guffy

I did my test in April and failed. The report said I failed on shocks, bushings and wing mirror mount. Couldn't afford to get it fixed in the retest period so had to put it through again, fair enough.

So all the original problems were addressed but now it fails on the rubber on clutch pedal missing (which has been missing for last two tests) and the lights not signing straight. 28 euro to pull into the first station, check the lights and drive straight through!! It the whole station took 2 minutes to check everything needed yesterday. Ridiculous!

ba_barabus

Sounds like the NCT centre done its job to me

CiniO

gufc21 wrote: »

I did my test in April and failed. The report said I failed on shocks, bushings and wing mirror mount. Couldn't afford to get it fixed in the retest period so had to put it through again, fair enough.

So all the original problems were addressed but now it fails on the rubber on clutch pedal missing (which has been missing for last two tests) and the lights not signing straight. 28 euro to pull into the first station, check the lights and drive straight through!! It the whole station took 2 minutes to check everything needed yesterday. Ridiculous!

Fact that it passed a test twice with clutch pedal rubber missing means that guys at NCT makes mistakes sometimes too and miss something.

Lights not alligned properly...
Hmm - maybe getting your shocks and bushing changed, changed a height of front or rear suspension a small bit which made lights to be out of the limits.

biko

I don't think we've had a "I failed so the test is a money racket" thread in a few weeks now.

kona

biko wrote: »

I don't think we've had a "I failed so the test is a money racket" thread in a few weeks now.

He passed?

Hoffmans

Pure scam

biko

kona wrote: »

He passed?

Nah, he failed on alignment and pedal rubber this time.

Had he been able to afford the initial retest he wouldn't have failed as they would only have checked what he failed on first test.
Now he had to go for a full test again in which they check everything again.


My thoughts on NCT:
for a lot of Irish people this is the only time the car is actually inspected by a mechanic. They are happy to just fill with petrol and keep driving until something breaks in which case they act very surprised indeed.
As older people can tell you, before the NCT the amount of dangerous ****boxes on the roads were astounding. The NCT has fixed that.

Sin City

biko wrote: »

I don't think we've had a "I failed so the test is a money racket" thread in a few weeks now.

Ill be bringing my car to the NCT center in the next few weeks so prepare for another thread.:D

Guffy

ba_barabus wrote: »

Sounds like the NCT centre done its job to me

I. Think it may have come across wrong in text. I'm not giving out that I failed the test, I was venting at the fact I have to pay 30 euro for less than a minutes work.

ba_barabus

gufc21 wrote: »

I. Think it may have come across wrong in text. I'm not giving out that I failed the test, I was venting at the fact I have to pay 30 euro for less than a minutes work.

Thing is they have to book the lane, pay an NCT inspector, use equipment and also try and make a profit from it.

I think 30€ is reasonable

Guffy

ba_barabus wrote: »

Thing is they have to book the lane, pay an NCT inspector, use equipment and also try and make a profit from it.

I think 30€ is reasonable

Really? I mean if they had to mount the car fair enough but its at the first station, takes a minute no reason they couldn't drive in reverse out is there

ba_barabus

gufc21 wrote: »

Really? I mean if they had to mount the car fair enough but its at the first station, takes a minute no reason they couldn't drive in reverse out is there

Insurance risk would dictate that can't happen I'd imagine.

Its operated and run by a private company who are there to make a profit. It's not unreasonable to be charged 30€.

And don't forget the inspector has to go and print your details and do other admin work.

I think calling the whole process just a minutes work is understating things a little.

If you have a problem why not call them rather than posting anonymously about it.

There is a user here called NCTtester who can give a full breakdown of time and work involved.

Tails142

I think it is a money making racket and some of the staff working there are just terrible but it serves an important safety purpose and has improved safety on the roads overall.

