MOT changes to be introduced in May following DPF investigation
New methods to better detect the presence of DPFs are under development, Department for Transport tells GW
Research to better detect DPF removal through emissions follows fears that the current MOT is failing to identify many cases of DPF removal because it only includes a ‘visual inspection’ of the hardware.Research to better detect DPF removal through emissions follows fears that the current MOT is failing to identify many cases of DPF removal because it only includes a ‘visual inspection’ of the hardware.
Changes are to be made to the MOT as part of a revised Roadworthiness Directive which comes into force from May 2017 and new technology is being developed to detect DPF removal.
In a statement obtained by GW, the Department for Transport (DfT) said: “Alternative methods of detecting the presence of particulate filters are under development and we are examining their suitability for use in an MOT.
“Further research is required to ensure potential methods accurately determine a pass or fail.”
The government investigation followed urgent calls for reform with claims that the current MOT is failing to identify many cases of DPF removal because it only includes a ‘visual inspection’ of the hardware, which can be welded back together.
It is an offence, under the Road Vehicles Regulations to use a vehicle which has been modified in such a way that it no longer complies with the air pollutant emissions standards it was designed to meet.
The DfT said: “Removal of a DPF will almost invariably result in a contravention of the Regulations, making the vehicle illegal to use on the road.
“Potential penalties are £1,000 for a car and £2,500 for a van.
“The legislation makes the owner or user of the vehicle primarily responsible for its condition.
“Whether the person who had removed the DPF, or had offered to remove it, had also committed an offence would be a matter for the courts to decide.”
Speaking earlier this year, Dave Garratt, chief executive at the Garage Equipment Association (GEA), said: “[DPF removal] has been going on for a long time and it is probably getting progressively worse.
“The biggest hole in the MOT is that they don’t really check it.
“[Visual inspection] does not actually tell you if there is a core in the canister.”
Do you support calls for a DPF removal crackdown? How many cars have you failed during a test due to removal? Share your experiences and any concerns in the comments below.
13.1K 16 6 4 1 13.1K
Posted by: Garage Wire Editor on 29th November 2016
Comments on “MOT changes to be introduced in May following DPF investigation”
TREV November 29, 2016
WITH THE COST OF A NEW DPF SO HIGH AND THE SYSTEMS SO PROBLEMATIC, DPF REMOVAL IS OFTEN THE ONLY OPTION AVAILABLE OTHER THAN WRITING THE VEHICLE OFF BECAUSE OF THE COST OF REPLACEMENT, MOST VEHICLES WILL STILL PASS THE EMISSIONS TEST EVEN AFTER REMOVAL, WHY DID THEY NOT INTRODUCE A DIFFERENT TYPE OF TEST IN THE FIRST PLACE IF THEY WERE THAT WORRIED, THIS IS JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE MOTORIST PAYING THE PRICE.
Mark Brown November 29, 2016
Yes they are problematic but they are easy to fix. The problem is people don’t drive the car right then take it to a garage that hasn’t got a clue how they work, they can’t fix them so they recommend removal. Most faults are easy and relatively cheap. I’ve only had to replace 2 DPFs in 8 years.
Get a better garage
Jon November 29, 2016
I agree A dpf never fails ithere is always a cause and garages don’t have a clue
Andy Blakeman November 29, 2016
Well Mark, what about when the DPF fails, due to it being out of it’s service life, resulting in the insides of the DPF melting together, allowing no exhaust gases through at all! They physically melt, you can’t fix that, other than replace or remove! So it’s not all a simple fix at all!
Cheap DPF’s are built of the same quality, so after a month they’re knackered, I’m sure people would pay a higher tax bracket if it meant getting rid of the DPF, I know I would!
stewart cumming November 29, 2016
I agree with the DfT concerns that this item is removed and that, at present there is no reliable way of checking for the DPF’s core presence. What is a concern that if the current MOT testing stations are required to invest in new equipment or upgrade old equipment to assess the DPF’s presence then they will need to look at the current MOT cost and, more importantly, the MOT stations that use this as a loss leader and price the test way below what it should be.
The DfT also need to look closely at garages and tech’s that remove the DPF and come down hard on this practice.
Remember this bad practice this affects everyone’s health and it is very short sightedness in the long run.
mr cassidy November 29, 2016
Yet another way to rip us off dont they take enough from us as it is, rob the poor feed the rich yet again.
Tim Peryer November 29, 2016
Removal is not the only option , you can get the filter professionally cleaned weather it’s soot or ash.
