Submission to NZ Transport Agency On Tailoring the Low Volume Vehicle certification process to risk Exempting approved imported modified vehicles

Transcription

1 Submission to NZ Transport Agency On Tailoring the Low Volume Vehicle certification process to risk Exempting approved imported modified vehicles from LVV certification 23 September

2 Dear Sir / Madam Submission: Tailoring the Low Volume Vehicle certification process to risk, exempting approved imported modified vehicles from LVV certification. This submission is from: Motor Trade Association (Inc) PO Box 9244 Marion Square Wellington 6141 The contact person in respect of this submission is: Name: Graeme Swan Title: Sector Specialist - Repairer Ph: (04) graeme.swan@mta.org.nz Thank you for the opportunity for MTA to provide comment on exempting approved imported modified vehicles from LVV certification, regarding the views of and its effect on the automotive industry. Yours sincerely Graeme Swan Sector Specialist - Repairer 2

3 Introduction The Motor Trade Association Incorporated (MTA) was founded in 1917 to represent the interests of an industry with a well-defined obligation to provide quality service to the public. One of the founding maxims of the organisation is to do nothing that is contrary to the principles of Safety First and Always. MTA currently represents approximately 3,700 businesses within the New Zealand automotive industry and its allied services. Members of our association operate businesses including automotive repairers (both heavy and light vehicle), collision repairers, service stations, vehicle importers and distributors and vehicle sales. In total MTA members employ in excess of 40,000 staff across New Zealand. Some 1900 MTA members are also NZ Transport Agency appointed WoF Inspecting Organisations, and there are also several MTA members that are currently Low Volume Vehicle (LVV) certifiers as well as a number of other members that import motorhomes, disability vehicles or performance vehicles. Safety is an obvious concern for MTA members when dealing with vehicles that have undergone some form of modification. The LVV system, as operated on behalf of NZTA by the Low Volume Vehicle Technical Association Inc, provides transparency for car dealers and repairers by ensuring that modifications have been reviewed and documented. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the exempting approved imported modified vehicles from LVV certification and have the following comments to make. Submission What impact would the proposals have, and on whom? The Transport Agency is particularly interested in your comments on costs in implementing the proposals. As we have seen with the recent implementation of the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, it is clear that the need for policies, systems, and processes are vital for ensuring safety. The development and operation of such systems does come with a cost, but the overwhelming safety benefit is seen as worth the effort. We must be vigilant for people who would seek to bypass this cost and thereby reduce the focus on safety. MTA members have raised concerns around the safety of some disability vehicle modifications on vehicles from Europe, especially vehicles from the UK that are certified in accordance with the UK small series national type approval. Some of these modifications do not meet current New Zealand standards and thus there is a cost in bringing these vehicles into line with local certification requirements. As with any business, costs and profits are a huge driver, without an independent 3rd party inspection of the vehicles modifications there may be some parties that ignore these differences and exploit the proposed amendments to the detriment of the safety of the vehicle s ultimate user. MTA notes that no substantive cost-benefit analysis has been conducted by the Transport Agency for this proposal. In its assessment of submissions, we will be interested to see how the Agency is able to enumerate the costs and benefits as described by submitters. The short period for consultation means that MTA has been unable to commission or undertake any substantive economic analysis of its own. 3

