Massive jump in DOE test fees- RSA

Going Forward

New test fees from the 7th October:

http://www.cvrt.ie/en/What-is-Changed/Pages/Test-Fees.aspx

This is a massive jump in fees compared to what it used to be:

http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Vehicle%20Testing/CVT%20FAQs%20updated%20March%202012.pdf

http://www.vtntest.ie/

Theanswers

Rip of Republic.

All these increases will do is damage business.

Very few accidents if any are caused by vehicle defections.

Ardeehey

Theanswers wrote: »

Rip of Republic.

All these increases will do is damage business.

Very few accidents if any are caused by vehicle defections.

Price increases are unfortunate but job needs to be done, just ask the family of the poor schoolkid that was killed and the rest injured in Offaly a couple of years back...rear axle came off the bus!

Theanswers

Well then they should raise the NCT too. A-lot of the vehicles being DOE tested are identical to those which if passenger undergo the NCT.

So for the sake of safety/ fairness should they not be tested to the same standards 1 hour vs (15-20 minutes) and of course the same price.

Because...
it has to be done.

Theanswers

Why does it take longer to discover if a commercial landcruiser is safe vs the same passenger landcruiser?

visual

Theanswers wrote: »

Why does it take longer to discover if a commercial landcruiser is safe vs the same passenger landcruiser?

The test centres for DOE aren't as high teck as NCT

Theanswers

visual wrote: »

The test centres for DOE aren't as high teck as NCT

Yet it costs more?

Bpmull

Thats unreal it's going to cost me over 95 euro plus vat to test my focus van next Friday when it's booked in. I always get annoyed when I hear people going on about the nct how much of a rip of it is at 55 euro. I think nct is fair you don't test the car till it is 4 years old then every 2 years and then every year I think the cost is fair enough too.

rubberdiddies

It's a scam. I do about 10k per year in a berlingo van and have to undergo this test every year. My current van is 2 years old.

I also don't like the fact that they are done in garages where conveniently enough they can fix any problems that cause a failure.

Two years ago I brought a van in to a test centre only for it to fail. The very same garage quoted me 850+ VAT to 'fix' it.

I declined, took it to my local mechanic, paid him €70 and then brought it to another test centre where it passed.

The cost of doing the test isn't the only rip off

Going Forward

RSA a bit pricey alright, I suppose someone has to pay for all the CCTV sytems installed by the RSA in the test centres though......

Bit cheaper up north:
https://www.gov.uk/getting-an-mot/mot-test-fees

Rip off republic going strong.

Theanswers

What CCTV Cameras and why?

visual

RSA isn't the motorists friend nor are they concerned with fainess. They have a firm hold on the cash cow without challenge.

Going Forward

Theanswers wrote: »

What CCTV Cameras and why?

RSA have installed live cameras in VTN centres to keep an eye on tests along with ANPR cameras to identify the vehicles.

One could surmise that as the RSA has successfully reduced road deaths, it had to create another crisis to not only occupy itself with, but which would ensure it's employees jobs, budget and survival into the future.

As it is accepted that vehicle defects account for a very small percentage of fatal accidents it's hard to see any other valid reason for this very large hammer being used to crack such a small nut, for such a small national fleet.

visual

Going Forward wrote: »

RSA have installed live cameras in VTN centres to keep an eye on tests along with ANPR cameras to identify the vehicles.

One could surmise that as the RSA has successfully reduced road deaths, it had to create another crisis to not only occupy itself with, but which would ensure it's employees jobs, budget and survival into the future.

As it is accepted that vehicle defects account for a very small percentage of fatal accidents it's hard to see any other valid reason for this very large hammer being used to crack such a small nut, for such a small national fleet.

I would say the improvements in infrastructure and more motorways has had a bigger contribution to safety than all the effords of RSA combined.

aaakev

rubberdiddies wrote: »

It's a scam. I do about 10k per year in a berlingo van and have to undergo this test every year. My current van is 2 years old.

I also don't like the fact that they are done in garages where conveniently enough they can fix any problems that cause a failure.

