MOT Problems Via EU

[Parksy]

Below is an extract from Auto express.

EU rules could mean modified cars could fail MOT. Even for tow bar and stereo upgrades

Cars with any kind of modification could fail an MoT if new EU rules get the green light from member states, a motoring group is warning.
The Association of Car Enthusiasts (ACE) says even aftermarket wheels or stereos would bring a fail, and mean cars would have to undergo costly, time-consuming vehicle approval testing before they could be considered roadworthy.
It’s all down to an EU proposal to change the definition of the roadworthiness test so that “components of the vehicle must comply with characteristics at the time of first registration” – effectively outlawing any deviation from factory spec. ACE’s Barry Cornes told Auto Express that under the current wording, “potentially something as minor as changing the stereo could result in an MoT failure”.
AA technical specialist Vanessa Guyll said: “The AA is very worried about this. It seems completely over the top.” She warned that the regulations would be too draconian even if watered down to include only parts that affect performance, safety or emissions.
Owners would need to buy expensive original parts – even for older cars. And models made by defunct brands, where original parts are no longer available, would have to go through vehicle approval testing after any repair.
Barry Cornes of the Association of Car Enthusiasts told us: “If this proposal becomes law in its current wording, then every car would have to stay as it was when it left the factory.”
Cornes fears this will affect all car owners – not only those who go in for extensive modifications. “Unless parts of the ruling are relaxed, any change will make a car non-standard,” he added.
“Even tow bars may be failures. If it’s not factory-fitted or approved, you’d be forced to go for individual vehicle approval tests with the car.”

 

[Surfer]

Never happen in its current form as thousands of people will become unemployed. As for the towbar that check is now included in the MOT anyway. Lastly people need to read it thoroughly before scare mongering so can we please have a link to the proposal? Thanks.

 

[Dustydog]

I don't believe any car comes direct from the factory with a tow bar .

My new KIA ,7 years ago,was ordered with a tow bar etc. But as Lutz pointed out it was probably fitted by a third party tow bar company brought in by the dealer.

 

[tradewinds]

I have had a Toyota factory fitted towbar, can be done but it is not common.
However what the proposal says is that it would have to be type approved, ie specific for your car.
I don't think the present MOT checks for type approval. It covers road lights and security of fittings.
If you have an older car and spare parts are not available then this could cause further problems.
If the AA is very worried it is worth taking note for the rest of us.
The article is in Auto Express.

 

[JonnyG]

"never happen" ! ok maybe not in its full current form
but is already in the process of being passed, on motorcycles although some forms of the original draft has been altered, and biking groups have been demonstrating which seems to have got some of the proposals removed.Shame motoring oganisations cannot think out of the box had they gotten on board earlier it might have been different. So yes it will be happening but to what degree will be down to how much pressure motoring organisations can come up with

 

[weejock]

I would imagine that someone in the EC has drawn up a utopian wish list knowing they will have to drop half the things to get various people to agree a final draft. Somethings probably should not be changed like tyres but I can never see a thing like that getting past the competion commision. My own car is heavily modified but for the life of me I cannot see why it should fail an mot due to it having carbon brakes rather than steel ones. Maybe my choice of steel suspension to replace the standard air setup could be seen as a step too far but it was carried out by a proper tuning company who has the cars sent to them direct from the manufacturer.
So yes a few things may get tightened up but I think the furry dice are safe for now.

 

[Lutz]

It is not true that every car will have to stay as it was when it left the factory, nor would the owner be forced to buy only original parts. What it does mean, however, is that all parts fitted to the vehicle after it has left the factory and which effectively constitute a technical modification must be type approved and appropriate documentation to that effect must be supplied to the consumer by the manufacturer of those parts. This would, for example, include fitment of towbars. However, how this will be handled in the UK is unclear. Either the owner would have to carry the manufacturer's documentation with the vehicle in the same way as an MOT certificate or the details of the modification would have to be entered as amendments to the V5c certificate, as is already the case in other countries.
Besides, the proposal is not a new rule, only harmonisation of existing regulations.
Someone is getting a bit too hyped about it all.

 

[Parksy]

I should imagine that any new legislation about type approval would not be retrospective anyway, it would be impossible to enforce and would be damaging to the economy.

 

[Lutz]

You're probably right, Parksy. It may be very difficult to get type approval documentation from a manufacturer of a component that one has fitted to one's car years after buying it, especially if the manufacturer has gone bust in the meantime. However, it is conceivable that major modifications may require subsequent retrospective individual vehicle approval through the MOT. Over here, in such cases, we have professional vehicle engineers that assess the modification and pronounce judgment on whether it is acceptable. The system does have one advantage. Once approved by the equivalent of the MOT, the insurance company can no longer argue about whether the modification affects insurance coverage or not, nor can the owner be blamed for any consequences. On the Continent it also makes it a lot easier to relocate and re-register a vehicle that has moved permanently from one country to another. Considering that this involves about 20% of the total vehicle population within the EU, it is not an insignificant issue. For example, we are getting quite a lot of Polish people who previously worked in the UK bringing their UK registered cars to Germany and are now working here.

