Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

When is a RWC not a RWC?

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by mjt57, Aug 17, 2006.

  1. In May I bought a used Blackbird. The person who I bought it off, a copper, incidentally, got its RWC from a bike shop in Ringwood (MEL). It passed, except for requiring a new tyre, which the guy had fitted.

    I've been unable to do any big rides, or even get to ride it on daytrips between then and the past two or so weeks. But over the past 3 weekends, I have done around 1,200km. Imagine my surprise when I got home from Healesville on Sunday to discover that the front pads are down to metal and one of the discs is slightly scored.

    Usually, pads are deemed unserviceable when there's about 3-5mm or less material on them. That, though, should still be good for a couple of thousand kays.

    I suspect that the tester didn't even look at the bloody things, or if he did, he wasn't looking at the right thing, or that he perhaps looked at one set of pads. I won't know what the status of both sides are til I get a chance to pull it apart, probably on the weekend.

    But yeah, this is dangerous. I'll be lodging a complaint with Vicroads. I have all the details, as I kept a photocopy of the documentation before filing it with Vicroads. I'll be sending the copper a copy of the letter. He might want to perhaps have "words" with the fellow when he's on duty next...
  2. Well I dunno about all that, but to answer your original question of when is a RWC not a RWC, my answer is: When it's a giraffe!
  3. Tough luck there.

    Unless you have evidence that they were below the legal and safe limit when the RWC was done, don't waste your time complaining. There are a number of things that could have happened between RWC and now to cause the brakes to wear excessively, so unless you KNOW otherwise, don't waste your time.
  4. In Victoria roadworthy inspections are a joke. I've had obvious faults missed and perfect items knocked back. For example I had one bike knocked back because of a tiny scratch on the brake lever, and another bike (same inspector) passed even though the brake lever was half ground down after a fall.

    Another bike was knoked back because the rear shockie was "leaking" even though I had just had it rebuilt. Turns out the "leak" was some seal grease the rebuilder had put on the shaft.

    Best to treat a roadworthy as a formality, it says nothing about the condition of the bike.
  5. I learnt this the hard way.
  6. +1 on that.. best is to get pre-inspection check on the bike before you buy it..

    Same thing happen to me when I bought the car.. I ended up have to spend thousands of dollars to get it 'real' roadworthy..
  7. Victorian regulations only require roadworthy testers to check _one_ wheel unless they have changed in the last couple of years since we were doing roadworthies.

    They may have checked the rears....
  8. 1mm is generally regarded as minimum safe thickness, depending on how you ride, this may lasy 5000kms, or a week!
    I never get any sort of government slip when buying a bike/car, they tell me nothing at all.

    Regards, Andrew.
  9. when selling a bike, first "sell" it to a mate, and get a dodgey raodworthy...

    then have the roadworthy items fixed up by the mechanics

    then sell it roadworthy!

    if they're going to dodge your roadworthy, better to sort it out like this, then have someone come attack your face telling you it wasn't r/worthy
  10. General rule is if they (the buisness doing the RWC) have $$ and they are bussy they will pass any thing coz the chances of them being cought if the bike is regasted is very very slim. Easy money for them. The buyer has days to make a complaint and needs to pay some one else to check the item in question. If the bike is NOT regested than they will go over it with a mignafing glass just incase VicRoads does a random check on that bike while it is being regested... and lately the frequency of these "random" checks has doubled! I had one dome last year... and VicRoads than don't just look at the numbers... they look EVERY where!
  11. Um, not 100% about in Vic, (but i do know in QLD)on this but i believe there is a claus, that states that when they issue a RWC, the vehicle must be at a point, in which i it will still pass in 4 weeks from date of issue.

    For example that is why brakes and tyres normally fail, as they inspector is saying this vehicle will be right for the next 4 weeks etc.

    Might be worth a call, to Vicroads and see if the same time period applies down here.

    cheers stewy
  12. Have had similar thing with a previous car i bought that had a RWC (not to mention pre purchase inspection) but it wasn't until a two months later when i just went in to get a wheel alignment done they showed me that all four tyres had been slashed in the sidewalls, repaired badly and were all bulging and ready to explode. Aside from the fact its illegal to repair a tyre sidewall i thought back over the type of driving i had done since i got the car and the consequences if one of those tyres had had a blowout at a bad time which prompted me to complain. Vicroads were most unhelpful... you have to pay a fee to complain and then they said it only applies for the first 14 or 28 days anyway as someone mentioned. Its like you have to get two RWC done just to make sure its safe!

    On issuing 'dodgy' RWC... it doesn't happen nearly as much as it used to because the potential consequences for the issuing mechanic are huge these days. Years ago you could just get one dodged up from almost anyone... these days unless you know the mechanic very well and you are keeping the car yourself they won't even consider it for fear of losing their licence.
  13. A RWC is valid for 28 days. You'd think that if there were any marginal components that during that time they'd be expected to "fail".

    And yeah, I know that a roadworthy isn't a condition report. I'm just annoyed at myself for taking it for granted that everything was hunky dory. I normally check these things out.

    Whatever, it's my mistake for not checking it more carefully. Equally, I'm concerned that it managed to pass the roadworthy.

    I can't remember the specs, or the regs, as it's been a hell of a long time since I've been in the trade. But I would have expected a tad more than 1,000km from the pads.

    Usually, when they're down to a point where you start scraping metal from not scraping metal over a 900 km span, they're not serviceable. I've had unservicable pads last a lot longer than this on other bikes.

    Anyway, the Vicroads regs suggest that the pad thickness be no less than what the manufacturers specify, or past their wear indicators. Or, in the absence of wear indicators, no less than 1mm.

    That surprised me. I would have thought that it'd be a lot more than that.

    Here's the link to the document:

    http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/vrpdf/rdsafe/VSI 26.pdf

    In any case, it's a good lesson for new players. Always check this stuff out for yourself, or get someone who knows what he's doing to do it for you.
  14. Depends on the type of pads it had as well.... maybe very soft/ racing ones?
  15. That's pretty open to interpretation though isn't it. Is that 4 weeks of riding weekends or 4 weeks of riding a 200km round trip to work every day? You could never use that in court as a basis for a complaint.
  16. In my experience, an RWC is a piece of paper designed to take money out of my pocket and into someone else's.

    First bike I bought - the right indicator didn't work and the brake light was stuck on. Came with an RWC.

    Most recent car I bought - the demister didn't work, the wheel bearings caused pulsing pressure in the cabin, and the engine had an oil leak. Came with an RWC.

    Last bike I bought had oil in the air cleaner. Came with an RWC.

    So forgive me if I think its bullshit to begin with.
  17. The stupid thing about a RWC for a motorbike is that it does nothing to assess the state of the motorbike, just the things that can be quickly and easily inspected. For example... check - oil not dripping out bottom of bike. It's completely irrelevant if there's gaffa tape holding something in place, as long as it's behind a resprayed shiny fairing then no one cares!

    I've had more than my fair share of 'issues' with RWC's and VicRoads inspections and none of them really had a clue what they were looking at. Each RWC tester has their thing that they pick up on (read as they know what they can make money on!).