My story is from years ago when the other company was running it. I had imported my car and driven it without an nct for two years, as when I imported it I would've only got a cert for a few months because it goes back to the date of manufacture and then I never bothered until the next two year period rolled around. over this time I went through many garda check points and my tax and insurance was looked at and nobody ever said where is your nct.

so when I did bring it for the nct it failed for excessive play on the offside rear wheel, fair enough I had noticed the tyre wearing more on that side, I though it was the bearing but the tester actually took me out to show me the part he suspected, brought it to the garage, replaced part for 300, 28 for retest, failed again on same problem, same tester he pointed out another part, brought to garage, 250 to replace this next part, garage weren't sure why it failed, 28 for another retest, brought it back, it was a different tester he didn't even check the wheel by trying to wobble it, just visual and it passed. grand I thought but the wobble was still there because I continued to burn through tyres in that offside and you could hear a ticking when the car rolled, I still think it was the bearing but the garage didn't think so.

anyway roll on two years later, I had been throwing money into the car but as a 10 year old bmw with high mileage it needed work. when I brought it into the next test there was a faulty wheel sensor tripping out the abs, a cracked air intake hose had the engine management light on and there was a problem with the rear Reg light wiring which meant it wasn't working and showed as a blown bulb on the dash. I said I would get it tested first so I could cut down on the number of trips to the garage and time off work and get all the problems sorted at once. I was half expecting to be told that I wouldn't be able to drive the car away and would need to get it towed to the garage because of the abs problem. There was also lots of suspension problems and I could see myself the bushings needed to be changed, the tyres were all wearing differently, the back offside wheel had actually worn down to the steel reinforcement after about 8000 miles before I saw and replaced it. Anyway I was expecting to be told the car needed a lot of work.

The car passed, not even a pass advisory.

So the moral of the story, it is pure luck of the draw and depends on which tester you get on the day.

ba_barabus

What's worse is you drove the car knowing the tyres were that worn. Never mind the rest of it.

kona

biko wrote: »

Nah, he failed on alignment and pedal rubber this time.

Had he been able to afford the initial retest he wouldn't have failed as they would only have checked what he failed on first test.
Now he had to go for a full test again in which they check everything

Then got retested and passed? And is complaining about paying the retest fee for the alignment along with different standards of inspection.

Guffy

Insurance risk? As you said its a private company they are going to charge me. I'm just venting my frustration with it. If you really have a prob with it being anonymous I'll give my details to anyone who asks

ba_barabus

gufc21 wrote: »

If you really have a prob with it being anonymous I'll give my details to anyone who asks

Nobody here wants your details.

I'm saying if you have a problem with the charge tell NCTS and try get something done about it.

Atlantic Dawn

Not many places if any in Ireland you can bring a car and get the level of testing done as is carried out by the NCT with detailed computer printout for €55, if anyone is aware of any I would love to know.

George Dalton

Everything is a money making racket if you choose to have a certain viewpoint.

Gumbo

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Not many places if any in Ireland you can bring a car and get the level of testing done as is carried out by the NCT with detailed computer printout for €55, if anyone is aware of any I would love to know.

+1

I am always of this view point. My car is a 99 so it's yearly, but for €55 I get a complete look over, bushings, suspension, leaks everything and as you say a receipt with date and mileage printed so it keeps up the full documented history on the car and makes it traceable on going.

It, in theory means you can simply drive a car and not worry about checking the major components yourself in between.

daingeanrob

kceire wrote: »

+1

I am always of this view point. My car is a 99 so it's yearly, but for €55 I get a complete look over, bushings, suspension, leaks everything and as you say a receipt with date and mileage printed so it keeps up the full documented history on the car and makes it traceable on going.

It, in theory means you can simply drive a car and not worry about checking the major components yourself in between.

i am the exact same a cheap look over the car. peace of mind is got from this (admitadly subjective) look under and around the car for faults by a mechanic.

CiniO

However I think it wouldn't be a bad idea if NCT guys if they discover incorrect lights allignment they should correct it.
Once they have car on testing lane already and have a device for measuring lights alignment in there setup to check the lights, then it's only a matter of 10 second to turn the screw to have lights corrected.
I can't understand why this can't be included in test.

I know everyone is going to say that NCT is not there to fix out cars, but this particular thing is actually trivial to be fixed at that stage - so why not. Would save us a lot of money on going to garage to adjust it and then retesting again.

Guffy

kona wrote: »

Then got retested and passed? And is complaining about paying the retest fee for the alignment along with different standards of inspection.

No tested again, missing the retest time my fault, and being failed on alignment and having now to pay another 30 quid for a quick job, or as mentioned there could easily have been adjusted by tester on site, although I realise there could be insurance issues there.

