Mark Stockdale Principal Advisor – Regulations - FOMCfomc.org.nz/AA_Presentation_to_FOMC_AGM...
24
WoF frequency review Mark Stockdale Principal Advisor – Regulations
Transcript of Mark Stockdale Principal Advisor – Regulations - FOMCfomc.org.nz/AA_Presentation_to_FOMC_AGM...
WoF frequency review
Mark Stockdale
Principal Advisor – Regulations
Overview
• What are the changes? • Why? • Why not heritage vehicles?
(and why they should be tested less often)
• Where to next?
New label from 2014
Background • review of WoF, commercial CoF, and annual
vehicle licensing (AVL) commenced March 2012 • stakeholder working groups (AA, MTA etc.) • draft proposals consulted in September • changes announced in January 2013 • major changes to AVL deferred • consultation on implementation in May 2013;
introduced during 2014
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Vehicle Licensing Reform 70% of AA Members supported fewer WoF inspections in a random survey
Possible changes to AVL (‘rego’) • increase payment options (e.g. direct debit) • email and txt reminders • early payment incentives and late payment
penalties • abolish AVL for some vehicles e.g. trailers • change or remove license label • focus on non-payment offences and remove
frivolous infringements e.g. not displaying current label correctly
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Payment incentives like utility companies Changing or removing licence label, or abolishing frivolous infringements will benefit trailers, motorcycles, vintage cars with half windscreens etc where its impractical to prominently display label
What are the changes? Age of vehicle New WoF inspection frequency Date for introduction
New
An initial WoF inspection, another one at three years old, then one per year for the lifetime of the vehicle
1 January 2014
First registered anywhere in the world on or after 1 January 2000
One per year for the lifetime of the vehicle
• 1 January 2014 for vehicles first reg’d between 2004-2008;
• 1 July 2014 for vehicles first registered between 2000-2003
First registered anywhere in the world before 1 January 2000
One every six months for the lifetime of the vehicle No change
Presenter
Presentation Notes
The phase-in will smooth the impact of the changes on the inspection industry which would otherwise create uneven demand for WoFs throughout the year
Summary • year 2000 is the cut-off between 6 or 12 month
WoFs – forever • applies to cars/vans, motorcycles, caravans and
trailers (CoF remains at 6 months) • you don’t need to do anything; WoF inspectors
will assign appropriate expiry date • no distinction for heritage vehicles • within 10 years only 13% of the fleet will require
a 6-monthly WoF
Presenter
Presentation Notes
The changes will be accompanied by targeted police enforcement and a 3-year publicity campaign to increase awareness among vehicle owners that they need to take responsibility for the safety of their vehicle all year round and proactively check their vehicle is roadworthy at all times. Annual savings are projected to be about $159m a year for 900,000 motorists through reduced WoF cost and travel time/fuel savings
Why review WoF?
• discussion document: “NZ’s vehicle inspection safety system may not deliver the best balance between cost, safety and other benefits.”
• NZ has most frequent periodic inspection regime in the world
• cars in UK tested every 19,000km on average; every 32,000km in Germany: 6,200km in NZ!
• few crashes caused by vehicle defects
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Question: is NZ’s 6-monthly WoF system a function of our fleet age and road quality? Answer: study the relationship between crash and mechanical condition and compare to international trends
Data analysis
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
NZ NSW UK Germany Japan
# in
spec
tions
Comparative inspection frequencies over 8 years
Presenter
Presentation Notes
And here’s another look at some of the key data around our current WoF regime… How does NZ’s inspection frequency compare with other countries?
Data analysis
0 5 10 15 20 25
Lost control Failed to give way/stop Inattention/distraction Did not see other party Too fast for conditions
Alcohol or drugs Inexperienced
… Vehicle factors
Injury crash cause (%)
2.5% of crashes or 0.4% where sole cause
Presenter
Presentation Notes
We are fortunate, like other countries, that vehicle defects are a very small contributor to crash causes. In fact the MoT estimates vehicle defects are involved in 2.5% of all vehicle crashes, and are the sole cause 0.4% of crashes. Of the NZ vehicle-fault crashes, approximately 15% of vehicles did not have a current WoF; and approx. 9% of vehicles on the road are unwarranted
Data analysis
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Tyres
Lighting
Brakes
Body/structure
No WoF
No driver licence
Vehicle faults (%) where contributed to fatal crashes
This is the problem
Presenter
Presentation Notes
When we look at fatal crashes where a vehicle defect was a contributing factor, we see that nearly 40% did not have a WoF, so these vehicles are not being captured by the current system. And, despite the frequency of our check, over half had some sort of tyre fault.
Presenter
Presentation Notes
So lets have a look at that tyre problem…
www.tyresafety.org.nz
Presenter
Presentation Notes
So, in light of the disproportionate number of tyre-related crashes in spite of our regular WoF check, a number of organisations came together this year to run a tyre awareness programme, which hopefully will become an annual event. The tyre safety website contains useful advice on checking tyres – and the NZTA has produced special keyrings to help motorists check tyre tread depth, and I have bought some to give away Obviously I’m preaching to the converted with this audience – as a classic car owner I check the condition and pressure of my tyres monthly – but help yourselves to a keyring
Why year 2000?
