Proposed Victorian club permit changes

[DoubleChevron]

Hi Guys,

break out your pens and get writing. We currently have a brilliantly fantastic club permit scheme in Victoria. Not happy with this, they are trying to enforce photographic requirements (a MASSIVE impost on large clubs) and FULL ROADWORTHIES.... To get a modern vehicle through a modern victorian Roadworthy is hard enough.... But to get a bloody 40+ year old car thorugh would be near bloody impossible.

Victorian Club Permit Scheme changes (http://www.aussiefrogs.com/forum/froggy-chat/113087-victorian-club-permit-scheme-changes.html)

I have posted the proposed changes here. Let in-inundate Vicroads with Objections. We DO NOT want enforced Roadworthy certificates on vintage and classic vehicle. A lot leaked and weeped when new, how can they expect to be perfectly leak free (with photographic evidence) 50+ year later :o

The "M" modification plates ? Brilliant idea, it removes the grey area currently plaguing the scheme :)

seeya,
Shane L.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Unlike other states, in NSW Roadworthies have been mandatory on all registered vehicles every year and my SIII Land Rover on HCRS gets an inspection station roadworthy every year too.

Having unsafe cars on the road is not what any club/historic/or special interest scheme is about.

[Scouse]

Hi Guys,

break out your pens and get writing. We currently have a brilliantly fantastic club permit scheme in Victoria. Not happy with this, they are trying to enforce photographic requirements (a MASSIVE impost on large clubs) and FULL ROADWORTHIES.... To get a modern vehicle through a modern victorian Roadworthy is hard enough.... But to get a bloody 40+ year old car thorugh would be near bloody impossible.

Victorian Club Permit Scheme changes (http://www.aussiefrogs.com/forum/froggy-chat/113087-victorian-club-permit-scheme-changes.html)

I have posted the proposed changes here. Let in-inundate Vicroads with Objections. We DO NOT want enforced Roadworthy certificates on vintage and classic vehicle. A lot leaked and weeped when new, how can they expect to be perfectly leak free (with photographic evidence) 50+ year later :o

The "M" modification plates ? Brilliant idea, it removes the grey area currently plaguing the scheme :)

seeya,
Shane L.I think you'll find that the photographic evidence is required to verify that the car was suitable for the Club Permit scheme to start with.
That way, when the car is found to have a V8 or flares/massive wheels down the track, the authorities will have evidence that this work was done after the permit was issued.

[Bigbjorn]

Unlike other states, in NSW Roadworthies have been mandatory on all registered vehicles every year and my SIII Land Rover on HCRS gets an inspection station roadworthy every year too.

Having unsafe cars on the road is not what any club/historic/or special interest scheme is about.

I wholeheartedly agree. And the certificate should be provided by a licensed inspector not by a club mate rubber stamping a declaration.

[DoubleChevron]

Unlike other states, in NSW Roadworthies have been mandatory on all registered vehicles every year and my SIII Land Rover on HCRS gets an inspection station roadworthy every year too.

Having unsafe cars on the road is not what any club/historic/or special interest scheme is about.

I've seen the absolutely laughablely "roadworthy" cars from NSW in the past.

It's nothing at all to do with allowing "unroadworthy" vehicles on the roads. One of my cars has been owned since 1996 (that's 18years without a roadworthy .... WHY HAVEN"T I HAD THOUSANDS OF ACCIDENTS MAIMING PEOPLE IN THIS CAR :o :o :o..... It had "one" roadworthy back then. How is this more or less dangerous than someone putting there pride and joy onto a club permit.'

The reality is the "roadworthyness" of a vehicle has absolutely no statistical impact on it being in an accident that causes death or injury ( otherwise south australia would have horendous accident statistics. They have NO roadworthy ... ever ... there, even when vehicles changes hands).

this is how stringent they are:
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/~/media/files/documents/business%20and%20industry/vsi26_1212_web.ashx

The tester also needs to keep photographic evidence of all testing. including for leaks. The photos must be stored in multiple offsite archives and all sorts of bull****.

Last time I got a roadworthy was on a 2year old Citroen C4 that had only done 30,000kms from new. It failed as the windscreen washer didn't work. I took it back (after changing the blown fuse).... The guy took the keys, parked the car on the street, took a photo of it infront of his business, took photos of it's VIN numbers, started the car and took photos of the wipers running and the windscreen washers working :o :o This is a requirement of the RWC in Victoria :eek: :eek: :eek:

Imagine getting a 35 year old Range Rover that weeped everywhere when new .... let alone 30years later through this ... unless you coudl find someone that was willing to "massage" the piccies and requirements and bit to ensure a pass.

It's a load of bull**** designed to push older cars off the road (older as in 5+years) as they become un-economic to tyr and keep on the roads. The car industry loves this as it'll mean more sales of new cars.

My father fathers 1950 Traction Avant will be ready for a club permit soon. Can you imagine trying to get a 1950 model car with no syncho's on the lower gears, drum brakes, "pump" windscreen washer, single speed wipers, no demister fan, no indicators or factory lighting through a roadworthy. No seatbelts (they can be fitted, but are very ineffective due to the car being designed in the 1930s' so there being nowhere substantial enough to bolt the belt too). Lets no mention grease points, ball joints and driveshafts without rubber boots. etc....

There's not a snowmans chance in hell this could pass a modern roadworthy ... let alone the brake tests etc...

We used to have a local guy that lived and breathed old cars ... everyone took there oldies to him for Roadworthies. As soon as these modern roadworthy requirements came in ... he shutup shop. It wasn't worth all the bull**** involved.

seeya,
Shane L.

[Bigbjorn]

Shane, your 1950 Citroen only has to comply with the regulations in force then. You don't have to fit seat belts (in Qld.) if the car predates the requirement and has never had belts fitted. The gearbox is not part of a safety inspection. Drum brakes, the wipers, lighting only need to work as well as their design permits. The pump washer is a rarity on a car of that vintage and I don't think anyone would notice if you removed it prior to inspection. Vic Roads requirements are not excessive (I read that link) and only what is to be expected, and are similar to those requirements legislated in other states. Qld. Transport are savage on oil leaks following representations from the motor cycling groups about the amount of oil at intersections.

[DoubleChevron]

Shane, your 1950 Citroen only has to comply with the regulations in force then. You don't have to fit seat belts (in Qld.) if the car predates the requirement and has never had belts fitted. The gearbox is not part of a safety inspection. Drum brakes, the wipers, lighting only need to work as well as their design permits. The pump washer is a rarity on a car of that vintage and I don't think anyone would notice if you removed it prior to inspection. Vic Roads requirements are not excessive (I read that link) and only what is to be expected, and are similar to those requirements legislated in other states. Qld. Transport are savage on oil leaks following representations from the motor cycling groups about the amount of oil at intersections.

It'll have seatbelts fitted... In theory everything you say is true. THe reality is, you'll have a bugger of a time trying to find someone that'll book in a vintage car... and then your reliant on them understanding and applying common sense. Have you ever tried to get a modern (as in 1985 Citroen CX) through a roadworthy.

FAILED:
--indicators don't self cancel
--slop in the steering
--handbrake won't apply in 3clicks
--brake pedal is hard
--has air horns
--etc,etc.etc...

Then your into fighting with the bloody tester "the indicator never self canceled" ... "I want them to self cancel" .... "Shove your roadworhty fee where the sun don't shine then I'm not paying" ... and on and on we go. "Mate, start the car, there should be slop in the steering with it off".... "the brake pedal should be hard, it's just a valve" .... **** me, the handbrake self adjusts to upto 15clicks automatically on this car" ... "AGAIN, I'M NOT REMOVING the god damn air horns, I've shown you the factory two stage button on the dash, they only work if you press really hard on the button to over-ride the town horn" ... and on and on we go....

Find someone with half a brain "A Citroen, this'll be interesting" ... "No worries mate, yeah weird, not self cancelling indicators, no worries'.... "nice car mate, good to see something different, here's your roadworthy" ... Or your list of valid things that need repairing.

it will all be fun no doubt. All I know is getting a roadworthy now in victoria is far from easy. Infact can be downright bloody difficult. The ludicrous bit is after all the bull**** ... the car will never be checked again ... ever .. .if I own it for another 20years... How does it being classed as "roadworthy" at 3:30pm on the 15 Novemeber in 2014 impact the safety of the car over the next 20years :wasntme:

There is no doubt I'll still own my cars in another 20years too.

seeya,
Shane L.

[B92 8NW]

It is hard to get a roadworthy in Vic, I'll agree, but it's also ridiculously easy to get a dodgy one:D
The current system doesn't work. It's not about safety, it's just an earner. If it was about safety, they'd go the way of NSW.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

I've seen the absolutely laughablely "roadworthy" cars from NSW in the past. And I have seen Victorian vehicles with external rust you could have put your hand through.

