2012 Mot Changes

[sidge]

Not sure if any of you have seen this, or if any of these will actually come off but these are some of the things being considered for MOTs from the start of 2012, I have seen these been discussed other sites but didn't see it any where here.

Shamelessly lifted from another site by the way.

HID lights – Specifically those aftermarket kits that give the very bright headlight beams. Any cars found with these kits will be an automatic MOT failure. Testers are able to easily spot the difference between HID kits, and manufacturer fitted Xenon’s. Easy to spot as Xenon cars have suspension level sensors, in car beam adjuster, and usually headlight washers.

Chipped ECU’s - Unsure of just how/if this one will realistically be enforced, but any cars with chipped ECU’s will in theory be an MOT failure. I can only assume VOSA have found an easy way of checking ECU software through the cars OBD port (diagnostic plug).

Wiring harness – The general condition of he wiring harness will be checked to make sure there is no rubbing or chaffing, and that the harnesses are in generally good condition. If unsecure, or damaged again MOT failure.

Airbag warning lights - If any warning lights are illuminated, it will again be an MOT failure.

[sidge]

Just found this another site as well

There are to be some changes to the MOT test from 1st January 2012 which are being introduced in response to European Commission Directive 2010/48/EU of the 5th July 2010 and which will effect those with aftermarket HID headlights and remapped ECUs:

4.1.4 Compliance with requirements:

a Lamp, emitted colour, position or intensity not in accordance with the requirements

b Products on lens or light source which obviously reduce light intensity or change emitted colour

c Light source and lamp not compatible

4.1.5. Levelling devices (where mandatory):

a Device not operating.

b Manual device cannot be operated from driver’s seat.

4.1.6 Headlamp cleaning device (where mandatory):

Device not operating.

For anyone with a remap, section 6.1.9 may be relevant.

6.1.9 Engine performance:

a Control unit illegal modified.

b Illegal engine modification.

(by 'illegal', it is assumed that they mean changed/programmed differently from OEM specifications)

There will also be a new check on the general condition of the wiring:

4.11. Electrical wiring

a Wiring insecure or not adequately secured.

b Wiring deteriorated.

c Damaged or deteriorated insulation

and on the function of airbag and seat belt pre-tensioner systems:

7.1.4. Safety belt Pre-tensioners:

Pre-tensioner obviously missing or not suitable with the vehicle.

7.1.5. Airbag:

a Airbags obviously missing or not suitable with the vehicle.

b Airbag obviously non-operative.

7.1.6. SRS Systems:

SRS MIL indicates any kind of failure of the system.

Some of the above won't be popular with some around here I know, but VOSA have confirmed that the necessary changes to the MOT test schedule will be introduced and from 1st January 2012 vehicles that fall foul of the new requirements will fail the test.

I think the biggest change is that they will now be able to detect re-maps and car will fail the MOT if this is the case.

I assume that this has been brought in because a lot of people who re-map their cars don't inform their insurance company

[james_60]

Hi

If a remap is classed as illegal then does that mean anyone with the mountune kit including the remap are now "illegal"

Jamie

[Michael P]

well i'm glad about the HIDs, they absolutely drive me up the wall.

[Jason Tierney]

It needs to be specific as to what a legal remap is and an illegal remap, its only the illegal ones that will fail..

Jay

[mintalkin]

'from vosa'

The car/light goods vehicle MOT test is about to change – the European Commission has changed the Directive that covers it. We take a look at when these changes are likely to come into effect and what they mean for MOT testers.

Britain has been testing vehicles under the MOT scheme for 50 years now. Last year, the European Directive covering the MOT test was updated and revised by a modern version called 2009/40/ EC. This was then updated by 2010/48/EU, which was ratified on 5 July this year.

The new Directive keeps the EU minimum 4-2-2 test frequency but adds a number of new elements to the British MOT test. The Directive anticipates all test changes being in place by 1 January 2012, and a common European approach to test certificates in place by 1 January 2014. So what is VOSA doing to introduce the changes?

In terms of test frequency, in mid-July the coalition government confirmed that it intends ‘to look at the issue of MOT test frequencies later this year’. VOSA contributed statistical data to inform the last review in 2008, and we expect that our computer system and the data you have entered will be utilised again in much the same way.

We expect to hear more details of the government’s review proposals later in the year.

As far as changes to the test content are concerned, VOSA has already been analysing the requirements of the new Directive and working out how to implement them. We started this earlier in the year by talking with representatives of the MOT trade at our regular Trade User Group and VTS Council meetings. Both VOSA and the Department for Transport (DfT) are keen to ensure that any changes to the test are introduced in as practical a way as possible, keeping the burden on the trade to a minimum and ideally keeping the changes cost neutral.

In many cases, the changes shouldn’t necessarily lead to an increase in average test times. A good example is the malfunction indicator lamps on the dashboard that indicate defective electronic power steering, electronic stability control and secondary restraint systems. Testers already check the dashboard for other lamps, so no extra time would be required for this addition to the test.

