Thread: Victorian Roadworthies

Shane, did he actually write a Rejection slip, or just a list? If it was just a list go elsewhere. If he wrote a rejection it isn't so easy. Make him point out every fault, with witnesses, or, take it to another shop, get a list from them and confront him with it.

I know they are getting tougher, but yours sounds ridiculous.

Originally Posted by johntins

Shane, did he actually write a Rejection slip, or just a list? If it was just a list go elsewhere. If he wrote a rejection it isn't so easy. Make him point out every fault, with witnesses, or, take it to another shop, get a list from them and confront him with it.

I know they are getting tougher, but yours sounds ridiculous.

Should be just the first test section of the RWC. You are under no obligation to return to the original tester for the second test and RWC.

Originally Posted by Gordie

Sounds extreme. Go elsewhere.

Exactly. It pays to go to someone you know who is reasonable, when getting a RWC in Vic these days.
And by that, I don't mean any shonky stuff, the vehicle does not have to be new, it just has to be RWC commensurate with its age, I know wheels have to come off, photos taken etc, but the secret is COMMON SENSE.
A few years ago we had a 2 year old AMG C63 which we'd bought new & had sold, so we needed a RWC,...took it to the selling Dealer, who tried to knock it because when a torch was shone on the windscreen, a few "marks"showed up,....but looking through it, from the driver's seat, day or night, it was 100% clear???!!!..Cost of a new Mercedes screen would've been ridiculous & the buyer wanted the original screen,...which was for all practical purposes perfect,....after an hour of arguing & getting the General Manager,....it was passed.
Pickles.

Originally Posted by Homestar

Should be just the first test section of the RWC. You are under no obligation to return to the original tester for the second test and RWC.

So, do hey no longer have the pink option, Gav? I ran into that one, and the problem was, the pink got recorded, and would be sent to VicRoads as part of the auditing process. A car that failed at one tester would be picked up if it was passed by another.

Originally Posted by johntins

So, do hey no longer have the pink option, Gav? I ran into that one, and the problem was, the pink got recorded, and would be sent to VicRoads as part of the auditing process. A car that failed at one tester would be picked up if it was passed by another.

Yes, that's the one, but if you get a RWC from a registered supplier, it doesn't matter that if the audit occurs - as long as it passes a RWC from somewhere. What if they audit it? Tell Vicroads you thought the first tester was a **** and here's the RWC of it passing - what can they do? The ownus is on the tester to ensure the vehicle meets the requirements and the tester will need to prove that it did, not the client - I've done exactly what we are talking about here - got a ****ty test from a tool and get it done elsewhere - in the last couple of years too, so during the current regs.

From the Vicroads website - says nothing about how many inspections it has beforehand or by who as long as they are licenced.

"A Certificate of Roadworthiness can only be issued when a vehicle is passed by a licensed vehicle tester, operating from a nominated garage or service station. A certificate is only issued when a vehicle passes the inspection."

Originally Posted by Pickles2

Exactly. It pays to go to someone you know who is reasonable, when getting a RWC in Vic these days.
And by that, I don't mean any shonky stuff, the vehicle does not have to be new, it just has to be RWC commensurate with its age, I know wheels have to come off, photos taken etc, but the secret is COMMON SENSE.
A few years ago we had a 2 year old AMG C63 which we'd bought new & had sold, so we needed a RWC,...took it to the selling Dealer, who tried to knock it because when a torch was shone on the windscreen, a few "marks"showed up,....but looking through it, from the driver's seat, day or night, it was 100% clear???!!!..Cost of a new Mercedes screen would've been ridiculous & the buyer wanted the original screen,...which was for all practical purposes perfect,....after an hour of arguing & getting the General Manager,....it was passed.
Pickles.

Yep, always go in armed with the knowledge of what is and isn't required. I always carry a copy of this - https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/~/me..._web.pdf?la=en - and have successfully argued many points. If I think they are wrong, I just drop this on the table and ask them to show me in this document where it says what they are claiming.

Section G clearly shows the only times a windscreen can be failed - it's very specifically worded as are all sections. If it's not in VSI26 they can't fail it. If they claim they can, simply tell them you'll report them to Vicroads - I've done this before as well, and it changes their minds very quickly. 😉

Originally Posted by DoubleChevron

Hi Guys,

so how is everyone else getting around the sheer insanity of the roadworthies. My brother purchased a really tidy early 1990s F250. The paint is a little faded on the roof, the dash looks crap. But the thing runs and drives like new. The previous owner was a F truck crazy with heaps of them and was reducing his fleet. This thing had only been roadworthied last year for the previous owner. My brother ran it upto a mechanic ( a friend he went to school with). and he gave it a good going over to pickup any outstanding stuff it might fail on. The steering pump was weepy, so it was rebuilt. He also fitted new cylinders to the rear and a diff seal.

I had no doubts she would sail straight through.

