MOT changes next year.

[ScottB5]

Thought I'd pass on this thread in the 8P section about MOT changes next year.

MOT changes from april 2012

[CHEZ]

nice one scotty dog!
as it happens just booked mine for next wednesday!

[Der_Techniker]

Headlight requirements are updated to take account of the particular characteristics of High Intensity Discharge (HID) lamps.
HID headlights can cause dazzle if they are dirty or aimed too high so car manufacturers must fit headlamp cleaning and levelling systems. A car will fail if a mandatory headlamp cleaning or levelling system is missing, doesn't work or is obviously defective.

Well mines fine then. Just looked at the updated test manual, and it doesn't specify "automated" levelling systems, so the thumbwheel and headlamp wash will do just fine

[paul20v]

Well mines fine then. Just looked at the updated test manual, and it doesn't specify "automated" levelling systems, so the thumbwheel and headlamp wash will do just fine

YES it does so you will have a fail :

Vehicles equipped with High Intensity Discharge
(HID) or LED dipped beam headlamps may be fitted
with headlamp washers and a suspension or
headlamp self levelling system.
Where such systems are fitted, they must work;
however, it is accepted that it may not be possible
to readily determine the functioning of self levelling
systems. In such cases, the benefit of the doubt
must be given.
Headlamp washers may work in conjunction with
the windscreen washers (when the dipped beam
headlamps are switched on) or by a separate
switch.
HID lamps may be identified by:
• taking a few seconds to reach full intensity
• having a bluish tinge to the light
• having an igniter module/inverter behind the
headlamp
• having ‘DCR’ marked on the headlamp lens.
HID headlamps use high voltage and extra care
should be taken when inspecting these items.

[Oranoco]

Here's the crucial bit that makes the fitment of retro fit HID kits a non fail item

YES it does so you will have a fail :

Vehicles equipped with High Intensity Discharge
(HID) or LED dipped beam headlamps may be fitted
with headlamp washers and a suspension or
headlamp self levelling system.
Where such systems are fitted, they must work;
however, it is accepted that it may not be possible
to readily determine the functioning of self levelling
systems. In such cases, the benefit of the doubt
must be given.
Headlamp washers may work in conjunction with
the windscreen washers (when the dipped beam
headlamps are switched on) or by a separate
switch.
HID lamps may be identified by:
• taking a few seconds to reach full intensity
• having a bluish tinge to the light
• having an igniter module/inverter behind the
headlamp
• having ‘DCR’ marked on the headlamp lens.
HID headlamps use high voltage and extra care
should be taken when inspecting these items.

Because of the wording used in the manual it would be incorrect to fail a vehicle with a HID kit fitted irrespective of whether it has self levelling and washers or not. Again it's down to headlamp alignment and pattern

[aragorn]

Depends if thats the exact wording though. UK Law doesnt allow HID's at all directly. European Type approval overrides the UK construction and Use regs however, and the type approval for HID's states they must have washers, and an automatic levelling system either on the headlight, or the vehicle as a whole.

[Oranoco]

Depends if thats the exact wording though. UK Law doesnt allow HID's at all directly. European Type approval overrides the UK construction and Use regs however, and the type approval for HID's states they must have washers, and an automatic levelling system either on the headlight, or the vehicle as a whole.

Absolutely correct. However the may wording is used in the official document and as such retrofit HIDs remain an MOT pass as long as theaim and beam patern comply. Their use on the highway remains unlawful as you suggest

[paul20v]

Absolutely correct. However the may wording is used in the official document and as such retrofit HIDs remain an MOT pass as long as theaim and beam patern comply.

Your bang on
ive read this and never clocked the MAY word
so basically they have stuffed it and as said its no different to whats its always been .

[aragorn]

Thing is, a) they may well simply amend it before its implemented.

b) if your tester ignores "may" and fails you, your only option at that point is to appeal to vosa, on the grounds that while you DO have illegally fitted HID's, they put the word "may" into the testers handbook...

[paul20v]

Thing is, a) they may well simply amend it before its implemented.

i doubt they will amend it as that is straight off the computer system word for word thats the fresh update , you never know but i will be suprised if they do .

[jcb]

why not avoid the retest and just put bulbs in for the test
takes seconds

[Goosey]

b) if your tester ignores "may" and fails you, your only option at that point is to appeal to vosa

not the first option, first you should ask the tester to point out in the manual to you where it's states it's a fail.
people can misread things so it can easily be resolved, involving VOSA at the moment could turn messy for the tester and testing site considering a lot are losing their jobs this year

[aragorn]

You really think its going to turn messy for the tester, failing a car that ACTUALLY HAS illegally fitted headlights due to what is effectively a typo?

