NCT broke car (alternator belt)

smilgy · 22-08-2013 10:06am #1

So my dad is currently at the NCT test centre where he was due an nct for his taxi. Its a 2010 Avensis. I just got off the phone with him saying that they have broken the car. They were doing some sort of test/check where they had to rev the engine a lot and something has broken and now the car is immobile.

What course of action should we take ? He is in the process of ringing his insurance company for breakdown cover, but what happens then ?

biko · 22-08-2013 10:10am

They rev the engine during emissions test, but not higher than it can take if it's a healthy engine.
Without knowing the exact details it's hard to say what went wrong, maybe a seal broke or it overheated.

He's already on the phone with his insurance company, they'll advise him on the next steps.

Jesus. · 22-08-2013 10:11am

I think its just failed the test.

JustAThought · 22-08-2013 10:15am

Woman in work - had new ish car - brought it to the NCT- they left the oilcap or similar off and she didn't notice: car ran out of vital fluid & engine was totalled . She ended up taking them to court - got CCTV if the car in situ with cap not replaced. " New " car duly paid for. Two or more years of no car, days off work , solicitors & agro. Not good.

I'd be hoping it was broken by them while in their care...

smilgy · 22-08-2013 10:16am

It failed the test alright ;D He said as the engine was being revved there was a bang and a load of black smoke came out of the exhaust. The car was then brought out of the test centre, his money was refunded and he was sent on his way. Is NCTS now liable for damages ?

Anan1 · 22-08-2013 10:18am

smilgy wrote: »

It failed the test alright ;D He said as the engine was being revved there was a bang and a load of black smoke came out of the exhaust. The car was then brought out of the test centre, his money was refunded and he was sent on his way. Is NCTS now liable for damages ?

Hardly, he'd have signed a disclaimer. If the car couldn't take being revved then it was going to break soon anyway.

ba_barabus · 22-08-2013 10:19am

smilgy wrote: »

It failed the test alright ;D He said as the engine was being revved there was a bang and a load of black smoke came out of the exhaust. The car was then brought out of the test centre, his money was refunded and he was sent on his way. Is NCTS now liable for damages ?

It's odd that the money was refunded.

biko · 22-08-2013 10:20am

What did insurance people say?

smilgy · 22-08-2013 10:21am

Anan1 wrote: »

Hardly, he'd have signed a disclaimer. If the car couldn't take being revved then it was going to break soon anyway.

In his opinion it was excessive revving. Is the tester not admitting in a way, fault by refunding him his money in the first place ?

Insurance are refusing to tow him as he is not inside DUblin (wtf?). The test centre was in Arklow.

listermint · 22-08-2013 10:22am

Anan1 wrote: »

Hardly, he'd have signed a disclaimer. If the car couldn't take being revved then it was going to break soon anyway.

Disclaimers dont entirely remove fault if they were negligible.

JustAThought · 22-08-2013 10:23am

Anan1 wrote: »

Hardly, he'd have signed a disclaimer. If the car couldn't take being revved then it was going to break soon anyway.

No - I'm Sitting at the test centre at the
Moment - tere is NO disclaimer to sign & I checked the notice boards - they disclaim damages in the parking area , but not otherwise .

keithsfleet · 22-08-2013 10:27am

JustAThought wrote: »

No - I'm Sitting at the test centre at the
Moment - tere is NO disclaimer to sign & I checked the notice boards - they disclaim damages in the parking area , but not otherwise .

As far as I know, only people having diesel cars tested sign this disclaimer.
You don't sign it for a petrol car.

Sobanek · 22-08-2013 10:27am

I thought cars didn't need to be tested for the first 4 years?

listermint · 22-08-2013 10:28am

Sobanek wrote: »

I thought cars didn't need to be tested for the first 4 years?

DOE on a taxi.... every year

smilgy · 22-08-2013 10:28am

Sobanek wrote: »

I thought cars didn't need to be tested for the first 4 years?

Taxis gets tested every year

skibum · 22-08-2013 10:29am

They get you to sign a disclaimer if you are getting a diesel tested in Deansgrange.
They rev the tit's off my car every time, hate hearing them doing it from the observation area.

Anan1 · 22-08-2013 10:29am

listermint wrote: »

Disclaimers dont entirely remove fault if they were negligible.

Negligent? Sure all they did was rev the engine!

Sam Russell · 22-08-2013 10:30am

Sobanek wrote: »

I thought cars didn't need to be tested for the first 4 years?