Two years ago I brought a van in to a test centre only for it to fail. The very same garage quoted me 850+ VAT to 'fix' it.

I declined, took it to my local mechanic, paid him €70 and then brought it to another test centre where it passed.

The cost of doing the test isn't the only rip off

Im not saying it doesnt happen in some places, i know it does just like in the NCT but that you have just tarred everyone with the same brush with that post...

I work in a main dealers which has a test centre, i get no special treatment on sales vehicles and fail for the very same things as everyone else coming through the door, there is also never anything like you implied where things are exagerated or lies told in order to get work into the garage. You are right thougb about it being convienient, convienient for the customer if they dont want to fi d someone to do the repairs. We also waive the retest fee if we do the repairs which saves the customer time and money.

Im not sayi g your lieing g about your van just saying its not as common as you implied, especially in the last few years.

People dont seem to understand how regulated doe centres are. We get near weekly visits from the RSA, they call in unannounced and can go through any test that is being done, sometimes they stay for an hour or sometimes all day and go through tests with all the testers.

To the poster who said doe centres are not as high tech as nct centres, they are, more so in some cases with heavier equipment for larger vehicles like trucks and buses.

The price increase is huge imo, standard van test has gone up by €23 ffs!! Remember this is the rsa and NOT the test centres increasing the prices! Our poor receptionist has been getting an earfull off loads of people when she is taking bookings and telling them the new rules! Haha

rubberdiddies

aaakev wrote: »

Im not saying it doesnt happen in some places, i know it does just like in the NCT but that you have just tarred everyone with the same brush with that post...

I work in a main dealers which has a test centre, i get no special treatment on sales vehicles and fail for the very same things as everyone else coming through the door, there is also never anything like you implied where things are exagerated or lies told in order to get work into the garage. You are right thougb about it being convienient, convienient for the customer if they dont want to fi d someone to do the repairs. We also waive the retest fee if we do the repairs which saves the customer time and money.

Im not sayi g your lieing g about your van just saying its not as common as you implied, especially in the last few years.

People dont seem to understand how regulated doe centres are. We get near weekly visits from the RSA, they call in unannounced and can go through any test that is being done, sometimes they stay for an hour or sometimes all day and go through tests with all the testers.

i certainly haven't tarred everyone with the same brush, at least it definately wasn't my intention. I specifically said that the second test centre I brought it to passed without any problems.

aaakev

Fair enough, i read it that you thought place that tests vehicles and also repairs them is going to be up to no good... Which im sure thwre are a few but it would be very far from the norm if you get me

What was the original issue they quoted you to repair and what did your mechanic do?

rubberdiddies

aaakev wrote: »

Fair enough, i read it that you thought place that tests vehicles and also repairs them is going to be up to no good... Which im sure thwre are a few but it would be very far from the norm if you get me

What was the original issue they quoted you to repair and what did your mechanic do?

from what i remember there was an engine warning light pre-test (which had been continuously lit for a number of months). they said it needed a new alternator, 2 brake pads, a new tyre, mini service and labour.

My local mechanic replaced a fuse i believe which got rid of the engine warning light and put on 1 brake pad.

I brought it back to him 5 months later for a service and it just needed a basic service. no tyre change required.

I guess my point really was that the current system opens up the possibility for unscrupulous garages to add a fault or two on that isn't necessarily there. Now maybe the original DOE place made a genuine mistake, but if so it could have proved a costly mistake for me.

I feel that if we are forced to DOE every year, it should be Independent, like the NCT.

dantastic

rubberdiddies wrote: »

from what i remember there was an engine warning light pre-test (which had been continuously lit for a number of months). they said it needed a new alternator, 2 brake pads, a new tyre, mini service and labour.

My local mechanic replaced a fuse i believe which got rid of the engine warning light and put on 1 brake pad.

I brought it back to him 5 months later for a service and it just needed a basic service. no tyre change required.

I guess my point really was that the current system opens up the possibility for unscrupulous garages to add a fault or two on that isn't necessarily there. Now maybe the original DOE place made a genuine mistake, but if so it could have proved a costly mistake for me.