Why not just do the job properly, and if you want to use HID's, add the appropriate features that the law requires? The features arent there for fun, they are there so you dont blind other drivers, which i'm sure you'll agree is a fairly useful feature. Or maybe you've never had the pleasure of driving along a dark country road and finding some berk coming towards you in his chavved up hatch with retrofitted HID's burning your retinas out?

I shall admit that my car does currently have HID's without levelling and washing, however the levelling kit is in the shed and the washer parts are mostly laying in the garden, so its merely a matter of finding some time to install them, and they will certainly be on there by the time MOT comes around.

[Goosey]

you can't say that till you've fitted them lol

and it's not a typo, that really is how it is so any tester who fails one and it leads to appeal they would get 20 points straight off if unlucky
reason i say at the moment it becasue VOSA had to cull 200 staff a year ago and i hear another 500 will go this year so they are out and about trying to catch testing stations out to justify their jobs rather then the old normal site visits.

it was only a couple of weeks ago i had a ford ka sat behind me with some really bad HID's fitted, problem was made worse from oncoming cars putting main beam on in MY face to expose their anger :|

[aragorn]

Exactly, so i see no problem with failing the ****ers and getting them off the road. Its rare i see a retrofitted car that DOESNT have rediculous glare.

Ofcourse its a typo. The law specifies that cars with HID's MUST have washers and levelling. The manual says they may have washers and levelling. How can that be anything other than a typo. If the law requires them to be fitted, and your going to improve the MOT test to check for them, then why on earth have they put the word "may" in there. The only possible explanation is that its a mistake.

[Goosey]

take a look at all the imported cars we have in this country that have ALL gone through SVA's
i'll use the integra as example seeing as i know them well, a lot of the later "98 spec" ones came with HID's from factory and they don't have self leveling or washers.

the MOT has to be as clear as possible and you'll find they have gone slightly backwards on this as it's not straight forward enough to work out if a car has standard fit HID's or not, that comes down to product knowlage.


the cheap tat that most have fitted is down to the traffic police to sort unfortunatly

[aragorn]

Theres no way the cheap tat would pass the beam pattern checks of the MOT, so surely they'd fail on that?

[Goosey]

if that wasn't right then yes they would :-)

[rs4wannab]

how do i get around my airbag light, have bucket seats and harnesses the only thing left connected is the passenger airbag, so even if i put the steering wheel back and refit my seat belts and plug them in i still have a light on as the seat airbag isnt connected!! can i link them out with a resistor? or is that "not allowed". some things are very vague and open to alot of interpretation. if it passes this time ( march) and the issues listed as advisories would vosa still rape me if pulled over?
god damn it just got the car how i wanted it!!!!

[aragorn]

could always remove the airbag warning lamp from the cluster?

[ScottB5]

could always remove the airbag warning lamp from the cluster?

Then its a instant MOT failure.
The ABS Light needs to come on and then go off.

[Der_Techniker]

Yeah that is correct Scott. IF he was talking about abs

The airbag system can be fooled by adding a resistor, though the value escapes me. Or blank off the light (or pull it out) i'd have to blank off the led as its soldered to the board, yours may simply be a bulb

[ScottB5]

Yeah that is correct Scott. IF he was talking about abs

The airbag system can be fooled by adding a resistor, though the value escapes me. Or blank off the light (or pull it out) i'd have to blank off the led as its soldered to the board, yours may simply be a bulb

I've all ways been told its the same for Air Bags.

[rs4wannab]

my girlfriends car is in for its mot on saturday so will have to find out what is required, shame you cant just take the whole system out but thats not ok either, although you are allowed to remove the abs system as long as all components are removed...... theres just no logic to it!

[S4_dan]

IIRC, the Airbag light is monitered. I'm certain that the MOT tester last year was on about it when I took a Clio in that I was selling. Sometimes the light would stay on for alot longer than a start-up check but it did always go out within 5mins of driving. I said about pulling the bulb out and he didn't look impressed at all!

[ScottB5]

I got a feeling it will become a fail when it all changes in April.

I'm trying to find the answer but other forums are saying it will be.

[OldRedEyes]

I personally hope they fail every car with non standard, non factory fitted HID's as i am so fed up with getting dazzled by them. It does my firkin' head in.

[murran]

nope if the car had airbags as standard. even if you rig the light to come on and go off.....

if it obviously has no drivers airbag in the steering wheel..... it will fail under "components missing" reguardless of the light seemingly working.

as for hid's i'll be failing after market bodged in systems..... "may" or not.

[Der_Techniker]

I personally hope they fail every car with non standard, non factory fitted HID's as i am so fed up with getting dazzled by them. It does my firkin' head in.

Now I will hold my hands up and say I don't have "factory xenons". But my aftermarket ones have the correct beam pattern, no scatter, and are as good as the OEM ones. Though I have made a spacer to ensure the focal point of the lamp is the same as the halo variant. Moving the burner approx 3mm back.

