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!
Sincerely,
Michael Barry Technician Quick Stop Smog & More Sacramento, California, USA
1 Replies Received
(View Replies)
1 Replies Received
(Hide Replies)
|