 

[Sproket]

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/doc/roadworthiness-package/com%282012%29380.pdf

 

[ProfJohnL]

A few comments based on the document Sproket highlights:-

The first point is that the proposals of the the commissions document are arguably not binding on the UK or any member state, as Paragraph 10 states:

(quote=Paragraph 10)
"Roadworthiness testing is a sovereign activity and should therefore be done by the Member States...... ."

However further down the document
(quote=paragraph 27)
"...... implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. ...... in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying own the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control

So in theory at least each member state country has the choice of what elements to enact or not, however the UK has in the past enacted all previous elements, so its unlikely we will veto any of these unless there is very strong case to do so.

Regards the scope of the proposals especially related to electronics;

(quote= paragraph 11)
"For the inspection of vehicles and especially for their electronic safety components it is crucial to have access to the technical specifications of each single vehicle. Therefore vehicle manufacturers should not only provide the complete set of data as
covered by the certificate of conformity (CoC) ...... This is of crucial importance especially in the field of electronic controlled systems and should cover all elements that have been installed by the manufacturer."

So the proposal is only to look at those items that are subject to the vehicles type approval in relation to roadworthiness. It is therefor unlikely to include in car entertainment or other optional accessories which play no part in roadworthiness or safety.

There are a number of other points that may be derived from the document:-
For conformity the document set out a number of definitions which include
(quote=Page 14)
"‘vehicle’ means any not rail-borne motor vehicle or its trailer"
(/quote)

So any reference to Vehicle in the document applies equally to motor vehicle or it trailer. SO, the provisions can be applied to equally to trailers, which id further supported by

(quote=Page 12)
"Motor vehicles and their trailers shall periodically be tested in accordance with this Regulation in the Member State where they are registered"
(/quote)

This is a clear warning that some form of trailer roadworthiness testing will need to be introduced.

Whilst the document may not be as draconian as earlier reports may have implied with regards to car accessories and modifications, it does potentially expand roadworthiness testing to a wider class of vehicles.

See what you think!!!

 

[WoodlandsCamper]

You're probably right, Parksy. It may be very difficult to get type approval documentation from a manufacturer of a component that one has fitted to one's car years after buying it, especially if the manufacturer has gone bust in the meantime. However, it is conceivable that major modifications may require subsequent retrospective individual vehicle approval through the MOT. Over here, in such cases, we have professional vehicle engineers that assess the modification and pronounce judgment on whether it is acceptable. The system does have one advantage. Once approved by the equivalent of the MOT, the insurance company can no longer argue about whether the modification affects insurance coverage or not, nor can the owner be blamed for any consequences.

On a similar vein a few years ago I had a Vauxhall Cavalier which was scraped down the whole length of the drivers side by a lorry, and it was declared an insurance write-off. I bought the car back from the insurance company for £90 and replaced the front wing, wing mirror and bumper with parts from a scrap yard (they even had the right colour!!) and bought a scrap driver's door (but never replaced it). Before I could re-insure the vehicle and get it back on the road I had to take it to a VOSA test station to have it assessed (at a price) as being road worthy again due to its 'modifications'. It passed and I kept/used the car for a while longer.

 

[weejock]

Thanks for putting up that link as it made for quite interesting reading. I would have to agree with the proff in that it does look like an mot for caravans cannot be that far off. It is an idea I am not too opposed to but you can see big difficulties for seasonal pitch users etc. Also if I read the article correctly it seems as if a car will now not need it's first mot until four years old and the second one not until it is 6. The one aspect I did find a bit puzzling was the wording about what happens if the car fails. Currently if your car fails you can take it to be traded in or put it up on ebay and sell it with no mot. From my reading of the wording you will now have to repair the car before it could be sold.
At least it looks like any modifications can be done as long as the inspector is comfortable that they will not effect safety or emmisions. I think fitting a set of non standard tyres is more likely to result in a failure rather than wholesale changes to the structure.

 

[seth1]

More rubbish from Europe,just remind me again whats the time scale on anual mot testing in Europe?Would i be correct in saying every three years to our once a year test.The EU should focus on getting the general roadworthyness of foriegn vehicles up to scratch and on a par with ours.On average my company gets called out 3 times a week by VOSA all to foriegn outfits,all with brake defects .I read this week the EU wants to extend our anual test to three years also.When are people going to wake up from this nonesonce with Europe.

 

[chrisbee1]

I think there are enough problems with the current MOT legislation, the first test after 3 years? Our company light delivery vans are out for 8 hours every day and by the time of their first MOT have covered getting on for 150,000 miles. Mrs Chrisbee's car is shortly due it's first test at 8000 miles. Are we to believe that mileage doesn’t have a bearing on roadworthiness?

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello Chris,
I do agree with you, and I would even go further, My BIL runs a garage, and he has told me of a suprising number of cars the see at less than 12 months old where issues have arrisen that would fail an MOT. I think MOT's shoudl be perfomed every 12months from new.