Lads I never complained about the 55 quid, I agree it is actually good value for a full look over of the car. I brought it in first time knowing it would fail so I would get a cheaper diagnostic to find out excalty what needed to be fixed.

JJJJNR

Total scam, they gave me a 27 month pass.

lost marbles

the headlight thingy seems to be the latest NCT "make them retest "racket .
my experience was i put my car through the test and it failed on the dip light beam being too high ,everything else passed in the single figures [i look after my motor ] .
anyways back to my mecanic and he put it on his machine ."look at the measurements they are reading on mine as perfect "
he sent me to a a mate of his who runs a very well known tyre fitting ect ,company and "hay presto " it was bang on with their readings aswell .but for pig iron the guy lowered the beam a smidge .[not even a quater turn of the screws ]
so a week and €28 later the car passed .
smells like a scam to me .;)

Tails142

ba_barabus wrote: »

What's worse is you drove the car knowing the tyres were that worn. Never mind the rest of it.

obviously changed tyres when I saw steel lol, you don't expect new tyres to be bare after 8000 miles especially when you are checking them regularly and the other three are barely worn but it was right on the inside edge and you had to get on the ground to see.

I was spending about 2000 a year maintaining the car with an Indy mechanic so it wasn't as if the car was too badly looked after it just kept developing problems and it was cheaper to get new tyres than replace suspension with the roads and ramps in this country, aluminum suspension parts on beamers ain't cheap.

the whole point of my story was the contrast between one tester nit picking and another tester letting a car with dangerous problems and obvious fails through

NUTZZ

Make up you're own mind if it's a money making racket;

I went for an NCT a few months ago, it failed on one thing, the handbrake, got a reading of 16% which is obviously a fail. This was news to me as I've never had any problems with it.

Went back in a week later to do a retest having done nothing to the car and it passed with a handbrake reading of 80%.

Needless to say I was not impressed, the difference in the readings was outrageous. It was the same tester both times so he must not have pulled up the handbrake at all the first time. I was disgusted leaving the center having paid a fee twice and done literally nothing to the car.

Tails142

lost marbles wrote: »

the headlight thingy seems to be the latest NCT "make them retest "racket .
my experience was i put my car through the test and it failed on the dip light beam being too high ,everything else passed in the single figures [i look after my motor ] .
anyways back to my mecanic and he put it on his machine ."look at the measurements they are reading on mine as perfect "
he sent me to a a mate of his who runs a very well known tyre fitting ect ,company and "hay presto " it was bang on with their readings aswell .but for pig iron the guy lowered the beam a smidge .[not even a quater turn of the screws ]
so a week and €28 later the car passed .
smells like a scam to me .;)

there are obviously ways to fool the testing equipment into passing faulty vehicles so the opposite must be true too

OldmanMondeo

€30 is a flat fee. Op, say you car failed on 5 things, each requires the car to use each stage of the test lane, then €30 is good value.

CiniO

NUTZZ wrote: »

Make up you're own mind if it's a money making racket;

I went for an NCT a few months ago, it failed on one thing, the handbrake, got a reading of 16% which is obviously a fail. This was news to me as I've never had any problems with it.

Went back in a week later to do a retest having done nothing to the car and it passed with a handbrake reading of 80%.

Needless to say I was not impressed, the difference in the readings was outrageous. It was the same tester both times so he must not have pulled up the handbrake at all the first time. I was disgusted leaving the center having paid a fee twice and done literally nothing to the car.

To be honest I think you just invented this story.

There is no way on earth that handbrake could have performance of 80%.
25 - 30% would be the absolute maximum. Below 16% is a fail.

dukedalton

My query with the NCT is how reliable an indicator is it of your car's general health? I'll admit I am by no means an expert, but I know people whose car's have been running fine but failed on what appear to be trivial things. On the other hand I once drove a ten year old Corsa which passed the NCT no bother, but the clutch failed a matter of days after the test.