4 Would any groups or individuals be disadvantaged by the proposals, and how? There are 5 groups that MTA believe could possibly be disadvantaged by this proposal. 1) Low Volume Vehicle certifiers By description, this is a low volume industry. With even a slight increase in imported modified vehicles coming into New Zealand that do not require local certification, there may be a reduced work load and thus lower income for some current certifiers. If this leads to business failure or a withdrawal from the certification industry, the lower supply of certifiers will affect the pricing of vehicles that do require certification. 2) Low Volume Vehicle Technical Association (LVVTA) Less vehicles being certified will lead to a lower income for LVVTA. For an Association that is largely funded through certification fees this will have an adverse effect on the service that they are able to deliver to certifiers, the motoring public, modified vehicle industry and the Transport Agency. LVVTA cannot simply raise those fees, which are set by regulation. Examples of this may be reduced training courses for certifiers, inability to respond to public queries, lack of resources to develop or review Low Volume Vehicle Standards. 3) NZ Transport Agency - With less vehicles being certified there will be less income for the Transport Agency through regulated fees, however this will have less of an impact on the Transport Agency than the loss of income will have for LVVTA and LVV Certifiers. As the Agency charged with ensuring safety on New Zealand roads, will systems be introduced to ensure that the Agency is able to track and confirm the fitness of overseas modified vehicles on NZ roads? 4) Local Vehicle modifiers Local vehicle modifiers may not be able to compete with imported modified vehicles on price due to the fact that they will be incurring additional costs due to local certification requirements. The worst case scenario would be that some of these modifiers go out of business. This is not, however, a simple matter of concern for local industry. The likely follow on effect for the end vehicle user is not being able to get a disability vehicle from overseas adapted to their specific needs, but not being able to find a local modifier specialising in this type of modification/adaption. 5) Consumers/end users MTA has concerns around consumer rights should any imported products or vehicles be faulty or subject to recalls. If vehicles are extensively modified the manufacturer s local agent may refuse to honour recall campaigns. Furthermore, if the modification has been carried out overseas and is found to be substandard, who will cover the remedial action as the overseas modifier carries no liability here in New Zealand? The consumer will also be disadvantaged if there are a reduced number of local vehicle modifiers or certifiers available due to the decreased workloads, leading to increased charges for work. As well, if LVVTA is able to secure increased funding through higher fees, these will be ultimately passed on to consumers. Would any groups or individuals benefit from the proposals, and how? As noted earlier, the Transport Agency will need to show in its decision document how it assesses the different costs and benefits described by submitters to this process. Some groups will see costs and benefits (for example, end users of modified vehicles), but the assessment of where overall balance of those lands will be interesting to see. Groups that would possibly benefit from this proposal would be the importers of modified vehicles, in particular motorhomes, disability and high performance vehicles. These may be private individuals with one off imports or businesses that specialise in the importing and selling of modified vehicles. 4

5 Users of disability modified vehicles will also benefit from these proposed changes as they will possibly be able to access newer vehicles that are fitted with newer more advanced technology. MTA does not believe that these imports are crossing the border in high volumes at the present time, and does not believe that these proposed changes would drastically increase the number of vehicles being imported. Are there any implementation or compliance issues you would like to raise? If this proposal were to go ahead, one area that will need significant consideration from the Transport Agency will be how to identify modifications associated with second stage manufacture once the vehicle is in-service. Issues may arise at warrant of fitness (WoF) time when an in-service inspector needs to determine if a vehicle has been modified under the control of the vehicle manufacturer or if it has been further modified since entering service. The Transport Agency must bear in mind that the average vehicle life span in new Zealand is between 16 to 18 years, and that the vast majority of Inspecting Organisations and Vehicle Inspectors are not allowed access to the LATIS system, so do not have access to the Notes that an entry certifier may have entered about the vehicle or its modifications when it was entry certified. MTA would like to see sample European Community Whole Vehicle Type Approval (ECWVTA) certification plates made available to importers and vehicle inspectors. This would be best achieved through photos in the Entry and In-service VIRM s plus a Technical Bulletin giving further information. There also needs to be clarity around vehicles being further modified in New Zealand. Disability vehicles may require further modification or adaption for the end-user or motorhomes may also require additional seats or seatbelts fitted. Will these vehicles require certification for all of the modifications or just the modifications carried out in New Zealand? Additional questions asked of MTA by the Transport Agency What sort of volumes of modified vehicles they (members) currently import? MTA does not actively track the number of vehicles our members import, but we believe that there would only be a few hundred modified vehicles imported from Europe in any one year. The number of modified vehicles imported from Japan and America would be similar if not slightly greater. In total MTA believe that we would be looking at modified vehicles per year being imported. Whether the proposed changes would be likely to encourage you (members) to import more vehicles from the proposed jurisdictions, or try to import vehicles that already have overseas approvals? MTA members indicate that they would be more likely to import modified vehicles from the proposed jurisdictions that have already been modified and certified, as they can potentially save hundreds of dollars and significant amounts of time by not having them re-certified here in New Zealand. That said, there is the assumption that allowing imported modified vehicles without local certification will only occur if the Transport Agency has assured itself that the overseas compliance regimes are compatible with New Zealand safety requirements. 5

6 6