DPF delete MoT failure ?

[Patrico777]

Hi

wanted to ask I want to remove dpf filter on my dads bmw e60 but was wondering if its mot failure I want to get it done at jf automotive the men on the phone said it might fail but not sure so want to get your advice 

 

thanks in advance 

[TomsFocus]

DPF removal is always a failure.

But if they can't see it's been done, they cant fail it...  In other words, as long as they gut it and weld it well enough that it looks like it's never been touched it'll still pass.

 

[Patrico777]

13 minutes ago, TomsFocus said:

DPF removal is always a failure.

But if they can't see it's been done, they cant fail it...  In other words, as long as they gut it and weld it well enough that it looks like it's never been touched it'll still pass.

 

Yeah I think they are good company have good reviews sjould I risk it then

[TomsFocus]

Personally I wouldn't bother unless it was either blocked up or the car was being remapped for extra power.  

If it's working fine I don't see a need to remove it.

It's up to you and your dad though really, its not my car lol.

[stef123]

Even if it is obvious someone's been at it they can't see inside it so you'll end up with a pass and advise. 

[Patrico777]

Yes we want to remove as it needs new one and it cost 1,3k to change or 500£ to clean but I told him rather remap and delete but in garagese everyone saying it illegal that he will not pass etc that why i am asking on here as I be moving to bmw soon Buying his bmw 520d 56 plate

[TomsFocus]

Well they're right, it is illegal lol, but the MOT is the least of your worries, it's full of loopholes and testers discretion.  I'm not sure I agree with Stef this time though, the wording is something like 'removed or tampered with' so it does need to look standard imo, maybe down to the tester though.  I have seen a few diesels fail on it more recently, they seem to be tightening up on it now. 

If DVSA pull you I dread to think what the consequences would be, they can remove things unlike the MOT tester and will know if its been gutted.  Plus it technically invalidates your insurance so could be an issue if you crash as well.  It really depends on whether or not it's worth the risk to you at the end of the day. 

[stef123]

Missing or where one was fitted as standard. Guy doing mot can't see inside it though however suspicious he is. 

Pass and advise was what I would told by an mot tester. 

[iantt]

2 minutes ago, stef123 said:

Missing or where one was fitted as standard. Guy doing mot can't see inside it though however suspicious he is. 

Pass and advise was what I would told by an mot tester. 

the only way to fail for dpf missing is to be sure that there isnt a dpf ,i.e. a straight though pipe where you would expect dpf to be.

pass and advise if in any doubt .

[isetta]

"Plus it technically invalidates your insurance so could be an issue if you crash as well.".  I think this is debateable. I think the insurer would need to prove that such an action increased the performance of the car to successfully win that dispute but it does not stop them trying it and causing lots of grief.

re the comment about them tightening up. Yes, the authorities are on to this and they issued a bulletin to MOT testing stations saying that if MOT testing businesses get involved in aiding and abetting and doing DPF removals then if casts doubt on their suitability to be a trusted business to carry out MOTs. That bulletin is there for the public to read along with the whole MOT manual and all of the other bulletins (including one which tells testers to allow lots of play on Mercedes Sprinter van front ball joints)

I personally would be worried if there is visible signs of gutting the DPF on the outside of the DPF if I was taking car for MOT. Although if you argued that it had been cut open to clean properly and then welded back up how do you or the MOT tester prove the dpf is not empty or empty?

 

[Stoney871]

It would invalidate your insurance as the car has been modified to remove or deactivate a device required by law to be fitted to the car.

If an insurance company was to inspect the car after a collision and note the dpf delete (yes they can be that petty) they would not pay up.

Sent from my SM-G930F

[isetta]

"It would invalidate your insurance as the car has been modified to remove or deactivate a device required by law to be fitted to the car. "    I can't see that exclusion in my policy.

People often say driving a car with no MOT invalidates your insurance - 

People often say driving an untaxed vehicle invalidates your insurance -

Neither of those are exclusions are in any policy I have ever read, nor have they appeared on the statement of fact at application time.

Although I wouldn't put it past some of the newer cheaper insurers to put stuff like that in the small print.

(I have worked for many insurance companies and have read many policies)

[Stoney871]

It is stated in policies that the car must be kept in a street legal condition.

Any modifications that would cause a car to fail an MoT / being untaxed fall firmly under that category.

Sent from my SM-G930F

[TomsFocus]

See this is the problem I have with people saying it could be an MOT advisory...surely the insurance would check the MOT was valid before even starting physically assess it?  For example if you lost control and crashed, and they found a lower ball joint had been advised that year, that'd give them a good point to start checking.  If there's a DPF advisory on there, their job of never paying out would be made easier!

Same with ANPR, does it show advisories or just valid/invalid?  If it shows advisories the police or DVSA could pull you in to check it where otherwise they may not have done if the car looks standard and you're not on the phone or driving like a bell?

