Car Exhaust Noise

[ging84]

Monkey boy 1 said:

Timsta said:

This is exactly why I read "Using a vehicle with an exhaust system that has been modifies as to increase the noise made by the escape of exhaust gases" to mean drilling holes in the exhaust and associated idiotic actions.

Hmm, not thought of that angle of approach to the wording.

I'm not sure that would form the grounds for a very good defence, i very much doubt the wording of that has a very strict meaning so that it would only apply to alterations made with the sole intention of increasing the noise or they'd struggle to get any prosecutions under it, but i'm sure your lawyer could tell you more definitively if it is something worth pursuing.

I think you are far better off attacking the evidence as faulty (because it clear is), To demonstrate this best you really need the stationary sound test reference value, one will definitely have been one taken for your vehicle for type approval.
The EU type approval stationary sound test is very similar to ISO 5130, main difference there is a flat rule of 75% of the rated rpm, but keep in mind the rated rpm is the book value for peak horse power not the rev limit (this applies equally to ISO 5130 - see 3.4). So the stationary test would have been done for your vehicle at somewhere between 4000 and 4500 depending on what the book value is. This is a little over the 3750 that is required by the police force's own test standard but still well below the rpm the test was actually run at and well outside the 5% variance allowed by ISO5130 and 3% allowed by the EU test. Although the reference value will almost certainly be lower than the reported sound level, it will clearly show the rpm for the test being much too high this should prove their test is invalid . Your lawyer should be able to advise you if it is your responsibility to get this for your defence or if it is up to the prosecution.

The statement that the legal limit is 82 and the threshold for prosecution being 90, is from what i can tell completely false, there is a mention of a 82dB(A) limit, but that is a drive by noise test not a stationary noise test which are done in a completely different manner and produce much lower readings. The 82dB(A) value is actually the limit for certain off-road vehicles drive by test and has nothing to do with normal passenger cars at all.
It maybe that the police force are able to choose an arbitrary sound level that they considered to be impossible from a standard car without an illegal exhaust alteration and use that for the basis of a prosecution, but clearly if these are the values they use for a static test, they are not very well thought out. To put it into context the stationary sound test value for my car, a 2005 mini cooper S is 88dB(A) at 4500rpm, and that is by no means the loudest car on the road, it's type approved yet illegal by norfolk police's standards although below the threshold at which they would prosecute. i've read somewhere that some Subarus and some bmw M3s have test values of 91dB(A) which would make owners of them liable for prosecution in Norfolk despite being type approved (possibly violating EU law / EU trade agreements).
Cars now i think are meant to have the sound test value printed in the log book (possibly from the 2001 emissions changes ) so if you can get some people with some loud cars (m3, scooby, tvr etc) to check their log books and if anyone has one showing 90dB(A) or above then perhaps you could get a copy of this and use it to demonstrate to the court quite how out of touch with reality these chosen limits are.

One final thing to remember is that the wording of the law here is specifically about noise, not sound, and noise is subjective, it is sometimes described as sound which causes nuisance or is damaging to health. I would check with your lawyer first, but i'd say if you are happy with the sound it makes and do not believe it causes a nuisance you should be able to stand up in court and honestly state that you do not believe it is more noisy than stock while still (perhaps silently) acknowledging that it may be slightly louder than stock.

[Monkey boy 1]

ging84 said:

I'm not sure that would form the grounds for a very good defence, i very much doubt the wording of that has a very strict meaning so that it would only apply to alterations made with the sole intention of increasing the noise or they'd struggle to get any prosecutions under it, but i'm sure your lawyer could tell you more definitively if it is something worth pursuing.

