Rear HeadRests & WOF

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Rear HeadRests & WOF

1 | 2

steve181

130 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 16

#1661610 31-Oct-2016 18:10

The 2 rear seat belts may also need replacing (another thing it failed on)

If I turn up with no rear seats will it definitely pass the headrest issue & also would the rear seatbelt issue become void if there are no rear seats?

maoriboy

1043 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 577

Trusted

#1661612 31-Oct-2016 18:11

steve181:

maoriboy:

Check out the following:

https://vehicleinspection.nzta.govt.nz/virms/in-service-wof-and-cof/general/vehicle-interior/head-restraints

and Tables and Images.

If my understanding is correct, rear headrests are not required i.e. no LVV certification required.

My car failed today because of this. I called the NZTA & the girl I spoke with shared your opinion but didn't seem rock solid confident about it (I guess because the info in the link might as well be in Russian it's that vague). She basically said I should ask the person that did the WOF to show me a document that states that I must have them or something along those lines.

It's frustrating I couldn't get a black & white answer from NZTA, I might call them back tomorrow & maybe get to speak to someone with more experience? On a side note does the NZTA set the WOF laws or is there a better organization to contact?

Unfortunately you probably won't get anything more definitive than that from the NZTA. The WOF process basically comes down to an inspectors interpretation of the VIRM, so while 1 inspector would pass you on no rear seat headrests, another would fail. Take a printed copy of the VIRM down to the place you got your WOF from and ask them to explain where they believe it failed. Perhaps even get a 2nd opinion from another WOF agent before going down??

maoriboy

1043 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 577

Trusted

#1661613 31-Oct-2016 18:13

afe66

3181 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1678

Lifetime subscriber

#1661616 31-Oct-2016 18:22

If you scroll down there is a link that says there has been amendment which says you _can_ remove rear headrests.

https://vehicleinspection.nzta.govt.nz/amendments/virm-in-service-certification.

But for me.

If its a good idea for front headrests, I'm not going to remove them for my friends/family in the back.

blackjack17

1715 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 868

#1661619 31-Oct-2016 18:28

I have two from an old toyota corona that you are welcome to have, I can measure up the distance to ensure they fit if you want

Auckland

Hillsborough

Electric kiwi signup credit Sharesies credit

scuwp

3927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2510

#1661647 31-Oct-2016 19:20

It always amazes me how people are fixated on taking shortcuts to obtain a piece of paper on the window at the expense of the safety of themselves or their passengers. Some screwed up priorities right there. "Sorry your a paraplegic bro, but on the bright side I managed to score my car a sweet warrant so it's all good". You get my drift...

..steps down from soapbox...

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

steve181

130 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 16

#1661649 31-Oct-2016 19:24

scuwp:

It always amazes me how people are fixated on taking shortcuts to obtain a piece of paper on the window at the expense of the safety of themselves or their passengers. Some screwed up priorities right there. "Sorry your a paraplegic bro, but on the bright side I managed to score my car a sweet warrant so it's all good". You get my drift...

..steps down from soapbox...

I personally don't have back seat passengers so safety doesn't come into it.

In my case having rear head rests makes things less safe as with them I'd now have two large blind spots in my rear view mirror.

MikeAqua

8203 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3957

#1661722 31-Oct-2016 21:02

Our Pajero has holes for 3 head rests on the middle row of seats, but we only have two.

The rear row is folded away and the two head rests for it are stored in the rear door pockets.

Maybe that's why we have never failed WOF.

Edit: with the middle headrest fitted the rear-view mirror is effectively useless

Mike

ubergeeknz

3344 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1041

Trusted

Vocus

#1661748 31-Oct-2016 21:47

kiwifidget:

I had a failed WOF over no rear headrests, even though they were sitting on the floor of the back seats. I had removed them as they annoyed me in the rear view mirror and I felt they made it harder to see out the back window.

I had to put them back in, redo the WOF, and yes, pay again (which may have been the real reason behind failing me in the first place), and then when I got home, put them on the floor again.

PITA.

That's not right. Reinspection is free within 30 days (and in that case, you could have done it there and then). Seems like you were had :/

maoriboy

1043 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 577

Trusted

#1662044 1-Nov-2016 14:17

ubergeeknz:

kiwifidget:

I had a failed WOF over no rear headrests, even though they were sitting on the floor of the back seats. I had removed them as they annoyed me in the rear view mirror and I felt they made it harder to see out the back window.

I had to put them back in, redo the WOF, and yes, pay again (which may have been the real reason behind failing me in the first place), and then when I got home, put them on the floor again.

PITA.

That's not right. Reinspection is free within 30 days (and in that case, you could have done it there and then). Seems like you were had :/

Yep, I agree. Had indeed.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1662048 1-Nov-2016 14:37

scuwp:

It always amazes me how people are fixated on taking shortcuts to obtain a piece of paper on the window at the expense of the safety of themselves or their passengers. Some screwed up priorities right there. "Sorry your a paraplegic bro, but on the bright side I managed to score my car a sweet warrant so it's all good". You get my drift...

..steps down from soapbox...

While that's kind of true, IIRC when they were looking at extending WOF interval from 6 months to one year, the argument against - that this would impact on road safety - was nullified by serious crash unit data and overseas data suggesting that vehicle faults as a contributory factor (ie not even "sole" factor) to deaths/injuries were extremely low (a few % at most), and of those faults, most were from bald/dangerous tyres. Morons are far more effective at killing and maiming themselves and others on the road when driving "safe" cars than cars made "unsafe" by their own stupidity.

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

scuwp

3927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2510

#1662056 1-Nov-2016 14:53

Fred99:
scuwp:

It always amazes me how people are fixated on taking shortcuts to obtain a piece of paper on the window at the expense of the safety of themselves or their passengers. Some screwed up priorities right there. "Sorry your a paraplegic bro, but on the bright side I managed to score my car a sweet warrant so it's all good". You get my drift...

..steps down from soapbox...

While that's kind of true, IIRC when they were looking at extending WOF interval from 6 months to one year, the argument against - that this would impact on road safety - was nullified by serious crash unit data and overseas data suggesting that vehicle faults as a contributory factor (ie not even "sole" factor) to deaths/injuries were extremely low (a few % at most), and of those faults, most were from bald/dangerous tyres. Morons are far more effective at killing and maiming themselves and others on the road when driving "safe" cars than cars made "unsafe" by their own stupidity.

Probably exactly my point. The paper on the window doesn't make the car safe, the car being in good condition and the safety system well maintained does. The wof should be almost inconsequential if the vehicle is maintained to a good condition consistently. For the sake of a headrest I would not expose my passengers to the risk of a head or neck injury, just as I would not allow a person to use a seat without a working seatbelt. In theory the wof system in an ideal world should be redundant.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

Bung

6768 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2951

Subscriber

#1662099 1-Nov-2016 15:48

In the NZ urban areas the vehicle occupancy is about 1.6. That means 3 cars with only a driver for every car with 1 passenger. Any car with more than 1 passenger means even more single occupants.

1 | 2