Electrical wiring and batteries are now included in the test’s scope, but testers already check the vehicle structure where wiring is secured – often along the same routes as other testable items, such as brake pipes in the engine compartment. So again, this doesn’t look like an additional burden on the tester. In the pre-computerisation days, testers often (wrongly) failed vehicles for insecure batteries, so they must have been looking at them then! Now, it means that when we implement the new Directive, vehicles can legitimately fail for battery insecurity, for no extra tester effort.

Other items – such as headlamp bulb and unit incompatibility, headlamp levelling devices and illegal engine ‘chipping’ – will need further thought before we can get a workable solution for MOT stations.

Some of the new items may require extra effort on the part of the tester – when we know for sure what that is we’ll be talking again with our trade and DfT colleagues to work out what the impact will be.

The common EU test certificate should be relatively easy to achieve – the only data that the Directive expects and that we don’t currently provide is the symbol for the vehicle’s country of origin. Probably 99% of vehicles tested will have

‘UK’ entered here, but if you do test vehicles with a foreign plate, you will need to enter the correct country symbol. We may even be able to make this change earlier if there is a convenient opportunity.

The MOT trade can rest assured that VOSA is working closely with you to introduce any new elements as efficiently and effectively as possible, with the minimum of fuss. Just as importantly, we are also working closely with Siemens to ensure that any system changes due on New Year’s Eve 2011 go smoothly! We should know more by the time the MOT seminars take place – come along and ask the experts.

[amarokuk]

The remapping thing is interesting. A few months or even a couple of years back I read a report about concerns raised in some of the euro zone countries about vehicle remapping to improve performance. One point was about emissions banding and how remapping could move a vehicle into a higher band which had implications for those countries that raise tax or penalties for higher emission vehicles. The article mostly focused on Diesel powered vehicles but hinted at the fact that petrol could be remapped as well.

This to me sounds like the EU is trying a solution by making remapping illegal probably only if the remap affects the emissions banding rather than anything to do with power.

My car is due to get MOTd end of Jan 2012 so looks like I could be one of the guinea pigs.

[Kirst Harrison]

Oh this is confusing?

My husband drives a Seat Leon Cupra which he had Revo Stage 2 done earlier this year. As it was done professionally and we told his insurer straight away so he was covered i assumed this makes it legal. But my understanding from what you are saying now is that from January 2012 it wont be? As it wont pass the MOT? Is that correct?

How is that fair?

[ford focus edge]

Well my cars an immediate fail then after the end of this week its getting some hid's 6000k 35w fitted (already got projector lenses etc so SHOULDN'T blind people but will be removed if they do).

Frankley whats it to them if there adjusted and the beams are set correctly anyway why dont they ban the cars with xenon's if there going to cripple us who just want to see better at night ...

Remap banning will never work you can remove it the day before ur MOT and put it back on the next day seems to me to be utterly pointless.

Thankyou yet again the government and vosa you make out lives that little bit worse every time you breathe .

My 2p worth lol

[james_60]

Iam hoping from what it reads it means the following :-

An illegal engine chipping is when someone cuts wires an adds in performance increasing chips or modifications.

Legal hopefully means a performance modification that has been installed by a professional company of that nature.

Telling your insurance company was the best thing to do.

Also Hopefully if they do make changed to the mot they will accept modifications by viewing a certificate provided by the company that did the work.

I hope I make some sense

Jamie

[Kirst Harrison]

Ok i see.

Yeah he got it done by a professional company and it came with a switch so you could have different settings and one of those setting puts it back as standard. So assuming this is ok, he could set it to standard before MOT?

It does say on the Revo website "Switching back to stock allows you to �hide� the software from those that dont need to know about it."

So could we get away with it? ;)

[DONFRAMAC]

Ok i see.

Yeah he got it done by a professional company and it came with a switch so you could have different settings and one of those setting puts it back as standard. So assuming this is ok, he could set it to standard before MOT?

It does say on the Revo website "Switching back to stock allows you to �hide� the software from those that dont need to know about it."

So could we get away with it? ;)

I expect there will be lots of ordinary drivers temporarily refitting H4 bulbs and W5W's, for the test, then whipping-out the shells again to refit their 35watt BI-XENON's and LED type W5W's. My lamps are white and properly set-up on MoT gear. No glare or over-temperature in evidence. I have seen those self-levelling Range-Rover HID's bouncing, and flashing other road users, so why pillory those with low wattage HID's that are well set-up? Washers are not needed on cool 35 watt lamps.

Next year, DRL's become a legal requirement on new cars. Are we to to expect this legislation to become retrospective? If not, why not, if the HID's, LED's, and Chipping laws are retro!!

My info. on chipping states that cleaner exhaust and improved MPG can result from a balanced approach to tuning.

