DPF removal and Insurance

Author
Discussion

Osinjak

Original Poster:

5,453 posts

121 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
Magic919 said:
Osinjak said:
Magic919 said:
Is 'illegal' in quotes any different to being illegal? What is the new law that is enacted from that date regarding DPFs?
Yes it is, it indicates that I'm not entirely sure about it hence the apostrophes. For the last part of your question, the info is in the AA link above.
I can't see any new law referenced on that page. Can you see one?
No, hence the discussion.

Magic919

14,126 posts

201 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
Not sure what there is to discuss.

Osinjak

Original Poster:

5,453 posts

121 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
Well I'm sure there are plenty of other threads you could contribute to if you don't feel you can contribute to this one.

Magic919

14,126 posts

201 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
Indeed. This one is hard work.

Engineer1

10,486 posts

209 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
Osinjak said:
Magic919 said:
Osinjak said:
Magic919 said:
Is 'illegal' in quotes any different to being illegal? What is the new law that is enacted from that date regarding DPFs?
Yes it is, it indicates that I'm not entirely sure about it hence the apostrophes. For the last part of your question, the info is in the AA link above.
I can't see any new law referenced on that page. Can you see one?
No, hence the discussion.
would this be the new law? https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-rules-for-m...

Retroman

969 posts

133 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
Just to chime in here.

Passing an MOT and having a vehicle that's legal to use on the road are two separate things.
You can pass an MOT with a car that's illegal to use on the road, and you can have a road legal car that may fail an MOT

To the fine letter of the law, any modification to the vehicle that means it can no longer meet the emissions criteria that was set when it was released is illegal.
This covers remaps, decats, DPF removal and EGR blanking or removal.
The chances of proceedings for one of the above offences is virtually zero though.

From Feb this year, on diesel cars that had a cat or DPF fitted as standard it will be an MOT fail if the DPF or cat has been removed.
It's currently only a visual inspection so if it appears a cat or DPF is present then as long as it passes the smoke density test, it will still pass.

Currently EGR deletes and remaps are MOT failures in parts of Europe and we're trying to follow their lead so i wouldn't be surprised if they appear at some point over here as well in the near future.

Osinjak

Original Poster:

5,453 posts

121 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
That's how I understood it but how interested would an insurance company be? Is it something they would look for in the event of a total loss claim for example?

Retroman

969 posts

133 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
As far as i know, your insurance would still be valid as long as the modification didn't contribute to the accident.
But you would still be liable to make any payments for the extra rise in premium from when then undeclared mod was fitted.

I'm with a broker who specialises in performance vehicles. I've got a VAG 1.9 TDi with a 2.5" turbo back exhaust fitted. The cat was removed and a "ghost cat" was put in place instead (cat heatshields welded over the top of the pipe)
When i delcared it to my insurance, i told them a full performance exhaust system was fitted and all was sorted.

bradjsmith88

117 posts

128 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
Phone your insurer and ask them?

Each one has its own underwriting criteria - as far as i'm aware there is nothing to say that they have to decline 'technically illegal' modifications - although it would be frowned upon and possibly seen as a moral hazard.

The insurer takes your premium - if your a good risk you dont claim and they make a profit - does removing a DPF make you a good or bad risk? Thats the insurer's decision - so phone them and ask!!

As for rejecting a claim - read your policy booklet!! What does it say? It will refuse claims for unroadworthy vehicles? If you declare the DPF delete, and they agree to insure you how can they then refuse to cover you for something they accepted in the first place?!

Osinjak

Original Poster:

5,453 posts

121 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
Retroman said:
As far as i know, your insurance would still be valid as long as the modification didn't contribute to the accident.
But you would still be liable to make any payments for the extra rise in premium from when then undeclared mod was fitted.

I'm with a broker who specialises in performance vehicles. I've got a VAG 1.9 TDi with a 2.5" turbo back exhaust fitted. The cat was removed and a "ghost cat" was put in place instead (cat heatshields welded over the top of the pipe)
When i delcared it to my insurance, i told them a full performance exhaust system was fitted and all was sorted.
I think it's the wording on the AA's website that makes it ambiguous, it suggests that removing the DPF will mean the car will fail the emissions regulations which means the car will be illegal and that it may invalidate the insurance. So even if the removal of the DPF didn't cause an accident, you still may not be insured because of the apparently illegal modification. All this is new since Feb 2014. How likely is it that an insurance company would go rooting around your DPF in the event of a claim?

