http://www.myfoxdfw.com/story/25857502/texas-to-no-longer-require-auto-inspection-sticker
Starting in March, inspections won't be separately-stickered; data from them will be sent to the computers of tax offices and other places that deal in license plates and their accompanying window stickers. Drivers will have to have been inspected prior to the issuance of their license plate/registration. A sample design of the combined sticker has not been made public yet. The state claims this move will save them millions of dollars in costs.
There has been a lot of fraud with the current system where Hispanic-owned garages issue stickers to other Hispanics without checking vehicles properly, or issuing them even if a vehicle fails.
I'm not saying that Hispanics are the only ones doing this, but they were the ones that got busted.
It sounds like the new system will make fraud even easier, since they won't even have to take their car to the garage to get the phony paperwork.
Quote from: Brian556 on June 28, 2014, 01:58:34 AM
There has been a lot of fraud with the current system where Hispanic-owned garages issue stickers to other Hispanics without checking vehicles properly, or issuing them even if a vehicle fails.
I'm not saying that Hispanics are the only ones doing this, but they were the ones that got busted.
It sounds like the new system will make fraud even easier, since they won't even have to take their car to the garage to get the phony paperwork.
Even in NJ this is prevelant, i know a place where i can get a sticker for about 100 bucks. A friend in PA knows a place that will do a PA sticker too. It all comes down to how much you're willing to spend on a sticker.
In my state, inspections are a joke. It is $5, with the state getting $1 and the garage getting $4. Same as it was in 1956. A garage cannot afford to do a serious inspection for $4, when it could do an oil change for upwards of $50. So most just slap on a sticker and there you go. It is basic economics.
Kentucky did away with inspections, and stickers, in the 1970s. The inspection stickers (which were placed on the windshield) were traded for proof of insurance stickers (placed in the back window), which went by the wayside less than 10 years later in favor of cards certifying proof of insurance that were to be carried in the vehicle.
quote from HB Elkins:
QuoteKentucky did away with inspections, and stickers, in the 1970s. The inspection stickers (which were placed on the windshield) were traded for proof of insurance stickers (placed in the back window), which went by the wayside less than 10 years later in favor of cards certifying proof of insurance that were to be carried in the vehicle.
Interesting..no inspections at all. So, I guess KY lets people drive vehicles that are unsafe and spew tons of excess pollutants in the air?
The good thing about the emissions check is that it has virtually stopped people from driving vehicles that spew excessive pollutants, odors and smoke. Before, it was really bad driving behind one of these junkers. Their odors would give people in nearby vehicles headaches (literal) all the time.
Quote from: Brian556 on June 28, 2014, 10:33:19 AM
quote from HB Elkins:
QuoteKentucky did away with inspections, and stickers, in the 1970s. The inspection stickers (which were placed on the windshield) were traded for proof of insurance stickers (placed in the back window), which went by the wayside less than 10 years later in favor of cards certifying proof of insurance that were to be carried in the vehicle.
Interesting..no inspections at all. So, I guess KY lets people drive vehicles that are unsafe and spew tons of excess pollutants in the air?
The good thing about the emissions check is that it has virtually stopped people from driving vehicles that spew excessive pollutants, odors and smoke. Before, it was really bad driving behind one of these junkers. Their odors would give people in nearby vehicles headaches (literal) all the time.
We don't have any inspections in Illinois either except for an emissions test every other year on a vehicle five years old or older.
NJ's system is like Illinois' system.
Modern-day cars tend to be much better in not emitting pollutants, odors and smoke. And people do tend to keep their cards in good shape. Sure, someone may have a headlight out, but that could occur the day after a car went thru an inspection station as well. And don't forget - people can still be pulled over for violations that would be uncovered at an inspection station. If it's anything like what I see on facebook posts, usually when a person is pulled over for a broken headlight, they complain they should've only been given a warning and not a ticket. They usually neglect to say how long that headlight has been out. Or how they couldn't tell that it looked a bit darker than before in front of them.
As far as stickers go - In NJ, originally the inspection was due every year, the same month your registration was due. You had to have a new registration card before you went to the inspection station. Then the state stated requiring every two year inspections, but every year registrations. So they did an inspection sticker on the windshield, and a registration sticker on the license plate. Now they did away with any sort of registration sticker.