I feel that if we are forced to DOE every year, it should be Independent, like the NCT.

1 brake pad?

That would suggest to me that the brakes actually need _more_ work than just a few pads.

It should be pretty obvious if the tyres need changing. Again, 1 tyre only? why the uneven wear?


I don't get people who thinks this (DOE/NCT) is a money making racket. Just because some lazy git passed the component a second time doesn't necessarily mean it's up to the job. Maybe the first guy who failed you was actually right?!

rubberdiddies

dantastic wrote: »

1 brake pad?

That would suggest to me that the brakes actually need _more_ work than just a few pads.

It should be pretty obvious if the tyres need changing. Again, 1 tyre only? why the uneven wear?


I don't get people who thinks this (DOE/NCT) is a money making racket. Just because some lazy git passed the component a second time doesn't necessarily mean it's up to the job. Maybe the first guy who failed you was actually right?!

so the lazy git that passed the second time and my mechanic were both wrong then?

no chance whatsoever that the 1st DOE was wrong?

Considering the following DOE (ie: the following year) it only required 2 tyres I would think it was the first DOE that was wrong.

I'm not a mechanic or car savvy by the way, this was 3 years ago....i said one brake pad because that's what i think i remember. And yes it was 1 tyre that was mentioned. I remember that specifically due to the conversation I had with my mechanic afterwards.

aaakev

rubberdiddies wrote: »

from what i remember there was an engine warning light pre-test (which had been continuously lit for a number of months). they said it needed a new alternator, 2 brake pads, a new tyre, mini service and labour.

My local mechanic replaced a fuse i believe which got rid of the engine warning light and put on 1 brake pad.

I brought it back to him 5 months later for a service and it just needed a basic service. no tyre change required.

.

that makes no sense... An engine warning light would not lead you to a faulty alternator... And if your mechanic changed one brake pad i wouldnt be using him again. Brakes ware together so you dont change one at a time you replace both sides together.

Tyres often fail not because of ware but damage to the inner or outer wall, very hard to explain to some people that the bubble sticking Out of the tyre is dangerous when some mechanics tell them its not!! Happens regularly believe it or not

Theanswers

dantastic wrote: »

1 brake pad?

That would suggest to me that the brakes actually need _more_ work than just a few pads.

It should be pretty obvious if the tyres need changing. Again, 1 tyre only? why the uneven wear?


I don't get people who thinks this (DOE/NCT) is a money making racket. Just because some lazy git passed the component a second time doesn't necessarily mean it's up to the job. Maybe the first guy who failed you was actually right?!

Considering the DOE now costs over 120 ish euro. Including VAT.

Yes, It is nothing more than a money racket.

aaakev

Theanswers wrote: »

Considering the DOE now costs over 120 ish euro. Including VAT.

Yes, It is nothing more than a money racket.

€110.70 for a 3.5ton van. I agree its too expensive but nothing more than a money racket? So it doesnt make sure all the vans driving around are safe??

rubberdiddies

aaakev wrote: »

that makes no sense... An engine warning light would not lead you to a faulty alternator... And if your mechanic changed one brake pad i wouldnt be using him again. Brakes ware together so you dont change one at a time you replace both sides together.

Tyres often fail not because of ware but damage to the inner or outer wall, very hard to explain to some people that the bubble sticking Out of the tyre is dangerous when some mechanics tell them its not!! Happens regularly believe it or not

Whether it makes sense or not this is exactly what happened. What am I to do? Turn back time and tell them off?

It was the warning light that appears in the form of a battery symbol on the dash. Maybe I'm getting the terminology wrong?

Again as explained above the brake pad mention was my wording. I don't know/recall exactly what he did. Suffice to say I was charged €70+VAT.

aaakev

rubberdiddies wrote: »

Whether it makes sense or not this is exactly what happened. What am I to do? Turn back time and tell them off?

It was the warning light that appears in the form of a battery symbol on the dash. Maybe I'm getting the terminology wrong?

Again as explained above the brake pad mention was my wording. I don't know/recall exactly what he did. Suffice to say I was charged €70+VAT.