I think you are far better off attacking the evidence as faulty (because it clear is), To demonstrate this best you really need the stationary sound test reference value, one will definitely have been one taken for your vehicle for type approval.
The EU type approval stationary sound test is very similar to ISO 5130, main difference there is a flat rule of 75% of the rated rpm, but keep in mind the rated rpm is the book value for peak horse power not the rev limit (this applies equally to ISO 5130 - see 3.4). So the stationary test would have been done for your vehicle at somewhere between 4000 and 4500 depending on what the book value is. This is a little over the 3750 that is required by the police force's own test standard but still well below the rpm the test was actually run at and well outside the 5% variance allowed by ISO5130 and 3% allowed by the EU test. Although the reference value will almost certainly be lower than the reported sound level, it will clearly show the rpm for the test being much too high this should prove their test is invalid . Your lawyer should be able to advise you if it is your responsibility to get this for your defence or if it is up to the prosecution.

The statement that the legal limit is 82 and the threshold for prosecution being 90, is from what i can tell completely false, there is a mention of a 82dB(A) limit, but that is a drive by noise test not a stationary noise test which are done in a completely different manner and produce much lower readings. The 82dB(A) value is actually the limit for certain off-road vehicles drive by test and has nothing to do with normal passenger cars at all.
It maybe that the police force are able to choose an arbitrary sound level that they considered to be impossible from a standard car without an illegal exhaust alteration and use that for the basis of a prosecution, but clearly if these are the values they use for a static test, they are not very well thought out. To put it into context the stationary sound test value for my car, a 2005 mini cooper S is 88dB(A) at 4500rpm, and that is by no means the loudest car on the road, it's type approved yet illegal by norfolk police's standards although below the threshold at which they would prosecute. i've read somewhere that some Subarus and some bmw M3s have test values of 91dB(A) which would make owners of them liable for prosecution in Norfolk despite being type approved (possibly violating EU law / EU trade agreements).
Cars now i think are meant to have the sound test value printed in the log book (possibly from the 2001 emissions changes ) so if you can get some people with some loud cars (m3, scooby, tvr etc) to check their log books and if anyone has one showing 90dB(A) or above then perhaps you could get a copy of this and use it to demonstrate to the court quite how out of touch with reality these chosen limits are.

One final thing to remember is that the wording of the law here is specifically about noise, not sound, and noise is subjective, it is sometimes described as sound which causes nuisance or is damaging to health. I would check with your lawyer first, but i'd say if you are happy with the sound it makes and do not believe it causes a nuisance you should be able to stand up in court and honestly state that you do not believe it is more noisy than stock while still (perhaps silently) acknowledging that it may be slightly louder than stock.

Thanks Ging for the reply, some interesting points there. The main thing that the Police failed to account for is the RPM limit stated in ISO5130, for my vehicle which produces it's maximum power between 5000 & 7500 RPM, the limit set by the test is 3750 RPM, Norfolk plod checked it at 5250RPM.

They have also sneekily changed tact too,
Their initial paperwork says "Use of a motor vehicle causing unnecessary noise" as written on the £30 FPN I was given

Then the court summons says the charge is Use of a motor vehicle with an altered silencer / Exhaust system

Now there is a big difference to having a noisy exhaust and having one which is altered, this has got me a little worried to the fact is yes, the exhaust system is altered,but it according to Norfolk Police, if the officer deems that the system is non-standard, they can slap you with a FPN. even though the test they did was at the wrong target speed.

I have lots of information, too much to really go into on here, but all I am going to do is keep to the facts.

[ging84]

sounds to me like Norfolk police are making it up as they go along, it is not an alteration alone that creates an offence, there needs to be an increase in noise, an exhaust that only has cosmetic differences would not be a problem at all. You and the police can both agree it's been altered but disagree on it being more noisy, it is up to the court to decide. Possibly an officer's opinion that it was non standard and more noisy is enough evidence for a fix penalty and it would be up to anyone who contested it prove it was not more noisy than it should be. In this case the police chose to order a test before making that decision about issuing the ticket, so they must not have been entirely convinced until after the test, unless the test was just to waste your time and your petrol or maybe even to manufacture the false evidence they needed.

