Practically Classics Forum

The information is in the link you posted, which seems to be the most up to date:

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.

OK, just asked some of the other test venues and they all cite page 2 of 3 of the regulations as they apply to HID lamps, this update has been altered only in a couple of minor details since the right column in the online summary.

data/file/408941/aftermarket-hid-headlamps.pdf wrote:Once fitted to the vehicle it (referring to the HID lamp unit) must have headlamp cleaning and self-levelling (which can be for the headlamp or can be in the vehicle suspension - some expensive estate cars have "self-levelling suspension" and that is adequate). Also, the dipped beam must stay on with the main beam.

Don't let the "aftermarket" part of that confuse you further, this is the legislation that applies to O/E fitments too, it's just that the emphasis of the file is on using HID kits in the wrong backshell/lens units but the rule about cleaning and self levelling systems applies to O/E and aftermarket HID systems, a fact made clearer by the mention of the illegality of using HIDs in anything other than suitable replacement shells.

That page is found here, and this appears perfectly plain, though it is equally plain to me now that the page from the (MOT test) manual has the potential to mislead the literalist.

How else can an MOT tester's manual be taken? If it is written there, it HAS to be taken literally, the manual wasn't written for people to interpret however they wish.

I understand the sentiment about HIDs, as there is potential to cause a lot of glare when fitted badly. However to try to blanket ban upgrades of any sort to vehicles is a knee jerk reaction, which I feel ought to be resisted. Otherwise we end up like some other EU states, where they are not permitted to change the tyres unless approved.

I would greatly recommend HID upgrades as they are just so much more efficient. Have yet to try LED lamps so can't comment on them, but I would expect that they will be fine if the focal point is the same as the halogen bulb.

John, I was sent some information by a friend, that might be of interest...


The dft info sheet gives guidelines. As it states, technically all HiDs are illegal in UK because they're not mentioned in the RVLR (they are in type approval though so you probably couldn't pass an IVA without levelling and washing?)

The guidelines were written at the same time as discussions were taking place over the rewrite of the MOT manual and they eventually bottled out and changed it to "may be fitted"

Directive 2010/48/EU Testable Components was the eventual document that defined the MOT requirement and added the following test For Class 4, 5 & 7 vehicles Headlamp levelling and cleaning devices when fitted for HID or LED headlamps

http://cleanair.london/wp-content/uploa ... nnex-B.pdf

Thank you. Yes, that most certainly is of interest, especially as many of my contacts in the trade are every bit as confused by this (and other currently contentious MOT issues..) as many of the unknowing users of vehicles that - surprisingly often - have aspects to their design that are technically unacceptable in the UK but tolerated in order to avoid upsetting European manufacturers. That last part may be too cynical but sometimes, it feels as though that's what's happening.

I for one would be interested to read any views from History on this subject.

As for mine, one thing I did not realise was that H1 reflectors need more depth behind them when compared to H4's. So theres another aspect to be considered.

JPB wrote:Thank you. Yes, that most certainly is of interest, especially as many of my contacts in the trade are every bit as confused by this (and other currently contentious MOT issues..) as many of the unknowing users of vehicles that - surprisingly often - have aspects to their design that are technically unacceptable in the UK but tolerated in order to avoid upsetting European manufacturers. That last part may be too cynical but sometimes, it feels as though that's what's happening.

I think it's more a case of non-joined up government, with inconsistencies between the construction and use regulations and the MoT.