Cedric Stephens | Are annual vehicle inspections necessary?

Who assumes the risks when a vehicle is placed in the custody of an employee or agent of the Island Traffic Authority, ITA, to be tested to determine its roadworthiness and facilitate the issuing of a certificate of fitness and road licence under the provisions of Section 4(1), Part II of the Road Traffic Regulations 2022?

Neither the Road Traffic Act nor the regulations provides answers.

There are no signs in the 15 vehicle examination depots across the island that seek to limit or exclude the authority from legal liability while vehicles are in its custody or under the control of employees – like the disclaimer notices that are often seen in private parking spaces that purport to exclude the parking space providers from legal liability.

The ITA’s website offers no guidance on the subject or says anything about how motorists should go about seeking compensation if their vehicle was damaged when it was being tested for roadworthiness. The subject is shrouded in secrecy.

In the absence of more and better particulars – as my legal friends would say – I would argue, as a non-lawyer, that the risks linked to the roadworthiness tests are assumed by the ITA and/or the Jamaican government. This means that the costs and expenses that have been incurred by a motorist for repairing his/her vehicle because of a collision on ITA’s premises are ultimately paid from the Government’s bank account or the consolidated fund, if at all.

The current Road Traffic Act and regulations were part of a programme to modernise the island’s road infrastructure.

Was the capacity of ITA also upgraded, or is it the same old-same old? Has the auditor general ever conducted a performance audit on the operations of the ITA and its examination depots to assess its efficiency and effectiveness in meeting its objectives? Are annual tests for certificates of fitness effective in improving safety on the island’s roads? These questions are being posed against the background of long-standing suggestions of corruption involving the issuing of driving permits and certificates of fitness.

Are there other, more effective, and objective ways of testing whether a vehicle complies with the road traffic regulations instead of relying on the judgment of one person who has driven the vehicle for a few minutes? Is the existing regime of tests for roadworthiness compliant with international best practices? To what extent are the dysfunctions in the ITA contributing to the country’s epidemic of road accidents?

Expat Focus, www.expatfocus.com, in discussing the Barbadian roadworthiness test, says: “Barbados requires all vehicles to undergo an annual roadworthiness test, commonly referred to as the fitness test. This test ensures that vehicles are safe to operate on public roads and complies with the country’s regulations. The test is conducted by the Barbados Licensing Authority. The inspection includes a thorough examination of the vehicle’s brakes, lights, suspension, and tires, among other things.”

“The Barbadian fitness test is the equivalent of the British MOT (Ministry of Transport) test. Both tests ensure that vehicles meet specific safety standards and are roadworthy. However, the MOT test in the UK is a bit more stringent and covers a wider range of vehicle components.”

The same source also publishes information about the ITA’s roadworthiness test. Significantly, it did not say the local test was the equivalent to the British MOT roadworthiness test.

The testing of vehicles in the United Kingdom is conducted principally at commercial garages (authorised examiners) and by some local authorities (designated councils). These are authorised, or designated as appropriate, by the Driver and Vehicles Standards Agency, DVSA, and are known as VTSs or vehicle testing stations. The stations and their staff are subject to inspections by the DVSA to ensure that testing is properly carried out. Test equipment used must be approved by the DVSA.

MOT tests are carried out by testers who are specifically trained and approved. They record test results on the MOT database and sign official test documents. A VTS may only test those classes and types of vehicle that they are authorised to test and which are of a size and weight that can be accommodated on the authorised test equipment.

The most common MOT failures as recorded by the DVSA include lights 18% – one of the most common failures is a blown bulb, which can include fog lights, reversing lights, and daytime lights alongside headlights and brake lights; suspension 12%; brakes 10% – loose, unresponsive handbrakes or those that don’t ratchet up properly will indicate a potential problem; tyres 7%; windscreen 7%; exhaust 4%; steering 3%; fluids; and other issues.

The ITA does not publish similar information.

Australian researchers say a theme that is repeated through many of the studies is that “random inspection may be more effective in reducing crash rates than periodic motor vehicle inspections or is vital as a supplement to periodic inspections. The reason put forth in various studies was that random inspection encourages motorists to always maintain their cars in a roadworthy condition, whereas PMVI encourages motorists to maintain their vehicles in a roadworthy condition only at inspection times.”

Do the costs and risks associated with conducting annual vehicle inspections outweigh the benefits? It would be interesting to hear from Jamaica’s Ministry of Transport.

Cedric E. Stephens provides independent information and advice about the management of risks and insurance. For free information or counsel, write to: aegis@flowja.com or business@gleanerjm.com