[vsonix]

Norfolk Fuzz said:

it looks a bit loud

Norfolk Fuzz said:

it only requires an opinion that the system is not standard and that it is noisier

now THAT's policework right there

...

do 'opinions' stand up in court?

Edited by vsonix on Tuesday 16th April 04:54

[herewego]

Monkey boy 1 said:

Thanks Ging for the reply, some interesting points there. The main thing that the Police failed to account for is the RPM limit stated in ISO5130, for my vehicle which produces it's maximum power between 5000 & 7500 RPM, the limit set by the test is 3750 RPM, Norfolk plod checked it at 5250RPM.

They have also sneekily changed tact too,
Their initial paperwork says "Use of a motor vehicle causing unnecessary noise" as written on the £30 FPN I was given

Then the court summons says the charge is Use of a motor vehicle with an altered silencer / Exhaust system

Now there is a big difference to having a noisy exhaust and having one which is altered, this has got me a little worried to the fact is yes, the exhaust system is altered,but it according to Norfolk Police, if the officer deems that the system is non-standard, they can slap you with a FPN. even though the test they did was at the wrong target speed.

I have lots of information, too much to really go into on here, but all I am going to do is keep to the facts.

Why don't you make an appointment to talk to the CPS? They might drop it when you show them the rpm error then you won't need to worry about the altered part. If they don't agree and tell you they are going to rely on the altered exhaust then at least you know where you are and you haven't lost anything.

[Monkey boy 1]

Just a quick update, Only a few more days until the court date. I have been sent through the Witness statement from the other PC who was at the scene when my car was noise checked. His statement has the wrong car colour and incorrect vehicle reg. Good start isn't it? Also I was sent through a bundle of photos which they took of the exhaust system.

I'm actually quite looking forward to Wednesday now. It's dragged on now since August last year, but has given me plenty of time to read through and see what mistakes they (Norfolk police) have made

Will keep you all informed of the result

Edited by Monkey boy 1 on Saturday 25th May 14:46

[GC8]

Dont be disheartened when the magistrate glaze over, then find you guilty having disregarded the police officer contradictions and general dishonesty/incompetence. This is far from unusual and you will have the option to appeal to the crown court. Its here where you can expect to be treated properly, if they even pursue it.

[Monkey boy 1]

Right, The verdict was GUILTY for having a modified exhaust system which contravenes the Road vehicles Construction & use regulations 1986. section 54 (2)
"Every exhaust system and silencer shall be maintained and efficient working order and shall not be altered so as to increase the noise made by the escape of exhaust gasses"

Which, to be honest I thought they would go for, BUT, and this is the big But, I was given a conditional discharge because the Police paperwork stated that the test was done in accordance to ISO5130 and the vehicle checked at 3/4 revs, which, by now if you have read this post from the start you will know is incorrect. They checked the car at 1500RPM too high.

The Magistrate actually knew his stuff too. The copper said the exhaust was excessively loud, The magistrate said that the pipes didn't look loud at all and were more in keeping with the looks of a Merc, Jaguar or BMW system.
The Magistrate also picked fault with the copper saying the car was Green, Magistrate said that the car is no way green, more Blue, He also picke up that the Copper got the veh. Reg incorrect..

When asked about the ISO test the copper said that he knew the ISO spec, end the Magistrate picked up on the fact that it was tested at the wrong rev range, He also asked as to why I wasn't given a 'corrective action' form to get the exhaust checked. to which the copper said that at present an MOT does not check vehicle exhaust noise.

Copper squirmed a bit when asked about how they deduce the noise result and where the 82dB and rev limit comes from. His answer was the standard "We are trained in the use of the machine and adhere to the procedures laid down by Norfolk Chief Constable.
I said that the 82dB comes from a drive-by test which is totally different to the static test and that the ISO5130 regulation actually has no defined result to work from.

