HIDs and the law - an explanation

[Neil VR6 0]

I wrote to the powers that be regarding HID illegality or otherwise and asked for an explanation

 

My email:

 

My car is 16 years old and the original equipment headlamps ran through a non-relayed circuit which resulted in a significant voltage drop at the bulb. The consequence of this was appalling light output, and frankly, unsafe night driving, unless on high beam which is not practical for today’s roads choked with traffic.

 

The remedy to this situation was an aftermarket HID kit (with no built-in cleaning or self-levelling) which has increased my ability to foresee potential hazards at night. The new set-up also places less strain on my car’s ageing electrical loom as current draw is only in the region of 35w. The beam pattern is identical to standard although the light output is far greater. The system is reliable and I have never been flashed by oncoming traffic for having poorly adjusted lights. My car also passed its MOT in September and the tester even commented on how good the lights were and passed it with no issues.

 

Compared to other cars on the road I see my aftermarket set up as a genuine improvement and I have welcomed the upgrade to make my car safer for me, my passengers and pedestrians alike.

 

Within this context, why has my car been deemed unlawful?

 

Their response:

 

The Road Vehicle Lighting Regulations 1989, as amended (RVLR) require headlamps to have an approval mark to show compliance with the relevant European legislation (see Schedule 4). A lamp that is designed for use with a filament bulb will be approved to the specific regulation for these lamps, e.g. UNECE Regulation 112.

 

Paragraph 14 of part II of the regulations states:

 

Filament lamps

14.—(1) Where a motor vehicle first used on or after 1st April 1986 or any trailer manufactured on or after 1st October 1985 is equipped with any lamp of a type that is required by any Schedule to these Regulations to be marked with an approval mark, no filament lamp other than a filament lamp referred to in the Designation of Approval Marks Regulations in-

 

(a) regulation 4 and Schedule 2, items 2 or 2A, 8, 20, 37 or 37A; or

 

(b) regulation 5 and Schedule 4, item 18, shall be fitted to any such lamp.

 

This effectively means that only approved filament bulbs may be fitted to a lamp designed and approved for use with filament light sources. A HID light source is not a filament bulb and therefore cannot be used in a halogen lamp.

 

The above basically prohibits the use of HID conversion kits, whether or not headlamp cleaners or automatic levelling are fitted.

 

As stated in the factsheet, the only legal way to convert a vehicle to HID is to remove the existing lamp units (by lamp unit I mean the entire lamp including reflectors, lenses etc., not just the bulb) and replacing it with a lamp unit that has an approval mark to show it was approved for use with HID light sources, in this case UNECE Regulation 98.

 

Once this is done there is then the issue of headlamp cleaners and automatic levelling. The Road Vehicle Lighting Regulations require that headlamps should not be used so as to cause undue dazzle or discomfort to other persons using the road, Part III Para 27. Due to the high intensity of HID lights, they will cause dazzle if dirt accumulates on the lens or they become mis-aimed under different loading conditions. In our view the only way of preventing dazzle, and so complying with the regulations, is to fit automatic headlamp levelling and headlamp washers. This is already the accepted approach in European regulations, see UNECE Regulation 48.

 

So, in answer to your question regarding your vehicle, if the headlamps are approved for use with halogen bulbs, you cannot fit a HID conversion kit that simply fits a HID light source in place of the filament lamp. You could fit a new pair of headlamps that are approved to UNECE Regulation 98 for use with HID light sources but you would then need to take steps to prevent dazzle to other road users, i.e. headlamp cleaners and automatic levelling.

 

Bulbs, whether filament or HID, must have an "E" mark to show that they meet the technical requirements for that light source, including the correct base cap. The base cap for a halogen bulb differs to that for a HID bulb to prevent them being interchangeable. Therefore a HID light source that fits into a halogen lamp cannot have a valid approval mark. Some kits do claim to have the correct "E" mark but usually this is placed on the balast and is the approval to show that it complies with the European regulations on electromagnetic compatability rather than the regulations on bulbs.

 

Finally, there are good safety reasons not to put a HID light source into a lamp designed for halogen bulbs. Recent tests carried out by the Department on two such kits showed that, although they produced a beam pattern that might pass the visual MOT test, the actual light intensity at specific points in the beam pattern that are controlled to minimise dazzle exceeded the minimum allowable values by a considerable margin. In addition these lights tended to put too much light directly in front of the vehicle rather than "throwing" it down the road where it is needed. This will tend to draw the driver’s eye away from the distant road scene and give them less time to react to obstacles in the road.

 

This is the opinion of the Department for Transport but only a Court of Law can give an authoritative interpretation of the law.