It's nothing at all to do with allowing "unroadworthy" vehicles on the roads. One of my cars has been owned since 1996 (that's 18years without a roadworthy .... WHY HAVEN"T I HAD THOUSANDS OF ACCIDENTS MAIMING PEOPLE IN THIS CAR :o :o :o..... It had "one" roadworthy back then. How is this more or less dangerous than someone putting there pride and joy onto a club permit.'And both you and I would make sure that we have vehicles in good, roadworthy condition. I can't say that about a lot of people with "old" cars.
The reality is the "roadworthyness" of a vehicle has absolutely no statistical impact on it being in an accident that causes death or injury ( otherwise south australia would have horendous accident statistics. They have NO roadworthy ... ever ... there, even when vehicles changes hands). I would like to see your evidence for that claim? :D

this is how stringent they are:
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/~/media/files/documents/business%20and%20industry/vsi26_1212_web.ashx

The tester also needs to keep photographic evidence of all testing. including for leaks. The photos must be stored in multiple offsite archives and all sorts of bull****.

Last time I got a roadworthy was on a 2year old Citroen C4 that had only done 30,000kms from new. It failed as the windscreen washer ...Very annoying, I have to agree! :mad:
Imagine getting a 35 year old Range Rover that weeped everywhere when new .... let alone 30years later through this ... unless you could find someone that was willing to "massage" the piccies and requirements and bit to ensure a pass.I have a 30 year old Range Rover I've owned since new and it only started it's first leak after about 15 years. because I kept it serviced by professionals.
It's a load of bull**** designed to push older cars off the road (older as in 5+years) as they become un-economic to tyr and keep on the roads. The car industry loves this as it'll mean more sales of new cars.You may be correct, however with classic car enthusiasts like ourselves, we will jump through whatever hoops they put in front of us because of our love of cars and all the wrecks that owners who only want cheap rego will send their heaps of junk to the recyclers. Thats a good thing.

[Bigbjorn]

I would like to add this comment for any Victorians who are getting the hump about proposed changes to their very generous part-time registration scheme. Don't antagonise the bureaucrats. You could end up with a much worse scheme. Qld. and NSW do not have discounted part-time registration scheme. They have a permit to use an unregistered vehicle under certain laid down conditions. I know from conferring with Qld. Transport on behalf of the combined clubs that the bureaucrats regard the schemes as un-necessary and serving no useful purpose, are something extra to administer, only provide a benefit to a relatively small number of people, and the big kicker, cost the government money. Get the wrong powerful peoples backs up and you could end up with no scheme at all.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Absolutely correct Brian.

We already have insurance companies who give discounts to people who don't drive to work (and therefore are the proverbial weekend drivers) and there have been numerous talk-back radio commentary that regular registration should be based upon the days you drive and not standard flat rates for all.

Governments want increasing revenue so this can only lead to much higher daily rates and increases to cover the administration of such a monsterous beaurocratic nightmare.

[Scouse]

The tester also needs to keep photographic evidence of all testing. including for leaks. The photos must be stored in multiple offsite archives and all sorts of bull****.

I can't see any reference to photos being required for a roadworthy check.


Oh, I'd put your pen away too. According to the information you've posted on your other site, and what is written in the current Restored Cars magazine, these changes have already been discussed with the AOMC & Federation & what each club is getting now is notification of what is going to happen.

[101RRS]

I would like to add this comment for any Victorians who are getting the hump about proposed changes to their very generous part-time registration scheme. Don't antagonise the bureaucrats. You could end up with a much worse scheme.

Yes - I agree.

The ACT Council of Car Clubs had been negotiating with the Govt for a couple of years to bring in the 90 day a year system that Victoria has. While not a lot of headway had been made at least negotiations were still open.

A club member who was frustrated with the slow progress wrote an abusive letter to the Chief Minister over the issue - guess what - an answer within 2 weeks - not approved.

So be careful in stirring the pot as it may very well backfire in a big way.

Garry

[460cixy]

Our chief minister needs a few more abusive letters I recon

[Mick_Marsh]

I have had to get one or two roadworthies from time to time and, in my opinion, Shane has a very real and valid concern.

I can't see any reference to photos being required for a roadworthy check.
Yes, and yet they are.
Another thing you won't find there is the brake fade test. My 1970 Mercedes with excellent four wheel disc brakes only just passed that test. I doubt my S2a with drum brakes all round will pass it, or the Inter for that matter.
And there is that other roadworthy item you will probably not find in print, "unsightly".
Mechanically my Commodore is in a good roadworthy condition except it would be considered to be unsightly. It would not pass a roadworthy today unless I get it resprayed. I've been told that by someone that does roadworthies.

More food for thought, there have been many cases when blue slipped vehicles have failed the Victorian roadworthy.

I have many Victorian roadworty stories I can tell you from experience.

Thanks for posting this Shane. I have been trying to find out facts in print on this subject for some time. The last I read was the roadworthy for these vehicles was going to be a more sympathetic one given these vehicles were constructed to different ADRs. It seems that point has been lost in the documentation you posted.

[Scouse]

I have been trying to find out facts in print on this subject for some time. Surely this subject has been discussed at car club level prior to the seminar :confused:.


Restored Cars has a ink to the Bristol Owners Club site:
http://www.bristolownersclubofaustralia.com.au/download/Summary-of-CPS-Seminar.pdf

[DoubleChevron]

Surely this subject has been discussed at car club level prior to the seminar :confused:.


Restored Cars has a ink to the Bristol Owners Club site:
http://www.bristolownersclubofaustralia.com.au/download/Summary-of-CPS-Seminar.pdf

It depends how active your club is with regards too the AOMC. I live in a regional area and have little to do with the running of clubs and weekly/monthly meetings.

I'm a member of the Citroen classic car (australia wide), the CCCV (citroen car club of victoria) and have been meaning to join the ballarat vintage/classic car club (there a great bunch of guys, I know some of them). Now to get to club or AOMC meetings I'd have to travel to the other side of meblourne on weekdays, which isn't going to happen unless I take the afternoon off work.

So the only way you willl find out anything is by the monthly car club newletters (if you club figures they care enough about the permit changes to print the details). I'm also a member of the Victorian Weird wheels club. This is a smaller club based in Regional Victoria, this is the club I found out about he changes through... as it's small enough the members got together and did a universal "Oh crap" .....

Don't get me wrong, the permit scheme is the best thing the victorian government has ever done for the motorist as far as I"m concerned. Everytime the sun comes out, it's like a town wide classic car meet out ont he road. It's bloody fantastic.

Bring in the "M" plates, but whatever you do, don't enforce full modern roadworthies on cars. If it must be a tested, make it a far less stringent "safety check".

seeya,
Shane L.

[Mick_Marsh]

Surely this subject has been discussed at car club level prior to the seminar :confused:.


Restored Cars has a ink to the Bristol Owners Club site:
http://www.bristolownersclubofaustralia.com.au/download/Summary-of-CPS-Seminar.pdf
Yep. It has but, what Vicroads say to the genereal public is different to what the AOMC interprets it as. I refer you to this section in the document you have posted that I am already aware of.

VicRoads will look at how it could provide support to RWC testers unfamiliar with older vehicles to assist them in understanding what test standards are appropriate for older motor cars.When Vicroads inspect a vehicle, all they are interested in is the engine number and chassis number is the same as that on the roadworthy. Whether or not the vehicle is roadworthy is left to the tester.
To give you an example of why I quoted that section of the document you posted, I registered a 1968 Mini a few years ago. It failed on a roadworthy on a few points one of which was seatbelts. Now, as you are no doubt aware, a 1968 vehicle falls under the Second Edition ADRs and, being manufactured in 1968, does not require seat belts (unless previously fitted). If seat belts are fitted, they require engineering under the VASS. But, for fifty bucks the tester fitted a second hand set he had lying around. I let him fit them as, if Vicroads had wanted engineering approval, it would have been the testers responsibility. The point of this story was that the licensed vehicle tester did not test the vehicle to the ADRs applicable to the vehicle. That is what that quote gets at. The AOMC say Vicroads will assist the licensed vehicle tester but in Shanes documents, nowhere does it say the vehicles will be tested against the standards appropriate for older motor cars.

[Mick_Marsh]

I would like to add this comment for any Victorians who are getting the hump about proposed changes to their very generous part-time registration scheme.
Just to clarify, it is not registration, it is a permit i.e. you are permitted to drive the vehicle on Victorian roads under the conditions of the permit. This permit is not valid in some states of Australia but registration is valid in all states and territories of Australia. If the conditions of the permit are not followed, you can be charged with driving an unregistered vehicle.
With Vicroads, what you read on the web is not necessarily what is practiced in reality. I've tripped them up on this on a few occasions.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Hi Shane

In NSW we have been going through similar and ongoing problems with RMS(RTA). e.g. if they wanted vehicles with upgraded brakes (which is an acceptable safety improvement under HCRS), the RMS was insisting on individual vehicle testing and not type approval or cross approval. The problem was that they wanted the vehicles tested at something like 140-160KPH where the owner would have to hire a drag strip or airfield to do the testing off the public roads. Many classic cars wouldn't even go that fast.

Even the current RMS preferred position of 80% of the vehicle's V/max would require the hire of a strip somewhere.

Diana

[101RRS]

If individual roadworthy testers in Vic are requiring cars to have equipment that they were never fitted with such as seatbelts and non cancelling blinkers then those individual inspectors need to be reported as clearly later standards cannot be legally imposed on older vehicles.

I appreciate this may be difficult for some individuals but there is where the State Council of Car Clubs comes into play.