It's a taxi.

dantastic · 22-08-2013 10:30am

They would be liable if they do something wrong.
The revving of the engine for the emissions test is normal and per the book. On a diesel this is often thought of as excessive by bystanders but it is per the book.

I don't think they are liable unless they actually revved the car too much. Could see a tester getting a bit over excited with a Ferrari but a '10 Avensis a thurs morning, not likely.

Sounds like plain old bad luck, it was bound to happen anyway.

What is strange is the insurance company's refusal to tow it. could be a term of the taxi insurance though. To only operate within a certain area.

Stranger is the refund of the nct fee!

renofan · 22-08-2013 10:31am

The NCT didn't break your car. Something was already wrong with the car before the fella tested it.

Guy:Incognito · 22-08-2013 10:32am

JustAThought wrote: »

No - I'm Sitting at the test centre at the
Moment - tere is NO disclaimer to sign & I checked the notice boards - they disclaim damages in the parking area , but not otherwise .

The couple of people in front of me in Naas about 6 weeks ago were signing disclaimers for their diesels.

As for his opinion being that they were excessively reving it, unless hes at the very least a qualified mechanic I doubt thatll hold much water. A (healthy) car shouldn't crap itself from being revved a bit for a short period.

listermint · 22-08-2013 10:32am

Anan1 wrote: »

Negligent? Sure all they did was rev the engine!

Do you know that ? I wasnt aware you were there ? Nor was i. So i am not to say they werent negligent and neither are you.

Which is why i responded to your post about the disclaimer and not if they were negligent or not.

Anan1 · 22-08-2013 10:33am

smilgy wrote: »

In his opinion it was excessive revving. Is the tester not admitting in a way, fault by refunding him his money in the first place ?

Insurance are refusing to tow him as he is not inside DUblin (wtf?). The test centre was in Arklow.

The only way to excessively rev a modern car is to put it in too low a gear at speed.

smilgy · 22-08-2013 10:35am

Just off the phone with him again and he has found the problem. The belt that runs through the alternator, aircon etc has semi snapped. He has now temporarily mended it and is on his way to the garage. He said that this was the banging noise as there was a bit of the belt hitting off things. I was on the phone with NCTS and they said send in an email with all the details and proceed from there which is what I will do.

irelandspurs · 22-08-2013 10:37am

Got my van doe'd and bloke came in and asked me was the timing belt changed within it's limits as he had to rev the van and there was a risk of the belt breaking.

listermint · 22-08-2013 10:37am

Anan1 wrote: »

The only way to excessively rev a modern car is to put it in too low a gear at speed.

Thats a tad generalistic, many 'modern cars' can rev all over and past 3K which can be excessive. ECUs are not a fail safe.

Mongarra · 22-08-2013 10:37am

OH brought her car for test and they said it failed as the bonnet would not close. It was closed when she brought it in as I had done a few last-minute checks before she left and there was no problem with closing bonnet. They obviously broke it but denied this and would not accept responsibility.

She brought it to a nearby garage where they fixed it and she brought it back to NCT centre straight away as it was only a visual check. It passed this time and she was satisfied with outcome but we were very annoyed at the obvious lie and refusal to admit it was their fault. However as it passed the test she didn't take it any further.

Anan1 · 22-08-2013 10:40am

listermint wrote: »

Thats a tad generalistic, many 'modern cars' can rev all over and past 3K which can be excessive. ECUs are not a fail safe.

Name one modern car engine that cannot safely be revved past 3k?

keithclancy · 22-08-2013 10:40am

http://www.ncts.ie/q13.html

The engine is in a fit state to be tested e.g. Cam belt/timing belt. You may be asked to sign a disclaimer at the test centre.

Sounds like engine had something wrong with it.

listermint · 22-08-2013 10:43am

Anan1 wrote: »

Name one modern car engine that cannot safely be revved past 3k?

Thats a stupid post, just as it is to make silly general posts about all modern cars. Come on man....

Anan1 · 22-08-2013 10:58am

listermint wrote: »

Thats a stupid post, just as it is to make silly general posts about all modern cars. Come on man....

Seriously, any modern engine in good condition will be able to take all the revving an NCT tester can throw at it in its stride. In this case a worn belt let go - if it hadn't happened during the test then it probably would have happened very soon afterwards.

bucketybuck · 22-08-2013 11:01am

smilgy wrote: »

Just off the phone with him again and he has found the problem. The belt that runs through the alternator, aircon etc has semi snapped. He has now temporarily mended it and is on his way to the garage. He said that this was the banging noise as there was a bit of the belt hitting off things. I was on the phone with NCTS and they said send in an email with all the details and proceed from there which is what I will do.

