Varied response to repairable write-offs

When NSW Transport Minister’s annnouncement of the banning of repairable write-offds was published on www.paintandpanel.com.au, it attracted many comments.

There are many views within the industry about this emotive topic, and many comments were posted on the A&P website.

These are your comments.

Yes the vehcile is poorly repaired, but don’t forget the rest of the procedure in re–registering this car. Why wasn’t it picked up by the person doing the blue slip inspection and why was it not picked up in the RTA inspection? No excuse. This car shouldn’t have passed for rego by so called experts. Those people should be accountable and suspended or sacked as well. There is more than one factor if the car is checked properly it wouldnt be on the road full stop.
Steve, 8 April

Hi out there. It is a pitty that there are people out there that do take short cuts and endanger the lives of their unsuspecting customers by carring out dodgey repaires on there vehicles . I am in Victoria and and am a mechanic by trade. I also buy several of these repairable writeoffs from the auctions. These vehicles are repaired back to manufactures specifications by MTA-approved panel beater, then must undertake a VIV inspection to be able to be registerd. It sounds like NSW has some very crooked VIV inspectors and I believe that the law should deal with them accordingly, not ban the sale of these vehicles as repairable writtoffs. When will someone in politics make the people responsible for their actions and make them accountable as well . Are the people inspecting the vehicles in NSW approved by the MTA? Someone is definatley not doing their job. Let the full hand of the law deal with them I say.
Garry Forbes, 8 April

I have recently purchased a vehicle from the auctions with under $400 worth of damage. To send this vehicle to the scrapheap is a huge waste. The insurance companies will not wear the cost. They will charge the consumer in premiums. Not to mention all the people that it will put out of work, e.g. wreckers, auctioneers and repairers. They say the vehicle could be used for spare parts but if other vehicles can’t be repaired after a crash how would you use those parts. Another hidden cost would be increased vehicle prices. For example,  if you have a crate of apples and you discard big pile before their intended end, the cost of the remaining apples has to go up. Consumer pays again !!!! An extension of the current blue slip system would be smarter. They could call it an orange slip or something. With say $100 charge which goes to the inspection station. And a more thorough inspection of write off damage.
Darren, 8 April

Why is the government trying to cover up their shoddy inspection system by penalising the guys who do it right? They should look in their own “backyard” first and get their system working. This Corolla must have been checked and “passed” by someone authourised by them to get a blue slip check.
Stephen, 9 April

Congratulations to NSW. This is a really fantastic initiative. I guess we in the west really are “Wait a While” on this one.
Wayne Phipps, 9 April

What drugs was your RTA officer on when they re-rego’d the car? Surely he checked the (compliance plate) on the firewall to make sure the numbers were mathching, just below the strut tower has creased back to the fire wall. Sure crap repair or no repair, but who done (sic) the blue slip, and what office re rego’d it. Your system in NSW was a discrace, you wonder why repairers didn’t follow rules of repairing cars, because your half wit govenment only had identy checks not structual checks. That car would not get back on the road in Victoria with sub standed repairs like that - not a hope! Your government needs to take responsibilty. They were told to pull their finger out many years ago and have tight restrictions on written-off vehicles. Now they are taking a weak approach.
Shane, 11 April

Well done on the great iniative by the NSW Government. Maybe there needs to be some legislation put in place to ensure the insurance customers are made more aware, if not actually told what they are getting back after the have had their vehicles repaired under insurance. Are insurance companies making their customers aware that a second hand part that came from a written off vehicle has been fitted to their sometimes almost brand new two-year-old love and joy. If only the panel repair clients are not held to ransom to become and stay a recommended repairer. Why would you want to spend hours repairing a damaged panel that is going to be fitted to sometimes a two year old vehicle?
Dave, 12 April