I wonder why the some States set up the Historic registration scheme as a "permit" - here is the ACT it is just another class of registration and is not a "permit". One of the few good aspects of our system - the 90 day system would be great though.

Garry

[DoubleChevron]

Hi Shane

In NSW we have been going through similar and ongoing problems with RMS(RTA). e.g. if they wanted vehicles with upgraded brakes (which is an acceptable safety improvement under HCRS), the RMS was insisting on individual vehicle testing and not type approval or cross approval. The problem was that they wanted the vehicles tested at something like 140-160KPH where the owner would have to hire a drag strip or airfield to do the testing off the public roads. Many classic cars wouldn't even go that fast.

Even the current RMS preferred position of 80% of the vehicle's V/max would require the hire of a strip somewhere.

Diana

I dunno ... I'm just trying to imagine an old Series I ... or 101 hurtling along at 140-160km/h ... But my imagine just isn't that great.

So your saying if I add a brake booster or upgraded the braking on the old Traction Avant .... It would need to do brake testing from 140km/h ? Rated top speed was 115km/h when they were new. And 115km/h would be pushing the old longstroke 3 bearing engine well beyond it's design limits, the frail 3spd manual gearbox limits topspeed due to engine revs....

Very, very few classic cars would do 160km/h. Mine *wouldn't*. Well the one in my avatar would, but that's hardly what you'd call the sort of classic car you would upgrade brakes an performance on. It was explained to me the brake fade test out at the Wombat Forest camp. There isn't a hope in hell *any* classic car would pass the brake fade test ( Well there is maybe 1/2dozen factory vehicles that would, Renault 8/10, Citroen DS, and exotics with massive inboard disc brakes similar to the Citroen DS's). That is all. Anything with drums would overheat and fail.

seeya
Shane L.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Shane

Thats what the RMS wanted. Can you imagine 140KPH on a model T Ford if they wanted to add front brakes or replace the mechanical with hydraulic rears?

In the last couple of years the 4WD association, the Hot Rod Association and the Council of Motoring Clubs have formed an association of peak NSW councils "ACMC" and have formed a new technical advisory body. The current NSW Roads Minister has seen the absurd position that RMS has been taking. Even after the Minister stopped introduction on new laws the RMS tried to re-introduce the same VSI by regulation not via parliament and heads have rolled in the RMS, but that has only been a minor win.

Another absurdity was bodies. We all know that prior to WWII many vehicles arrived in Australia as rolling chassis and the bodies were built locally, often out of timber frame with metal cladding. Holden Motor Body Builders were one such company making bodies for GM chassis. The RMS wanted to consider restored 1920s and 1930s vehicles/chassis with remanufactured bodies as new individually constructed vehicles and subject to ADR current in 2013 when the vehicle was finished.

[Mick_Marsh]

Hi Shane

In NSW we have been going through similar and ongoing problems with RMS(RTA). e.g. if they wanted vehicles with upgraded brakes (which is an acceptable safety improvement under HCRS), the RMS was insisting on individual vehicle testing and not type approval or cross approval. The problem was that they wanted the vehicles tested at something like 140-160KPH where the owner would have to hire a drag strip or airfield to do the testing off the public roads. Many classic cars wouldn't even go that fast.

Even the current RMS preferred position of 80% of the vehicle's V/max would require the hire of a strip somewhere.

Diana
Good luck in getting the S3 up to those speeds. I assume you have the disc brake conversion on it. If it still had the drum brakes, i doubt it would pass the "brake fade" test that is applicable to todays Victorian RWC.
Of note, I have a friend who has a 1920's Buick. It does not have or require seat belts, is capable of speeds in excess of 80mph, has brakes of the type that has shoes that apply to the external part of the drum (and more takes the edge off the speed rather than stopping) and this vehicle only requires a club inspection to get a permit.

I would like to point out, I'm not against compulsory roadworthies to get club permits. The 101 is on a club permit and, rather than puting the responsibility on the club, I chose to get a roadworthy to get the permit.

[Mick_Marsh]

If individual roadworthy testers in Vic are requiring cars to have equipment that they were never fitted with such as seatbelts and non cancelling blinkers then those individual inspectors need to be reported as clearly later standards cannot be legally imposed on older vehicles.
You've hit the nail on the head there Gary. In all the rhetoric, everyone is expecting the older cars to be tested to the design of the vehicle but that is not translating into the documentation. That is the worry. The old boys who are familiar with older cars are getting out of the business and the licensed testers of today aren't familiar with a pre-air bag vehicle
To follow on from something Brian said, if you complain about the tester, you may find you won't be able to get a RWC for that car. RWC testers are not keen to test a car that has been failed by another tester (another personal experience thing).

If (and that is a big if)
VicRoads will look at how it could provide support to RWC testers unfamiliar with older vehicles to assist them in understanding what test standards are appropriate for older motor cars.was in the Vicroads roadworthy requirements documentation in a prominent, easy to find place detailing what the requirements are, I doubt people would have concerns.
As it stands, the Vicroads documentation is open to misinterpretation or interpretation outside the spirit of the scheme.

[Homestar]

UNfortunately part of the problem is the car clubs themselves. When I say that I mean 'car clubs' - there are plenty of 'clubs that only have 1 or 2 members just so they can get cars on the road without being checked by anyone. Anyone can register themseves as a car club and then 'Inspect' their own cars and pass them for the club permit scheme.

This means there are heavily modified vehicles on the roads without proper engineering or anything - that is the loophole Vicroads are trying to close.

While I agree with some of what's being said here - like there should be some allowance for the fact the vehcile is old and how it was originally designed, I don't have an issue with having to have my vehicles safe and roadworthy before I can use them on the roads.

My 101 would be close to road worthy right now - maybe a couple of minor issues, but nothing I couldnt sort quickly and cheaply. It doesnt leak oil from anywhere apart from the overdrive - which I would soon have removed if I needed a RWC for it.

I've got a Mechanic who is sensible about how RWC are done - he ensures all points are coverd and safe, but he doesn't make stuff up that doesn't need doing or make it any more difficult than it has to be. His take on oil leaks is that if nothing drips off the car while he is actually conduting the test, then it passes - the car can be weeping, and quite damp before it starts dripping and that's fine with him - and that is the Vicroads requirements - not dripping, but can be weeping and damp. Most Mechanics will fail that, but if you find someone like that - as Garry said - report them - I've had quite a few interesting conversations over the years questioning some peoples interpretation of the rules. They are quite clearly laid down and fairly easy to understand.

Tale a copy of the RWC rules with you when you get a car tested and if they fail something - ask them to point out inthe rules what part it failed on - you would be surprised how much some Mechanics fail for no reason but their own opinions.

[Judo]

UNfortunately part of the problem is the car clubs themselves. When I say that I mean 'car clubs' - there are plenty of 'clubs that only have 1 or 2 members just so they can get cars on the road without being checked by anyone. Anyone can register themseves as a car club and then 'Inspect' their own cars and pass them for the club permit scheme. This means there are heavily modified vehicles on the roads without proper engineering or anything - that is the loophole Vicroads are trying to close. While I agree with some of what's being said here - like there should be some allowance for the fact the vehcile is old and how it was originally designed, I don't have an issue with having to have my vehicles safe and roadworthy before I can use them on the roads. My 101 would be close to road worthy right now - maybe a couple of minor issues, but nothing I couldnt sort quickly and cheaply. It doesnt leak oil from anywhere apart from the overdrive - which I would soon have removed if I needed a RWC for it. I've got a Mechanic who is sensible about how RWC are done - he ensures all points are coverd and safe, but he doesn't make stuff up that doesn't need doing or make it any more difficult than it has to be. His take on oil leaks is that if nothing drips off the car while he is actually conduting the test, then it passes - the car can be weeping, and quite damp before it starts dripping and that's fine with him - and that is the Vicroads requirements - not dripping, but can be weeping and damp. Most Mechanics will fail that, but if you find someone like that - as Garry said - report them - I've had quite a few interesting conversations over the years questioning some peoples interpretation of the rules. They are quite clearly laid down and fairly easy to understand. Tale a copy of the RWC rules with you when you get a car tested and if they fail something - ask them to point out inthe rules what part it failed on - you would be surprised how much some Mechanics fail for no reason but their own opinions.

That gives me an idea. Leave a copy of the RWC rules cover page up on the passenger seat when you take the vehicle in. Subtle enough hint?

[Mick_Marsh]

I've got a Mechanic who is sensible about how RWC are done - he ensures all points are coverd and safe, but he doesn't make stuff up that doesn't need doing or make it any more difficult than it has to be. His take on oil leaks is that if nothing drips off the car while he is actually conduting the test, then it passes - the car can be weeping, and quite damp before it starts dripping and that's fine with him - and that is the Vicroads requirements - not dripping, but can be weeping and damp. Most Mechanics will fail that, but if you find someone like that - as Garry said - report them - I've had quite a few interesting conversations over the years questioning some peoples interpretation of the rules. They are quite clearly laid down and fairly easy to understand.

Tale a copy of the RWC rules with you when you get a car tested and if they fail something - ask them to point out inthe rules what part it failed on - you would be surprised how much some Mechanics fail for no reason but their own opinions.
Good point.
One question, who/where do you report them to? Is there a proper person who will take the complaint seriously and deal with it swiftly?

