Headlight washer blanks - mot compliance

[joytodrive25]

I've been told by the tester that Rentec (Edinburgh) use that blanks are a failure with xenon headlights? So now instead of fitting they are having to repair. I'm not particularly happy as I have read numerous times that this isn't the case.
Any way I can clarify? Any testers able to help? I'd love some clarity before speaking to them about it. I really don't want them on asthey are almost pointless. And now paying forRentec to fix something to satisfy one tester!
Any help is much appreciated. I know there are excerpts from the regs on here but at work all night and then have to deal with this in the morning before work.

 

[Djw John]

They are correct but most testers won't care. Either repair the system or chuck some base spec halogens on for test day.

 

[joytodrive25]

Basically yes, now that I've had more time to read about it at home. It is technically correct, though very strict.
The pump has failed and is now being fixed. Just need to decide whether to fit the blanks at a later date and maybe go somewhere else next year or just send them back which the seller (eBay-madcon) says I can.
Thanks for the help anyway John!

 

[flebay]

I've been told by the tester that Rentec (Edinburgh) use that blanks are a failure with xenon headlights? So now instead of fitting they are having to repair. I'm not particularly happy as I have read numerous times that this isn't the case.
Any way I can clarify? Any testers able to help? I'd love some clarity before speaking to them about it. I really don't want them on asthey are almost pointless. And now paying forRentec to fix something to satisfy one tester!
Any help is much appreciated. I know there are excerpts from the regs on here but at work all night and then have to deal with this in the morning before work.

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.
So if there not fitted they dont have to work, mine passed every year with the blanks
Watchdog: Unfair MoT failures

6 Jun, 2012 7:00amJon Morgan

• FACEBOOK
• TWITTER
• GOOGLE+

Roadworthy Mitsubishi Evo fails its MoT on a technicality, because of a poorly-worded rule
Cars are failing the MoT test on an obscure technicality despite being roadworthy, Auto Express has learned. Reader Timothy Walsh was gobsmacked when his pride and joy – a 2004 Mitsubishi Evolution VIII – was declared unsafe to drive after its annual check-up.

The tester told Timothy, from Banbridge, Co Down, that it had failed because the car’s factory-fitted HID headlamps did not have washers and a self-levelling system – both of which are required on new cars with HID lights under type approval laws that came into effect in 2010.

But Timothy’s car was built in 2004, long before the regulations were introduced. “How can a car built in 2004 meet regulations introduced six years later? It’s ridiculous!” said Timothy, who now faces the prospect of paying to replace perfectly good headlamps before getting his Mitsubishi retested. The problem is down to the wording of MoT guidelines issued by Northern Ireland’s Driver and Vehicle Agency (DVA).

The section on HID lamps is slightly different to the one issued by the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA) to garages in England, Scotland and Wales. VOSA’s states: “A car with HID lights MAY also have headlight washers and self levelling which must be checked and in working order if fitted.” The DVA’s states: “A car with HID lights MUST have headlight washers and self levelling...”

We pointed out the discrepancy to the DVA and asked if the wording would be changed so cars couldn’t be failed for not meeting regulations introduced many years after they were made. But a spokeswoman said the DVA believed its regulations were right and that the same test standard would be applied by garages in the rest of Britain.

A spokesman for VOSA denied that this was the case. He said: “If a car has the washing and self-levelling system then we’ll check it and it will need to be in full working order. If it’s not there, we don’t check it – we give the owner the benefit of the doubt.”


The problem
The wording of new MoT regulations meant Timothy Walsh’s Mitsubishi failed its MoT on a technicality, despite being perfectly roadworthy.

DVA's response
A spokeswoman said: “The DVA tester’s manual accurately reflects the legal requirements for HID headlamps and no changes are envisaged.”

Legal advice
Timothy can appeal against the examiners’ decision and have the car re-examined. If the new examiner upholds the appeal, the car will get a test certificate and the DVA may refund part or all of the fee.

Our verdict
It’s absurd to expect cars to comply with regulations introduced after they were built. We suspect the DVA guidelines have been incorrectly worded, but the agency doesn’t want to admit the mistake.


Do you have a motoring problem that needs investigating? We're here to help… E-mail mail@autoexpress.co.uk or Tweet us@AutoExpress.

 

[joytodrive25]

An answer from the garage is :
If you turn up for test with the blanks fitted it CANNOT fail as they are not there to test. I should have made Rentec fit them prior to MOT test. Once failed they need to be rectified. They have offered to fit the blanks and take the pump back for them if I want as they are sound

BLANKS do not mean failure!!!!!

 

[joytodrive25]

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.
So if there not fitted they dont have to work, mine passed every year with the blanks
Watchdog: Unfair MoT failures

6 Jun, 2012 7:00amJon Morgan

• 
  
  
  • FACEBOOK
  • TWITTER
  • GOOGLE+

Roadworthy Mitsubishi Evo fails its MoT on a technicality, because of a poorly-worded rule
Cars are failing the MoT test on an obscure technicality despite being roadworthy, Auto Express has learned. Reader Timothy Walsh was gobsmacked when his pride and joy – a 2004 Mitsubishi Evolution VIII – was declared unsafe to drive after its annual check-up.

The tester told Timothy, from Banbridge, Co Down, that it had failed because the car’s factory-fitted HID headlamps did not have washers and a self-levelling system – both of which are required on new cars with HID lights under type approval laws that came into effect in 2010.

But Timothy’s car was built in 2004, long before the regulations were introduced. “How can a car built in 2004 meet regulations introduced six years later? It’s ridiculous!” said Timothy, who now faces the prospect of paying to replace perfectly good headlamps before getting his Mitsubishi retested. The problem is down to the wording of MoT guidelines issued by Northern Ireland’s Driver and Vehicle Agency (DVA).

The section on HID lamps is slightly different to the one issued by the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA) to garages in England, Scotland and Wales. VOSA’s states: “A car with HID lights MAY also have headlight washers and self levelling which must be checked and in working order if fitted.” The DVA’s states: “A car with HID lights MUST have headlight washers and self levelling...”

We pointed out the discrepancy to the DVA and asked if the wording would be changed so cars couldn’t be failed for not meeting regulations introduced many years after they were made. But a spokeswoman said the DVA believed its regulations were right and that the same test standard would be applied by garages in the rest of Britain.

A spokesman for VOSA denied that this was the case. He said: “If a car has the washing and self-levelling system then we’ll check it and it will need to be in full working order. If it’s not there, we don’t check it – we give the owner the benefit of the doubt.”


The problem
The wording of new MoT regulations meant Timothy Walsh’s Mitsubishi failed its MoT on a technicality, despite being perfectly roadworthy.

DVA's response
A spokeswoman said: “The DVA tester’s manual accurately reflects the legal requirements for HID headlamps and no changes are envisaged.”

Legal advice
Timothy can appeal against the examiners’ decision and have the car re-examined. If the new examiner upholds the appeal, the car will get a test certificate and the DVA may refund part or all of the fee.

Our verdict
It’s absurd to expect cars to comply with regulations introduced after they were built. We suspect the DVA guidelines have been incorrectly worded, but the agency doesn’t want to admit the mistake.


Do you have a motoring problem that needs investigating? We're here to help… E-mail mail@autoexpress.co.uk or Tweet us@AutoExpress.

Thanks for this helped me feel like I was correct, which I was in the end!

 

[flebay]

Thanks for this :smile: helped me feel like I was correct, which I was in the end!

Nice not to have eye sores under the lights.

 

[MarcB]

Two different MOT testers have told me that if the item is not there how can they test it.
I have xenons in the Trophy and it pass's