From what I can tell, the biggest defenders of every year inspections and registration stickers are those in states that still mandate them. In states that don't mandate them, there's nothing that signifies driving conditions are car maintenance is worse, compared to every-year states.
My issue with no having inspections is that there are a lot of people out there who are lazy and irresponsible, and do not maintain their vehicle.
Take, for example, a former friend's mother.
Her house was really nasty, dog shit and piss all over the floor, everything in a state of disrepair.
She was overweight, once eating at McDonald's three times in one day.
Her minivan was not properly maintained. She was always getting pulled over for having lights out because she was too lazy to fix them.
Her van one day stopped shifting because the transmission had gone completely dry.
She took it to a garage, and they said that due to that, and about five other things, that the vehicle was no longer roadworthy.
It's people like this that make inspections necessary.
Did she live in a state that had inspections? If so, what good were they? It was the police that would stop her, and her mechanic that took the car off the road. If anything, it's an argument as to why have inspections to begin with.
Quote from: Brian556 on June 28, 2014, 10:33:19 AMQuoteKentucky did away with inspections, and stickers, in the 1970s. The inspection stickers (which were placed on the windshield) were traded for proof of insurance stickers (placed in the back window), which went by the wayside less than 10 years later in favor of cards certifying proof of insurance that were to be carried in the vehicle.
Interesting..no inspections at all. So, I guess KY lets people drive vehicles that are unsafe and spew tons of excess pollutants in the air?
It's not just Kentucky--it's also Kansas and plenty of other states. I have been told that Kansas used to have periodic vehicle emissions testing in the 1970's but abolished it in the 1980's. There is no emissions testing even as part of immatriculation procedures like inspecting a car for purposes of granting a salvage title (which people now have to do if they want to continue driving a car that has been totaled by an insurance company for, e.g., hail damage).
Kansas has license plate decals as part of annual vehicle registration renewal, but no vehicle insurance stickers. Auto insurers are instead expected to issue insurance proof cards which must be shown to the police along with the registration and driver's license at traffic stops.
QuoteThe good thing about the emissions check is that it has virtually stopped people from driving vehicles that spew excessive pollutants, odors and smoke. Before, it was really bad driving behind one of these junkers. Their odors would give people in nearby vehicles headaches (literal) all the time.
Conditions may be different in Texas, but that has never really been a problem in Kansas, where the police are usually pretty good about ticketing for visible emissions and equipment faults.
Texas has a higher Gini coefficient than Kansas (0.469 versus 0.445), although median household income and per capita income are similar (former about $1000 higher in Texas; latter about $1000 higher in Kansas). Based on this one would expect a Texan to be more likely to drive an older car in poor repair than a Kansan, and that in turn might tip the balance of advantage in favor of using an inspection system to screen out marginal vehicles rather than leaving the police to treat them on a case-by-case basis under the nuisance laws.
In NJ if your car is a 1996+ inspection is mostly a joke...pull in, they do the OBD-II check, and that's it, you get a new sticker and you are on your way, sometimes they pull the gas cap to test for pressure. pre 1996 it is a two speed idle test with a tail pipe sniffer. Idle and 2500 RPM
QuoteDid she live in a state that had inspections? If so, what good were they? It was the police that would stop her, and her mechanic that took the car off the road. If anything, it's an argument as to why have inspections to begin with.
This was in Texas. At least with yearly inspections, they have a chance to catch this stuff, and it can't go on for more than year.
Then again, lazy/stupid/irresponsible people are pretty easy to spot due to them always having at least one light out, and a dirty or damaged vehicle.
Virginia currently only has emissions testing in the Washington suburbs. I say "currently" because I believe it'll come at least to Hampton Roads within the next 10 years, and the entire state eventually. We also have annual safety inspections but not OBD2 testing. Statewide the inspection requires the emission control equipment to be present, but like other states, going to the right place you can pass inspection with or without jt. Vehicles with antique plates (for which all vehicles 25 model years old or more are eligible) are exempt from both types of inspections, but cannot be driven freely.
Delaware has both emissions and OBD2 testing, something that has caused a friend's car to not be road-legal since 2006.