Retroman

969 posts

133 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
Osinjak said:
I think it's the wording on the AA's website that makes it ambiguous, it suggests that removing the DPF will mean the car will fail the emissions regulations which means the car will be illegal and that it may invalidate the insurance. So even if the removal of the DPF didn't cause an accident, you still may not be insured because of the apparently illegal modification. All this is new since Feb 2014. How likely is it that an insurance company would go rooting around your DPF in the event of a claim?
DPF removal has always been illegal IIRC, it's just recently it's became an MOT failure as well to bring the MOT in line with current regulations regarding emissions legality.
I would take anything like this on the AA website with a pinch of salt, as they are often wrong or misguided with their advise.

Osinjak

Original Poster:

5,453 posts

121 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
Retroman said:
DPF removal has always been illegal IIRC, it's just recently it's became an MOT failure as well to bring the MOT in line with current regulations regarding emissions legality.
I would take anything like this on the AA website with a pinch of salt, as they are often wrong or misguided with their advise.
Aye, it all seems a bit woolly really.

pork911

7,140 posts

183 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
The only reason to consider it before the event like this is if you are contemplating swerving utmost good faith.


Inform your insurer and they will tell you.

The only reason not to, is if you suspect you may not like the answer and are willing to accept the consequences of not asking.

Osinjak

Original Poster:

5,453 posts

121 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
The conversation on BMWLand centres on whether an insurance company assessor would dig around the DPF in the event of a large claim, I think it's unlikely but given that DPF removal supposed to be illegal since Feb 14 I just wondered how plausible that would actually be.

Retroman

969 posts

133 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
It's not since Feb 2014, it's always been illegal to remove.

Osinjak

Original Poster:

5,453 posts

121 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
Apols, meant to say the test but regardless, I didn't know it had always been illegal.

ging84

8,897 posts

146 months

Thursday 17th April 2014
quotequote all
DPF removal was not previously illegal nor is it now. What maybe be illigal is driving a vehicle which does not comply with emissions regulations, as far as I am aware there are no strict laws yet on this (for diesels), so it is neither an offence to remove a dpf or drive a vehicle with one that has been removed.

What has changed is simply that vosa has choosen to no longer automatically allow vehicles to remain in service which have been modified in this way.
This has always been their right they just have not done so untill now, they are required to automatically allow any vehicle which has been type approved to remain in service so long as it remains compliant with it's type approved design and does not break any other laws.

Retroman

969 posts

133 months

Thursday 17th April 2014
quotequote all
ging84 said:
DPF removal was not previously illegal nor is it now. What maybe be illigal is driving a vehicle which does not comply with emissions regulations, as far as I am aware there are no strict laws yet on this (for diesels), so it is neither an offence to remove a dpf or drive a vehicle with one that has been removed.

What has changed is simply that vosa has choosen to no longer automatically allow vehicles to remain in service which have been modified in this way.
This has always been their right they just have not done so untill now, they are required to automatically allow any vehicle which has been type approved to remain in service so long as it remains compliant with it's type approved design and does not break any other laws.
If the vehicle is modified in such a way where it no longer meets the emissions requirements that were set when the vehicle is new, then it is an offense.
Removing the DPF or cat on a diesel will cause it to no longer meet these requirements. If it could meet the requirements without these parts, then manufacturers wouldn't waste lots of money designing, developing then fitting the unessasary parts.

ging84

8,897 posts

146 months

Thursday 17th April 2014
quotequote all
Retroman said:
If the vehicle is modified in such a way where it no longer meets the emissions requirements that were set when the vehicle is new, then it is an offense.
Removing the DPF or cat on a diesel will cause it to no longer meet these requirements. If it could meet the requirements without these parts, then manufacturers wouldn't waste lots of money designing, developing then fitting the unessasary parts.
and what are those emissions requirements?
as far as i am aware there are currently none for diesels other than visible emissions

lbc

3,216 posts

217 months

Thursday 17th April 2014
quotequote all
Retroman said:
Removing the DPF or cat on a diesel will cause it to no longer meet these requirements.
If it passes an MOT, then it meets all current requirements legally.

Please quote the law that states a car must have a DPF?