 

[stef123]

Advisories are just that. They don't mean something is unsafe or otherwise, simply letting you know that something may need attention in the future.

if ANPR could read advisories and the police could pull you over, I'd be pretty annoyed for having an advisory on a car seat fitted! 

[Stoney871]

ANPR doesn't show advisory information but insurance companies can get access to all MoT records via VOSA.

Sent from my SM-G930F

[TomsFocus]

1 hour ago, stef123 said:

Advisories are just that. They don't mean something is unsafe or otherwise, simply letting you know that something may need attention in the future.

if ANPR could read advisories and the police could pull you over, I'd be pretty annoyed for having an advisory on a car seat fitted! 

A child seat isn't the same though, there's nothing illegal about that, unless your seat belt happens to be bust so you fit a child seat to cover it up, but that's unlikely lol.  I would think they'd be interested in advisories about illegal modifications to emission systems though...  Or say you had an advisory about tyres 6 months previously, they are probably past it if not changed and would be worth a pull to get some fine money...

1 hour ago, Stoney871 said:

ANPR doesn't show advisory information but insurance companies can get access to all MoT records via VOSA.

Sent from my SM-G930F

Fair enough, they're missing a trick there then!  

What about the DVSA vans with ANPR?  Do they have instant access to that info?  I see quite a few round here and always wonder how much they know/what they're actually looking for.  They do regular pull-ins to go over cars with a fine tooth comb as well, I don't think the traffic cops would know what to look for in regards to DPFs but I'm pretty sure DVSA would.

[stef123]

I would class that as harassment, still wouldn't be a happy bunny! Lol.

Having a system like that I would be just aswell walking as by sounds of it I probably have no human rights by driving a car. Everytime I get clocked by police I would be getting my tyre checked that still has 2.5mm of tread left on it.. 

 

[TomsFocus]

You don't have any human rights by driving a car anyway, police can stop and search you just on their 'gut feeling' if they want...   

I do see your point though.

[Stoney871]

Advisories are just that. They don't mean something is unsafe or otherwise, simply letting you know that something may need attention in the future.

if ANPR could read advisories and the police could pull you over, I'd be pretty annoyed for having an advisory on a car seat fitted! 

A child seat isn't the same though, there's nothing illegal about that, unless your seat belt happens to be bust so you fit a child seat to cover it up, but that's unlikely lol.  I would think they'd be interested in advisories about illegal modifications to emission systems though...  Or say you had an advisory about tyres 6 months previously, they are probably past it if not changed and would be worth a pull to get some fine money...

ANPR doesn't show advisory information but insurance companies can get access to all MoT records via VOSA.

Sent from my SM-G930F

Fair enough, they're missing a trick there then! [emoji23] 

What about the DVSA vans with ANPR?  Do they have instant access to that info?  I see quite a few round here and always wonder how much they know/what they're actually looking for.  They do regular pull-ins to go over cars with a fine tooth comb as well, I don't think the traffic cops would know what to look for in regards to DPFs but I'm pretty sure DVSA would.

Ah, they know everything [emoji41]

Sent from my SM-G930F

[stef123]

2 hours ago, TomsFocus said:

You don't have any human rights by driving a car anyway, police can stop and search you just on their 'gut feeling' if they want...   

I do see your point though.

I should be able to go about my business without harassment though. I don't drive i travel. Scottish sovereign..  

[Stoney871]

I have seen cases of advisories for the most stupid reasons.

Goes to prove that they aren't allowed to remove/disassemble anything during a test.

We often get patrol cars coming back with advisories that the paintwork is obstructed by 'stickers'.

It's a smegging police car, what do they expect???

Sent from my SM-G930F

[stef123]

1 minute ago, Stoney871 said:

I have seen cases of advisories for the most stupid reasons.

Goes to prove that they aren't allowed to remove/disassemble anything during a test.

We often get patrol cars coming back with advisories that the paintwork is obstructed by 'stickers'.

It's a smegging police car, what do they expect???

Sent from my SM-G930F

I see no reason for that particular advisory. On an ageing vehicle, advisories such as undertray fitter or plastic covers fitted to underside I can understand.. 

[Stoney871]

1 hour ago, stef123 said:

I see no reason for that particular advisory. On an ageing vehicle, advisories such as undertray fitter or plastic covers fitted to underside I can understand.. 

I think it's just our nominated garage being arsey.

BTW, it's a Halfords AutoCentre.

They are crap but our previous garage of choice closed so some 'wiseguy' chose Halfrauds.

[stef123]

24 minutes ago, Stoney871 said:

I think it's just our nominated garage being arsey.

BTW, it's a Halfords AutoCentre.

They are crap but our previous garage of choice closed so some 'wiseguy' chose Halfrauds.

enough said mate