Quote from: Brian556 on June 28, 2014, 10:33:19 AM
Interesting..no inspections at all. So, I guess KY lets people drive vehicles that are unsafe and spew tons of excess pollutants in the air?
There are laws in place regarding improper equipment, and vehicles violating them are subject to being pulled over and the driver cited. And smog is not a problem in Kentucky like it is in places like California or New Jersey.
I'm grateful that we have one less bureaucratic obstacle to vehicle operation in my state.
WV fought back a federal mandate to force emissions inspections (which are anti-poor and ineffective anyway) about 15 years ago.
As to safety, there is no evidence that states with such inspections have a better rate of equipment related traffic mortality/morbidity.
NC got rid of the physical sticker four or five years ago. You still need an inspection, but it is transmitted to the DMV's computer from the garage's computer. No inspection, no renewal. They had a transition year to sync up the inspection with the plate's renewal month. I was down there recently and saw several cars that had garage issued faux stickers. Same size as the old NC stickers, but read "Next NC inspection due MON YR at Acme Garage". Marketing.
No inspections in Arkansas
iPhone
One of the selling points of the "Cash For Clunkers" program was that it would take old, fuel-inefficient and more prone to polluting older vehicles off the market. What it really did was dry up the availability of cheap transportation for people who needed vehicles to get to work but couldn't afford anything other than an older, used car or truck. Those cars were destroyed simply because they were older.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 28, 2014, 12:19:25 PM
From what I can tell, the biggest defenders of every year inspections and registration stickers are those in states that still mandate them. In states that don't mandate them, there's nothing that signifies driving conditions are car maintenance is worse, compared to every-year states.
NJ ditched the safety inspections because the numbers showed they weren't all that effective in improving safety. They couldn't ditch the emissions check because of the EPA Clean Air Act mandate.
Quote from: SP Cook on June 29, 2014, 07:14:44 AM
NC got rid of the physical sticker four or five years ago. You still need an inspection, but it is transmitted to the DMV's computer from the garage's computer. No inspection, no renewal.
NJ is the exact opposite, you need a valid registration to pass inspection. This leads to a loophole where they basically can never suspend registration for expired inspection (it would be a catch-22). So if a car fails, people will drive years with an expired inspection and risk getting pulled over and a $130 fine. They usually get away with it in the bigger cities though.
One of the complaints in NJ regarding smog is that many pollutants come from factories, mines and other industries further west (PA, WV, OH) due to the trade winds. Even if every car in NJ were to be electric, the state probably would still fail or perform poorly in some air quality tests.
Louisiana's inspection is pretty basic. Check all lights,horn for proper operation. Very short "test drive" to test brakes..ha.ha.
In areas that have problems with EPA standards there is an ODB hookup and test. A lit check engine light is a fail.
Cost is $18.00. I've seen cars that make you wonder how they passed.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on June 28, 2014, 03:49:28 PM
In NJ if your car is a 1996+ inspection is mostly a joke...pull in, they do the OBD-II check, and that's it, you get a new sticker and you are on your way, sometimes they pull the gas cap to test for pressure. pre 1996 it is a two speed idle test with a tail pipe sniffer. Idle and 2500 RPM
An OBD-II test may be quick and easy but it isn't a "joke". Modern cars are loaded with sensors that regularly check the state of various things which impact emissions control. If any one of these sensors detects something amiss it will turn your check engine light on and you will have to diagnose and fix the "problem" or your vehicle will not pass emissions inspection.
My car has had its check engine light on most of the time for months now, based on the error code I've determined it's a fuel system pressure issue - something which has zero impact on the car's ability to function and a nonzero but minor impact on its emissions. Fixing whatever bullshit "problem" there is would cost me hundreds of dollars, for no benefit other than keeping the bureaucracy happy. Fortunately I plan to sell my car before the next time it is due for emissions inspection, so it will be someone else's problem to fix.
So yeah, to hell with emissions inspections. Waste of resources, unnecessary headache for car owners. Cars need to have emissions requirements at the point of manufacture, but after that, one may assume that most vehicles won't drift enough for there to be any significant effect on air quality.
New York has two window stickers, one for registration and one inspection. The state does emissions and safety inspection together.
Connecticut did away with stickers entirely in 2010, preferring to simply log the data in a central computer which the license plate scanners on police cars have access to. Connecticut cops can confirm you are current on registration and inspection without needing a sticker. But CT only does emissions inspections, not safety.