CiniO

lost marbles wrote: »

the headlight thingy seems to be the latest NCT "make them retest "racket .
my experience was i put my car through the test and it failed on the dip light beam being too high ,everything else passed in the single figures [i look after my motor ] .
anyways back to my mecanic and he put it on his machine ."look at the measurements they are reading on mine as perfect "
he sent me to a a mate of his who runs a very well known tyre fitting ect ,company and "hay presto " it was bang on with their readings aswell .but for pig iron the guy lowered the beam a smidge .[not even a quater turn of the screws ]
so a week and €28 later the car passed .
smells like a scam to me .;)

Funny thing about light alignment is that there is horrendous leeway for possible setups.
NCT manual allows dipped headlights to be between 0.5% and 2% in height.
That means for example that car which has it's light located at 70cm above the ground level, might have his lights to lit area up to 35 metres in front of the car in case of 0.5% setup, up to 140 metres in front of the car if they are set at 2%.
You must admit, that there is huge difference if your dipped lights lit the road in front of you at 35m comparing to 140m.
While both setups are within NCT requirements.

So in general lights have to be really much out to fail.

CiniO

dukedalton wrote: »

My query with the NCT is how reliable an indicator is it of your car's general health? I'll admit I am by no means an expert, but I know people whose car's have been running fine but failed on what appear to be trivial things. On the other hand I once drove a ten year old Corsa which passed the NCT no bother, but the clutch failed a matter of days after the test.

Because clutch has nothing to do with NCT really.
It might also be impossible to tell what state the clutch is until it dies.

C4Kid

IMO the yearly nct check of cars over 10 years old is the most obvious money racket of the nct.

Especially considering it came in from a budget which has f all to do with safety. I think it makes very little difference to leave the car an extra year with a check.

knotknowbody

CiniO wrote: »

However I think it wouldn't be a bad idea if NCT guys if they discover incorrect lights allignment they should correct it.
Once they have car on testing lane already and have a device for measuring lights alignment in there setup to check the lights, then it's only a matter of 10 second to turn the screw to have lights corrected.
I can't understand why this can't be included in test.

I know everyone is going to say that NCT is not there to fix out cars, but this particular thing is actually trivial to be fixed at that stage - so why not. Would save us a lot of money on going to garage to adjust it and then retesting again.

I agree it must be frustrating if the car fails on something trivial like the lights, especially when it requires a lane retest as opposed to a visual, but I don't think they should fix trivial things at the NCT centre, its not their job and introduces a possible extra layer of liability for them that just makes things to complex.

If you are getting your car tested, your mechanic, if you use one, should if he is even remotely competent cover the basics like light alignment.

If you look after the car yourself then you don't need the NCT guys to fix basics because you will have picked it up beforehand and sorted it.

The problem with the NCT is that people treat their cars like sh1t, run it through to "see what it needs", then get pissed off that the tester didn't align the lights as its a quick job, or replace a bulb, or adjust the handbrake when he had it on the lift. I have an uncle who would know his way around a car, but never does anything before the test even the obvious stuff and then moans to me when it fails that its a money racket, and they are in it with the garages to generate work and it not fair to be doing tests on the car that you can't do at home.

I look after my own car and can set the lights without the machine, I drive it up close to a wall in the yard, I know that when I am a certain distance back from the wall the centre of the dipped beam on the wall should be a certain height from the ground, and obviously straight in front of the car. The passenger side beam is allowed be a little higher than the driver side to give you a better chance of seeing pedestrians, I've been doing it like that for years and have set lights that had failed for neighbours and friends before their retest many times and never had a fail.

If people took even 10% of the interest in their cars, that myself or the typical car person like CiniO on here did, NCT fails would drop dramatically, it really is not a difficult test to pass.

Guy:Incognito

CiniO wrote: »

However I think it wouldn't be a bad idea if NCT guys if they discover incorrect lights allignment they should correct it.
Once they have car on testing lane already and have a device for measuring lights alignment in there setup to check the lights, then it's only a matter of 10 second to turn the screw to have lights corrected.
I can't understand why this can't be included in test.

I know everyone is going to say that NCT is not there to fix out cars, but this particular thing is actually trivial to be fixed at that stage - so why not. Would save us a lot of money on going to garage to adjust it and then retesting again.

Nothing creates the temptation for creating work that costs money quicker than a testing system that also fixes stuff. Theres no shortage of stories from the papers to do with dodgey mot testers in the uk

biko

Indeed, the function of the nct it to test, not to fix - even if it only takes a second.