Obviously im not saying go back in time.... Im just trying to make sense of what your saying.

That is the battery light, its a red light. The engine light is an amber/orange light in the shape of an engine

rubberdiddies

aaakev wrote: »

Obviously im not saying go back in time.... Im just trying to make sense of what your saying.

That is the battery light, its a red light. The engine light is an amber/orange light in the shape of an engine

I should have said 'dashboard warning light' instead. I can talk to you in detail about the wonders of web design but not about mechanics I'm afraid!

All I'm really saying is that I beleve the DOEs should be carried out in an independent test area not affiliated with a garage. I know that's obviously not gonna happen but it's something I've often thought about.

I'm going to be getting rid of my van before its due it's next DOE so the increase won't affect me but it is quite a steep increase.

bucketybuck

aaakev wrote: »

I work in a main dealers which has a test centre, i get no special treatment on sales vehicles and fail for the very same things as everyone else coming through the door, there is also never anything like you implied where things are exagerated or lies told in order to get work into the garage.

We have the same situation, a test centre attached to our workshop. The idea that we get away with anything, or get special treatment is very amusing to me, its just not like that.

rubberdiddies wrote: »

My local mechanic replaced a fuse i believe which got rid of the engine warning light and put on 1 brake pad.

Your local mechanic is an idiot.

Going Forward

bucketybuck wrote: »

Your local mechanic is an idiot.

Or a liar. One brake pad?

bucketybuck

rubberdiddies wrote: »

from what i remember there was an engine warning light pre-test (which had been continuously lit for a number of months). they said it needed a new alternator, 2 brake pads, a new tyre, mini service and labour.

My local mechanic replaced a fuse i believe which got rid of the engine warning light and put on 1 brake pad.
.

For some reason I feel the need to come back to this. The list you gave above as some example of a Rip-off Garage could easily be nothing of the sort.

I bet you anything when the van failed the test that you asked the garage to give a quote for repair, but you didn't actually pay them to investigate the faults. I bet they got a fail list and were asked to make a price up from that.

Hence why you get a price for an alternator, they have to quote worst case scenario. Brakes worn, they quote for brakes, and as a safety issue they damn well should. A mini-service? Whats the problem here, they quoted for it, they didn't make you do it. And a tyre? Tyres can be worn and still pass the DOE test, I bet if the tyre was on the limit and if they didn't mention it they would be called cowboys that didn't even check the van.

So rubberdiddies, did you pay that garage to fully investigate those reported faults or did you just give them a list and ask them to pull a price from somewhere?

Red Nissan

Ardeehey wrote: »

Price increases are unfortunate but job needs to be done, just ask the family of the poor schoolkid that was killed and the rest injured in Offaly a couple of years back...rear axle came off the bus!

And I believe it had only recently been tested. Commercial are already subject to a yearly test even for brand new vehicles and had been subject to a test, long, long, long before the NCT arrived for private motorists.

Red Nissan

Theanswers wrote: »

Why does it take longer to discover if a commercial landcruiser is safe vs the same passenger landcruiser?

Commercials are tested very year and busses and Taxi's every six months. NCT, four years from new and two year intervals?

Going Forward

Red Nissan wrote: »

Commercials are tested very year and busses and Taxi's every six months. NCT, four years from new and two year intervals?

Every six months? Since when?

Going Forward

Red Nissan wrote: »

Commercials are tested very year and busses and Taxi's every six months. NCT, four years from new and two year intervals?

He meant the difference between how long it takes to do the test, as in hours and minutes......

Red Nissan

aaakev wrote: »

Fair enough, i read it that you thought place that tests vehicles and also repairs them is going to be up to no good...

One will meet all kinds. Many moons ago my Hiace had a fail due to a bad bearing, the mechanic said "I can book you in immediately for €150 or slip me €80 and I'll fix it in the line" ~ he did.

Red Nissan

Going Forward wrote: »

Every six months? Since when?

I believe it's in the raft of changes since the first of this month.