[colicabcadam]

good news in my eyes, should see less idiots with HID's on the road in their "broadcast" type headlights, the amount of times i have lost visual contact with the road because of these idiots with HID's in a normal type headlight is stupid

[Der_Techniker]

good news in my eyes, should see less idiots with HID's on the road in their "broadcast" type headlights, the amount of times i have lost visual contact with the road because of these idiots with HID's in a normal type headlight is stupid

I whole heartedly agree. ive been in the same position, but when they are set up correctly in a near identical lamp to the OEM, they are no worse than OEM...
sorry had to fight my corner before i get flamed at some point no doubt...

[slepy]

I don't want to raise any not necessary discussion here but I had a A6 special edition few months ago for few weeks and I was surprised how high headlights were set. Now driving in a S3 8P it's exactly the same. In fact when I had HID kit fitted to my B6 they were lower than the ones in A6 and S3.I did lower them a bit not to blind other drivers and never had anyone flashing me etc.

[Oranoco]

I whole heartedly agree. ive been in the same position, but when they are set up correctly in a near identical lamp to the OEM, they are no worse than OEM...
sorry had to fight my corner before i get flamed at some point no doubt...

Couldn't agree more. When installed as decribed and set up correctly there are no issues at all.

[Goosey]

as for hid's i'll be failing after market bodged in systems..... "may" or not.

we'll know who to blame when one day only VOSA can test vehicles due to NT's doing what they want :-)



as for the airbags then you've have to prove that SRS wasn't standard on your car, can be done by removing components on a car where SRS was an optional extra, benafit of doubt would lie with the presenter.
if it's anything newish or known for them all the have SRS then unfortunatly it's all going to have to be there and working.

i must admit i thought/hoped that the SRS would have fallen into the same criteria as ABS.
or at least covered by the same loophole for drivers seat adjustment for fixed bucket seats

[Oranoco]

Be interesting how this effects my brother as he converts cars for disabled drivers which often means removal of the airbag for the fitment of hand controls.

[Goosey]

it won't, we've got a customer that has the same problem as it needs a modified steering wheel.
there's a section about specialised modifications that covers doors and seats, nothing in the SRS section though, can't see it being a problem

[modded a3]

After april the airbag light will be testable and it must work and must not stay illuminted the new criteria also states any airbag missing be it dash steering wheel or seats etc if any have been removed the car will fail

[aragorn]

I'm not so sure on the air bags.

Surely if you can prove they're simply not fitted at all, rather than being fitted but being broken and you've masked the light...

My track car has no airbag ECU, no airbags and no airbag wiring.

The rumors floating round seem to be that if its obviously a proper competition car the tester can use his discretion:

Road legal track cars & new MOT rules....thoughts?

New MOT regs

[Goosey]

had a tester on a refresher recently and some of these questions came up, seems VOSA staff have mixed/incorrect opinions on some items.

for example the requirements of a steering lock, the tester said he was told any electronic immobiliser (standard or aftermarket) meets the criteria but one of these aftermarket locks doesn't??
how the hell does some alarm lock the steering lol



either VOSA are seriously failing at teaching more than normal or people are not listening

[jcb]

Exactly, so i see no problem with failing the ****ers and getting them off the road. Its rare i see a retrofitted car that DOESNT have rediculous glare.

Theres no way the cheap tat would pass the beam pattern checks of the MOT, so surely they'd fail on that?

I will class myself as a rarity then!
I have been through three MOT beam pattern tests without issue.
Was pulled by the Police (undeservedly I may add) and despite it being at night and them looking for a reason to apply some paperwork they didnt pick them as aftermarket.
I have never been flashed to my knowledge either

I suspect that if I had the MOT done at Kwikfit that they wouldnt even know they were aftermarket.
Without removing the headlamp or putting it on a ramp and removing the undertray you cant see any external wiring.
the only other way is to remove the back of the headlamp unit and hunt around for the H7 connector the HID power is plugged into. still not easy to find unless you knew what you were looking for.

Same goes for airbags. If you have your circuit properly "resistored" to deal with lights coming on and going off and a dummy steering wheel airbag or aftermarket wheel there is no reason for them to fail you.

[aragorn]

Yeh, projector headlamps tend to be a lot better, but they're still not always perfect, and so still suffer scatter due to the differing focal points between the two types of lamp. You can often improve things by dismantling the unit and spacing the reflector bowl away from the lens, or alternatively spacing the bulb back from the holder slightly.

Passing an MOT or even a police stop check doesnt mean the lights are ok, it just means they didnt notice any issues.

Same only goes for airbags if you still have the original equipment to resistorise/stealth.

My track car project has no carpets, no airbags, no airbag wiring, no airbag ECU etc etc.

[paul20v]

My track car project has no carpets, no airbags, no airbag wiring, no airbag ECU etc etc.

