N C T or no N C T ?

salysol

A friend took his 1981 car in for the N C T it passed.
Two days later he taxed it and declared it vintage and veteran,next thing you know the department of transport deactivated it on the N C T system.
He then queried it and was told it was no longer required to do the N C T as it is V&V on their system.
Plus he has it's exemption in writing.

Now i am aware that when a car reaches the magic age of 30 it is up to the owner to ask the tax office to change the tax band from private to V & V otherwise as has happened to me they will still tax you at the current rate of a non V & V car.

I often wondered if there was a loop hole in the system and it seems there is after all.

They further told him that the N C T claim isn't legally standing in relation to any vehicle that was in the V & V tax band.

So any insight into this ?

antodeco

They changed this to 1/1/80, but your post suggests why I can only manually ever book my mini in.

salysol

antodeco wrote: »

They changed this to 1/1/80, but your post suggests why I can only manually ever book my mini in.

Yes i am aware of the 1/1/80 that all cars do an annual N C T, but my point is have you changed the tax band in your tax book to vintage/veteran ,they seem to be baffled by that aspect,if it's V & V then you might not need an N C T, i could be wrong though,i'm only going on what i was told.

hoodie6029

Sounds like a gap in the computer systems. NCTS probably are not set up to accept a car with a v&v tax class. Since the numbers going for an NCT with this class are small they're forced down the manual route

mattroche

To me this is a no brainer, if the car is being driven on the road, even just to shows or rallies, get them tested, even pre 1980s, at E56 it is a very cheap way of finding out how good or bad your car is. Get the report, and then decide what you need to do to the car to make it and roadworthy, not necessary to pass the N.C.T. as some of the refusals can be for quite minor defects, which would not affect the safety of the car. :)

salysol

mattroche wrote: »

To me this is a no brainer, if the car is being driven on the road, even just to shows or rallies, get them tested, even pre 1980s, at E56 it is a very cheap way of finding out how good or bad your car is. Get the report, and then decide what you need to do to the car to make it and roadworthy, not necessary to pass the N.C.T. as some of the refusals can be for quite minor defects, which would not affect the safety of the car. :)

I agree totally, a no brainer is right, for exmple i declared 2 classics of the road last week would you believe they sent me new reg certs,i already have the tax books .

antodeco

I normally stick it through the NCT about every 18 months. It never passes, as theres always small little things (not linked to safety). Where my concerns lie is that if the NCT cannot, as such, NCT older cars as standard, where does that leave the legislation?

salysol

antodeco wrote: »

I normally stick it through the NCT about every 18 months. It never passes, as theres always small little things (not linked to safety). Where my concerns lie is that if the NCT cannot, as such, NCT older cars as standard, where does that leave the legislation?

It's a simple fix all road going vehicles should be in a fit state ,so there for they should all do some sort of annual test, at least you will have peace of mind , in the knowledge that the vehicle you are driving is in road worthy condition.
The N C T Dept should be able to test any car no matter the age, trouble is it's all computerised and i doubt if many if any of the testers are trained mechanics.

homingbird

I would'nt have that much faith in the nct as they have their failure rate. once thats done they can pass cars like mine which had the track rods totaly shot & rear suspension on the way out. Its all down to the owner of the car if you wait for them to tell you your car is not fit for the road you would be safer cycling a bike!!!!

oceanman

homingbird wrote: »

I would'nt have that much faith in the nct as they have their failure rate. once thats done they can pass cars like mine which had the track rods totaly shot & rear suspension on the way out. Its all down to the owner of the car if you wait for them to tell you your car is not fit for the road you would be safer cycling a bike!!!!

totally agree, the ntc has little to do with road safety, just a money making racket!

Dades

Very interesting reading, this. I'll be applying for V&V status in October.

I've also just failed the NCT despite bringing it in 3 months early to avoid any issues that might arise before the due date - and thinking it was in tip top condition.

Need to replace all four tires despite having done about 500 miles since they all passed in November. The guy also said I had some dodgy ("cables and connections: incorrect assy") under my steering column. This was a switch I'd added which he pulled out so it was dangling down over the pedals on my way home.

Best of all was a fail on my windscreen washers - the spray being deemed "unacceptable". This was bollocks as my 30 yr old pump system still manages to get water in all the wiper radius - after a good hold down of the pump lever, and maybe some help with the wind. For a discretionary part of the test I thought this was just mean.

If I can get out of bringing my car to these shysters again, I will, and just deal with my local mechanic for an annual checkup.

salysol

Dades wrote: »

Very interesting reading, this. I'll be applying for V&V status in October.

I've also just failed the NCT despite bringing it in 3 months early to avoid any issues that might arise before the due date - and thinking it was in tip top condition.