[gromit]

The changes to the VIC club permit system seem to have be driven by the AOMC, the Vintage & Veteran car club were certainly against roadworthies I'm told.
Guess what, prior to 1930 you still won't need a roadworthy so both groups got their way.

I have the paperwork from VicRoads in front of me because I'm the president of a small club, we have until 10th October to express our concerns to VicRoads.
Our Club will be passing on some concerns but, at the end of the day, it was discussed by the bigger clubs, AOMC etc. some months ago and the VicRoads wheels have now been set in motion.

Part of the reason for forming a small Club was to get away from the officialdom that is rife in most clubs. You know, the person who gets into an official role and throws his/her weight around laying down rules & requirements to be in the club and get a club permit etc.etc.
One local club you had to be a member for 2 years, had to attend 6 meetings each year, car had to be absolutely original (even paint colour)......
I guess the problem is as clubs get bigger members may never be seen (or their vehicles) except at renewal time so I sort of understand some of the concerns.
A lot of clubs already insist on roadworthies because they were running scared about liability, our Club is becoming 'incorporated' to limit risk to the commitee members.

The changes mean a rise in cost of initial registration because of the roadworthy, permit to get to the test and then maybe a permit to go for a re-test if the tester doesn't know the regulations that applied at the time the vehicle was built.
The cost of photo storage to the Club is minimal, just more time each year on renewing the permit which mean club fees will have to rise.

Modifications allowed for Club Permit vehicles are now clearly laid out in terms of things like engine changes, power increases etc. etc. whereas before someone could knock you back because the engine wasn't 'original'.


Comments in this thread are not going to change anything. If you have a vehicle on Club Rego in VIC then you need to make sure your club expresses any concerns to VicRoads as soon as possible. We have a commitee meeting in a week to discuss and then reply to VicRoads.

The Feral Sports Car Club website has a summary of the changes that occur as a club grows CarClub2 (http://feralsportscarclub.net/CarClub2.html)
There's a lot of politically incorrect stuff on this site but for me it sums up why we should have small clubs devoted to driving not making up rules and regulations for people on power trips......


Colin

[Mick_Marsh]

The Feral Sports Car Club website has a summary of the changes that occur as a club grows CarClub2 (http://feralsportscarclub.net/CarClub2.html)
There's a lot of politically incorrect stuff on this site but for me it sums up why we should have small clubs devoted to driving not making up rules and regulations for people on power trips......
Yep, The Ferals sum up why I don't attend the club meetings of the car clubs I belong to.
Does your club afilliate with the AOMC? Most of the ones I belong to do.
I'm of the opinion that the spirit of the proposed changes will be good, but, I fear instead of the political animals in the club getting off on a power trip, that power trip will be moved to the RWC inspectors.

[gromit]

Mick,

We're not affiliated to the AOMC but maybe next they will insist that all clubs have to be....... more officialdom and, of course, more cost.
What do you gain by affiliation ? Did they drive the original change to the permit system ?
I'm sure club 'control freaks' would have been happier with the old system where you had to be on an authorised 'club run' mind you the Ferals had that covered. Caught 150km from home the owner claimed he was doing a road test trying to trace an intermittant misfire......

Our Club's concerns are about the roadworthy testers, it was trouble when I got my Series I on full rego years back without seatbelts.
A simpler 'safety' test would be more appropriate with reduced costs and a reduced permit fee to get there.


Colin

[Mick_Marsh]

What do you gain by affiliation ?
Buggered if I know!

Our Club's concerns are about the roadworthy testers, it was trouble when I got my Series I on full rego years back without seatbelts.
A simpler 'safety' test would be more appropriate with reduced costs and a reduced permit fee to get there.
We share the same concerns. I think all that is required for the roadworthy/safety check should be in print and readily available. Anything outside the documented points can not be used to prevent a roadworthy being given i.e. the RWC inspector should not be able to say "You need paint as the vehicle is unsightly".

Quite some years ago, there was an old Ford that was rebuilt. About an XM I think. The owner gave it a really nice paint job. It looked good but he was refused a roadworthy until he had it repainted. You see, he had painted each panel a different colour. Blue roof, green bonnet, red right fender, yellow left fender, etc. Does the finish of a vehicle have anything to do with the roadworthiness of said vehicle. I don't think so.

[Rextheute]

I have been a member previously of car clubs ( and on the committee ), no more - since moving to Victoria a couple of years ago now my cars are on full rego , I drive them more often .
There is a club locally .....but its by invite only , and I'm not social enough in town , or wasn't born here .....

The feralscarclub is the essence of why I like old bangers - drive em , have a laugh with your mates . But none of the 'club scene' .

[Rextheute]

ps I'm not involved with the fscc , not that i wouldn't be .

I do however admire their attitude !

[Mick_Marsh]

ps I'm not involved with the fscc , not that i wouldn't be .

I do however admire their attitude !
I would love to join the ferals. I don't like beer so precludes me from becoming a member.

[gromit]

If you're not happy with club politics then all you need to do is get together with a group of mates, form a club and apply to VicRoads to be recognised.
It takes a while because the wheels move very slowly but persistance pays off. I ended up sending a letter from 'the Club' saying that at a meeting a member had raised the issue of why it was taking so long to get approval. Got approved a week afterwards. Took about 3 months in total.

Our club is invite only because as soon as you get people joining who you don't really know you need rules.... then we are back to square one. If I accepted everyone who has asked to be a member when they've heard about the club we would have a membership of 100's by now and be bogged down with meetings, rules, power struggles etc. etc.

Keep it small, keep it about the vehicles and driving them, not trailer queens and meetings.


I liked the Ferals idea of an AGM....
"everyone happy with the president, the secretary, the vice president & the treasurer ?"
"OK, meeting over, where's the beer"
Our AGM will be along similar lines.

The information you need to get a club approved is on the VicRoads website and the Feral's website but if you need any further information PM me.



Colin

[SuperMono]

Well when something was put together with a bit of practical common sense it isn't going to take too long before someone comes and makes it overly complex.

I think the common concern isn't the roadworthy requirement itself, more the likely lack of appropriate knowledge among those permitted to sign off on the RWC. Lack of knowledge of both the regulations and era specific standards (for the vehicle being inspected).

Understand some clubs are already concerned about liability of carrying out safety inspections, so try to bypass that by requiring RWC now.
This is probably feeding into these reforms.

Also does appear there is some confusion among clubs as to what current requirements are (not the proposed ones).

Reading through some of the proposed changes it does have some smell of slightly informed bureaucrat about it.
Examples.
Brakes: Depending on the vehicle you can fit brakes (the entire system) from another model from the same manufacturer.
What about the common practice (when the vehicle was current) of fitting brakes from another make?
You can fit commercial kits from a company that has responsibility for liability and the kit is marketed for the specific model.
So if it was available at the time (when the vehicle was current) but the original company is gone, can you still fit a secondhand kit from (for example) eBay?
Recreation of period correct parts and kits.......

Engines: You can fit another engine with more power (40% for <2000cc).
Do you have to dyno an original motor and the replacement to check you are within the limits?
Published power claims from old cars are completely unreliable.

[Bigbjorn]

There was a group attempting to pressure the Transport Dept. for a "Collector Plate" that could be used on any vehicle owned by the plate holder. So if you had a number of vehicles eligible for the Special Interest Scheme you could drive any one of them on this plate. This is not acceptable to insurers who issue CTP policies which are specific to a vehicle. Police and QT also saw it as a nightmare. Legislation would be required. Never going to happen. The leader of the group is a loud, aggressive and bombastic character whose attitude and behaviour did them no favours. At one meeting, a senior bureaucrat looked down his glasses at the leader and told him" Perhaps if you sold a few of your fifteen cars you could afford to register the rest?"

[DoubleChevron]

Buggered if I know!

We share the same concerns. I think all that is required for the roadworthy/safety check should be in print and readily available. Anything outside the documented points can not be used to prevent a roadworthy being given i.e. the RWC inspector should not be able to say "You need paint as the vehicle is unsightly".

Quite some years ago, there was an old Ford that was rebuilt. About an XM I think. The owner gave it a really nice paint job. It looked good but he was refused a roadworthy until he had it repainted. You see, he had painted each panel a different colour. Blue roof, green bonnet, red right fender, yellow left fender, etc. Does the finish of a vehicle have anything to do with the roadworthiness of said vehicle. I don't think so.

The Ballarat Vintage and Veterans have found a good way around the liability and safety certificate issue.

One of there members is a RWC tester in Ballarat. The deal is he does the safety checks for a small fee (so his existing insurance/liability stuff covers him). But it's a less stringent check without all the photographs and bull****.

With marque specific clubs, I reckon you could easily get bitten wanting a safety certificate. Eg: If I was to check someones Citroen DS .... I'd turn a blind eye to wet areas so long as there not leaking excessively (nothing wrong with a bit of automated rust proofing), not really care if the windscreen is a little "well used", not care there is a little wear in the steering relays... couldn't give two hoots if the steering rack boots are split ("See those mate, tape/seal/split boot them up so you don't get dust and moisture in there" ).