 

Yours sincerely

 

DfT – Transport Technology and Standards

 

I don't know what everyone on here thinks but there's nothing in the reponse about how they plan to enforce this given that the key annual goverment vehicle check (the MOT) doesn't seem to pick it up. I can't see police stopping my car given the state of some of the other cars on the road which invariably only have one headlamp working half the time anyway!

[was8v 0]

This is all correct, I agree with what they are saying, HID light output as you know is very different to halogen. The lens/reflector design are different and the requirement for self levelling and washing is important - why would they stipulate this if it wasn't? They dont just make these things up for fun.

 

--------------

 

Regarding enforcement - they may not be picked up on your car. Until you have an accident in which someone gets seriously injured and the investigation concludes you dazzling them was a contributory factor. How would you feel about HIDs then? It is a possibility, and becuase you have done the modification yourself and knew it was not legal you would not have a leg to stand on.

 

An uprated loom and decent bulbs are plenty. If you want HID then a newer car with them designed and fitted properly is the correct way forwards. IMO.

[Neil VR6 0]

Well my experience is that the overall effect is positive, I've certainly not had anyone flash me or suggest that my lights are dazzling.

 

In answer to your rather pointed question around how would I feel about HIDs if they were seen to be a contributory factor to an accident; I take that chance on the basis of being able to see an awful lot more than when the standard lights were in place.

[was8v 0]

In answer to your rather pointed question around how would I feel about HIDs if they were seen to be a contributory factor to an accident; I take that chance on the basis of being able to see an awful lot more than when the standard lights were in place.

 

For what its worth I think thats a valid point, however a jury may not accept this. Many people in this world will see a home modification like this as inherently "dodgy" and will not see the value in the modification. The same could be said about uprated headlight looms - many aren't waterproofed properly and use components not designed for the harsh engine bay environment - it could fail causing an accident, however the effect here is of a failed bulb - an accepted risk. Being blinded by non-approved lighting is not a risk most people would be prepared accept.

 

I know youa re not blinding anyone, but if something was to happen, that conclusion could possibly be drawn.

 

All IMO.

[Neil VR6 0]

I completely agree :salute: I guess for me it's a trade off I'm willing to take. It's not an OE factory install although a garage did do it for what it's worth as electrics baffle me!

 

As with all things, rules exist for the 2% of people who didn't do things properly prior to the rule being introduced and ruined it for the rest of us. (In my opinion!)

[JMC 0]

I would have thought Insurance companies would not look kindly on you if you had HIDS installed either, whether or not they were in use at the time of an accident, given the legallity situation. I could see that in their eyes, you would be driving around with an illegal setup which would surely invalidate any insurance :shrug:

[vwdeviant 0]

Love the part about self-levelling and not blinding people..

 

Someone e-mail that to the X3/5/6 dept of BMW and ask why their self levellers seem to work independantly of each other! The number of badly aligned 4x4 lights is scary... we know our heads are right in their beam patterns!!!

 

Well another nail in the HIDs in non-HID light units coffin then! Only a matter of time before Plod Jump on this too!

 

Added to insurance companies not paying out etc etc etc...

 

 

Neil, I may have missed something, when did they deem your car "Unlawful"? :scratch:

[was8v 0]

Love the part about self-levelling and not blinding people..

 

Someone e-mail that to the X3/5/6 dept of BMW and ask why their self levellers seem to work independantly of each other! The number of badly aligned 4x4 lights is scary... we know our heads are right in their beam patterns!!!

 

Yes this is a pet hate of mine too. Whena range rover sport comes storming up behind and then sits on your bumper, you unable to see anything at all.

 

Its crazy that theres no decent regulation of the height at which lights are mounted considering many cars sit lower.

[Neil VR6 0]

Neil, I may have missed something, when did they deem your car "Unlawful"? :scratch:

 

The fact that my HIDs aren't self levelling, e-marked, made by eunuchs, or have a cleaning sprayer makes them illegal.

[Dude VR6 0]

I`m going to put an uprated loom in my car, if that works then I will be happy. But as for all the new cars on the road that drive past me, or behind me with HID`s, I can`t see for shit as we all know that they are very bright. one of my work mates has fitted an after market kit to his FIAT(I know he`s SAD for owning a FIAT) and he hasn`t had any problems with them from other driver, or the police. Untill the law is clear, BLACK/WHITE, then this argument run on and on.

But I still want a HID kit that is road legal for my car.

[colinstubbs 0]

Untill the law is clear, BLACK/WHITE, then this argument run on and on.

 

 

Which bit of....

 

A HID light source is not a filament bulb and therefore cannot be used in a halogen lamp.

 

The above basically prohibits the use of HID conversion kits, whether or not headlamp cleaners or automatic levelling are fitted.

 

..isn't BLACK/WHITE enough for you??????

[Dude VR6 0]

HID bulbs still have a filament, its the gad that is differant

[KipVR 1]

HID's don't have a filament.

