Rwc

Bossxr8 · 21-02-2010, 11:35 PM

I bought an AUII wagon for my fiance on Thursday, but I just noticed the inside edge of the front tyre is bald, and obviously not roadworthy. Where do I stand on this?

Is the place who did the roadworthy responsible for fixing this, or will they say take it up with the previous owners. Should I expect them to replace the tyre? A RWC requires the car to be roadworthy for 28 days I think, not 3.

I know the tyres were on the car before it went in for the RWC as I looked at them before the RWC was done, just didn't notice it being bald on the inside being tucked up inside the wheelwell, and because I bought the car off my brother I know the wheels were not swapped before it was done just to pass the RWC. If it came up on the roadworthy he would have replaced it no problem.

svo supporter · 22-02-2010, 12:11 AM

You're responsible for it now that the RWC is done. It'd be to hard proving the tyres haven't been swapped since the RWC was done.

BTW. Sounds like a dodgy RWC has been done

JC · 22-02-2010, 12:37 AM

Just buy a tyre or put the spare on. It's not like you've been defected for it.

aussie muscle · 22-02-2010, 09:46 AM

The only action i've seen taken by the RTA over a RWC, my brother in law is a mechanic. he failed a beat up old laser from passing, then two days later saw it was registered. they'd gone to someone else to get it passed. he contacted the rta and they suspended the license of the mechanic when they found he was not making a compliant inspection.

Bossxr8 · 22-02-2010, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JC

Just buy a tyre or put the spare on. It's not like you've been defected for it.

Thats not the point, the car was given a RWC when its obviously not roadworthy. Why should I be out of pocket by having to buy a new tyre. If the car was genuinely roadworthy it would have had a roadworthy tyre fitted before it was able to pass the test.

3vXT · 22-02-2010, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Thats not the point, the car was given a RWC when its obviously not roadworthy. Why should I be out of pocket by having to buy a new tyre. If the car was genuinely roadworthy it would have had a roadworthy tyre fitted before it was able to pass the test.

Your brother sold you a car with a half bald tyre, why not take it up with him.

You could take it back to the place you got the rwc, point out the crappy tyre and then tear up the rwc but its not up to them to replace the tyre.

TURBOTAXI · 22-02-2010, 07:20 PM

As the driver/owner its your responsibility to make the car roadworthy.
The failing of the inspection station to pick it up is a separate issue.

svo supporter · 22-02-2010, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Thats not the point, the car was given a RWC when its obviously not roadworthy. Why should I be out of pocket by having to buy a new tyre. If the car was genuinely roadworthy it would have had a roadworthy tyre fitted before it was able to pass the test.

I don't understand what your problem is? If you're complaining the car shouldn't have passed the RWC, why not take it somewhere else, dig into your pocket for another independant roadworthy so they can ping you for the unroadworthy tyre. That way, you (a) have to buy a new tyre and (b) have paid out more money for another roadie and the car will be properly roadworthy.

Otherwise just accept the fella that did the roadie missed something simple like that and put a good tyre on the car to save getting a defect.

**Luke Plaizier** · 22-02-2010, 09:07 PM

I'm confused a bit too. Are you asking if the guys that did the RWC warrant that the car is roadworthy, and if it's not, even though they passed it, they than havean obligation to make it roadworthy?

I can see your point, but I guess it would depend if there's a legal requirement for them to warrant their inspections. Either that, or you're looking to ping the inspector.

Lukeyson

JC · 22-02-2010, 09:18 PM

Bit hard to ping the inspector on a tyre - he just says "That's not the tyre that was on it when it was inspected" and you'd have to prove otherwise. As SVO_supporter has pointed out, a tyre will be cheaper than a second RWC.

Bossxr8 · 23-02-2010, 08:31 PM

Fair enough, i'll cop it on the chin and buy a new one, just wish they would do their jobs properly. Surely a bald tyre is the most obvious roadworthy item imaginable, and not picking it up is just poor form.

CFOUR · 23-02-2010, 08:44 PM

My brother purchased a ute with rust hidden under carpet, the guy who passed it paid for it to be fixed.

Mr12345678x · 23-02-2010, 09:32 PM

When I bought my AU the dealer got it RWC'd the next day, I found out a week later driving to work that the demister wasn't working. I took it back and showed him, he pulled the trims up and sure enough they were ripped off the glass, not something which would probably be picked up during RWC because the light goes on and everything, just wasn't defrosting the glass... I made him fix it at his expense

Kryton · 24-02-2010, 10:15 PM

IF there is just 3mm of tread, even though it has not worn evenly, then it is still RWC.

And a RWC does not require the car to be roadworthy for 28 days at all.
The 28 days are there for your benefit as it can take 3 weeks to get a booking for Rego.
The car only has to be in a road worthy condition at that time it was inspected.
If you go smash your car to bits on the 8th day, do you still think that RWC would be accepted when you apply for rego and the car is bent around a tree?

Your brother sold you the car, so either he can replace the tyre or you can replace the tyre - it is NOT up the RWC inspector to do so - he did not wear it out.
While your at it, you can get a wheel alignment which will prevent it from happening again.

chrisfpv · 24-02-2010, 10:41 PM

If it were me then i'd be having another RWC done anyway just to make sure nothing else was "missed".

I've been the victim of a dodgy roadworthy and didn't realise until 5 Months later when I decided to sell the car (Holden VX) to upgrade to my current XR6 that the RWC done on the VX was dodgy, and I was left with a $1,350 bill to have a RWC completed to sell it.

I know it was dodgy because I was on my L plates at the time so I wasn't doing anything that would warrant $1,350 worth of repairs in 5 months, and this was with all 4 tyres in good health too.

Bossxr8 · 24-02-2010, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davway

IF there is just 3mm of tread, even though it has not worn evenly, then it is still RWC.

No, it was totally bald on at least 20% of the treadface. Zero tread on it on the inside edge.

svo supporter · 24-02-2010, 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XR

If it were me then i'd be having another RWC done anyway just to make sure nothing else was "missed".

I've been the victim of a dodgy roadworthy and didn't realise until 5 Months later when I decided to sell the car (Holden VX) to upgrade to my current XR6 that the RWC done on the VX was dodgy, and I was left with a $1,350 bill to have a RWC completed to sell it.

I know it was dodgy because I was on my L plates at the time so I wasn't doing anything that would warrant $1,350 worth of repairs in 5 months, and this was with all 4 tyres in good health too.

So instead of saying it was dodgy, why not say what had to be replaced for the bill to be that much.

Geez, you could throw a complete set of springs and shockers in the car, along with a rear camber kit and that'd eat up that $1300 quick smart. And I'd class that as wear and tear.

**GasoLane** · 25-02-2010, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

If it came up on the roadworthy he would have replaced it no problem.

Well, just tell your Bruvver that he owes you a tyre.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

No, it was totally bald on at least 20% of the treadface. Zero tread on it on the inside edge.

And a wheel alignment