Is he going to apologise to the test centre and give them the test fee back? Certainly not their fault if the alternator belt is worn. Probably did him a favour, at least this way it didn't snap when he was driving.

listermint · 22-08-2013 11:01am

Anan1 wrote: »

Seriously, any modern engine in good condition will be able to take all the revving an NCT tester can throw at it in its stride. In this case a worn belt let go - if it hadn't happened during the test then it probably would have happened very soon afterwards.

just to be clear negligent can include many things like basic checks before applying the auto foot to the pedal.

you dont just go out and rev a vehicle past 3K without checking levels and and a visual over items.

Spook_ie · 22-08-2013 11:04am

listermint wrote: »

just to be clear negligent can include many things like basic checks before applying the auto foot to the pedal.

you dont just go out and rev a vehicle past 3K without checking levels and and a visual over items.

Is it not your responsibility to ensure it's at least fit to test?

bucketybuck · 22-08-2013 11:05am

listermint wrote: »

just to be clear negligent can include many things like basic checks before applying the auto foot to the pedal.

you dont just go out and rev a vehicle past 3K without checking levels and and a visual over items.

You don't bring a car to NCT test without checking levels and and a visual over items.

renofan · 22-08-2013 11:07am

listermint wrote: »

just to be clear negligent can include many things like basic checks before applying the auto foot to the pedal.

you dont just go out and rev a vehicle past 3K without checking levels and and a visual over items.

But that is not the tester's worry as it states clearly when you book a test that all levels should be checked by the person bringing the car to be tested and also that they'll have to sign a form regarding the timing belt if it's a diesel.

smilgy · 22-08-2013 11:10am

bucketybuck wrote: »

Is he going to apologise to the test centre and give them the test fee back? Certainly not their fault if the alternator belt is worn. Probably did him a favour, at least this way it didn't snap when he was driving.

We have three diesel cars in the household that get their NCT done by him and I'm inclined to believe that when he said it was revved excessively it was revved excessively.

Also, he didn't demand his money back, the tester brought him around and offered the money to him, which from my point of view would suggest that he was somewhat feeling guilty. Granted I wasn't there and didn't see it happen so I can't have much say in it.

He's on his way back now, is gonna pick up a belt and we're gonna change it so he can do the test again as soon as possible. Not much harm done other than the trip out and the cost of the belt.

renofan wrote: »

But that is not the tester's worry as it states clearly when you book a test that all levels should be checked by the person bringing the car to be tested and also that they'll have to sign a form regarding the timing belt if it's a diesel.

Also, AFAIK, its a timing chain.

kirving · 22-08-2013 11:11am

renofan wrote: »

But that is not the tester's worry as it states clearly when you book a test that all levels should be checked by the person bringing the car to be tested and also that they'll have to sign a form regarding the timing belt if it's a diesel.

If the tester realised that the car has a very low tyre before the brake test, he can't just go ahead anyway since it's the drivers responsibility to ensure that the car is in a fit state. If he went ahead with the brake test anyway, that would be negligent.

I know that this isn't what happened here, but a disclaimer doesn't remove responsibility from the tester.

listermint · 22-08-2013 11:13am

Sorry lads i forgot the NCT center can never be negligible.

Il climb back in my hole.

HA. ridiculous.

Jesus. · 22-08-2013 11:25am

Did somebody say revving past 3k is excessive? :eek:

Anan1 · 22-08-2013 11:27am

listermint wrote: »

Sorry lads i forgot the NCT center can never be negligible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

listermint · 22-08-2013 11:33am

Anan1 wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Strawman is it?

You made the assertion that by signing a disclaimer you are signing your rights away. You sir are hilarious. As already demonstrated in this thread someone already took the NCT to task on this and won.

I am not saying this particular case they were negligible (as you well know) just responding to your quite frankly silly and very generalized responses.

bucketybuck · 22-08-2013 11:34am

smilgy wrote: »

We have three diesel cars in the household that get their NCT done by him and I'm inclined to believe that when he said it was revved excessively it was revved excessively.

You are missing the point.

It sounds like the alternator belt snapped. Even if the NCT did rev the car excessively, if the belt had been sound it wouldn't have snapped.

The belt was obviously worn and should have been spotted during service. If that belt had snapped on the road while driving it could have caused a lot of damage. The power steering belt snapped on my van a few weeks ago, promptly wrapped itself around the timing gears, messing up the timing and damaging the pistons. As I said, it was probably a good thing it happened where it did.