Anonymous November 29, 2016
and how many times must i have the stupid thing cleaned ? they are a terrible design
Aaron November 29, 2016
Agreed with Trev, how can the government turn around Ansell people “it was illegal to remove your DPF” when t the time there was nothing in place to prevent it, I haven’t problem with measures being taken to prevent future DPF removal such as a start date for DPF’s to be mandatory such as catalytic converters in the 90’s but for the vast majority of owners with a DPF removed vehicle many of them was not to know, by this sort of rule people would be fined for smoking in pubs before the smoking ban was put in place
Sully November 29, 2016
If there are to be legal consequences for using a vehicle on the road that has had it’s DPF removed, and additional legal consequences for the people who remove them, then lets have a level and fair playing field. There should also be legal consequences for designers and manufacturers for making money out of flawed, under manufactured and over priced DPF systems. It’s these failings that are forcing people to have DPF’s removed. Take away the recurring failures and excessive repair costs and the problem will evaporate. So, rather that spending £££ on legislation and prosecuting the vehicle owners ( the real victims ) make the designers and manufacturers responsible for the systems they supply. Simple. Rant over.
Craig November 29, 2016
In that case what if you were to buy a car second hand that had already had a dpf removal would that make you liable as how do I know my car hasn’t had the modifications? I don’t know of mine has or not. Also didn’t they bring in mandatory dpf as of 2009 on all diesels?
Paul November 29, 2016
TREV REALLY SHOWS WHAT IS WRONG. IF YOU ARE DOING LOTS OF SHORT JOURNEYS DON’T BUY A DIESEL.VERY RARELY DOES A DPF NEED REPLACING. IF IT IS BLOCKING THERE IS ALWAYS A REASON BEHIND IT. PEOPLE ARE DYING AND SUFFERING BECAUSE OF THE POLUTION. MODERN CARS COST! IF YOU ARE NOTPREPARED TO PAYS BUY A BIKE
Matt November 29, 2016
Most dpf faults are caused by the owners. Not letting it regen when it needs to is the biggest cause of a blockage or even engine failure. Let it do what it needs to and 99% of dpf faults will be eradicated
Nick November 29, 2016
DPF’s can be cleaned for a fraction of the cost to replace. This should be done at every service. It should be illegal to remove the dpf from a vehicle, The garage owner as well as the driver should be held responsible for removal.
Stuart Duff November 29, 2016
A welded dpf doesn’t necessarily mean the core has been removed, and that’s problem with a visual check, current welding practices can effect an almost seamless and perfect weld. So some improved inspection, testing clarification is required.
Eddie November 29, 2016
The whole MOT thing is a rip off. Basic brakes, steering and lights are all that need testing.
Johnson November 29, 2016
It’s strict mot tests that keep people like you safe
Lee Heywood. November 29, 2016
All these emission Controll methods are flawed. Anyone who believes they actually reduce long term pollution without questioning is deluded. The carbon footprint of an older car used for 20yrs is less than the throw away cars of today. The article also states it’s an offence for a vehicle to be altered in a way that it does not produce the pollution levels it was design for yet the mot test itself makes allowances for this feature if an older engine it fitted to a newer car. Go figure.
Neal November 29, 2016
There should be a debate as to Wether the DPF is the only option, there doesn’t seem to be enough scientific evidence that this is THE most efficient solution.Catch all the harmful pollutants in a filter and while that’s happening increase engine wear through back pressure increase ,therefore increasing oil consumption which in turn reduces engine efficiency , oh and then just heat the filter up and burn the toxins away, there’s got to be a more intelligent way !
Lee November 29, 2016
I think it’s a big con they want all this stuff to make a car run clean but penalise the drivers with massive repair bills when they go wrong and they wonder why they take them off! I know I would. Government ripping of the public that’s what it is !
eric November 29, 2016
The first time you need to replace a dpf negates all fuel cost savings……just buy a petrol :)
Paul stockham November 29, 2016
So when you buy a second hand car how do you know if it’s had its dpf removed and who is liable seller or buyer?
dan November 29, 2016
Doesn’t matter what you do people will always find a way round it
Leave a Reply
Please leave your comment below. Your email address will not be published but you can request notifications.
Email notification options:
Other popular recent posts
Research to better detect DPF removal through emissions follows fears that the current MOT is failing to identify many cases of DPF removal because it only includes a ‘visual inspection’ of the hardware. MOT changes to be introduced in May following DPF investigation
A dangerously modified towbar. MOT Horrors: more pictures expose the UK’s hidden dangers
AA bosses are pressuring patrols into selling more, claims GMB trade union. Trade union accuses AA of ‘bullying’ patrols into selling parts
Take part in a short motor factor survey to share your views on motor factor consolidation. Image: Bigstock. ECP Andrew Page: Have your say in motor factor survey
David's A4 was damaged by a fast fit and attempts to fix it left him frustrated. Owner fuming after Kwik Fit damage car and bodge the repair
TPMS: New independent research points to carmakers again manipulating official tests. VMs found to be manipulating TPMS tests