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
7.0%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Vehicle age (years)
Percent of cars/vans with WoF-related crash factor by vehicle age (2007-2011)
Valid WoF
No WoF
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Lets look at vehicles over 12 years of age… As you can see, there is an upward trend in contributory mechanical factors as a vehicle ages, albeit off a small base and worse for non-compliant vehicles…
Why year 2000?
• ‘modern’ cars are safer (passive & active safety equipment, structural design)
• safety doesn’t deteriorate much as they age • annual WoF makes sense long term, but public
concern over worn, less-safe Jap-imports (1995-97)
• year 2000 cut-off easy to administer & enforce
What about heritage vehicles?
49.2% 41.3%
9.5%
Annual mileage of heritage vehicles FOMC club survey
<1000km 1000-3000km >3000km
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Vehicles aged over 30 = 2.5% of the vehicle fleet, or about 75,000 from a total fleet of 3m (light and heavy)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Once a year
Annual up to age 12,
then 6-monthly
Annual for vehicles
>30
Every 12,000km or 3 years
Only test when sold
Exempt heritage vehicles
Keep status quo
Preferred WoF Frequency FOMC club survey
Presenter
Presentation Notes
60% of FOMC members supported an annual WoF 31% supported every 12,000km or 3 years, whichever came first 30% supported exempting heritage vehicles, or only test on sale Only 9.4% supported status quo 56% also supported making the WoF test simpler for vehicles over 30 years
What about heritage vehicles?
Vehicle age Average WoF failure rate
< 5 years 12%
5-10 years 22%
11-25 years 34%
> 25 years 28.6% ↓
Presenter
Presentation Notes
You saw on the earlier graph that WoF failure rates gradually climb as vehicles age to over 20. But then they begin declining as they surpass 25, which makes sense as such vehicles tend not to be in daily use, and if they have survived that long then they are well-maintained. Vehicles aged < 5 years: 12% Vehicles aged 5-10 years: 22% Vehicles aged 11-25 years: 34% Vehicles aged > 25 years: 28.6%
What about heritage vehicles?
Crash stats with vehicle defects (2005-2011): 22 (0.7% of all 3116 defect crashes) involved
vehicles >40 years, none fatal (3 serious injury) 139 (4.5%) involved vehicles aged 30+ years
(1984 on): • 7 (0.2%) fatal (almost all being under 30
years at the date of crash) • 29 (0.9%) serious injury
Presenter
Presentation Notes
I assisted FOMC by looking at crash data involving older vehicles…
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
0 - 4 5 - 9 10 - 14 15 - 19 20 - 24 25 - 29 ≥ 30
rate
/freq
uenc
y
vehicle age
share of car population share on road accidents
Vehicle population vs. Accident involvement with injuries
0.41
0.87
0.27 0.19
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
25 - 29 > 30
Presenter
Presentation Notes
These stats are consistent with other jurisdictions as this graph of crash data from Germany shows…
What about heritage vehicles? Vehicle Compliance Amendment Rule 2013 sought feedback on: WoF frequency for ‘vintage’ and
‘veteran’ vehicles definition of ‘vintage’ and
‘veteran’ – currently: • Veteran = pre-1919 • Vintage = 40+ years
Presenter
Presentation Notes
The Cabinet paper noted: Under the chosen option, the owners of vintage and classic vehicles and trailers and caravans would remain on six-monthly inspections despite low use. The owners of such vehicles have tended to argue for less frequent inspections... The issue is likely to be raised during consultation on amending the relevant transport rule, and could be considered then. However, the economic benefits generated by specific arrangements for these vehicles or any increased safety risks would be small, and making such arrangements would increase implementation costs.
What about heritage vehicles?
International practice: • UK: pre-1960 exempt, all others annually • Sweden & Netherlands: vehicles over 30 every 2
years (instead of annual); >50 exempt • France: >30 every 5 years • rest of Europe: every 2 years (all light vehicles) • Japan: every 2 years from age 3 (all vehicles) • Australia: no periodic inspection (all vehicles)
except NSW, NT (annual from age 5, 3)
Presenter
Presentation Notes
NZ has the most frequent safety inspection in the world – for mainstream and heritage vehicles
What about heritage vehicles?
• AA supported reviewing frequency and definitions
• FOMC proposed: annual inspections for over 40 years ‘vintage’ to include 30+ years and redefined
as ‘heritage’ (lower ACC, annual WoF) • however, final Rule retains status quo
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Less than 1% of the fleet are aged between 30 and 40 years
Where to next? • FOMC met with Associate Transport Minister
to review WoF frequency and ‘vintage’ definition (40 years)
• no further changes to WoF frequency are planned: “economic benefits of specific arrangements [for heritage vehicles] is small, and…would increase implementation costs.”
• 6-monthly WoF will be untenable in 10 years
Presenter
Presentation Notes
The Minister said changing WoF frequency for heritage vehicles would be a significant change in govt. policy, and more work would need to be undertaken to ensure any changes would not create complications. However, he said the MoT does not plan to undertake any further work, because the economic benefits of specific arrangements for heritage vehicles would be small, while increasing implementation costs of the WoF changes. However, the government is open to reviewing the age for ‘vintage’ vehicles down from 40 to 30 years. But it’s estimated that within 10 years, only about 13% of the fleet will still be subject to 6-monthly WoFs, by which time it will be easier for administration, compliance and enforcement to have all vehicles subject to the same WoF frequency.