You started a thread titled "NCT broke car". This is patently not the case.

listermint · 22-08-2013 11:35am

bucketybuck wrote: »

You are missing the point.

It sounds like the alternator belt snapped. Even if the NCT did rev the car excessively, if the belt had been sound it wouldn't have snapped.

The belt was obviously worn and should have been spotted during service. If that belt had snapped on the road while driving it could have caused a lot of damage. The power steering belt snapped on my van a few weeks ago, promptly wrapped itself around the timing gears, messing up the timing and damaging the pistons. As I said, it was probably a good thing it happened where it did.

You started a thread titled "NCT broke car". This is patently not the case.

Which i agree with.

Anan1 · 22-08-2013 11:40am

listermint wrote: »

Strawman is it?

Straw man it is! You know perfectly well that I don't believe that the NCTS can never be negligent. This is about this case.

listermint wrote: »

You made the assertion that by signing a disclaimer you are signing your rights away. You sir are hilarious. As already demonstrated in this thread someone already took the NCT to task on this and won.

They took the NCTS to task on leaving the oil filler cap off, which is clear negligence and has nothing whatsoever to do with this case.

listermint wrote: »

I am not saying this particular case they were negligible (as you well know) just responding to your quite frankly silly and very generalized responses.

OP says that a worn aux belt gave way during the test. I'm really struggling to see how this can be blamed on either the tester or the test. Sure they rev the balls off the cars, but I stand by my assertion that a healthy engine will take that in its stride.

smilgy · 22-08-2013 11:44am

bucketybuck wrote: »

You are missing the point.

It sounds like the alternator belt snapped. Even if the NCT did rev the car excessively, if the belt had been sound it wouldn't have snapped.

The belt was obviously worn and should have been spotted during service. If that belt had snapped on the road while driving it could have caused a lot of damage. The power steering belt snapped on my van a few weeks ago, promptly wrapped itself around the timing gears, messing up the timing and damaging the pistons. As I said, it was probably a good thing it happened where it did.

You started a thread titled "NCT broke car". This is patently not the case.

When I had started the thread, it did seem like NCTS had broken the car. However now that everything has been looked at, it does seem like they aren't completely to blame but who knows how long the belt might have lasted if the car had not been revved so much as in normal driving, the car is rarely revved above 3-4k rpm.

Anan1 · 22-08-2013 11:50am

smilgy wrote: »

When I had started the thread, it did seem like NCTS had broken the car. However now that everything has been looked at, it does seem like they aren't completely to blame but who knows how long the belt might have lasted if the car had not been revved so much as in normal driving, the car is rarely revved above 3-4k rpm.

That is one way of looking at it - another is that it may have given up in the worst place and at the worst time possible. Sure we'll never know now!

Wossack · 22-08-2013 11:58am

have a brainfart on the way home from work, and try and take off from lights in neutral - pop

aujopimur · 22-08-2013 12:23pm

Kevin Irving wrote: »

If the tester realised that the car has a very low tyre before the brake test, he can't just go ahead anyway since it's the drivers responsibility to ensure that the car is in a fit state. If he went ahead with the brake test anyway, that would be negligent.

I know that this isn't what happened here, but a disclaimer doesn't remove responsibility from the tester.

The testers usually check tyre pressures.

bucketybuck · 22-08-2013 12:24pm

smilgy wrote: »

When I had started the thread, it did seem like NCTS had broken the car. However now that everything has been looked at, it does seem like they aren't completely to blame but who knows how long the belt might have lasted if the car had not been revved so much as in normal driving, the car is rarely revved above 3-4k rpm.

They aren't at all to blame, stop trying to insinuate they are and instead look about properly servicing the vehicle.

listermint · 22-08-2013 2:11pm

Anan1 wrote: »

Straw man it is! You know perfectly well that I don't believe that the NCTS can never be negligent. This is about this case.

They took the NCTS to task on leaving the oil filler cap off, which is clear negligence and has nothing whatsoever to do with this case.

OP says that a worn aux belt gave way during the test. I'm really struggling to see how this can be blamed on either the tester or the test. Sure they rev the balls off the cars, but I stand by my assertion that a healthy engine will take that in its stride.

None of those facts you knew at the time you made the assertion about the disclaimer, So i stand by what you originally insinuated (before the OP came back with more detail) That by signing a disclaimer your rights have some how vapourised..

NCT broke car (alternator belt)

Comments