So we now have a headline. If it hits parliment in August, what will the legistlation actually say? Police can issue surogate numbers to their mates as currently happens to stat write offs. Then there’s alway’s the rollout of 2-4 years. Change of government and the whole thing gets shelved. Then the insurers will send the wrecks to other states for higher auction prices. Business as usual until well after I’m dead and buried is my tip. And I’m a positive thinker!!
Russ Hill, 12 April

This is another patch in the road towards a more expensive and wasteful future. Eventually it will also help erode any Australian automotive industry. We will all buy our cars from China and send them back as scrap three years later. Criminals that steal and rebirth will not be effected long term as they will always find another way to make a buck. Its just penalising an eco-freindly activity and the people in it that actually do the right thing.
Daniel Clemmett, 14 April

What about cars still structurally sound with say hail damage to all the panels?
Graham, 14 April

This decision in my opinion was made in haste and not all factors taken into consideration. The fact that the inspection process is flawed as the real reason these cars get back on the road. You also mention that there will be more work for the panel repair industry. No mention of the consumer who will now look at the repair bills and ask why are the insurance company spending so much money to fix my car “I want it written off”! I think the MTANSW who are quick to show up the MVTRC has more influence then common sense when looking at the big picture.
Shane, 14 April

On the surface this looks like a great concept. More vehicles should be repaired which would have been considered an uneconomical repair due to the drop in salvage prices paid at auction. The percentage of market value when considering if to repair it or not should rise to 80-90 per cent. This will mean that prices for the repairs will rise due to a surplus of damaged vehicles to be repaired. Yes, it will stop most of the backyard repairers carrying out shoddy repairs. Now consider the wider impact. Auctions houses, associated business, small repair business that rely on these repairable write off as source of income when work is in short supply, or when these repairers can not work for the major insurances companies due to the insurance companies criteria for affiliation. Some small shops can not compete with the current repair prices carried out by desperate repairers trying to stay in business. The answer is not in preventing these vehicles back on the road as these vehicles are still able to be repaired safely and successfully. The answer is to ensure that when the vehicles are presented for inspection that the vehicle is partly dismantled and checked for quality repair process. Every vehicle in NSW that is presented for re-registration is checked by the authorised blue slip inspection and then checked by the RTA. You do not have to be Einstein to work out that the present process of checking for quality repairs by the registered business and our RTA inspectors are at fault, not the shoddy repairer. If the checks were carried out properly the vehicle would never receive a road worthy certificate for registration. And hence never be on the road due to the shoddy repairs. This is another knee jerk reaction by the NSW Labor government to spin another feel good action that in the longer term will have devastating economical effects on the small repairer and the associated business. Mr Campbell should think this through before legislation is drafted and presented to parliament. Surely common sense has a place here.
Allan Ryan , 14 April

I’ve read everyone’s comments on this, and the article. As a repairer, I think it’s about time. Dismantlers won’t be out of bussiness. Why? Because damaged cars will be cheaper, hence you get a follow on effect in the price of spare parts, that are second hand, in turn this reduces your quoted amount, which in turn will creat more repairable, than non repairable, vehicles, which means more work for more repaires.
George, 15 April

There is a simple solution to this matter which I have raised with industry bodys previously: a simple flagging of vehicles by the assessor at time of asessment, that requires the vehicle to be certified by a structual engineer, which includes inspection of the vehicle during repairs, as is the common practise in vehicle modification, that must be signed off before registration can be gained, taking the VIV to the next level, in conjunction with a few other ideas that I have compiled would provide a workable solution to this knee jerk reaction.
Jon Roberts, 15 April

I feel this is a positive move forward with respect to the new legislation. The main losers here are the insurance companies who will now not be able to profit from the current process. The winner can only be the consumer and the legitimate vehicle repairer network. With respect to the Blue Slip/RTA inspectors, yes there is a major issue here as the inspectors do not have the correct experiences to inspect a vehicle both for mechanical defects as well as structural/repair defects
Steve, 15 April

Does this new legislation apply to motorcycles? In particular repairable write-offs.
Bob Rayner, 15 April