Going Forward

Ardeehey wrote: »

Price increases are unfortunate but job needs to be done, just ask the family of the poor schoolkid that was killed and the rest injured in Offaly a couple of years back...rear axle came off the bus!

No one is saying that vehicles dont need to be tested.

visual

To best of my knowledge you can only buy pads in sets for both sides. Total 4 pads.
I have a feeling OP is mistaken only one pad was fitted.

bucketybuck

visual wrote: »

To best of my knowledge you can only buy pads in sets for both sides. Total 4 pads.
I have a feeling OP is mistaken only one pad was fitted.

Yep, pads are sold in sets these days.

You should always change brake pads on both sides of an axle at the same time, but unfortunately there are still people out there who think they are saving money by only changing one side if they think they can get away with it.

Going Forward

bucketybuck wrote: »

Yep, pads are sold in sets these days.

You should always change brake pads on both sides of an axle at the same time, but unfortunately there are still people out there who think they are saving money by only changing one side if they think they can get away with it.

I'd say OP is just making a mistake.
Otherwise mechanic is a loon.

rubberdiddies

Going Forward wrote: »

I'd say OP is just making a mistake.
Otherwise mechanic is a loon.

Yeah I said earlier that my knowledge of motoring terms is limited. He probably changed 2 brake pads so.

Can't see why he is an idiot. He saved me from having to pay approx €750.
The van passed te doe and I drove it for another year. Does that make him an idiot?

As another poster mentioned maybe they gave me an estimate. Maybe. But if so it put me off.

Not entirely sure why I'm being attacked here. I'm posting a factual account of what happened about 3 years ago.

I've already stated clearly that I wasn't tarring all garages with the same brush. Quite clearly stated that in my second post as well as explaining my brake pad terminology in other posts!

bucketybuck

rubberdiddies wrote: »

Can't see why he is an idiot. He saved me from having to pay approx €750.
The van passed te doe and I drove it for another year. Does that make him an idiot?

I know lots of mechanics that could save you money. They would be more than happy to let you drive your vehicle on nearly bald tyres and with uneven wear on your brake pads. But at least you saved money!

As another poster mentioned maybe they gave me an estimate. Maybe. But if so it put me off.

Did you pay the garage and let them properly inspect your car?

Going Forward

Any (independent) mechanic worth his salt should be able to give a reasonably accurate estimate based on a DOE fail sheet.

The only major hurdle would be if there is an emission fault.

I had one experience of a DOE centre when, just as I picked up the keys after a van failed the test, they had an estimate already conveniently prepared for me.

I got my own mechanic to do it for less than half the price.

The reason why is that a main dealer will supply main dealer original parts, eg, branded brake pads costing say, 80euros as opposed to OEM costing E25, along with around E60 per hour labour- they've got to pay for the big fancy glass forecourt.

The same goes for filters, bearings, track rod ends etc.

Develop a good relationship with a motor factors and a good mechanic and you will save big time.

NuckingFacker

D.O.E Test? Lol. I buy a lot of vans, I take the DOE as being bull till proved otherwise. You can buy a doe, it'll cost a few bob more than the legit test, but it's there to be bought regardless. I now tend to buy not doe'd vans, as it saves me having to pay €1000 extra for a madey-uppey piece of paper. I DOE them myself, at a center I know and trust, for peace of mind. €98 versus €70 ish? Big deal. It's €30. It's not the end of the world.

bucketybuck

Going Forward wrote: »

Any (independent) mechanic worth his salt should be able to give a reasonably accurate estimate based on a DOE fail sheet.

The Alternator warning light is on the vehicle dash. What do you quote for on the estimate?

- Do you quote 5 minutes labour for a fuse?
- Do you quote 2 hours labour checking for a wiring fault?
- Do you include the price of a new alternator in case it is a fault with that?

You haven't even touched or seen the vehicle, what do you quote for? Remember now, if you didn't quote for the alternator and it turns out that the alternator is actually faulty well now you are a rip-off garage doing things that you never quoted for. So come on, whats in your estimate?

The problem with the original story is that one garage had to do an estimate sight unseen, while the second mechanic was given the car and told to try and fix it, and the OP is shocked that there might be a price difference between the two. Imagine that.