Interstingly, if you read the document Sproket points to, it suggests that for high milage vehicles the inspection frequency should be raised, but it dosent set any dimensions to the proposal.

 

[colin-yorkshire1]

See what you think!!!

I think it's a load of hot air from the EU that most countries "sadly not ours" will ignore.
I used to run a Opel Kadett GSI "Motorsport" that contained less than 10% of the original parts, put on it by Opel and it was a German import.
failing a car on the MOT because it has bigger wider lowprofile tyres that out perform the originals by 400% on the grounds of safety are well ridiculess

 

[Surfer]

Another scary thread about MOTs. Although I agree with a MOT on a caravan, it is unlikely it will make any difference to accident statistics regarding trailers as a MOT does not prevent people from speeding or overloading. Besides the logistics of getting all old trailers including caravans and horseboxes registered for MOT could prove to be a total nightmare. Some people only use their caravan once a year for a holiday of 3 - 4 weeks and then it is packed away till the next holiday. Perhaps the solution is a MOT once every three years, but then they will have to check the gas appliances also as I think this is included in the new regulations coming into force in October 2012. How will they test the braking capabilities on a caravan with ATC etc?

 

[ProfJohnL]

"Perhaps the solution is a MOT once every three years, but then they will have to check the gas appliances also "

The gas system in a caravan is to do with habitation of the caravan, not its roadworthyness. Consequently the MOT or MOT centres will not be involved with checking habitation equiepment.

 

[Lutz]

I think it's a load of hot air from the EU that most countries "sadly not ours" will ignore.
I used to run a Opel Kadett GSI "Motorsport" that contained less than 10% of the original parts, put on it by Opel and it was a German import.
failing a car on the MOT because it has bigger wider lowprofile tyres that out perform the originals by 400% on the grounds of safety are well ridiculess

If the Kadett was previously registered in Germany all the modifications would have been approved by the TÜV and entered in the German equivalent of the V5c certificate. There is therefore no reason why the MOT should have failed the car. In fact, the changes in law referred to in the original post should avoid just this sort of thing from happening.

 

[colin-yorkshire1]

I think it's a load of hot air from the EU that most countries "sadly not ours" will ignore.
I used to run a Opel Kadett GSI "Motorsport" that contained less than 10% of the original parts, put on it by Opel and it was a German import.
failing a car on the MOT because it has bigger wider lowprofile tyres that out perform the originals by 400% on the grounds of safety are well ridiculess

If the Kadett was previously registered in Germany all the modifications would have been approved by the TÜV and entered in the German equivalent of the V5c certificate. There is therefore no reason why the MOT should have failed the car. In fact, the changes in law referred to in the original post should avoid just this sort of thing from happening.

hi Lutz,
yes it was, I never thought of that, Motorsport is a reputable german company, the english equivelent would probably be Lotus. as they do modifications to prodution cars like BMW in their "M" seires, it had a british V5 with no indication as to how it had been modified but had the word "import" on the document,
all I do know is it was very expensive to insure, and a set of ceramic brake pads cost more than the whole braking system of a Astra GTE . the only reason I mentioned it in this thread was because of the reaction of the vehicle tester when I took it for it's first MOT.
"he could not believe his eyes" nothing on it was standard exept for the basic body shape and lights,
however it was a police magnet and I got stopped on average twice a week most of the time they just wanted to look at it, while others wanted to pull it to pieces to see if it was legal.

 

[Dustydog]

I apologise in advance if I have got this wrong.
I could have sworn I read in the Daily telegraph a while back that from Novemebr this year "Classic " cars will be exempt from needing an MOT examination. Also there w as talk about all cars only being MOTd every two years rather than annually.

That means Chrisbee's light commercials will have covered 300k miles!!

 

[Sproket]

I could have sworn I read in the Daily telegraph a while back that from Novemebr this year "Classic " cars will be exempt from needing an MOT examination.

Oh ! Woosie King

You did

 

[Surfer]

"Perhaps the solution is a MOT once every three years, but then they will have to check the gas appliances also "

The gas system in a caravan is to do with habitation of the caravan, not its roadworthyness. Consequently the MOT or MOT centres will not be involved with checking habitation equiepment.

Look up the new regulations regarding trailers which comes into force in October 2012 and there is reference in there to VOSA checking gas appliances in trailers. It could be natural follow on to have it included in a MOT if MOTs ever became compulsory for trailers as a gas cylinder in transit could be dangerous depending on how it is stored and connected. I think if you search the VOSA site you should find the proposals with the reference to checkingh of gas appliances.
Have a read and pass on your thoughts.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello Surfer,

I have spent some considerable time looking through the official online documentation from VOSA and the VCA looking for references to GAS as fitted to caravans.

I have found no direct references, only references to heaters in trailers where it is used to heat the internal volume or the load. None of these specifically mentions gas, and in the context of a caravan, the internal volume would not be heated when it is being towed as a vehicle. The heater is used when the caravan is set up for habitation, which is when it stationary and not technically a vehicle.

Now I am certain I have missed some documents, so please can you identify which document you are referring to, so I can review the content.