From the Magazine: Safety Scramble

DriveOn, Ontario’s safety inspection program, leaves auto shops frustrated

Ontario’s DriveON program has been up and running for approximately three years. When it was launched, it came with a promise to eliminate fraud in vehicle inspections, improve road safety, reduce emissions and streamline the certification process for everything from passenger cars to heavy-duty commercial trucks.

A year into its full implementation, and replacing a more manual, rudimentary system that tested emissions only, several shop owners and technicians have had their fair share of hiccups with DriveON. But the program has also helped streamline the inspection process and has managed to push out some bad actors.

Despite some of its benefits, the DriveON program has also managed to alienate the very shop owners it relies on to uphold vehicle safety standards. Interviews with repair facilities across the province reveal widespread frustrations, marked by issues with bureaucratic bottlenecks, unreliable technology and inconsistent customer service.

Due to the sensitive nature of the DriveON program, particularly the fact that anyone using the new system is not permitted to speak publicly about their experiences, CARS has concealed the identity of its sources to protect their privacy.

“Let me ask you, would you have any confidence in this program? If I didn’t have a dedicated office manager digging through all this nonsense, we wouldn’t have made it.”

A bumpy rollout

Auto shop owners interviewed for this story described the onboarding process as an administrative maze and a technical headache. From mismatched documentation requirements to inconsistent rulings from DriveON staff, many shops spent weeks or months trying to gain approval to perform vehicle inspections.

One Northern Ontario shop recounted a six-week ordeal involving multiple submissions, contradictory instructions and a final approval that only came after escalating the issue to a manager.

“Let me ask you,” the owner said, “would you have any confidence in this program? If I didn’t have a dedicated office manager digging through all this nonsense, we wouldn’t have made it.”

Further south, another shop owner described dealing with customer service reps over an insurance issue who admitted they were only trained for a day and were rejecting applications based on “mood” or vague keyword scans.

“The person reviewing the insurance documents that day was in a bad mood, so they kicked everyone’s back,” the owner was told during a support call. “They aren’t insurance writers. Ninety-nine per cent of the DriveON staff have no idea what they are looking at. Through the 12 phone conversations I had, one person actually told me they do a single-day course and then get given a spot and a computer to skim through insurance, looking for keywords. And if they are not there, we kick it back.”

Another shop in Central Ontario said they were locked out of the DriveON system due to a Canada Revenue Agency paperwork snag that remained unresolved months later.

The technical component hasn’t been any better. DriveON’s government-issued tablet that must be used for conducting inspections is bulky, underpowered and requires frequent recharging.

“The battery life is horrific. You can only do one safety inspection before it’s dead,” said one shop owner in Central Ontario. “You turn it off and try to reboot, and it crashes three times before letting you log back in.”

The owner added that although the tablet has streamlined the process of submitting an inspection, the size and weight of the tablet make it an impractical tool in the shop, and the quality of the camera leaves much to be desired.

Shop owners feel the DriveON program appears to have been designed by people who don’t understand how vehicle inspections work in real life.

“You can’t tell a fish how to swim or a dog how to bark,” said one technician. “This program was designed by people who think they understand inspections but don’t.”

“Shops are charging anywhere from $90 to $220 for light-duty safety inspections. There’s no standard. But our time has doubled and so have the risks.”

Many requirements are unrealistic. Shops are expected to take photos while measuring brake pads, airing tires or checking suspension — tasks that require both hands and make it impossible for one person to take an image with the bulky tablet.

“You need a third arm,” a shop owner said. “And you’re not allowed to have another tech help, which is insane.”

One shop owner admitted they get a second person to take the images during the inspection because it’s just not feasible for one person to do it alone.

Another shop compared the user interface to a software prototype released before beta testing. “Before we opened the shop, I worked in software. I would’ve fired the whole team for releasing something this bad,” the owner said, adding that even with his extensive experience and technical knowledge, learning to use the tablet and software was challenging, and most shop owners and technicians don’t have his level of experience.

