Join Now
International Automotive Technicians Network
Re: More STAR Observations
Posted to Emissions Forum on 8/14/2012 1 Reply

[...trimmed text...]

That is a noble intention, but is clearly NOT the stated intention of the FuPR. It boldly claims to ONLY target inspection performance, not repair performance, and fails miserably in that execution.

If they really wanted to punish those performing shoddy repairs, they would make it illegal for the idiot car owners to go over to Autozone and start throwing parts at codes, or buying any emission-related devices from Pick-N-Pull.

If they really wanted to eliminate "squeak thru" repairs, they would make it illegal to run any test-after-fail until the diagnostic recommendations of a licensed repair tech are followed and completed to the letter, including any overdue maintenance concerns.

If they really wanted to ensure durable repairs, they would increase the CrAP cost limit to several thousand dollars.

If they really wanted to ensure accuracy and consistency in the inspection process, they would fix all of the NUMEROUS subjective loop-holes in the official inspection guides.

If they really wanted to improve inspection performance, they would stop all of this short-term, long-term, and undercover nonsense, and simply direct a small but representative population of vehicles to a free referee inspection before their next-year renewal. A lot of bad things can happen in a year, but not nearly as many things as could happen in two. If a pattern of follow-up failures emerges, further investigation into the maintenance, repair, and inspection history might be warranted, not the automatic 'finger-pointing' at the last inspector who passed it.

That's all I have for now, but I promise that I'll be back!


Michael Barry
Quick Stop Smog & More
Sacramento, California, USA

1 Replies Received (View Replies)