From what I can understand you WILL be able to get on-line information on past MOT's so you could get the last 4 MOT reports on the hypothetical Toyota. Obviously not yet, as we haven't had 4 years of computerised MOT's.
You'll need the V5 reference number from the owner though.
|
What's needed is a statistical breakdown of the failures. Is a 4 year old Toyota a better bet than a 4 year old Ford, and why?
659.
|
> What's needed is a statistical breakdown of the failures. Is a 4 year old Toyota a better bet than a 4 year old Ford, and why?
Now that is very valuable info., so I expect HMG will give it away for free!
|
Its not often that I'm in any way offensive on this forum, but I have to admit astonishment at how so many people who obviously know so little about this topic can sit at a keyboard and write so much nonsense about it. We have had people telling us that its run by civil servants, Capita, EDS, Fujitsu etc etc and that its 'failing' blah blah blah.
Now, some years ago I actually attended a motor industry conference sponsored by Siemens when they told us all about the launch of this project. I also receive many motor industry journals and e-mail bulletins that have been keeping the industry up to date on the state of play. I also have a mate who was part of the original trial programme.
Whilst there WAS a small amount of public sector involvement in this project right at the start, the project has always been run a private sector project by Siemens Business Systems. Siemens provide everything - including the certificates, equipments, management, training for VTS staff, all call handling - bascially the whole package. The idea is that its based on the technology they supplied for the TuV testing in Germany - so (in theory) already proven...
I know any sniff of public sector involvement or 'civil servants' is enough to send many BR'ers into apoplexy but let's have some facts for goodness sake (for some reason the public sector appears to occupy a place in the demonology of the middle classes above only the EU and 'chavs')...still, better to pick on them than poor people and single mums I guess?
Anyway, the system is hardly 'failing' - there are about 19,000 VTS's on the system and about 11.7 million vehicles have now been tested and are on the database. Over 100,000 tests are being done each working day. Out of this number there have so far only been a total of few thousand 'aborted' tests where the test has not been completed because of problems with the system. Not really 'failing' is it?
It should be noted that the individual Vehicle Testing Station has authority to revert to 'handwritten' mode if there are problems with the local equipment.
If the whole system itself crashes or is unavailable for any reason then, after 15 mins of non-availability, the VTS has the authority to carry on with 'manual testing' - they just have to ring the Siemens hotline and listen to a recorded message that gives them an 'incident number' to write on the certificate.
I suspect some VTS's are 'stiring things' a bit and not telling customers about this.
The cost to the VTS of the whole service (i.e. the part of the test fee that the station has to hand over to VOSA/Siemens) is £1.09 per test. That's not a lot when one considers the service and the infrastructure being provided to the VTS.
Things like free retests are still available in my part of the world and are up to the individual VTS (as they always have been). I believe a 'partial retest' option is to be introduced later this year to cut costs further and reduce time taken. This was something that never (formally) existed undet the old system.
MoT test failure statistics are already coming through and I have some in front of me - we already know, for example, that from the 11.7m tests to date, 8.5m vehicles passed. Of the failures, 23% failed on lights and signalling, 23% failed on suspensions, 9% on emissions etc etc.
Model-specific data will be made available as the statistical 'confidence level' builds up. One can forsee this being released and presented in the form of a model-by-model breakdown as happens with the TuV data in Germany.
On the topic of 'public sector computer problems' I must relate a problem I had recently with my bank (a private sector company, obviously).
I had about £8000 paid into my account by a third party (to pay for a car). Unfortunately only about £5500 reached my account. The rest went AWOL. After numerous calls to the bank's horrendous call centre I eventually got them to investigate and they found that due to a 'computer error' my missing money had been sent to Next Plc. (the clothing company!). No one was able to explain how this had happened.
Anyway, I eventually got my money about a week later - but no apology, compensation or explanation....
|
Oh why does somebody always have to spoil things by dragging facts into it?
I haven't encountered the new MoT system yet, but it surprises me that this took so long - it's a relatively simple requirement and not to be compared with ambitious 'do everything' systems such as the NHS one.
|
|
|
Aprilia, as you state, it was sold as a "turnkey" operation. Its not that simple. Its not just a matter of boxing up a system that was in place in Germany, unboxing it, changing the language and turning it on in the UK.
If it was it would have been done in 6 weeks.
Almost certainly it has had to be tailored to meet the requirements of the UK, even more when it comes to integrating the data feeds and output into the other (hugely disparate) government systems.
I bet the internals now look very different to the orginal idea shipped over from Germany.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
Aprilia, as you state, it was sold as a "turnkey" operation. Its not that simple. Its not just a matter of boxing up a system that was in place in Germany, unboxing it, changing the language and turning it on in the UK. If it was it would have been done in 6 weeks. Almost certainly it has had to be tailored to meet the requirements of the UK, even more when it comes to integrating the data feeds and output into the other (hugely disparate) government systems. I bet the internals now look very different to the orginal idea shipped over from Germany. ------------------------------
Yes, dead right. What seems to have happened is that Siemens underestimated (or just didn't understand) the complexity of the UK testing system.
Virtually all of the UK's VTS's are run as independent small businesses (totally different scenario to, say, the NHS, which is one organisation). So the logistics of simply contacting, delivering and installing the terminals was, alone, a mammoth undertaking. They range from premises in central London to small garages on Scottish islands that do about 30 tests a year.
Siemens have had to train ALL testers in the use of the system. There are about 20,000 testing stations and IIRC something like 30,000 testers.... That's some training requirement! And some of those guys had probably never used a computer before.....
|
Yes, dead right. What seems to have happened is that Siemens underestimated (or just didn't understand) the complexity of the UK testing system.
They range from premises in central London to small garages on Scottish islands that do about 30 tests a year..... Siemens have had to train ALL testers in the use of the system. There are about 20,000 testing stations and IIRC something like 30,000 testers.... That's some training requirement! And some of those guys had probably never used a computer before.....
>>
This supports my earlier comments re management not finding out what happens at the workers end.
I have trained users who had not used dumb terminals or PCs in many countries and remote locations in many countries.
Challenges like kit delivered but then found in the Souk, communications problems due to telephone cable being pinched off the poles etc.
Politics at international level, earthquakes, war zones etc.
Aprilia from what you have told us re manual fallback I think the original press release tells us a lot.
>>....left many of the UK?s 19,500 MOT testing stations unable to perform tests with no warning, causing considerable loss to their businesses, and inconvenience to their customers.
Bad training and expectations. Of course systems crash with no warning. Use the back up manual system. It worked last year.
Later you will have to input the data. Perhaps a simple input of VIN, Reg, passed /failed and later fatten the record. This would satisfy ANPR systems. Perhaps a scanner and then let India do the input?
>>We are suggesting that VOSA could improve the situation substantially by interactively engaging with individual testing stations using voice messaging to inform them of current problems and anticipated effects. This would remove the need for the network having to contact a single Helpline and ensure that no one is left in the dark when problems occur.
?VOSA has to realise that answer-phone messages are not an adequate form of providing customer support ? and the MOT Test Station is their customer.?
So what do they want? Up to 19500 people phoned to say "System down and we hope to have it back soon" Many will have access to the web where info can be posted etc.
I have been there, got the T shirts, been threatened very seriously with jail if the system is not restored and the British ambassador has been informed.
A UK only implementation to literate users should have been better managed that what appears to have occurred.
|
From my experience VOSA are a very professional bunch of people and I have little doubt that the requirements were well specified right from the start. I suspect that Siemens were very very eager to get the business and may have 'overlooked' some aspects of the job.
Anyway, the original press release came from the RMIF who are not exactly unbiassed in all of this (you can hear the axes being ground).
Siemens are responsible for the system and they run the call centre - not VOSA.
I gather there is going to be SMS text messages being broadcast out to nominated mobile numbers, with info and incident number etc., in the event of a system crash.
Overall computerisation seems to work well and has been very beneficial in freeing up VOSA staff (who no longer have to work on basic bread-and-butter MoT admin tasks) to investigate corrupt VTS's. You know, the sort of place where cars which have never visited the VTS end up with a certificate (it does happen you know!).
I guess "MoT Computerisation working well" is not really a very exciting headline, is it? We want to hear about 'failure' and if the 'failure' can somehow be associated with government then so much the better.
|
>>VOSA are a very professional bunch of people
No doubt, but IT implementation is not their profession.
>>I suspect that Siemens were very very eager to get the business and may have 'overlooked'
Actually they are also professional people and IT implementation is [one of] their profession.
Nonetheless it goes back to what I said and you mentioned in a previous note - people, users and implementers alike, barrelled into a project wihtout bearing in mind either the 80/20 rule or the real world use and requirements of the system.
It happens all the time in a wide variety of environments, countries and organisations.
The government [by and large] doesn't have any implemntors, they are always private sector and contracted in. Hwoever, they are generally not as good as they think they are an dneed careful management.
Typically, and I know its a generalisation, government are not all that good at supplier and contract management, especially with a bunch of consultants who are experts at not being managed.
|
A Consultants first prime function is to generate the next piece of consultancy.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
A Consultants first prime function is to generate the next piece of consultancy. ------------------------------ TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
Rubbish - The next piece of work comes along anyway if you have done a decent job and the client's happy.
--
Was Charles {P} but someone c o p i e d my name with spaces.
|
Rubbish?
Thats not a consultancy term.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
>>The next piece of work comes along anyway if you have done a decent job and the client's happy
And that is merely one of a whole bunch of methods for achieving the next piece of consultancy.
|
...and nobody has yet mentioned the Air Traffic Control fiasco.....
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
|
|
