Ask an expert

I am writing to express my concern about Car dealers issuing their own WOF’s relating to second hand vehicles they are selling.

I feel this practice only favours the dealers and work against the purchaser. I recently purchased a vehicle from Albany Toyota which has become a most unpleasant and shoddy experience. Amongst other things the WOF issued 21/5/13 indicated tyre tread depth as 4m 4m for the front left and front right respectively and 7m and 7m for the rear tyres. The distance reading at inspection time read 192321km. The brake test readings showed 81% and it later proved that the front disk brakes had had incomplete attention and proved faulty.

On 27/5/13 with distance reading of 192342km an AA inspection stated 4mm 3.0mm for front left and right respectively and 5. O mm for rear tyres.

After another 2,800 km the front right was found to be well under the limit and required replacing while the front left still read 3.0 mm and the two rear at 5.0 mm.

This would indicate to me that the dealer issued a concocted WOF to suit its own sale purposes to avoid the coast of decreasing the profit of the sale and maximise their profit without due consideration as to the safety of the vehicle. There were numerous other major incidents mechanically with the vehicle including a 16” spare while the regular wheels were only 15”.Complaints made to Toyota Head office only protected the dealers “backside”.

I am now recommending that a full audit as to WOF issuing procedures be undertaken at Albany Toyota for the safety of others and that consideration be given to not allowing dealers to be given the right to issue their own WOF on their own second hand vehicles for sale. After all Bus and Truck operators with large fleets and comprehensive workshops do not have this right of issue for their own fleet.

Your comments are appreciated,

WoF issuing outlets are regularly audited by NZTA, the government authority which oversees and authorises WoF stations and garages. There are stiff penalties, including suspension of the WoF authority and inspector for any outlet found to be issuing fraudulent WoFs or any other irregularities, and while I can understand your point, with the onus being heavily placed on the issuing WoF inspector, any inspector who wishes to remain in the industry would be foolish to fall short of the strict standards set.
From what I can tell, nothing you have mentioned would seem suspicious. Tyre tread depths must be a minimum of 1.5mm. All the tyres were more than that in this instance and the brake measurement is a performance test, not an invasive brake pad wear inspection. Therefore, as long as the brakes perform to the criteria set, they will pass. Of course, brake pads will wear out but still perform, so it may well be that the pads and/or rotors needed replacing soon after a WoF being issued.
However, if you still believe this dealer issued a fraudulent WoF, you can lodge a complaint with NZTA, who will investigate.

The point is that the R F tyre was barely warrantable as it turns out. Also it was admitted that the brakes had only been half fixed as they hope to get away with only doing the bare minimum to get the vehicle sold! The other fact that has come to light it the different sized wheels! The situation where a car dealer can warrant its own second hand cars for sale is a bit like having the fox guarding the henhouse.

Your point about the fox guarding the henhouse is understood, but perhaps I've misunderstood about the tyres. I understood you to say the tyres were 3.00mm and 4.00mm. The minimum allowable by law is 1.5mm, so they were at least twice that, hence easily able to pass a WoF inspection.
I'm not sure what you mean by the brakes were half fixed, but if they met the stopping performance criteria, it would seem they were also legal.
Apologies I failed to address the spare wheel issue. Many spare wheels are a different size to the road wheels from the factory. It's not uncommon to have a steel spare and alloys on the road, or a space-saver type spare which will be a different size, although generally the tyre is of such a profile that the rolling radius is close to the road wheels. This is perfectly legal.
As I said, if you have an issue you can make a complaint to NZTA, but from everything I've understood, the WoF seems to have been legitimately issued.