However I also know to check for cracked suspension mounting tubes (engine/gearbox out, front suspension off job to fix), rust in the box sections and other model specific "issues"... That a roadworthy tester would never notice.... See what I mean about sucking by taking the car to a model specific expert for checking :eek: :wasntme:

seeya,
Shane L.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

If you want a single plate for all your vehicles, get a dealer plate.

[Mick_Marsh]

a senior bureaucrat looked down his glasses at the leader and told him" Perhaps if you sold a few of your fifteen cars you could afford to register the rest?"
Got to say, I'd believe that from a bureaucrat. If politicians are overpaid, bureaucrats are overpaid by orders of magnitude.
If I had two SIII's, I could sell one and pay for three full registrations so, after three years, I'm back to the same situation with one car. Typical of government foresight. Anything beyond three years does not exist.

You know, with cheaper registration for rarely used club vehicles, more of these treasures are kept on the roads which gives historical associations a marvelous pool of exhibits for their displays. I was at one on the weekend.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2014/09/1294.jpg (http://s1074.photobucket.com/user/mick_marsh_AULRO/media/REMLR/Gold%20Museum%202014/DSC_4369.jpg.html)

[Bigbjorn]

Got to say, I'd believe that from a bureaucrat. If politicians are overpaid, bureaucrats are overpaid by orders of magnitude.
If I had two SIII's, I could sell one and pay for three full registrations so, after three years, I'm back to the same situation with one car. Typical of government foresight. Anything beyond three years does not exist.

You know, with cheaper registration for rarely used club vehicles, more of these treasures are kept on the roads which gives historical associations a marvelous pool of exhibits for their displays. I was at one on the weekend.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2014/09/1294.jpg (http://s1074.photobucket.com/user/mick_marsh_AULRO/media/REMLR/Gold%20Museum%202014/DSC_4369.jpg.html)

Graeme Acton of Acton Land and Cattle was told pretty much the same thing when pushing Canberra for some government subsidy to do with live cattle exports. "Perhaps you could sell one or two of your ten cattle stations to tide you over." Not real short of funds, the Actons.

[dungarover]

The frustration seems to be the ignorance by the tester and the lack of understanding of vehicles that don't have Ford, Holden or anything made by our Asian friends so Land Rovers are probably one of the most misunderstood vehicles known to man.


My gripe with testers is when does a broken door seal affect the vehicle from a safety point of view or a torn seat? Or Even a saggy hood lining as long as the lining doesn't impede the rear vision mirror it shouldn't be a concern. Best one I had was the auto trans shifter film on a Rangie classic was torn due to age and the fact it's made of dodgy Land Rover plastic, I mentioned what does that have to do with a roadworthy the response was you don't know what gear you're in. I didn't think PRND321 was complicated but some people think otherwise. Old cars are that, old and some allowances due to the age as long as the safety aspects of the vehicles operation are in good working order that should be more than enough.


IMO car enthusiasts are more than likely going to care for there vehicles as opposed to most people who may own a new or near new car and fix things when there are far from un-roadworthy.





Trav

[DoubleChevron]

Well they did it ... They have completely ****ed up the club permit scheme. Requiring road worthies is bad enough. What utter ****witts wanted the implementation of annual "safety checks".... not to mention photos. This is going to be an absolute nightmare for big clubs. I wouldn't be surprised if this will cripple the larger clubs.

I'll scan and post the documents sent out today. Talk about a nail in the coffin for the previously brilliant club permit scheme in Victoria :(

EVERYONE >>> YOU HAVE UNTIL 31st of January to get your cars onto permits before the requirement for roadworthies.

I wouldn't be surprised if this killed off the bigger clubs. There is NO WAY a club with say 1000cars on club permit can upkeep an annual safety check and modifications check on all the vehicles. This is utter insanity.

To put this into perspecitive. My CX that hasn't had a roadworthy or safety check in nearly 20years... is now overnight considered to be unsafe every 12month unless it has a safety check...... It would be lucky to do 5000kms a year... yes the last 20years were perfectly safe where it did way, way, way more annual milage.

seeya,
Shane L.

[Homestar]

What is involved with the safety check? I assume this is an in house club thing that they have to keep a file on? What are the specifics?

I've already got mine on club permits now. I know it will be hard for the clubs, but is it too much to ask that your vehicle be safe to use on the road?

I agree this will be a huge impost on a large club who rely on volunteers to maintain the club permit register. I wouldn't be surprised if they go to a system that requires the user to pay an additional fee for this as they may have to farm it out to third party.

They would have gone this way to weed out the main offenders of the previous system - ie - highly modified vehicles. I don't blame Vicroads - I blame all the **** wits who ruined it for the rest of us....:mad:

[Judo]

Any links for more info? I'm interested to know more...

[DoubleChevron]

I'll scan and post the documents tonight. I'm pretty sure the vintage and classic car club in Ballarat has over 1000cars on permits. How on earth do they expect a car club of volunteers to do this :(

What will happen is thousands of small car clubs will get created overnight to get cars onto permits, and the big clubs will refuse to use the club permit scheme due too the work involved. Well that's what I think will happen either way :(

*safety* has nothing to do with it. DO you honestly think my old Citroen CX that we have had registered for nearly 20years (and moved too a club permit 4years ago) will suddenly be more or less "safe" than it has been for the last 20years.

I'm not sure what they are trying too achieve... But they sure have buggered it up for the large clubs.

seeya,
Shane L.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Well they did it ... They have completely ****ed up the club permit scheme. Requiring road worthies is bad enough. What utter ****witts wanted the implementation of annual "safety checks".... not to mention photos. This is going to be an absolute nightmare for big clubs. I wouldn't be surprised if this will cripple the larger clubs...

<snip> ...

To put this into perspecitive. My CX that hasn't had a roadworthy or safety check in nearly 20years... is now overnight considered to be unsafe every 12month unless it has a safety check...... It would be lucky to do 5000kms a year... yes the last 20years were perfectly safe where it did way, way, way more annual milage.

seeya,
Shane L.Me thinks you're over-reacting. People in NSW have had to have an annual roadworthy on all their cars* since the concept of an annual roadworthy was introduced. The clubs in Vic big or small will cope.

Back on NSW, it is optional whether the club has it's own inspection officer or they use the regular inspection station. The Vic clubs will have to make their own decisions whether they inspect themselves or make their members go out and get a regular roadworthy.

Just because your Citroen hasn't had a roadworthy in 20 years, doesn't mean that it won't pass one now. If it's registered it should be able to pass a roadworthy any time it's on the road, even if it wasn't required to have one. It seems now VicRoads has realised that some owners have been scamming the system and having unroadworthy cars on the road. This is their bureaucratic solution.

* new cars are not required to get a roadworthy for the second year.

[AndyG]

Has anyone worded up Ricky, the enthusiasts friend, or does he only do Commodes

[DoubleChevron]

Me thinks you're over-reacting. People in NSW have had to have an annual roadworthy on all their cars* since the concept of an annual roadworthy was introduced. The clubs in Vic big or small will cope.

Back on NSW, it is optional whether the club has it's own inspection officer or they use the regular inspection station. The Vic clubs will have to make their own decisions whether they inspect themselves or make their members go out and get a regular roadworthy.

Just because your Citroen hasn't had a roadworthy in 20 years, doesn't mean that it won't pass one now. If it's registered it should be able to pass a roadworthy any time it's on the road, even if it wasn't required to have one. It seems now VicRoads has realised that some owners have been scamming the system and having unroadworthy cars on the road. This is their bureaucratic solution.

* new cars are not required to get a roadworthy for the second year.

You know I'm completely wrong about the annual safety certificate bit either way .... I'll scan the documents in the next couple of hours and attach them. The bloody people with modified cars ... that's what there trying to stop. They have stuffed it up, now requiring full blown roadworthies :(

[Ralph1Malph]

Up here in the North, I think our scheme works ok, from what I have been told.

I have to ask though (at risk of having the post declared 'political' and banished to 'current affairs' or all together) did not the good people of Vic, recently choose their representatives via state election? A sporting analogy comes to mind.....own goal. :twisted::angel::twisted::angel::wasntme:

BTW, I'll be temporarily a resident of Vic for a few months so will require some trip buddies....


Cheers
Ralph

[MR LR]

I don't see a major issue, my Range Rover is on club plates and passes road worthy's... all the Veterans and Vintage cars in the family are maintained by all of us to a standard so as to pass aswell...

Modifications should be allowed, if legal. I'd also propose that there should be a differentiation between historic vehicles (period correct) and modified historic (old cars with new bits), the registration and insurance costs should reflect this.

The 25/30 year rule has somewhat ruined the historic vehicle scheme (it was originally just for very early cars). However me whingeing about it is slightly hypocritical because my RR is in the scheme... so providing people don't abuse it (have a look at summernats) I take no issue with it.

Cheers
Will.

[Homestar]

Up here in the North, I think our scheme works ok, from what I have been told.

I have to ask though (at risk of having the post declared 'political' and banished to 'current affairs' or all together) did not the good people of Vic, recently choose their representatives via state election? A sporting analogy comes to mind.....own goal. :twisted::angel::twisted::angel::wasntme:

BTW, I'll be temporarily a resident of Vic for a few months so will require some trip buddies....


