NCT Horror

A

asking7

Registered User
Messages
36
Hi,
I bought a car (private) 3 years ago. A few months after, this car passed the NCT with very liitle cost.
To my horror, 2 years later this car has failed the NCT with the following faults being reported by the NCT guy:
He told me that the car was involved in a serious crash; the axel is bent plus there are botched repair jobs done to the rear end of the car and to the arms of the axel.
He also said that my car would literally fold if it was involved in any sort of accident from behind.

The truth/reality here is that my car has never been involved in any accident under my ownership. The only repair done to it was replacing the master cylinder.
I let the NCT guy know this and asked him to confirm that they had a record of this car passing the NCT 2 years ago. – which he did. he accepted what I told him and advised me to contact the person I bought the car from and to check again with them about the cars history. I’m aware that this person obviously didn’t tell me the truth when I bought the car, however this should’ve been brought to my attention when it first went through the NCT.

As there are now serious repairs to be done here before my car passes the NCT, this is now going to cost a considerable amount of money.
My thoughts on this are that the guy who tested the car 2 years ago is partly responsible here as he should’ve noticed these problems then. I have his tester ID number and may investigate this further with the NCT.

I’d appreciate any advice on this matter

Thanks.
 
There might be an issue about the NCT certifying an unsafe car, but that is an issue of public safety: if you are out and about in an unsafe car my safety is potentially compromised.

I cannot see any basis on which you can make the NCT liable to you over the purchase of a car. You do not have the same relationship with them as you would have with an independent mechanic that you contract to give a car a pre-purchase inspection.
 
What exactly do you think the previous tester is responsible for unless you are accusing him of damaging your car?

Maybe he was negligent but either the car requires the repair work or it doesn't - how could that cost have been either increased or reduced due to the tester?
 
NCT may have missed the problem on the last check but that has nothing to do with your problem of now having to fix the car. Even if they did notice the problems at the last check would you expect the NCT to pay towards fixing you car?
 
Thanks for your reply - Padraigb

I agree with you that I cannot hold the NCT liable over the purchase of the car. However, surely the NCT can be held accountable for not complying with the EU directive which is aimed primarily at improving road safety. The failure of the NCT to do this is now costing me a lot of money. You agree?
 
Their failure to comply didn't cost you anything, the fact that you bought a dodgy car is whats costing you money now. Your ire should be directed at the seller for your dodgy car and the nct for letting you out in a dodgy car first time round, but maybe the problem wasn't as evident then as it is now 2 years of driving later. Either way you will be the one suffering the cost on this.
 
Caveat - I’m not accusing the last tester of damaging my car – I’m accusing him of not doing his job properly. This view was also supported by the NCT guy who performed the NCT last. If he had done this at the time, I was within my right to contact the previous owner about the true history of the car and then follow on from there…
 
Perhaps you should have carried out a proper inspection of the car before buying it rather than assuming the NCT would identify all issues with a car already purchased?

I think you are wasting your time chasing the NCT on this. It wont end anywhere.

The car was a private sale, you wouldn't have any rights to go and chase the seller and demand answers on if it was crashed. All that should have been fully checked out before you bought.
 
aristotle25 – I accept that I (as the buyer) maybe should’ve gave the car a more thorough inspection before I purchased it, however I (or the NCT guy who did the last test) cannot understand how this car previously passed the NCT, therefore the NCT (the first NCT guy) are guilty of serious negligence in terms of complying with their road safety directive.
 
Ok, lets say they are guilty of failing to spot the problem, what do you expect to come of that? And how much time and effort to expect to spend pursuing it?

I just think you have nothing to gain from chasing NCT on it.
 
As pointed out by other posters, you have made no direct loss as a result of the actions or inactions of the NCT tester, you have no case against them.
Leo
 
I bet you will find that in the t. & c of the nct report you will find that the nct cannot be held responsible for any default that may not have been detected or over looked at the time of the test or words to that effect.
 
On principle you should follow this through with the NCT. It's negligence on the part of the tester (who should be traceable through the cert). Even if NCT are not liable for costs it's worth the tester suffering the consequences of their negligence. You might even get your test fee back!

If your car has been recorded as being a write off previously the Gardai might be interested in following up how it made its way back onto the road.

There are websites where you can get your car's history e.g. http://www.motorcheck.ie/
 
I also agree with Der Kaiser. She brought the car to the NCT to have its road worthiness tested so i would have a problem with 2 things here

1) The reason we have these tests are, although an annoyance, to make sure we are driving a safe car. This car wasnt safe at all yet passed. A personal risk to the driver.

2) The sale was more recent when the first test was done, she had a much better chance of getting some kind of feedback/ result from the original seller.

How handy the T&C's of the NCT favour their mistakes completely.
 
When you pay the 50 euro ,one expects that certain level of inspections and testing are carried out as per the process. In certain cases an advisory may be given. If all these test were carried out with the expect proficiency then as was said previously what's the point of doing these, if an apparently dangerous car is given the green light to be driven at the risk to the owner and other road users.
Personally i would be more angry at the person who sold you a potentially lethal car, possibly secretly well aware of the serious defects.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top