He's just turned up at my place really ****ed off. With an A4 page of stuff that needs to be fixed. Here's some of the things I can remember off the top of my head:

--Door catches need replacement due to slop .... We opened a door ... yeah there is a bit of slop, the lower hinge bush is slightly ovalised .... WTF does this have to do with a roadworthy.
--duel rear tyres must be repaired so they dont' touch ?? ... so we look behind it. Sure enough, they are *JUST* touching on one side. FFS: Why didn't they just put 1psi of air in each tire ... that is all it would have taken to fix it.
--Fix leaking power steering pump ( WTF: Its a new rebuilt pump that doesn't leak ).
--Fix engine oil leaks .... this thing is parked on concrete in his shed each day .... it doesn't drip.
--Fix automatic transmision leaks ??
--Fix rear diff leaks ??

WTF ? Maybe it's weepy damp like every range rover was when it left the factory.

--Fix bent chassis member and supply engineers safety certificate for repair ...... WTF ?? god damn engineers certificate....
--Fix firewall rust ... supply structural safety engineers certificate.
--Supply engineers certificate for non standard seats ( they are ? ).
--repair rear left brakes... not enough braking force ( WTF ? they just did the rear brakes)
--tighten tub bolts
--replace or remove faded side lights
--replace all shocker bushes
--replace front right shocker.
--fix drooping bonnet insulation
--fix lower radiator hose that touches chassis
--fix clearance gap between engine and steering column.
--add missing washers to gearbox mounts.

heaps of just bull**** like this ... that is only what I can remember.

Now stuff like shocker bushes is valid (though I seem to recall he said the last owner changed them). Its a twin shock front, so it is possible one of the shocker is dead, and you would miss it without unbolting them to check.

But the **** they have picked. It is ludicrous, he took it down to the local bodywork place that does all the insurance work. He crawled under to look at the chassis.... and come out laughing... "That's irrelevant. its just a slight kink ... it would be 7mm C section. All we would do to fix that is 2 solid thumps with a sledge hammer .... though one hit would probably be enough". he checked the firewall. If you pull the wiring forward, you can see paint cracking at what will be a seam. The guy said "wire brush that and cover it with body deadener, give the chassis a whack with a hammer and take it somewhere else". None of this is even relevant at all. We can't do it though, its too heavy for our workshop.

Now the steering shaft clearance.... I'd say at some point it had a collapsed engine mount , so it did actually touch enough to mark (not groove) the paint... the paint damage looks ancient not recent. There is maybe only 2mm of clearance there. This cannot be fixed and is the way the car has always been (its a 460 big block after all). The car has probably been driving australian roads like this for a decade with no issues. I suggested to him, re-paint the steering shaft with mat black before taking it somewhere else.

We crawled under it to have a look at the seats..... and I just took a look and said "bloody hell... this is amazing". Every bush I could see is bright shiny poly, every body mount is bright shiny polly ... new exhaust... everything just looked amazing. I said "you put a load of wood in the back of this a couple of weeks back right ?... Those new bushes will just have settled into there mounts from the weight in the tub, so now the bolts will be loose".... keep looking ... damn it, he's right, the seats aren't into the factory mounts. But they are bolted in with huge washes that make the factory mounts look pathetic with there tiny bit of extra metal to prevent the bolt pulling through. Maybe find an original seat for a day to get it through ?? Where the hell would you find an F250 seat in Australia.

We can't find the missing washers they speak of, while searching for them I said "I can't find any ATF or engine leaks either. Maybe we need a bright light to look for dampness".

I think he's just going to take it home and sell it. All the engineers **** .... How in the hell are we supposed to keep cars on the road with the utter insanity of this. If you looked under this thing, you wouldn't bat an eye and giving it an immediate pass.

Oh the brakes ..... There is brake fluid all over the back wheel on one side. They must have stuffed the wheel cylinder when they pull the wheel off to check ... as it was NOT leaking when it went in (you can tell by how perfect and un-manky the tyre is that it only started leaking in the last few minutes).

seeya
Shane L.

i just had a look at the Vic Roads website for the current RWC guidelines.

https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/~/me..._web.pdf?la=en

have a look and compare. As a RWC tester you can't test and evaluate items outside of the testable items unless they pose a significant safety hazard.

Have a a read and compare your notes.

Good luck.

RWC testing in Vic is one great big scam. The RWC testers are usually associated with a service/repair shop and use bull **** RWC inspections to generate income, sort of like putting Dracula in charge of the blood bank. Talk about conflict of interest. The whole corrupt system is fostered by the VACC who generate equally bull **** 'guidelines' for their members (auto mechanics) to follow and blame any and all RWC costing on Vic Roads who theoretically 'own' the process but are vastly out gunned by the VACC whose only interest is in generating income for their members.

It's been this way for years and the 'status quo' is unlikely to change as long as licensed vehicle testers are allowed to do mechanical work.

Still not as bad as NSW though with their various and multi coloured slip/inspection system which is basically a state sponsored get rich quick scheme for mechanics with un neccessary over servicing.

For the OP, go and find an honest licensed vehicle inspector, there are some out there.

Deano