DPF removal check to be part of UK MOT test from February 2014

[fordfan]

Makes interesting reading, of course this is the first that the MOT testers have heard of this due to VOSAs (now the DVSA) uncanny ability to release things to the public before the people who need to carry it out.  We now know the requirement but not the age of vehicle it applies to, also we do not know how they want us to test it and apply the required test standard.

 

Common sense says to me that a DPF filters out the soot, so if the tail pipe is sooty it warrants further investigation such as checking the DPF casing for any welded on patches, followed by a tap (as mentioned above) with the corrosion assessment tool.

 

What is likely is that they will say that it shouldn't take any longer to test and won't allow a test fee increase.

[silver1011]

But how can it be proven the DPF has had its insides removed?

 

A welded seam doesn't prove its been gutted. A tap with a hammer might offer the suggestion it is now hollow but to prove it is another matter?

 

If the vehicle owner denies he's tampered with the DPF and is adamant it is still present what happens then?

 

After owning a vehicle with a failing DPF I can sympathise with those who have been forced to remove their DPF's, not those who have removed perfectly functioning DPF's simply in the pursuit of improved fuel consumption or increased power, but those who have been left looking at a £1,500 bill to replace a filter on a £5,000 car in an effort to get the car back on the road.

[nick74]

Makes interesting reading, of course this is the first that the MOT testers have heard of this due to VOSAs (now the DVSA) uncanny ability to release things to the public before the people who need to carry it out.  We now know the requirement but not the age of vehicle it applies to, also we do not know how they want us to test it and apply the required test standard.

 

Common sense says to me that a DPF filters out the soot, so if the tail pipe is sooty it warrants further investigation such as checking the DPF casing for any welded on patches, followed by a tap (as mentioned above) with the corrosion assessment tool.

 

What is likely is that they will say that it shouldn't take any longer to test and won't allow a test fee increase.

 

I wonder if its significant that EURO V become compulsory on all new cars from October 2010, and that those vehicles have recently become old enough to need their first MOT test? Pure speculation, but it perhaps would fit with the timing of this change.

 

I've often thought that imposing this retrospectively on older vehicles would be quite difficult, as prior to Oct '10 there were still many new non-DPF diesels being sold & registered quite legitimately, and the government does not appear to have any central database of which diesel cars from that era were supposed to have a DPF and which weren't. The introduction of EURO V changed that, as in practice no new diesel car sold from late 2010 onwards could comply with emissions regs without a DPF being fitted.

[mikejay]

I'm glad this has happened in a way. It stops me wanting to fork out to get it done for that extra power.

[Dr Zoidberg]

But how can it be proven the DPF has had its insides removed?

 

A welded seam doesn't prove its been gutted. A tap with a hammer might offer the suggestion it is now hollow but to prove it is another matter?

 

If the vehicle owner denies he's tampered with the DPF and is adamant it is still present what happens then?

 

 

Soot coming from the exhaust will be a further bit of evidence. If he believes it's been gutted, the MOT tester could refuse to issue a certificate, and you'd then have to appeal and prove that it was still intact

[Tramell]

This practice has always been illegal, contravening the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulation 61 A as it no longer meets emission standards applied to it when new.

 

In a sane world, you would think that as a matter of course, if you made an illegal modification to your car and it was spotted at the MOT, it would result in an automatic fail.

 

 

... companies continue to advertise the practice.

 

It grinds my gears that peole are allowed to advertise and supply illegal services and goods.

 

 

The law is truly an ass - in as much as any practice can be an animal

[andyvee]

Can you see the DPF without removing the undertray? I thought the MOT tester wasn't allowed to remove any undertrays etc when performing the visual inspections?

Sent from my phone so please excuse brevity and spelling

[seboni121]

I would have thought that most of us realised that this was inevitable ? With forums like this awash with threads " how to remove your DPF's " vosa Was aware of the situation and just required the mandate to enforce , hence the new guideline the testers will surely be given the necessary tools/ method to check and deliver a fail quite easily, these garages although not holding a gun to ones head, really knew this was on the cards and should never have been allowed to offered the service, most of the cars that have had this done will be at the mercy of the same garages that removed them, hopefully most if not all will have kept the innards for such an eventuality ?, will this mean that a lot of good cars will become vessels to carry dog food ?

[skodanorman]

All the more reason to buy a petrol!

[Guest]

Soot accumulation on a diesel tailpipe is a given and not an indication of dpf being gutted.

As long as particulate emissions are below the maximum permissible level for a particular vehicle the test is a pass.

A good dose of fuel system cleaner and an Italian tune up immediately prior to testing should help with doctored dpf vehicles.

[Chorlton]

EGR removal check coming next. Followed by checking for remaps.

[trundlenut]

My car still has the dpf and I don't intend to remove it, but you can't really see it even when the car is up on a ramp due to the undertray and the lack of space in the engine bay, so it could be tricky to check.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[Guest BigJase88]

Those dpf's make a fair difference to soot

My old boy has a 335d with dpf

I have a 320d without dpf (from factory)

The 335d's tail pipes are always clean, never ever sooty, my 320d on the other hand drives me bonkers! Its black after just one journey

Both cars are standard so no silly black smoke maps

[Huskoda]

Soot accumulation on a diesel tailpipe is a given and not an indication of dpf being gutted.

As long as particulate emissions are below the maximum permissible level for a particular vehicle the test is a pass.

A good dose of fuel system cleaner and an Italian tune up immediately prior to testing should help with doctored dpf vehicles.

 

110k on my DPF equipped car disagrees with the first line. My exhausts are still pretty clean. They've just gone brown around the tips, but not black.

 

The second bit I agree with, the Euro IV and V standards define permissible output. Mine has a DPF but is a Euro IV, so should pass without it.