My check engine light came on once. Got a free diagnostic at Oriley's. It said fuel system pressure issue. Guy who did tests said it might be a loose gas cap. I tightened the gas cap, and the light went off after the next time I drove he car.
Kind of a ridiculous reason for the check engine light to come on.
Quote from: Duke87 on July 01, 2014, 11:03:01 PM
So yeah, to hell with emissions inspections. Waste of resources, unnecessary headache for car owners. Cars need to have emissions requirements at the point of manufacture, but after that, one may assume that most vehicles won't drift enough for there to be any significant effect on air quality.
On what basis may one assume that?
Quote from: Brian556 on June 28, 2014, 01:00:41 PM
Her minivan was not properly maintained. She was always getting pulled over for having lights out because she was too lazy to fix them.
Her van one day stopped shifting because the transmission had gone completely dry.
She took it to a garage, and they said that due to that, and about five other things, that the vehicle was no longer roadworthy.
Quote from: Brian556 on June 28, 2014, 04:44:58 PM
QuoteDid she live in a state that had inspections? If so, what good were they? It was the police that would stop her, and her mechanic that took the car off the road. If anything, it's an argument as to why have inspections to begin with.
This was in Texas. At least with yearly inspections, they have a chance to catch this stuff, and it can't go on for more than year.
Then again, lazy/stupid/irresponsible people are pretty easy to spot due to them always having at least one light out, and a dirty or damaged vehicle.
So you're saying that in less than a year, her car went from passing inspection to having so many things wrong with it that it couldn't be on the road anymore. To me, all of this is saying that the issues were occurring at time of inspection, but they were ignored or not severe enough to be caught.
Honestly, you're still not convincing me that the inspection process is worthwhile.
To my knowledge, neither DE nor FL does annual inspections either; although FL used to prior to the 1980s(?).
My grandfather, who lived in Deltona from the mid-60s through 1976, told me how strict the FL safety inspection process used to be at the time.
Delaware does do inspections at least...I can't recall the exact terms, but it's either 4 years new then every 2 years, or 5/2. They continue to do safety and emissions testing.
Going back to the original topic, the District of Columbia issues a windshield sticker that contains combined inspection/license plate validation/residential parking permit information.
Problem was, when they started issuing the new window stickers, DC's own law enforcement agencies started giving tickets to people who had the new window stickers. Why? They allegedly had "expired license plates" because the decals on the license plates showed an expiration date that had already passed. As a result, the District issued new decals to everyone with DC plates that say "SEE WINDOW STICKER." They go on the corners of both the front and back plates where the stickers showing month and year of expiry used to go.
While I don't live in DC and wasn't affected, that sort of thing really raises my ire. It comes across as a giant middle-finger gesture from the DC government to its citizens to issue a new style of sticker and then give tickets to the people who followed the new law and used those stickers (not that they had any choice but to use them!). Even if the tickets were eventually dismissed (a non-trivial matter in DC), it's not right to put their citizens through the hassle of having to appeal the tickets and deal with DC's bureaucracy. The other thing is, it's hardly unique or rare for DC's law enforcement to issue improper tickets. It happens constantly. One of the local radio stations (WTOP) even has a "Ticketbuster" segment in which they help people who can't get satisfaction through the appeals process. The main thing that comes across in their reports is the overwhelming arrogance of the personnel who handle the appeals, even when it's indisputable that a ticket was wrongly issued.
(A slightly similar issue used to arise in some jurisdictions in Virginia. Almost all cities and counties used to issue the odious "county sticker"–essentially, when you paid your car tax you also had to buy a windshield sticker, for a separate fee, to prove you paid it. There was ONE city, I think Virginia Beach, that didn't issue them. Virginia Beach residents kept getting tickets in other Virginia jurisdictions, most notably Charlottesville, for "failing to display a county sticker." I recall a quotation from the Charlottesville city sheriff saying, essentially, he didn't care because it wasn't his problem to determine who was a Virginia Beach resident and who was a violator. Nowadays many counties and cities have stopped issuing those stupid things, although some still do, and the problem has gone away because it's common to see Virginia cars without a county sticker.)