Really to sum up, I didn't have to pay a fine or court costs and the Police did not have to pay compensation or court costs.

The Magistrate was really impressed with my homework and thanked me for submitting the ISO standard and the construction and use regs, and said that because the Police did the test correctly and that my car did have a non standard exhaust system but the Police paperwork was incorrect he had to give a conditional discharge.

I also found out that if your car has no rev counter they can only test at tick-over, but there is no set legislation for that, and if your car is a JDM or import you need to produce, at the roadside the SVA / IVA certificate to show it is an import.

[DoubleSix]

Very interesting. I'm a bit disappointed with the outcome, you?

[Monkey boy 1]

Yea, a little, but as the car has a Powerflow exhaust system on it rather than a standard one, I suppose this is the best I could really achieve. At least I didn't have to pay anything and watching the officer squirm was good.

[Buff Mchugelarge]

Good to see it turned out ok for you OP

So.. To sum up, after market exhausts are now illegal?

[Monkey boy 1]

Basically Yes, it contravenes the Construction & use regs - section 54(2)

[V8RX7]

Buff Mchugelarge said:

So.. To sum up, after market exhausts are now illegal?

This is ridiculous

(albeit true in the eyes of at least one magistrate it seems)

[bagman13]

Good on you. Hopefully now he will serve the local community in a positive manner. He can start by looking for my recently stolen bike .

[herewego]

Buff Mchugelarge said:

Good to see it turned out ok for you OP

So.. To sum up, after market exhausts are now illegal?

Only if they allow more noise than the original.

[V8RX7]

herewego said:

Buff Mchugelarge said:

Good to see it turned out ok for you OP

So.. To sum up, after market exhausts are now illegal?

Only if they allow more noise than the original.

But they all do (except the cheap and nasty replacements) and even they might.

[Mr E]

herewego said:

Buff Mchugelarge said:

Good to see it turned out ok for you OP

So.. To sum up, after market exhausts are now illegal?

Only if they allow more noise than the original.

Someone better tell Larini et al.

[Oilchange]

Jumped ahead a bit on this thread, kind of all the way really. So, the gist is basically any noisy car will be crushed, or something.

Cue, all Ferraris, Astons, Lambos, Lotus', Minis (original) and just about any car that isn't a Rolls Royce or electric or has a blowing manifold is going to be crushed?

Police were being a bit ttish really. How can an exhaust 'look' loud?

OFF SOD (rearrange)

- Just had a thought on this though.
IF, they had judged the car as 'sounding st', not just too loud but the aural quality was inferior (much like the effect a tin dustbin has on the rear end of your average Saxo/Golf etc) then I could give the Police some credit.
Punishment something like public bare-bottom spanking with a large haddock or forced to sport a large sticker on the boot reading 'kick my crap sounding chav-wagon'
That, I would agree with.

Of course, Alfa V6, Ferraris, Lotus twin-cams on Carbs, Maseratis and the like, they would get a knowing nod and a polite 'drive safely, sir' as Mr Plod stood grinning at the departing motorists enthusiastic departure.

Punitive fines, court? seriously?

What a load of old bks

Edited by Oilchange on Thursday 30th May 10:12

[Monkey boy 1]

Exhaust noise ticket is a non-endorsable £30 FPN. They can't issue a vehicle rectification notice because it is not an MOT failure as sound levels are not a requirement for an MOT.

To me this is just one of the many new laws & regs that the beaurocrats have brought out without thoroughly checking over it to see if it actually legal to administer it.

[herewego]

V8RX7 said:

herewego said:

Buff Mchugelarge said:

Good to see it turned out ok for you OP

So.. To sum up, after market exhausts are now illegal?

Only if they allow more noise than the original.

But they all do (except the cheap and nasty replacements) and even they might.

Some claim to adjust the frequency range to make the sound more appealing to enthusiasts of exhaust noise while remaining within the original and legal overall noise level.