CiniO

knotknowbody wrote: »

I agree it must be frustrating if the car fails on something trivial like the lights, especially when it requires a lane retest as opposed to a visual, but I don't think they should fix trivial things at the NCT centre, its not their job and introduces a possible extra layer of liability for them that just makes things to complex.
(...)
The problem with the NCT is that people treat their cars like sh1t, run it through to "see what it needs", then get pissed off that the tester didn't align the lights as its a quick job, or replace a bulb, or adjust the handbrake when he had it on the lift.

I would never expect tester to change my bulb or adjust handbrake. Those might actually be time consuming jobs.
But adjusting lights when you have already equipment for checking them in front of the car is only few second (just literaly one turn of the screw).

I would completely not hesitate to sign a declaration ahead of a test that I'm allowing tester to do it without taking any responsibility if screw breaks or something. This is just a thing that can save all the hassle.

I look after my own car and can set the lights without the machine, I drive it up close to a wall in the yard, I know that when I am a certain distance back from the wall the centre of the dipped beam on the wall should be a certain height from the ground, and obviously straight in front of the car. The passenger side beam is allowed be a little higher than the driver side to give you a better chance of seeing pedestrians, I've been doing it like that for years and have set lights that had failed for neighbours and friends before their retest many times and never had a fail.

That's pretty much exactly the same way I do it.

If people took even 10% of the interest in their cars, that myself or the typical car person like CiniO on here did, NCT fails would drop dramatically, it really is not a difficult test to pass.

True.
In the last 5 years, I've must have gone through more than 10 NCT tests, and I failed only once on something I missed (rear arm bushes). Beside, NCT were always a pass for me.
I don't think it's a money racket. I think it's a brilliant thing, and I while NCT is not perfect, booking and appointment system together with due date thing is complete joke, but test itself while not always is 100% accurate is absolutely the best I've seen.
I've have comparision to Poland and I know how ridiculous car testing is there.
In general it's a money racket there, as you always pass. Therefore test is just to take your money - not to check your car.

CiniO

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Nothing creates the temptation for creating work that costs money quicker than a testing system that also fixes stuff. Theres no shortage of stories from the papers to do with dodgey mot testers in the uk

Yes - dodgey mot testers might fail a car to have a chance to repair it and earn some money.

When it comes to adjusting lights, it's really simple thing.
NCT testes checks lights. If they are out of adjustment he just takes 15 seconds to adjust them. Doesn't charge extra for it. If they are OK then, good - they can pass.
If they are still not OK, as there is something wrong with adjustment system, then it's a fail.

I can't see any way for dodgey tester to gain anything on that.

CiniO

biko wrote: »

Indeed, the function of the nct it to test, not to fix - even if it only takes a second.

Why not change it?

Guy:Incognito

CiniO wrote: »

Why not change it?

Why change it ?

Its a seperate, independant testing system and should stay that way.

What else would you like them to fix?When they start doing small things like that people will stop ever checking them because they know the nct guys will do it. Pretty soon they are spending a couple of minutes fixing every car that comes in.

Leave fixing cars to garages (or the owner)

biko

CiniO wrote: »

Why not change it?

Why change it?
1. The NCT testers aren't there to fix your car. Nor should they be.
2. It opens up for corruption, misuse and allegations of misconduct from unhappy customers.
Read about corrupt MOT centres in UK, this is not what we should copy.

Tbh, if people are concerned about their car not passing the test, avail of free pre-nct checks offered at many locations.

maidhc

C4Kid wrote: »

IMO the yearly nct check of cars over 10 years old is the most obvious money racket of the nct.

Especially considering it came in from a budget which has f all to do with safety. I think it makes very little difference to leave the car an extra year with a check.

This I agree with!

I would have no objection if all cars needed a 12 monthly test, but the 10 year rule seems like another favour for SIMI.

NUTZZ

CiniO wrote: »

To be honest I think you just invented this story.

There is no way on earth that handbrake could have performance of 80%.
25 - 30% would be the absolute maximum. Below 16% is a fail.

Why would I make it up? What have I got to gain?

I may have the figures the wrong way around as I'm recalling from memory but my point was that there was a huge difference in the imbalance for both tests.

I'll post scans of the two tests result pages later from my 'story'

dgt

Lady dgt's (I um..... Er..... Lets say situation is complicated) car went through the nct. The clonking from the front was very audible, arb bushes perished as expected on an oldish car (02 yaris) which also has been involved in a few shunts. Flew theough the test, cert to next year.