Need to replace all four tires despite having done about 500 miles since they all passed in November. The guy also said I had some dodgy ("cables and connections: incorrect assy") under my steering column. This was a switch I'd added which he pulled out so it was dangling down over the pedals on my way home.

Best of all was a fail on my windscreen washers - the spray being deemed "unacceptable". This was bollocks as my 30 yr old pump system still manages to get water in all the wiper radius - after a good hold down of the pump lever, and maybe some help with the wind. For a discretionary part of the test I thought this was just mean.

If I can get out of bringing my car to these shysters again, I will, and just deal with my local mechanic for an annual checkup.

Just remember Dades this is only a coversation i had with a friend,it doesn't mean we can all avail of it on the strength of word of mouth,i suggest when you get the book updated to v&v you ask them what is the situation regarding NCT ,now that it is vintage,and if they state it's exempt ask for it in writing,it's worth a shot ?

Dades

Thanks, salysol. Yeah I understand. No harm in having a little plan in case someone opens the door, so to speak.

kja1888

salysol wrote: »

It's a simple fix all road going vehicles should be in a fit state ,so there for they should all do some sort of annual test, at least you will have peace of mind , in the knowledge that the vehicle you are driving is in road worthy condition.
The N C T Dept should be able to test any car no matter the age, trouble is it's all computerised and i doubt if many if any of the testers are trained mechanics.

You can't be employed as an NCT Tester unless you are a fully qualified, time served mechanic and have your certs to prove it. Check with the Dept of Transport if you dont believe me.

salysol

kja1888 wrote: »

You can't be employed as an NCT Tester unless you are a fully qualified, time served mechanic and have your certs to prove it. Check with the Dept of Transport if you dont believe me.

I wasn't aware of that,but good to know,thanks.

mattroche

The reality is any car registered the 1st Jan. 1980 requires an N.C.T., if it fails, it is because it has a fault. If you are not happy with the result,you can always appeal it. I find the simplest way is to put the car in for the test, if it fails, do whatever needs to be done, and have it re-tested. After all, a new N.C.T, does add additional value to the car. I have had many refusals, which were all justified. In fact, I think that all cars should be tested for road worthiness whatever age it is if they are going to be driven on public roads. Don't give the insurance companies a get out in the event of an accident.:):)

shawnee

Dades wrote: »

Very interesting reading, this. I'll be applying for V&V status in October.

I've also just failed the NCT despite bringing it in 3 months early to avoid any issues that might arise before the due date - and thinking it was in tip top condition.

Need to replace all four tires despite having done about 500 miles since they all passed in November. The guy also said I had some dodgy ("cables and connections: incorrect assy") under my steering column. This was a switch I'd added which he pulled out so it was dangling down over the pedals on my way home.

Best of all was a fail on my windscreen washers - the spray being deemed "unacceptable". This was bollocks as my 30 yr old pump system still manages to get water in all the wiper radius - after a good hold down of the pump lever, and maybe some help with the wind. For a discretionary part of the test I thought this was just mean.

If I can get out of bringing my car to these shysters again, I will, and just deal with my local mechanic for an annual checkup.

Wouldn't really like to put my 30 year old through an NCT . If these guys treat 30 year old cars like 5 year old cars , then it is not a suitable test. Most of these cars are driven carefully and not put through the stuff that the nct put them though.

type85

"Most of these cars are driven carefully and not put through the stuff that the nct put them though."? what kinda test do people think the NCT put cars through? if we list them in approximate order: emissions @idle <93, dip beam alignment, all exterior lights working, brake efficiency, then its upon the lift for a check of the ball joints+bushings on the shaker plates which attempt to deflect the tyre 3-4"? and then visual check on everything else to make sure nothing is insecure/loose/missing (wipers,corrosion,tyres,glass,seats and belts etc)

oceanman

yeah id be with shawnne on this one. definitely wouldn't any of those nct 'bozos' messing around with a vintage car.

corktina

they don't "mess around" with cars. I would say an hour on the road at moderate speed would put any car through more. I there's a fault waiting to show itself, I'd rather they found it

alastair

corktina wrote: »

they don't "mess around" with cars. I would say an hour on the road at moderate speed would put any car through more. I there's a fault waiting to show itself, I'd rather they found it

I'm ambivalent on this. I brought my Audi A2 in for it's NCT earlier this year and they couldn't figure out how to open the bonnet (it is a little convoluted). After pulling the dip stick around a bit in the belief it was a bonnet catch, they gave up and passed the car without seeing the engine bay. Doesn't really inspire confidence in how they might cope with something more idiosyncratic.