Cheers
Ralph

Let us know when you get here. :)

These new laws were well under way before the recent election.

[dungarover]

Leave it to government departments to complicate things are not terribly complicated in the first place. Only takes a few cowboy car clubs to ruin it for everyone else whilst the majority do the right thing.


Roadworthies for old Land Rovers are hard enough to get in Vic so no point being restricted to a club permit (despite the saving in rego costs) with all the red tape, then being held over a barrel by club hierarchy.


Trav

[Mick_Marsh]

Up here in the North, I think our scheme works ok, from what I have been told.

I have to ask though (at risk of having the post declared 'political' and banished to 'current affairs' or all together) did not the good people of Vic, recently choose their representatives via state election? A sporting analogy comes to mind.....own goal. :twisted::angel::twisted::angel::wasntme:

BTW, I'll be temporarily a resident of Vic for a few months so will require some trip buddies....


Cheers
Ralph
This process was well under way and possibly even decided before the change in government.

I'd be very interested in the finer details. I have two vehicles on the scheme.
What do you NSW people have? A blue slip and a pink slip. Do both have to be submitted each year?
The thing is, most vehicle testers in Vic. don't really know what standards apply. I have a number of vehicles that will not pass the current braking test yet will pass the requirements at the time they were manufactured. The problem that exists today is all too many roadworthy testers will be testing 1950's cars with the standards of today's cars.
I'll relate the experience with my Mini. It is a 1968. It does not require seat belts but did have some installed that conformed to the standards at the time. The road worthy inspector insisted he install a s/h set of seat belts from a Mazda RX7 to pass the roadworthy. I just said "do it". But, if you research the subject, that change required an engineers report AND it is illegal to install s/h seat belts.
It has the potential to be a big balls up

[Mick_Marsh]

Storm in a tea cup. From the Vicroads website:

Initial club permit applications (not renewals) for vehicles manufactured after 31 December 1948 will need to be accompanied by a current certificate of roadworthiness.

[Homestar]

Just looked through everything on the Vicroads website. It certainly seems to be a concerted effort to remove highly - and illegally modified vehicles from the road. The rest suffer, but apart from a RWC for new applications, I can't see anything to get into a real twist about.

I better make sure my club submit all the paperwork required before March 30...

[DoubleChevron]

Storm in a tea cup. From the Vicroads website:

Yeah like I said, I had it wrong. I glanced over them documents before I headed too work. It's sure going to make life interesting trying to rw some of the older stuff. I've been at my father to put his Traction Avant on a club permit prior to the changes. I fear trying to get a 1950 model car with drum brakes, no demister fans, no real lighting, no seatbelts, no synhros on the lower gears through a modern road worthy.

[Mick_Marsh]

Yeah like I said, I had it wrong. I glanced over them documents before I headed too work. It's sure going to make life interesting trying to rw some of the older stuff. I've been at my father to put his Traction Avant on a club permit prior to the changes. I fear trying to get a 1950 model car with drum brakes, no demister fans, no real lighting, no seatbelts, no synhros on the lower gears through a modern road worthy.I think that one will fail the brake test.

[THE BOOGER]

While they use the term modern safety cert they also say this about what standards are to be applied

Club permit vehicles must comply with the Vehicle Standards, appropriate to the date the vehicle was manufactured, contained in Schedule 2 of the Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 2009.

seems to be almost the same as NSW and other states:)

[Scouse]

While they use the term modern safety cert they also say this about what standards are to be applied

Club permit vehicles must comply with the Vehicle Standards, appropriate to the date the vehicle was manufactured, contained in Schedule 2 of the Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 2009.

seems to be almost the same as NSW and other states:)My 'club plate' car doesn't pass the current brake test on it's roadworthy check but as the brakes are as good as they get, the examiner overrides the result simply by writing 'passed' on the slip & initialing it.

[DoubleChevron]

Here's the changes detailed here:

https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/registration/limited-use-permits/club-permit-scheme/changes-to-the-club-permit-scheme-from-31-january-2015

basically there trying to stop all the modified cars getting onto the scheme.... so they have buggered it up for the rest of us :(

Don't worry, They are going too "write to roadworthy testers and give them guidence on testing vintage and classic cars" :eek:

The last car I got a roadworthy on was 2years old and had done less than 40,000kms from new. I was absolutely staggered and the effort put into failing it. Unless they get the testers to use some common sense, there's not a snowmans chance in hell most 30+year old cars will pass :(

seeya,
Shane L.

[DoubleChevron]

While they use the term modern safety cert they also say this about what standards are to be applied

Club permit vehicles must comply with the Vehicle Standards, appropriate to the date the vehicle was manufactured, contained in Schedule 2 of the Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 2009.

seems to be almost the same as NSW and other states:)

That is something we know, but the roadworthy testers are all scared ****less they'll cop a massive fine if they let anything slide. Remember photographic records of the mechanical components etc..

Having said that, I know someone that got a 1963 Citroen ID through a roadworthy in ballarat recently at Reptile Gulch motors. He DID pick up quite a bit of stuff to be fixed.... However every single item picked up I reckon was 100% right and needed doing.

seeya,
Shane L.

[Scouse]

That is something we know, but the roadworthy testers are all scared ****less they'll cop a massive fine if they let anything slide. Remember photographic records of the mechanical components etc..

The photographic records are to ensure the car qualifies for a H plate, not for comebacks on the mechanical inspection.
They want a photo of the engine bay & other shots of the car, not of wear in a tie rod end or a crack in a brake hose.

[Mick_Marsh]

The photographic records are to ensure the car qualifies for a H plate, not for comebacks on the mechanical inspection.
They want a photo of the engine bay & other shots of the car, not of wear in a tie rod end or a crack in a brake hose.
Shane was talking about the photo's for roadworthy. Photo evidence is required for various things and all failed items and when rectified.

Are you expected to have that for your blue slip, pink slip or whatever?

Oh, that is in addition to the photographs to be held by the club as proof it qualifies for a "H" plate.

[Scouse]

Photo evidence is required for various things and all failed items and when rectified.

Are you expected to have that for your blue slip, pink slip or whatever?

Really??
Nothing like that for us in NSW.


There's this in Shane's link in post #62:
Clubs are required to maintain dated photographs of vehicles entering the club permit scheme in accordance with the new Club Permit Agreement.
but where is the request for photos of failed/repaired items mentioned?

[Mick_Marsh]

Really??
Nothing like that for us in NSW.
Yep. Getting a Victorian RWC isn't as simple as steering, brakes,vision. It's quite involved and a lot of testers play it safe by failing lots of items. Even items that have no bearing on the roadwortyness of the vehicle.
I had a car fail because the springs in the wiper arms weren't strong enough. His method of testing was to lift the wipers off the screen. When I represented it, on the advice of a parts shop, I just told him I had replaced them. "Much better." he said without realising they were the failed ones and gave me the RWC. Another fellow had his Morris 1100 rejected because of a hole in the exhaust pipe. The hole was in the last half inch of the pipe so he cut it off with a hacksaw. Then it passed.
I know of a fellow who had his car fail on a RWC because it was "unsightly". Well, that was the excuse given. He had to paint all the rusty bits and bits that were in undercoat. There were no rust holes in the panels. Just surface rust.

[Mick_Marsh]

Really??
Nothing like that for us in NSW.


There's this in Shane's link in post #62:
Clubs are required to maintain dated photographs of vehicles entering the club permit scheme in accordance with the new Club Permit Agreement.
but where is the request for photos of failed/repaired items mentioned?
It's in the roadworthy rules. Difficult to find because the information is for licensed roadworthy testers, not the general public.
Best I can say is have a chat to a licensed roadworthy tester in Victoria. I know a couple of good ones who know their business well.

[Homestar]

It's all about finding a tester that has some common sense. I've put 2 cars through RWC since the new RW rules were introduced. One was a 93 Pulsar with 340,000KM on the clock - only fail item was a sloppy shifter - fixed with a roll of electrical tape. Second was the mighty Vectra - 97 model that had been sitting for years. Only needed new rubber boots on the rose joints in the back.

The tester I use is very good - he picks on stuff that needs doing, not silly **** to deliberately fail a vehicle.

Pity thee aren't more around like him.

[DoubleChevron]

The photographic records are to ensure the car qualifies for a H plate, not for comebacks on the mechanical inspection.
They want a photo of the engine bay & other shots of the car, not of wear in a tie rod end or a crack in a brake hose.

Both.... You should have seen them parking the new citroen c4 infront of the roadworthy place, takiing photos of with there building behind it .... taking photos of it's VIN, taking photos of the windscreen washers running (if failed due to a blown fuse to the windscreen washers)... photos of the speedo for milage between test and retest.

You have no idea how ridiculous victorian roadworthies are :(

[Scouse]

I've put 2 cars through RWC since the new RW rules were introduced. One was a 93 Pulsar with 340,000KM on the clock - only fail item was a sloppy shifter - fixed with a roll of electrical tape. Second was the mighty Vectra - 97 model that had been sitting for years. Only needed new rubber boots on the rose joints in the back.So, the examiner took before & after photos of these faults?

[Homestar]

So, the examiner took before & after photos of these faults?