I was very annoyed to see that, glaring faults such as the tyres being eaten on the inside and a huge hole in the boot overseen.

Think of it as I'm pissed that a car in that state was let pass, someone that I care about means nothing to someone else.

Before the bandwagon jumps on I have no say on what goes into that car or where it gets serviced (why should I!) and she won't change her car.....

Sam Russell

My car failed its NCT last October, aniversary date April, so I just parked it off road and waited till January to retest. Drove to the test centre and it passed except for a couple of tyres. Distance travelled between pass and fail? 12 miles. No work done inbetween.

CiniO

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Why change it ?

Its a seperate, independant testing system and should stay that way.

What else would you like them to fix?

Nothing else.
Just this.

When they start doing small things like that people will stop ever checking them because they know the nct guys will do it. Pretty soon they are spending a couple of minutes fixing every car that comes in.

Leave fixing cars to garages (or the owner)[/QUOTE]

There is significent difference between adjusting lights and pretty much anything else.
Here's few of them.
1. Adjusting light is very hard to be done correctly at home without proper equipment.
2. It takes 10 minutes at the garage and costs 20 or 30 quid if not more.
3. At NCT centre the same kind of equipment is used for testing as for adjusting in the garage. Once equipment is set up for testing, it takes literally few seconds in most cases to adjust them. So additional workload on NCT staff is negligible, while gain is huge (saves car owner a need to find a garage, and do it separately, pay separately, book retest, pay for retest, etc.
Also it would take workload from NCT centres which seem to be barely coping with amount of tests to be done (waiting lists are for few months in some places). It surely would be wiser to spend 15 seconds to adjust lights by NCT tester, than having to spend another 15 minutes purely on retesting a vehicle which failed only on lights alignment.

Can't see a reason against it.
I'm not for letting NCT centres to fix our cars. I'm only for letting them adjust the lights, as it's tine amount of work for them, which can save hassle for us and them.

For Forks Sake

CiniO wrote: »

Nothing else.


There is significent difference between adjusting lights and pretty much anything else.
Here's few of them.
1. Adjusting light is very hard to be done correctly at home without proper equipment.
2. It takes 10 minutes at the garage and costs 20 or 30 quid if not more.
3. At NCT centre the same kind of equipment is used for testing as for adjusting in the garage. Once equipment is set up for testing, it takes literally few seconds in most cases to adjust them. So additional workload on NCT staff is negligible, while gain is huge (saves car owner a need to find a garage, and do it separately, pay separately, book retest, pay for retest, etc.
Also it would take workload from NCT centres which seem to be barely coping with amount of tests to be done (waiting lists are for few months in some places). It surely would be wiser to spend 15 seconds to adjust lights by NCT tester, than having to spend another 15 minutes purely on retesting a vehicle which failed only on lights alignment.

Can't see a reason against it.
I'm not for letting NCT centres to fix our cars. I'm only for letting them adjust the lights, as it's tine amount of work for them, which can save hassle for us and them.

Would you be prepared to pay a higher NCT fee for this?

CiniO

biko wrote: »

Why change it?
1. The NCT testers aren't there to fix your car. Nor should they be.
2. It opens up for corruption, misuse and allegations of misconduct from unhappy customers.
Read about corrupt MOT centres in UK, this is not what we should copy.

Tbh, if people are concerned about their car not passing the test, avail of free pre-nct checks offered at many locations.

What corruption or misuse or allegations of misconduct.
You purely go there, leave car for test, and if tester discovers lights are not adjusted properly then he tries to adjust them. If for some reason he can't do it easily (f.e. adjustment screws are broken) then he just drops it and fails for incorrect alignment.
Where can you see any space for corruption?

CiniO

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Would you be prepared to pay a higher NCT fee for this?

No.

Sam Russell

Some ideas to improve the current system.

1, They could give a second supplier a licence to do NCT tests.

2. They should test every car every year. 25% of cars fail their first test.

3. Test should last at least 12 months.

4. Tests should be available 'on demand'. In other words, if you are prepared to wait, it will be done that day. Currently, there is insufficient capacity for the current demand.

When driver testing could not cope, they brought in an outside tester. Wait, wasn't that the NCT crowd.....

The NCT is affecting the second-hand car market in that 10 year old cars and older ones are scrapped rather than fixing them as they will need testing in another 12 months so what is the point.