If official lunacy persists, I shall have to refit my PIAA HE303 H4's, which put out 110/100W of light from 60/55W power, but the nice blue colour they show when not in use should create some embarrassed bobbies, if they pull me during the day, 'cos they are plain white when lit. I only have HID's because the headlamp shells are a total pain to remove for renewing lamps. I have never used them before, just fitted uprated H4's, and scratched the backs of my hands almost every time. This Fiesta Mk6.5 has forced the issue. The Yaris before it was just barely manageable.

[KeithC]

I expect there will be lots of ordinary drivers temporarily refitting H4 bulbs and W5W's, for the test, then whipping-out the shells again to refit their 35watt BI-XENON's and LED type W5W's. My lamps are white and properly set-up on MoT gear. No glare or over-temperature in evidence. I have seen those self-levelling Range-Rover HID's bouncing, and flashing other road users, so why pillory those with low wattage HID's that are well set-up? Washers are not needed on cool 35 watt lamps.

Next year, DRL's become a legal requirement on new cars. Are we to to expect this legislation to become retrospective? If not, why not, if the HID's, LED's, and Chipping laws are retro!!

Because they will be modified from standard beyond what the ruling bodies class as legitimate. Cars without DRL's aren't modified from standard, therefore not part of the legislation.

My info. on chipping states that cleaner exhaust and improved MPG can result from a balanced approach to tuning.

If official lunacy persists, I shall have to refit my PIAA HE303 H4's, which put out 110/100W of light from 60/55W power, but the nice blue colour they show when not in use should create some embarrassed bobbies, if they pull me during the day, 'cos they are plain white when lit. I only have HID's because the headlamp shells are a total pain to remove for renewing lamps. I have never used them before, just fitted uprated H4's, and scratched the backs of my hands almost every time. This Fiesta Mk6.5 has forced the issue. The Yaris before it was just barely manageable.

Give over, it's not as if you have to change bulbs every other week, month or year. We've had 2 cars for 15 years and I've changed the bulbs once because one was faulty.

[Nico.]

My mate had a HD kit on his lights, failed his MOT with them, he went home took them off re-booked it passed, and re-fitted them... only thing this is gonna create for the lights i think is people taking them off night before... which is not easy but do-able

[DONFRAMAC]

Because they will be modified from standard beyond what the ruling bodies class as legitimate. Cars without DRL's aren't modified from standard, therefore not part of the legislation.

Give over, it's not as if you have to change bulbs every other week, month or year. We've had 2 cars for 15 years and I've changed the bulbs once because one was faulty.

As you hail from Merseyside, perhaps you are unaware of the hundreds of desolate miles in Grampian, and Highland Regions (and other wilderness areas in the U.K.).

Luckily, I have only once been forced to fit a new H4 by the roadside, in the pitch dark, half-way between Inverness, and my home in Thurso, on the north coast of Scotland, where the railway line ends. Luckily, at that time, there was an evening-open petrol station, where I bought a new replacement for my standard Lucas H4 60/55W bulb. Lucky, also, in that my Renault 19 Saloon had readily accessible bulb-holders, so I could do the job "blind", just about.

We no longer have fuel stops within 60 miles of home in the evening, and the removal of headlamp shells just to fit a bulb is not on!! I have done the task fitting the PIAA HE303 bulbs, in broad daylight at home, nosed-into my garage for shelter, and the removal of 3 torx screws,+ a skilful "yank", is just plain lunacy on the part of Ford Design Department Boffins. I lost one torx key doing the job, by the way, and it did not drop to the deck later.

Even with the HID's fitted, my wife asked if my lights were on, when we left an Inverness filling-station, just 20 days ago, in the rain, at 6.30pm. So, my 3 times brighter than standard "burners" wern't exactly cutting a swathe thro' the gloom. The grass verge, painted road markings, and road signs were visible, but precious little reflection from tarmac, until we reached a 25 mile stretch of dry road. I have my lighting improvements noted by my insurer, and I feel that representation to Parliament may be necessarry, to allow use of 35w HID's, on grounds of safety. I have no wish to use the 55W ones, as they DO seem to attract comment of glare. Absolutely no-one has flashed me with my 35W lamps, and I don't expect it, as they were set up on MoT gear by the mechanic/fitter.

Please have some consideration for lonely travellers on unlit "A" and"B" roads, who often come head-to-head with convoys of fish-laden articulated trucks bound for Billingsgate. Their lights are rather high, and run on 24 volts!! I really DO need to see my near verge.

To put it into perspective, my "burners" are only 50% brighter than OSRAM and PHILIPS uprated filament xenon-enriched Halogen bulbs, but their reduced lifetime makes them very unattractive for use in my particular car, and don't counter with "glare" arguments, because the lower power ones are fine, even with my type of headlamp Shell, especially as the solenoid operated H4 HI-LO burner units are shrouded.