oceanman

corktina wrote: »

they don't "mess around" with cars. I would say an hour on the road at moderate speed would put any car through more. I there's a fault waiting to show itself, I'd rather they found it

each to their own...but I think I would rather have my own mechanic who I know and trust tell me if my car has any faults!

corktina

oceanman wrote: »

each to their own...but I think I would rather have my own mechanic who I know and trust tell me if my car has any faults!

will he inspect the whole car as cheaply?

markbld65

corktina wrote: »

they don't "mess around" with cars. I would say an hour on the road at moderate speed would put any car through more. I there's a fault waiting to show itself, I'd rather they found it

i've put a lot of cars in for nct and my thoughts are its a money making business its no guarantee of roadworthy

i put a car in a while back it was not ready but i didnt want to miss the date so in it goes with a blocked rad and bearing gone in the rear wheel instant fail you would think but it passed !!!!!! had the rad and bearing done the following week
same thing on another car didnt want to miss the date so in it goes with a complete rear caliper seized and disk rusted it passed !!! again i had the fault fixed in a few days when the parts arrived
had another car a modern one and when i drove it out bang they forgot to secure the sump guard lucky it fell down as they didnt put the dipstick back it was in a few inches at most

so nct is really not a test as such, i have more faith in my kids to go over a car then the nct boys

corktina

the point of the NCT is to enforce an inspection of some kind because if it wasn't there, some people would never even look at their cars and just drive them until they stop. It has largely stopped this and the roads are safer as a result. I fully support it.

ianobrien

I'm of the view that everything should have an NCT. Don't forget that if you are not happy with with a test venue, you have the option of going to a different one. For example, I will never go to Little Island or Blarney again for an NCT.

I reckon it's needed as I've seen some shocking classics on the road. I remember following a Rover P5 on a vintage run that had dodgy brake lights, axle tramp from the non existent rear shocks and the car couldn't drive in a straight line. The owner was against any form of NCT and he's said as his car was perfect, it didn't need it.

oceanman

corktina wrote: »

will he inspect the whole car as cheaply?

you consider the nct test which takes less than 30 minutes cheap!!..its a money making racket plain and simple,.not to mention the fact that by its very nature it will always be open to abuse by the unscrupulous.

corktina

it's not as open to abuse as the MoT in the UK is, where garages test the car and then hope to repair all the faults they find ...or invent,

corktina

oceanman wrote: »

you consider the nct test which takes less than 30 minutes cheap!!..its a money making racket plain and simple,.not to mention the fact that by its very nature it will always be open to abuse by the unscrupulous.

try 3 minutes at the doctors for a comparison or call out a plumber...

oceanman

corktina wrote: »

it's not as open to abuse as the MoT in the UK is, where garages test the car and then hope to repair all the faults they find ...or invent,

garages in the uk that are found to abuse the system can and do loose their MOT licence. no fear of that happening with the NTC, even after they have been openly exposed. its a con job.

oceanman

corktina wrote: »

try 3 minutes at the doctors for a comparison or call out a plumber...

we are talking about the work of motor mechanics here.....why bring doctors or plumbers into it!

corktina

it's a comparison , meant to show value for money

oceanman

corktina wrote: »

the point of the NCT is to enforce an inspection of some kind because if it wasn't there, some people would never even look at their cars and just drive them until they stop. It has largely stopped this and the roads are safer as a result. I fully support it.

an inspection of some kind!!.. so it ok if substandard checks are carried and dangerous faults often overlooked just so long as its enforced :rolleyes:

corktina

if you say so, I didn't.

adunis

If your after rebuilding it yourself an nct is the last thing youu'll need

guano_jim

imho the car is only "safe" the day it leaves the NCT centre.

testing should be random to encourage keeping the vehicle safe & roadworthy 365 days a year, not just the day it goes in for testing.

Not knowing when the car will be tested should keep more of them safer for longer. Penalties for driving an unsafe car on the road to be increased in line with severity of danger... ie tyres/lights/suspension & brakes more strongly penalised over emissions/noise/licence plate markings (ffs!)

Additionally a garda could request a car be tested if they had reason to beleive it was unsafe.
yes this means some cars may never be tested. but you wont know which ones.

random is right.

kasper

guano_jim wrote: »

imho the car is only "safe" the day it leaves the NCT centre.

testing should be random to encourage keeping the vehicle safe & roadworthy 365 days a year, not just the day it goes in for testing.

Not knowing when the car will be tested should keep more of them safer for longer. Penalties for driving an unsafe car on the road to be increased in line with severity of danger... ie tyres/lights/suspension & brakes more strongly penalised over emissions/noise/licence plate markings (ffs!)

Additionally a garda could request a car be tested if they had reason to beleive it was unsafe.
yes this means some cars may never be tested. but you wont know which ones.

random is right.

I would think that would be near impossible to implement .