John Cochrane, executive director with the Automotive Aftermarket Retailers of Ontario (AARO), agreed that some of the early feedback he was hearing from members indicated a high level of frustration.

“Although MTO provided webinars and bulletins to support the transition, there was still considerable confusion around program timelines and requirements,” he said, adding that the AARO did raise some of the concerns with the Ministry of Transportation. “Initially, there appeared to be some resistance, as the ministry believed sufficient guidance and information had already been provided. However, through continued dialogue, AARO was able to work with both the ministry and Parsons to deliver additional webinars and support resources to assist members with onboarding and operational challenges.”

The cost of compliance

Beyond the time and energy DriveON demands from shops using the system, it has a direct financial impact. Inspections can now take significantly longer due to photo documentation and sometimes glitchy software. Some shop owners estimate that a proper safety now consumes two full hours of shop time.

“What’s the proper way to charge for this?” one asked. “Shops are charging anywhere from $90 to $220 for light-duty safety inspections. There’s no standard. But our time has doubled and so have the risks.”

Technicians are required to put their licence number on every inspection report, and the businesses themselves are on the hook if they miss any defects during the inspection.

There is also the cost of the tablet itself, which is partially subsidized for the initial device, but costs around $700 if it breaks and needs to be replaced.

“No measurable updates or program adjustments have been communicated to AARO as a direct result of shop owner feedback. That’s something we’re continuing to press.”

A program with promise

DriveON’s core concept is difficult to argue with. By consolidating emissions and safety inspections into a single digital platform, which is managed by Parsons Corporation, the Ministry of Transportation is aiming to improve accountability and transparency. No more paper forms, vague safety standards, sticker swaps or shady shops passing vehicles that should be off the road. Instead, every inspection is logged, photographed and auditable in real time.

From the perspective of the AARO — the province’s main advocacy group for auto repair facilities — the DriveON program has the ability to do what it was intended to do.

“DriveON has the potential to significantly reduce illegitimate safety inspections by standardizing processes and improving oversight,” said Cochrane. “It has certainly removed any grey areas.”

According to AARO chair Eric Mileham, the new system has improved trust with customers. “The digital report includes photos and is more difficult to manipulate, so people are seeing it as more credible,” he said. “We’re also seeing fewer unfixable vehicles coming through, which is a good sign.”

And from a safety standpoint, Mileham added, the inclusion of additional equipment audits, like headlight aimers and tint meters, is pushing the industry toward higher professional standards.

AARO is also working to keep its members informed about any updates and new information about DriveON requirements. It has also partnered with Parsons to offer additional webinars on the procedures and address common concerns.

“Parsons has participated in our annual events to provide presentations and staff a dedicated booth at our trade show, allowing members to speak with representatives directly and receive in-person support,” said Cochrane.

But Cochrane also admits the ministry has yet to make meaningful changes based on shop feedback.

“No measurable updates or program adjustments have been communicated to AARO as a direct result of shop owner feedback,” he said. “That’s something we’re continuing to press.”

Cochrane also acknowledged the effect of the non-disparagement clause, which prevents many shop owners from voicing public criticism, even when problems continue to arise.

“The non-disparagement clause may discourage some shop owners from providing honest feedback, especially if they are concerned about potential repercussions,” he said. “AARO believes that for any program to improve, open and constructive dialogue between stakeholders — including shop owners, the ministry and program administrators — is essential. Transparency and trust are key to long-term success.”

Accepting feedback

What’s most striking in these conversations isn’t just the logistical challenges of DriveON, it’s the emotional toll it’s taken on the people actively performing the inspections. Some owners speak of burnout, others of questioning whether staying in the safety game is even worth it.

“You poke the bear long enough,” one shop owner warned. “Eventually, it’s going to say, ‘I’ve had enough.’”

For now, many shops are adapting out of necessity, while others that were perhaps not on the up and up are getting out completely to avoid the costs and liability — which is exactly what the DriveON program is intended to do.

---

This article originally appeared in the August 2025 issue of CARS magazine