This is Direct from the testers manual .......

Method of Inspection
1. As far as practicable, check that all airbags fitted as ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT are present and not obviously defective.
2. Turn on the ignition and check the presence and operation of any Supplementary Restraint System (SRS) malfunction indictor lamp(s) (MIL).
Reason for Rejection
1. An airbag obviously missing or defective. Note: A passenger airbag that has been switched off is not a Reason for Rejection.
2. A Supplementary Restraint System (SRS) malfunction indicator lamp: · inoperative · indicating a system malfunction.
This inspection applies to airbags, seat belt pretensioners and seat belt load limiters fitted as ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT .


Theres no let up for track day cars that i can see looking through the manual
if the car was fitted with them it has to have them for a UK test .

[aragorn]

Yeh, but if you read the links i posted, Testers have specifically asked VOSA about competition and track day cars and were told they were fine...

[paul20v]

Yeh, but if you read the links i posted, Testers have specifically asked VOSA about competition and track day cars and were told they were fine...

Yeah until your local VE comes round and catches you not failing a car and says "whats the manual say"
if its in the manual it has to be adhered to and until its there in black and white a tester is just asking to be busted for not failing an item clearly stated in the manual as a fail .

[aragorn]

Why dont you ask them yourself when you have your seminar about the new rules then?

[paul20v]

Why dont you ask them yourself when you have your seminar about the new rules then?

seminar
thats another mine field
already had a seminar and theres no more scheduled for a while
also not due a refresher course for another 3 years
problem is whats said on seminars and refresher courses is " whats it say in the manual "
thats the answer for everything so as a tester our hands are tied and i for one cant afford to lose my job so the manual is the guide to which i for one follow .

[aragorn]

Yeh i can see what you mean, it just seems weird that other guys have been told that cars specifically modified for competition use are fine. That bit you pasted doesnt mention anything about disability cars being exempt either, and yet you can be sure if the airbags were removed because the car was adapted for a wheelchair user, it would be allowed just fine.

[murran]

this has been directly asked.
apparently cars that are obviously "extencively" modified for a purpose, are exempt from these new failure items.

by extencively i mean fully rally/track car prepped. that means not just an after market steering wheel or bucket seats/harnesses on their own in an otherwise standard car..............


Thank you for your e-mail enquiry dated 9th February 2012, concerning ABS/SRS removal.

The information column in Section 3.4 of the Private passenger MOT inspection manual states that "If an ABS or ESC system has been intentionally rendered inoperative, the whole system must be removed. However, this does not apply to sensor rings or other ABS components which are an integral part of another component e.g. brake disc or drive shaft"

We are aware that the inspection of many of the new testable components may adversely impact modified vehicles. We have therefore made provision for most modifications to be accepted, provided that the vehicle is in fact extensively modified to meet a particular purpose, rather than simply modified on a whim and a fancy.

The Introduction of the 2012 MOT Inspection Manual will therefore be amended at the end of April to coincide with the commencement of testing the new components. It will state:

Modified Vehicles

Where a vehicle has been extensively modified or converted, Reasons for Rejection for components missing where fitted as standard should not be applied, for example:
• a car converted for rally use (i.e. rear seats removed and fitted with a roll cage and full harness seat belts etc.) may have been converted so as not to require a brake servo or power steering
• a car converted to a stretch limousine may no longer be fitted with curtain airbags

Additionally, Section 5.1 of the Manual will be amended to state: "An adult harness belt comprising a lap belt and shoulder straps bearing an FIA, British Standard or European approval marking (an upper case ’E’ or lower case ‘e’ and a number) is an acceptable alternative to any of the seat belt types listed"

It is also worth pointing out that Section 6.2 of the Manual, on Seats and Doors, already contains a note in the Information Column which states: "Original design characteristics and specialised modifications (e.g. to enable wheelchair access) are to be accepted"

It must be remembered however, that modifications can only be accepted so long as they comply with the Road Vehicles (Construction & Use) Regulations 1986 and the Road Vehicles (Lighting) Regulations 1989 as amended.

I hope this information has assisted you with your enquiry, but if you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact us again.

Kind Regards,

Robert Evans
Customer Service Centre
VOSA Operations Directorate

[aragorn]

Was just about to link this:

Weekend Racer - Update from VOSA re MOT regs

Which has the same reply. Seems its just not made it into the manual yet...

[murran]

"modified for a purpose" in my eyes is alot more than just sh1t missing and airbag lights on in a chavved up saxo dropped on its arse with 18" chrome rims and a flip laquer paint job.......
altho, you could argue that the said saxo is modified for the purpose of making the driver of such a car look like a total knobhead..... so being modified for that purpose means...... it would have to pass.

having such exemptions opens up a whole grey area meaning they may as well not have bothered at all with the new failure items in the first place!!