[sparks03]

Some of the more savvy garage owners/engine mappers who made a killing chopping out DPFs have probably stashed them all away waiting for this very regulation to come in!

 

 More likely they weighed them in for scrap and made a killing. 

 

 Glad I didn't bother with this in the end otherwise chestnuts wouldn't be the only type roasting on the open fire this Christmas 

[silver1011]

A poorly performing or failing DPF can produce soot at the tail pipe.

 

A sooty tail pipe isn't therefore conclusive to a DPF removal, although it is an additional indication.

 

If the MOT tester can fail a car because he 'believe's' the DPF has been removed and it is up to the ownder to prove it hasn't then this is a different story.

 

If the MOT tester has to be 100% sure the DPF has been tampered with to be able to fail the car then I'd say due to its location those who have had them removed have nothing to worry about.

[JungleJames]

I doubt any garage offered the DPF removal with a view to raking it in when the removal became illegal. I doubt they expected what has happened TBH.

Since it became illegal? Its always been illegal. The DPF was put in to comply with current emissions regs. No manufacturer is going to put it in just for a laugh. By taking it out the car never complied with the emission regs that it should have done. Hence taking it out was always illegal. Had diesel cars been subject to emissions tests during MOTs (which apparently they arent), then these cars would have failed MOTs before now.

 

If you honestly believe these garages didnt think they were doing anything wrong, then you are basically saying these garages werent very intelligent.

So yes, either they were very clever, and have been taking people for a ride (a lot of garages are famous for this afterall), or they werent very intelligent. 

[JungleJames]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing

I'm not quite sure what your big issue is with the garages, no-one held a gun to anyone's head to force them to have their DPFs removed

My issue? Well you know these garages that shaft you by saying you need things doing to your car when you dont? There are plenty around. Well the garages (or whatever they are) taking DPFs out, are basically shafting you in another sense. They go round saying it is perfectly legal, and is good for the car etc etc. Good selling techniques. Very clever. Except for the fact it was illegal, and I reckon they knew it was illegal.

It isnt hindsight. It was just a matter of time until it was clarified. They havent changed the law. They have just updated the MOT instructions to make it easier to stop this practice.

[@Lee]

Since it became illegal? Its always been illegal. The DPF was put in to comply with current emissions regs. No manufacturer is going to put it in just for a laugh. By taking it out the car never complied with the emission regs that it should have done. Hence taking it out was always illegal. Had diesel cars been subject to emissions tests during MOTs (which apparently they arent), then these cars would have failed MOTs before now.

 

If you honestly believe these garages didnt think they were doing anything wrong, then you are basically saying these garages werent very intelligent.

So yes, either they were very clever, and have been taking people for a ride (a lot of garages are famous for this afterall), or they werent very intelligent. 

I think we all knew what I meant, but I've gone and edited my post just for you

[Huskoda]

Is it still illegal to remove a DPF from a Euro IV car? The particulate limits are 5 times higher than Euro V and are passed by cars without one.

 

If its just a case of anything changing your emissions from stock, then surely all remaps would also be illegal.

 

Or are they scheduled for 2015. It was cats in 2013, DPFs in 2014, so remaps in 2015?

[XLBaconDoubleCheese]

No different to decatting a car, it's the owners choice no one else. I've never been sure on what changes might be made to dpf rules so I'd always avoid removing it personally. If someone chooses to its not the garages fault who carries out the work if rules are changed later on, they can only advise as it stands at the time.

[@Lee]

Is it still illegal to remove a DPF from a Euro IV car? The particulate limits are 5 times higher than Euro V and are passed by cars without one.

 

If its just a case of anything changing your emissions from stock, then surely all remaps would also be illegal.

 

Or are they scheduled for 2015. It was cats in 2013, DPFs in 2014, so remaps in 2015?

British Gas (IIRC) and a few other companies with large fleets of diesel vans will be ****** then as their engines have been remapped. They even tell you about it on the back citing 'green' credentials

 

Oh and some buses.

 

http://www.vansa2z.com/BT-fleet-remapped-to-improve-fuel-economy

http://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/2012/7/25/is-remapping-the-way-ahead-/44275/

[JungleJames]

I think we all knew what I meant, but I've gone and edited my post just for you

I honestly never knew that you meant 'MOT failure'. So apologies for the fact that you did. I wasnt trying to wind anyone up.

I still stand by the rest of it though, that the places offering these removals must have known it was wrong, and that eventually something would change to put a stop to it.

They must have known they should not have been offering such a service.

One good way of finding out, did any reputable garages offer this service? Id guess not.

[@Lee]

I honestly never knew that you meant 'MOT failure'. So apologies for the fact that you did. I wasnt trying to wind anyone up.

I still stand by the rest of it though, that the places offering these removals must have known it was wrong, and that eventually something would change to put a stop to it.

They must have known they should not have been offering such a service.

One good way of finding out, did any reputable garages offer this service? Id guess not.

There's a reputable tuner and garage owner looking now, maybe he can answer.

But yes, many reputable places offered DPF removal.

[JungleJames]

No different to decatting a car, it's the owners choice no one else. I've never been sure on what changes might be made to dpf rules so I'd always avoid removing it personally. If someone chooses to its not the garages fault who carries out the work if rules are changed later on, they can only advise as it stands at the time.

But the places offering this service were advising wrong. Some blatantly claimed it wasnt illegal. But it was. So yes, in that case it is also the garages fault.

If you go to a garage and ask them to remove your front window (extreme, but still something thats illegal), they would advise you it was not allowed to drive a vehicle like that, and no doubt refuse to do it.

So why were these places offering DPF removals not advising correctly?