[mariojoshi 1]

these lights tended to put too much light directly in front of the vehicle rather than "throwing" it down the road where it is needed. This will tend to draw the driver’s eye away from the distant road scene and give them less time to react to obstacles in the road.

 

This chap has obviously never seen standard Corrado headlights ;)

[paul20v 0]

this old chesnut again ,

personally i use hids and have for 6years now ,

as for legality does everyone do the speed limit exactly all the time ?

do any of you use a phone ?

"fag anyone"

both hands on the wheel at all times unless operating a control on the car eg, handbrake ,turn signal , changing gear etc

anyone tune the radio in etc as in an accident its all deemed dangerous driving ,

and as for uprated bulbs a lot are not emarked also illegal,

and hid light dazzling people ok not if adjusted correctly and giving the correct beam pattern ,

and i see so many halogen lights adjusted badly its unreal i would say around 50-60% of all cars i test need a tweek on the adjusters to put them in tolerence,

so basically im not looking for an argument but we all do what we do ,even if its right or wrong im also not condoning the illegal actions just saying were human

and as for making yet another thing illegal in this country i think where in enough of a nanny state as we are :salute:

[dr_mat 0]

Big problem with HIDs for me in general is that there's legislation in place to limit the power of filament bulbs to 55W/60W for headlamps, which places a certain restriction on the physical amount of light that can be generated. All HIDs, everywhere, on every car, produce obscene amounts of light by comparison and there doesn't seem to have been any legislative work to limit this. They are good for you, as a driver, because you can see much better, but even with perfectly correct beam patterns and levelling systems they are blindingly bright for oncoming traffic. The fact that people don't flash you is just because we're getting used to the fact that we're simply not going to be able to see anything when someone drives towards you with these things on.. The government should have stepped in a long time ago and placed a limit, in lumens, on how much light a car headlamp can produce throughout it's beam pattern, not just in the "blanked" area. Too late now and we're all stuck with it.

[horney 0]

As the MOT regulations tighten up over the next cuple of years cars with these and many other modifications will be failed and subject to an SVA test to confirm road legality. With HID's it would fail. Luckily these can be swapped out. Other such stuff as engine conversions are going to be clamped down on. ALready ou have to have documentation to prove the origins, size and number of any engine where the displacement or fuel type is different to the original engine. If you don't have the docs the DVLA won't change the engine number or capacity on the V5 and the databse. WHen you then go for an MOT it's flagged up as a number mismatch and hello SVA test.

 

Nick

[paul20v 0]

As the MOT regulations tighten up over the next cuple of years cars with these and many other modifications will be failed and subject to an SVA test to confirm road legality. With HID's it would fail. Luckily these can be swapped out. Other such stuff as engine conversions are going to be clamped down on. ALready ou have to have documentation to prove the origins, size and number of any engine where the displacement or fuel type is different to the original engine. If you don't have the docs the DVLA won't change the engine number or capacity on the V5 and the databse. WHen you then go for an MOT it's flagged up as a number mismatch and hello SVA test.

 

Nick

The mot has no issues at all with engine numbers in as much as

you do not enter an engine number at all into the VOSA computerisation system

so i dont know who told you this but there 100% wrong ,

sorry for the topic wondering but there it is .

 

there is a mention of engine changes in the testers manual but no engine numbers:

 

(info lifted directly out of testers manual)

 

Vehicles fitted with modified engines

___________________________________

 

If an engine has been modified in any way, it still has to meet the exhaust emission requirements according to the age of the vehicle.

 

 

also :Test according to which is older, engine or vehicle.

e.g. A 1995 car fitted with a 1991 engine (of whatever make), test to 1991 standards for emission purposes.

 

Note: The onus is on the vehicle presenter

to prove engine age.

[horney 0]

Maybe not yet but it's coming in the future. It's to clamp down on Road tax dodgers. It's in a load of government consultation papers. The reason the MOT went computerised is so they can track engine numbers and the like in the future.

 

Are you an MOT tester yourself? If so does the computer populate the engine number field for you? In the old days of paper based you used to have to write it on the certificate so you would have to check the car to fill this in.

 

nick

[paul20v 0]

hi

yes mate im a tester for my sins :)

theres no engine number required at all in the cars log in details which is daft ( sort of ),

the problem with engine numbers is where do you find then on the engine when an engine is 10 years old and the block as rusted and the engine numbers have all but disapeared this is where the problem will arrise

chassis numbers are allways visible so theres not an issue ,

if they want engine numbers logged there going to have to change the way the car makers put numbers on engine blocks ,

and i cant see that happening in a hurry .

Paul

 

ps, I dont ever remember engine numbers on certificates , only early ones they used to put engine size which they later dropped also.