Red Nissan

NuckingFacker wrote: »

D.O.E Test? Lol. I buy a lot of vans, I take the DOE as being bull till proved otherwise. You can buy a doe, it'll cost a few bob more than the legit test, but it's there to be bought regardless. I now tend to buy not doe'd vans, as it saves me having to pay €1000 extra for a madey-uppey piece of paper. I DOE them myself, at a center I know and trust, for peace of mind. €98 versus €70 ish? Big deal. It's €30. It's not the end of the world.

For this reason, from this month, you're out.

Going Forward

bucketybuck wrote: »

The Alternator warning light is on the vehicle dash. What do you quote for on the estimate?

- Do you quote 5 minutes labour for a fuse?
- Do you quote 2 hours labour checking for a wiring fault?
- Do you include the price of a new alternator in case it is a fault with that?

You haven't even touched or seen the vehicle, what do you quote for? Remember now, if you didn't quote for the alternator and it turns out that the alternator is actually faulty well now you are a rip-off garage doing things that you never quoted for. So come on, whats in your estimate?

The problem with the original story is that one garage had to do an estimate sight unseen, while the second mechanic was given the car and told to try and fix it, and the OP is shocked that there might be a price difference between the two. Imagine that.

Wouldnt an alternator light would point to a faulty or wearing alternator or a bad earth?

A reconditioned/exchange alternator is in the region of E70. Not terribly big money either way and not difficult to replace either 2 or 3 bolts. If its an oldish vehicle might as well change it anyway, it wont last forever.

Replacing a blown fuse wont cure an alternator/battery light on dash problem.

Shorts blowing fuses on the other hand can take hours to trace admittedly.
But I think from my reading this is not the case here.

bucketybuck

Going Forward wrote: »

Wouldnt an alternator light would point to a faulty or wearing alternator or a bad earth?

A reconditioned/exchange alternator is in the region of E70. Not terribly big money either way and not difficult to replace either 2 or 3 bolts. If its an oldish vehicle might as well change it anyway, it wont last forever.

Replacing a blown fuse wont cure an alternator/battery light on dash problem.

Shorts blowing fuses on the other hand can take hours to trace admittedly.
But I think from my reading this is not the case here.

You don't need to tell me any of that. So what would you put on your sight unseen estimate?

NuckingFacker

Red Nissan wrote: »

For this reason, from this month, you're out.

In as much as? I take them, replace the brakes, tyres, all bulbs, whatever needs doing and then get them actually tested as opposed to pretendey tested. I highly doubt i'm out, tbh.

Going Forward

bucketybuck wrote: »

You don't need to tell me any of that. So what would you put on your sight unseen estimate?

I wouldnt give nor expect to receive any accurate sight unseen estimate whether for plumbing or mechanical repair work, would you?

Red Nissan

NuckingFacker wrote: »

In as much as? I take them, replace the brakes, tyres, all bulbs, whatever needs doing and then get them actually tested as opposed to pretendey tested. I highly doubt i'm out, tbh.

My simple story, many moons ago, took van to test centre, failed, sold van, told buyer it failed, he came back to show me certificate, three years later told me it was the BEST van he ever had.

So anything goes. And I suppose, it still can.

Point not to missed though, in all [my] cases the vehicle was sound.

bucketybuck

Going Forward wrote: »

I wouldnt give nor expect to receive any accurate sight unseen estimate whether for plumbing or mechanical repair work, would you?

I have many times been asked to prepare an estimate based on nothing but a DOE failure list. Its part of the job, I do not have any choice in the matter. All I can do is work on a worst case scenario, and we are instructed to overestimate not underestimate as customers are rarely rational about the final invoice exceeding the estimated costs.

Clearly you yourself would not attempt an estimate based on nothing but the knowledge that the alternator light is on, which brings us back to the original story. He received a sight unseen estimate which obviously was based on the worst case scenario of service, replace alternator, replace brake pads and replace tyre.

Then on the internet this becomes another horrific tale of a nasty dealer trying to rip off the poor driver.