Yes, along with around 10 other mandatory pics - wheel and tyre combo - in case you've done a Californian wheel rotation, pics of VIN and engine numbers, pics of the underbody to ensure it hasn't been made from 2 cars, brake wear and various others. All have to be kept on file for 7 years and provided to Vicroads on demand if requested - like after an accident, random audit, etc.

[Mick_Marsh]

So, the examiner took before & after photos of these faults?
I'm getting the feeling you don't believe it because it's too stupid to believe. I'm with you there bro.

When the 101 was roadworthied, the tester had to remove the wheels and drums to take photographs of the brakes. Photo's of the brakes are some of the photographs the tester has to keep on record.

I think you lot north of the border are just beginning to realise why we Victorians cringe at the idea of annual roadwothies.

[JDNSW]

I'm getting the feeling you don't believe it because it's too stupid to believe. I'm with you there bro.

When the 101 was roadworthied, the tester had to remove the wheels and drums to take photographs of the brakes. Photo's of the brakes are some of the photographs the tester has to keep on record.

I think you lot north of the border are just beginning to realise why we Victorians cringe at the idea of annual roadwothies.

I know it was a long time ago, and things have changed - but have attitudes?

When I moved to Melbourne in 1971, I had to get a roadworthy on my ID19. The Tester insisted that part of the inspection was to remove a front wheel to check the brakes - he did not believe me when I told him he was wasting his time, but when he removed the wheel and found no brakes, and I pointed out that they were perfectly visible under the bonnet, he claimed the rules required him to remove a front wheel even if it did have inboard brakes!

John

[Mick_Marsh]

I know it was a long time ago, and things have changed - but have attitudes?

When I moved to Melbourne in 1971, I had to get a roadworthy on my ID19. The Tester insisted that part of the inspection was to remove a front wheel to check the brakes - he did not believe me when I told him he was wasting his time, but when he removed the wheel and found no brakes, and I pointed out that they were perfectly visible under the bonnet, he claimed the rules required him to remove a front wheel even if it did have inboard brakes!

John
Oh, yes. For the time, that is what had to be done.
Today they have to remove all wheels and drums and take photographs.

[DoubleChevron]

I have an irrational urge to take a Renault 10 in for a roadworthy... Inboard rear discs from memory .... that you can't see or photograph without the huge task of pulling it all too bits :eek:

[Rextheute]

Whilst I think that the roadworthy system is a rort - designed to get old bangers off the road .
I will prob never join a club - have been involved in a couple all the way to the top .
But I worked out using man maths that it would cost approx $1 a day over the cost of club reg ( approx ) $150 , to not have to deal with petty idiots .

So I will happily pay for all my cars to be on full reg ...it actually costs more to fully insure them .

I do agree that the club reg system has got out of hand when you can register ( a loose term ) a vehicle with no floors or boot as it was rusted out . At a couple of recent local country car shows there were many evident .....dunno who or how they passed muster .


Let's see what pops up at the upcoming Ballarat swap .

The legitimate enthusiast has and will continue to be punished , however a lot of car clubs are there own worst enemy with regard to who makes the call as to what is 'ok'

[DoubleChevron]

Whilst I think that the roadworthy system is a rort - designed to get old bangers off the road .
I will prob never join a club - have been involved in a couple all the way to the top .
But I worked out using man maths that it would cost approx $1 a day over the cost of club reg ( approx ) $150 , to not have to deal with petty idiots .

So I will happily pay for all my cars to be on full reg ...it actually costs more to fully insure them .

I do agree that the club reg system has got out of hand when you can register ( a loose term ) a vehicle with no floors or boot as it was rusted out . At a couple of recent local country car shows there were many evident .....dunno who or how they passed muster .


Let's see what pops up at the upcoming Ballarat swap .

The legitimate enthusiast has and will continue to be punished , however a lot of car clubs are there own worst enemy with regard to who makes the call as to what is 'ok'

Ah yes... the "banger" look.... I've got one of them :)

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/attachment.php?attachmentid=89371&stc=1&d=1421148801

Looks super ugly .... gotta love it. most of the panels wear heavily perished original 50year old paint .... looks rusty as buggery ... but is actually one of the best ID19's I've seen. What you can't see without me popping the bonnet is the whole chassis has been stripped and re-coated, the hydraulics rebuilt and the mechanicals ... pulled down, found to be 100% unworn (it must have done waaayy less than 100,000kms from new... the lack of wear everywhere is staggering)...... God it looks ugly.... It's bloody brilliant .... I float around the roads in this having a ball 45days a year ... for a measly $70 due to the brilliant club permit scheme. I have 4 cars on club permits. Being a single wage earner with a young family, there is absolute no way I could pay the $2600 to fully register them. It costs just $280 too have them on a club permit.

I'm "kinda" looking for an early 90's Range Rover that I can tidy up over the next couple of years. I can now put a 1990 model onto a club permit. In two years time I can put a 1992 model onto a permit .............. I doubt they'll get any cheaper than they are now. It seems the only way to find an unmessed with rangy is too look at the later 90's models (which is ok, 'cos they have a gruntier motor and I'd like to tow an big old caravan with it ... so more grunt is always better)

seeya,
Shane L.

[JDNSW]

Oh, yes. For the time, that is what had to be done.
Today they have to remove all wheels and drums and take photographs.

Do you seriously mean they had to remove a front wheel to inspect brakes even when it had inboard brakes with no brakes visible with a front wheel removed? (Which is what the tester claimed. I thought he was just covering up his ignorance!)

John

[Mick_Marsh]

Do you seriously mean they had to remove a front wheel to inspect brakes even when it had inboard brakes with no brakes visible with a front wheel removed? (Which is what the tester claimed. I thought he was just covering up his ignorance!)

John
Yep. The procedure was a front wheel had to be removed. If the roadworthy inspector had not followed procedure, he would have been penalised and put his roadworthy inspection license at risk.
Bureaucracy, what can I say?
And you lot north of the border wonder why we Victorians do not like the idea of annual roadworthy inspections.

[MR LR]

I'm going to apply a bit of logic to this... which is probably wrong due to it being beurocracy; however one would assume that the current Victorian 'road worthy' is similar to our Blue Slip, and if an annual item was introduced, surely it would be more relaxed, similar to our Pink slips?

[dullbird]

That would make sense.... and possible I would have thought

[Mick_Marsh]

I'm going to apply a bit of logic to this... which is probably wrong due to it being beurocracy
Correct.

[DoubleChevron]

NEVER .... Not for ANY REASON they can think of do we want annual "safety checks". They acheive nothing other than costing motorists a ****load of money.

seeya,
Shane L.

[Sprint]

I probably shouldnt find this quite so amusing...... but it seems to me the bulk of the complaints are coming from Citroen owners worried about their cars failing a roadworthy....

*sigh*...... lemons, I tells ya, lemons!

[Mick_Marsh]

I probably shouldnt find this quite so amusing...... but it seems to me the bulk of the complaints are coming from Citroen owners worried about their cars failing a roadworthy....

*sigh*...... lemons, I tells ya, lemons!
Maybe not lemons but they are very French.

[DoubleChevron]

I probably shouldnt find this quite so amusing...... but it seems to me the bulk of the complaints are coming from Citroen owners worried about their cars failing a roadworthy....

*sigh*...... lemons, I tells ya, lemons!

:Rolling: :Rolling: :Rolling:

actually I'm way more concerned about getting the rangie through an annual roadworthy. Everything seems to want to be "damp" .... If there wasn't at least one drip under both diffs, the gearbox, the transfer case and the engine each morning ..... I'd be checking the levels to make sure there was some oil in there :wasntme:

The cost of a roadworthy due too the time and effort involved is getting up towards $200 if nothing is found wrong. For me right now, that's $1000 a year in roadworthies .... if everything passes first attempt :o :o :o

And the benefit of this would be :confused::confused: Dunno, other than I'd be too broke to drive them and would have to park up all the oldies and just keep one car on the road.

Just remember, South Australia NEVER has roadworthies ... ever ... It must be a blood bath over there on the roads :wasntme: After all the reason for these things is too make cars "safe" right ?

I can't say I've ever heard of a windscreen passing a victorian roadworthy ... so for starters I'd be up for 5 windscreens each year ... :(

seeya,
Shane L.

[Mick_Marsh]

I can't say I've ever heard of a windscreen passing a victorian roadworthy ... so for starters I'd be up for 5 windscreens each year ... :(
That used to be the case. A stone mark (not chip, mark) or blemmish anywhere, or even a repair, new windscreen required. Tyres were another money spinner too.

Now , you need to find a good roadworthy inspector and challenge, with documentation of the rules. It truly is a battle at times.

[DoubleChevron]

That used to be the case. A stone mark (not chip, mark) or blemmish anywhere, or even a repair, new windscreen required. Tyres were another money spinner too.

Now , you need to find a good roadworthy inspector and challenge, with documentation of the rules. It truly is a battle at times.

I've heard of perfect windscreens being failed by some mates. What they do is get a very bright light and shine it across the screen at an angle. If they can see marks it's sandblasted and must be replaced. Slightly ridiculous.... There obviously trying to replicate driving into the setting sun (which can be frightful)

I've actually pulled off the road until the suns dropped below the horizon at times driving Melbourne -> ballarat . Hey it's an excuse for a coffee either way.