I hope Texas does a better job of communicating with law enforcement personnel in all jurisdictions throughout the state!
Quote from: Brandon on June 28, 2014, 11:30:39 AMWe don't have any inspections in Illinois either except for an emissions test every other year on a vehicle five years old or older.
And the latter is only in the Chicago metro.
Quote from: Crazy Volvo Guy on July 02, 2014, 01:14:52 PM
Quote from: Brandon on June 28, 2014, 11:30:39 AMWe don't have any inspections in Illinois either except for an emissions test every other year on a vehicle five years old or older.
And the latter is only in the Chicago metro.
And Metro East (St Clair & Madison Counties).
Quote from: Brandon on July 02, 2014, 02:39:53 PMAnd Metro East (St Clair & Madison Counties).
Yeah, but nobody cares about Detroit Jr... :P
Maryland has never had a "routine" safety inspection, though a newly-purchased used car must pass a rigorous safety inspection before it can be issued registration plates.
In the urban and suburban counties of the state, a periodic vehicle inspection for emissions only is required if your car has a gasoline engine.
Quote from: pctech on July 01, 2014, 04:50:37 PM
In areas that have problems with EPA standards there is an ODB hookup and test. A lit check engine light is a fail.
That's pretty much how PA does it's emissions (in counties that require it.) I learned the tough way a few years ago when I took my car in for both stickers (emissions and safety), and after waiting 40 minutes just to get the car in, they came out right away and said the "Check Engine" light was on and that was an instant fail (and, for whatever reason, they said they couldn't pull the code that triggered the light to know what to fix). I asked about just the safety inspection, so at least I could get 1 sticker, and they said they weren't allowed do that one till the emissions passed (THAT kinda pissed me off).
After some Google searching, I pulled a fuse that made the light go away (apparently reset the computer), and took it back... where they informed me that since the computer reset, I would have to drive ~100 miles or so before they could do the test... Which I did (though I ended up taking it somewhere else) - it passed both inspections - and about 70 miles later the Check Engine light came back on - and stayed that way for a year+ till the next inspection (where that "trick" didn't work again, the light would come back on after only 50 miles or so after reset).
I could be wrong, but it seems that it's the car that does the actual test, and the inspection station's computer linked to Harrisburg just confirms it (for a nice chunk of change)
Quote from: Mr_Northside on July 02, 2014, 03:40:24 PM
Quote from: pctech on July 01, 2014, 04:50:37 PM
In areas that have problems with EPA standards there is an ODB hookup and test. A lit check engine light is a fail.
That's pretty much how PA does it's emissions (in counties that require it.) I learned the tough way a few years ago when I took my car in for both stickers (emissions and safety), and after waiting 40 minutes just to get the car in, they came out right away and said the "Check Engine" light was on and that was an instant fail (and, for whatever reason, they said they couldn't pull the code that triggered the light to know what to fix). I asked about just the safety inspection, so at least I could get 1 sticker, and they said they weren't allowed do that one till the emissions passed (THAT kinda pissed me off).
After some Google searching, I pulled a fuse that made the light go away (apparently reset the computer), and took it back... where they informed me that since the computer reset, I would have to drive ~100 miles or so before they could do the test... Which I did (though I ended up taking it somewhere else) - it passed both inspections - and about 70 miles later the Check Engine light came back on - and stayed that way for a year+ till the next inspection (where that "trick" didn't work again, the light would come back on after only 50 miles or so after reset).
I could be wrong, but it seems that it's the car that does the actual test, and the inspection station's computer linked to Harrisburg just confirms it (for a nice chunk of change)
You are 100% correct.
When the OBD-II test is done, it uses the on board sensors and firmware to do the test. The computer they have is just a glorified code reader that enters it into an inspection report system.
New Jersey does not charge for the test.
On one of my vehicles the ABS module went bad – a new one costs $900 – and I had to pull the fuse to make the ABS system stop whirring once I parked. Otherwise it would drain my battery. When I did that, it caused the brake light on my dashboard to stay on, and it wouldn't pass inspection with that.
So when I go to get an inspection, I just reinsert the fuse and go get the inspection, whirring noise and all. It passes every time, and after it's done I take the fuse out again. In the meantime I just cover the brake light up with black tape and drive as normal.