millerm277;c-69666 wrote
- NJ + CT don't have safety inspection and the cars don't seem much worse.
- NH doesn't require auto insurance (and that one I don't agree with, although I'll also note that many states like NJ have minimum coverages that are so low as to be nearly as useless as not having insurance). But I'm mentioning it because conceptually that really ought to drive up auto insurance rates with higher uninsured motorist claims.....in practice, it doesn't seem to. My insurance is shockingly cheap for (good) full coverage.
- I'd have fewer objections to NH's inspection program if there were state-run stations with clear, consistent standards. The existing model of the "regulations are vague and inspections are only done by private shops, which have obvious incentives to exaggerate things for repair business and fail you for inspection if you disagree", was a bad one.
- As for tires, it's not like inspection currently requires you to have appropriate tires for the season. AFAIK you'll pass inspection just fine in January by showing up with a summer tire on the car as long as it's got the remaining tread depth + isn't rotted. Doesn't matter that it has zero grip at that time of the year.
- Basically everyone I've met with a dangerous vehicle up here still drives anyway uninspected. It's not like we've got much in police to enforce anything once you're away from the Boston suburbs.
Auto insurance is required for anyone that takes out a loan, and I suspect most people keep it after paying off the loan (who are we kidding, many people just needlessly trade up before their current loan is even done).
Inspections being done by service stations has always been a massive issue due to profit motive. In many cases, it harms safety and the consumer as I suspect most of us blow off "non-critical" suggested repairs as potential needless up charges when the repair really should be done. It is always challenging to figure out what is truly needed and what is being recommended with needless aggression.
Regarding tires, most folks are not changing between tires and timing things to avoid getting caught. Especially in NH where inspection month is tied to birth month. I think the point is that most bad tires should be caught within a year of going bad.
Overall, I think inspections were probably much more critical before most cars on the road had minimum safety standards (rising tide lifting all boats, and all that). Older cars are mostly off the road and I suspect those had things go bad more often.
Having to inspect within three years of buying a new car is ludicrous in any state. Absolute needless expense for every resident that buys a new car.
Without the requirement, one needs to wonder about vehicles not having brakes done when needed as people try to delay repair costs further than they should.
Final thought: without inspections, people will delay repairs, which makes me wonder if more used cars will hit the market with lingering issues. I assume used car dealers must still inspect for sale? But even then, people will not take care of their cars as much, would could cause an overall decrease in quality of used vehicles in the state.
Seems like an annual complimentary safety inspection would be the best of all available options. I guess almost any car service center might offer that to try to up sell repairs, both needed and not.
