What the fuck has insurance got to do with anything?

Six-monthly inspections for vehicles first registered before 1 January 2000

So if I import a classic from the UK, it’ll only need yearly checks despite being 40-50 years old and despite identical cars existing here in NZ that will need 6 monthly checks?

In the UK you can have special registration, register your classic for a weekend to take it on a club tour or similar. That’s impossible here, you have to jump through the 3 month exemption hoops which require a WOF, WOF requires driving on the road to the station, driving on the road requires a valid rego…

The views of such experts are frequently aimed at lining their own pockets rather than providing objective and real solutions.

The WOF system is still a disgusting criminal rort and Bridge’s solutions only go a very short distance in trying to right the situation.

Does not bode well for the energy industry. Simon should perhaps stick to regulations on pet poodles.

Why is a 26 year old car in 2025 any safer than a 13 year old car now?

What has been suggested here is good – comments from ‘experts’ who sit at home at their computer desks thinking they know better are not worth much weight compared to people who actually work in the industry.

Not in my 45 years of car ownership.

Living mainly rural (or semi-rural) you’d take your vehicle to whichever garage nearby did warrants, they’d throw it out on kingpins (or some other expensive-to-fix “fault”), you’d go away, grease the hell out of the vehicle, take it to the other local WoF issuing garage who would then issue you with the warrant.

Six months later you’d do it all over again.

Rex, 45 years ago they’d check damned near everything that is checked now but the check would be by sight, smell and feel, no electronics (which makes sense, morris 8s, Minors, Vauxhall Veloxs, Vanguards and Mark IIs etc. had no bloody electronics either.

[DPF: You realise these are minimum not maximum checks. I'd say those who can afford to buy brand new cars generally also take them back to the manufacturer for regular checks outside the WOF regime. Do you also realise some countries have NO mandated checks at all? They just trust people to be sensible and check as they feel the need]

If the Government has hard numbers to suggest that the proportion of new car owners taking their car back for regular checks is extremely high (95%+), then I have no problem with it.
However the fact that you used the word ‘generally’ suggests that you also assume there are exceptions, people who don’t bother with servicing and don’t mind voiding their warranty, although we’re both unclear as to what extent. I’m just questioning why these exceptions shouldn’t be covered by the legislation.

And yes, having lived in QLD I am well aware that some countries don’t require any checks at all. I think it’s great and is actually the system I would advocate for.
After all, it is based on the assumption that it’s not just rich people with new cars who are responsible enough to have their car serviced, without being prompted by a WoF check.

I’m just saying, if the Government IS going to go through the length of maintaining a WoF system, they might as well do so with some level of consistency.

But sadly, they didn’t get it right on gay marriage; they didn’t get it right on the Foreshore and Seabed Act; they didn’t get it right on the sale of the Crafer farms; they haven’t got it right on welfare; they haven’t done anything about the far-left control of education and the media; they haven’t got it right on over-inflated house prices………….

—-but I guess John Key poses well with gay boys and does the Kangnam style well.

And mileage is only a partial determinant of wear, a lot of items simply age, so a low mileage car like Rex’s father’s is not that much safer than a high mileage one.

As always with this govt the most affected will be those that can least afford it (or to be more precise in this case those that can afford it will not have too). Older cars are mostly held by the least well off whilst the newer cars by those with money. It’s acknowledged that there is no increase in cost for anyone but no coincidence I guess that their is reduction in cost for the rich.

Funny argument. I’m “rich” with a combined annual income of around $140k (but I sure don’t feel rich). Until 2 years ago we had 2x 1997 vehicles. So guess what, I’d still need to get them checked every 6 months, even though I’m “rich”.

We now have 1x 1997 and 1x 2010 (both of which we will own for many years more – can’t afford a new car more than once in a lifetime). So one of them would need to get checked every 6 months and the other annual once it gets to 3 years old. But in order to keep our 5/10 year warranty we need to get it serviced annually at the dealer we bought it from. It ain’t cheap but it provides peace of mind. Oh and guess what? It’s like getting a WoF anyway. You don’t think they’d just go and fix something and bill me for it if it needed it?

This of course assumes that the cost of WoF inspections doesn’t almost double the day the legislation takes affect. Probably won’t double, but I can guarantee it’ll go up a lot.

Of course they will, because the system sets up MTA members as both arbiter and beneficiary. What mechanic, seeing an oldr car come in for a WoF, doesn’t see it as a chance to find a myriad of niggling issues and hold the owner to ransom to have them “fixed” in return for an exorbitant fee?

I remember one disappearing so far into my engine compartment he feet were off the ground, only to energe and tell me he could “smell exhaust coming from the manifold” thus breaching emission guidelines and I’d need to have half the engine pulled out and the manifold replaced.

Once upon a time WoFs only tested for things that actually had a safety implication – brakes, lights, horn, seat belts – and not the multitude of mostly trivial nonsense that needs to be ticked off nowadays. And it was done by a government agency which thus had no financial imperative to find fault.

Then politicians, never content to leave well enough alone, started to meddle…

The WOF test must be done every one year, or in the case of motorised vehicles every 50000KM.
My opinion

Being well off is always advantageous – that’s one of the reasons one tries to earn a decent crust. I suppose we could legislate against that but it never worked in the good old communist countries. More expensive and newer cars are safer, people with money and sense maintain their vehicles better in general and have thus safer cars etc

But turning it in to somehow disadvantaging the poor (and those poor motor vehicle people) is completely against the point of the changes.

It’s all about the cost/risk equation. What’s the best way to have safe vehicles on the road at an appropriate cost?