I figure I'm just going to have to find someone that's not a moron to do my roadworthies .... should be fun :(

seeya,
Shane L.

[Homestar]

I can't say I've ever heard of a windscreen passing a victorian roadworthy ... so for starters I'd be up for 5 windscreens each year ... :(

seeya,
Shane L.

I've never had one fail. Unless there is a stone chip or crack in the drivers line of view, or a crack longer than 50mm, or extensive sand blasting, it is fine. Challenge your tester - I've had a screen pass with a decent sized chip in it, and a small crack in the top LHS of the screen.

I always go to a tester with a copy of the rules and let them know before the test that I expect it to be inspected as per Vicroads rules - and show them my copy - it keeps them honest.

[Homestar]

I figure I'm just going to have to find someone that's not a moron to do my roadworthies .... should be fun :(

seeya,
Shane L.

If you want to drive to Sunbury, I'll introduce to just such a person. :)

[DoubleChevron]

Hi Guys,

if you have a car that is obviously modified out there.... Now might be the time to do something about it before you get your car club in the merde :) :wasntme:

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/09/747.jpg


This is the reason they made the permit scheme changes I'd say ......... BTW: I have no doubt that car will be fine :) Anyone that's put that much time and effort into a car will probably have done it right!

seeya,
Shane L.

[Homestar]

Oh no, my Rangie has an EFI system off a 97 model LR!!! :D

I have no problem with this crack down. It's people like this that ****ed it for the genuine ones. If it's done right, then it will pass engineering fine, but the point is, it should have been engineered to start with...

I wonder what his club will say as they will get a notification about the defect and there will be a lot of scrutiny on that club now. In our club, anyone that violates the permit scheme twice is out for good. At least that allows for a one off 'I forgot to fill my logbook out' type violation before being booted - I have driven off and got a few KM while on holidays before I remembered I hadn't done this - I near crapped myself.

[dungarover]

With all the red tape bull**** that a lot of clubs have implemented I think I'll just put my 2 door Rangie on normal rego and not renew my membership. I'm not active anyway so it's pointless paying membership for something I don't get any use out of, also gives me an excuse to drive it more to justify the extra rego costs!!!

Trav

[DoubleChevron]

With all the red tape bull**** that a lot of clubs have implemented I think I'll just put my 2 door Rangie on normal rego and not renew my membership. I'm not active anyway so it's pointless paying membership for something I don't get any use out of, also gives me an excuse to drive it more to justify the extra rego costs!!!

Trav

Mate it's $70 bucks a year for 45days (which you will find is plenty). If you have daily drivers as well you will find you use the 2nd/3rd/4th cars a remarkably small amount (far less than you ever imagined).

I know of a club that might be able to help you out ...... Send me a PM. The club permit scheme in Victoria is nothing short of brilliant!

seeya,
shane L.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

It seems that NSW is trialling a new 60 day log book scheme for 30 year old vehicles that either meet the HCRS or modified vehicles that meet the requirements for full rego.

This is more along the lines of an enthusiasts vehicle and somewhere between original spec historic and hot-rod modified.

It will be ideal for people running modified classic shape Rangies and 110 counties etc.

The trial is for 2 years, but may be just the thing to fill the gap in the current rules. I need to see the details, plus cost and am still concerned about the issue for use more than 60 days e.g. a trip to Cape York and back taking in all the sites and scenes on the way.

see: www.transport.nsw.gov.au~MR_Classics get a better run with conditional registration trial

[Eevo]

Just remember, South Australia NEVER has roadworthies ... ever ... It must be a blood bath over there on the roads :wasntme: After all the reason for these things is too make cars "safe" right ?


SA also has the oldest average car age in the country.
roadworthys would take some old bombs off the road, but it would would be a money making exercise.
.

[Tombie]

If you want to drive to Sunbury, I'll introduce to just such a person. :)

I will be driving to Sunbury shortly Mr Cat... Shall PM for your number :cool:

[1976_michelle]

I've seen the absolutely laughablely "roadworthy" cars from NSW in the past.

It's nothing at all to do with allowing "unroadworthy" vehicles on the roads. One of my cars has been owned since 1996 (that's 18years without a roadworthy .... WHY HAVEN"T I HAD THOUSANDS OF ACCIDENTS MAIMING PEOPLE IN THIS CAR :o :o :o..... It had "one" roadworthy back then. How is this more or less dangerous than someone putting there pride and joy onto a club permit.'

The reality is the "roadworthyness" of a vehicle has absolutely no statistical impact on it being in an accident that causes death or injury ( otherwise south australia would have horendous accident statistics. They have NO roadworthy ... ever ... there, even when vehicles changes hands).

this is how stringent they are:
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/~/media/files/documents/business%20and%20industry/vsi26_1212_web.ashx

The tester also needs to keep photographic evidence of all testing. including for leaks. The photos must be stored in multiple offsite archives and all sorts of bull****.

Last time I got a roadworthy was on a 2year old Citroen C4 that had only done 30,000kms from new. It failed as the windscreen washer didn't work. I took it back (after changing the blown fuse).... The guy took the keys, parked the car on the street, took a photo of it infront of his business, took photos of it's VIN numbers, started the car and took photos of the wipers running and the windscreen washers working :o :o This is a requirement of the RWC in Victoria :eek: :eek: :eek:

Imagine getting a 35 year old Range Rover that weeped everywhere when new .... let alone 30years later through this ... unless you coudl find someone that was willing to "massage" the piccies and requirements and bit to ensure a pass.

It's a load of bull**** designed to push older cars off the road (older as in 5+years) as they become un-economic to tyr and keep on the roads. The car industry loves this as it'll mean more sales of new cars.

My father fathers 1950 Traction Avant will be ready for a club permit soon. Can you imagine trying to get a 1950 model car with no syncho's on the lower gears, drum brakes, "pump" windscreen washer, single speed wipers, no demister fan, no indicators or factory lighting through a roadworthy. No seatbelts (they can be fitted, but are very ineffective due to the car being designed in the 1930s' so there being nowhere substantial enough to bolt the belt too). Lets no mention grease points, ball joints and driveshafts without rubber boots. etc....

There's not a snowmans chance in hell this could pass a modern roadworthy ... let alone the brake tests etc...

We used to have a local guy that lived and breathed old cars ... everyone took there oldies to him for Roadworthies. As soon as these modern roadworthy requirements came in ... he shutup shop. It wasn't worth all the bull**** involved.

seeya,
Shane L.

.. the nsw roadworthy slip isn't worth the paper its written on... (brought my D2 home on a pink slip an spend $1600plus on it doing the RWC for vic)

[Lotz-A-Landies]

.. the nsw roadworthy slip isn't worth the paper its written on... (brought my D2 home on a pink slip an spend $1600plus on it doing the RWC for vic)I'm pretty sure there would be shonky businesses in Victoria too.

These day's it's only with great difficulty do you get a blue slip (NSW Roadworthy for a new registration on a light vehicle). This is because the NSW RMS has been auditing Blue Slip examiners and cancelling the authorisation of lots, sometimes for a wrong reading of the Law. But who do you argue to about a Government Department doing the wrong thing.

[Mick_Marsh]

But who do you argue to about a Government Department doing the wrong thing.
Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
What we do | Administrative Appeals Tribunal (http://www.aat.gov.au/about-the-aat/what-we-do)

For NSW government decisions you could try:
NCAT Home - NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (http://www.ncat.nsw.gov.au/)

For Victoria, VCAT
https://www.vcat.vic.gov.au/

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
What we do | Administrative Appeals Tribunal (http://www.aat.gov.au/about-the-aat/what-we-do)

For NSW government decisions you could try:
NCAT Home - NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (http://www.ncat.nsw.gov.au/)Wasn't my issue but a bloke I know, he'd already paid for a mouthpiece at the tribunal, but for e.g. without referring to the legislation the beak accepted the RTA's word that the regulations for door catches applied also to the bonnet.

This was one of the matters at issue and where the RTA believed one thing but where the regulations have a different clause that applies to bonnet catches. Every time my friend attempted to point out the relevant regulations the beak disregarded the information merely accepting the RTA knew what they were saying.

To take it any further he would have had to have his mouthpiece brief a silk and also file for bankruptcy as he went broke proving he was right.

[MR LR]

It seems that NSW is trialling a new 60 day log book scheme for 30 year old vehicles that either meet the HCRS or modified vehicles that meet the requirements for full rego.

This is more along the lines of an enthusiasts vehicle and somewhere between original spec historic and hot-rod modified.

It will be ideal for people running modified classic shape Rangies and 110 counties etc.

The trial is for 2 years, but may be just the thing to fill the gap in the current rules. I need to see the details, plus cost and am still concerned about the issue for use more than 60 days e.g. a trip to Cape York and back taking in all the sites and scenes on the way.

see: www.transport.nsw.gov.au~MR_Classics get a better run with conditional registration trial (http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/b2b/releases/150904_MR_Classics%20get%20a%20better%20run%20with %20conditional%20registration%20trial_F.pdf)
Well this is interesting... will give you a call early October to discuss, happy to be the guinea pig :wasntme: