Nearly three years after its launch, Ontario’s digital vehicle safety inspection programme struggles with technical flaws, bureaucratic delays, and industry concerns, raising questions about its effectiveness in enhancing road safety and reducing fraud.
Ontario’s DriveON vehicle safety inspection program, which was rolled out roughly three years ago, was primarily intended to stamp out fraud in vehicle inspections and to boost overall road safety. Essentially, it replaced an older system that mainly focused on emissions testing with a new, integrated digital platform that covers both emissions and safety inspections. The idea was to make the certification process smoother for both passenger cars and commercial trucks. But, based on conversations with various repair shops across the province, it’s pretty clear that there have been quite a few ongoing hurdles that are largely undermining these initial aims.
The launch of DriveON, to be honest, has been anything but smooth sailing. There’s been a lot of bureaucracy involved—kind of a bureaucratic maze—and plenty of technical issues. Shop owners have described the onboarding process as a real mess, filled with confusing paperwork requirements and inconsistent responses from the program’s support team. For example, one shop in Northern Ontario had to endure a six-week ordeal just to get approved. They kept having to resubmit documents and escalate issues. In other spots, shops have been hit with seemingly random application rejections, often because staff handling applications aren’t well-trained—they might have only had a single day of training, and their focus seems to be more on scanning for insurance keywords rather than making informed decisions. And there was this one shop that couldn’t access the system for MONTHS, all because of unresolved issues with the Canada Revenue Agency.
On top of all that, the software itself is problematic. The tablets provided by the government for conducting inspections are criticized for being bulky, their batteries drain quickly, and they often crash or run sluggishly. The cameras on these devices also leave a lot to be desired in terms of quality. Shops say it’s particularly awkward when they’re required to take photos while working on a vehicle—something that’s hard to do single-handedly and makes helpers or assistants almost necessary. The user interface — well, some say it feels like an unfinished or “bare-bones” software prototype, which can be challenging even for folks familiar with tech. Because of these problems, some shops have been forced to use unofficial workarounds, like having a second person take photos during inspections, which clearly points to a design disconnect between what the system expects and what’s practical on the ground.
Financially speaking, these issues have a real impact. Inspection times have more than doubled for many shops—what used to take about an hour now often stretches to two hours or more. This inevitably raises questions about how much shops should really be charging since fees for light-duty inspections can range widely—from about $90 up to $220. The requirement for technicians to include their license numbers on every report adds another layer of liability concern. Plus, even though the tablets come with some subsidies, the cost of replacing them when they break — which can be almost $700 — is an extra burden that shops aren’t thrilled about.
From the industry side, the Automotive Aftermarket Retailers of Ontario (AARO) does acknowledge that the program has some promising aspects but also stresses that frustrations are still very much ongoing. John Cochrane, the executive director, pointed out that despite efforts like webinars and bulletins, there was a lot of initial confusion around the program’s timelines and actual requirements. After engaging with the Ministry of Transportation and Parsons Corporation, the tech firm managing the platform, AARO was able to facilitate some additional support—but crucially, no major changes have been announced to address the feedback from shops. Cochrane even mentioned concerns over the non-disparagement clause in the program’s policies, which could prevent industry insiders from openly discussing ongoing problems—that’s a bit worrying, don’t you think?
Despite these challenges, DriveON has had some success stories. It has definitely helped cut down on unscrupulous operators—fewer vehicles that can’t be fixed pass inspection—and it’s improved professional standards overall since certain equipment audits are now mandatory (like aiming headlights correctly and checking window tints). Eric Mileham, who chairs AARO, noted that customers seem to trust digital reports more now because of the photographic evidence, and that makes tampering or manipulation much harder.
That said, there are still concerns about fraud and enforcement gaps. Steve Shipton, an inspection shop owner in Pickering, brought up the fact that some commercial trucks are passing inspections despite having serious defects—plus, there’s ongoing illegal online sales of inspection stickers. He emphasizes that tighter oversight is absolutely essential if this system is to keep its integrity and keep all road users safe. Meanwhile, mechanics responsible for inspecting heavy-duty vehicles report delays in receiving the new tablets and adequate training, raising doubts about whether the program is fully ready or effective at improving safety outcomes.
While the system has become fully operational after its initial teething issues — and the old paper-based Motor Vehicle Inspection Station certificates were phased out early last year — the road ahead still looks somewhat uncertain. Reliance on digital infrastructure means shops need to invest continually in connectivity upgrades, which adds to operational costs and complexity. Many shop owners are feeling burned out and question whether they can realistically sustain their role in safety inspections under the current conditions.
Parsons Corporation, for its part, stresses that the main goal is to increase transparency and accountability by digitally collecting a complete record of each inspection, which makes audits possible in real time. They recognize that there’s a learning curve and some technical hurdles, but overall, they see this as a vital step forward in modernizing vehicle safety standards.
All in all, the future of DriveON will depend on how well it balances maintaining high safety and anti-fraud standards with actually supporting the auto inspection industry practically. Improving system usability, providing better customer service training, and fostering honest, open discussions with stakeholders are probably key in turning all this potential into a workable, fair operation that benefits shops, regulators, and drivers alike.
[Sources referenced: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]
Source: Noah Wire Services
