LPG Discussion Forum

how long ago, this week?

It was there last night but not this morning.

defo nothing showing on the logs

Thinking about it, it was very late last night as I had a report for work to finish and kept popping in every time I needed a break. I have a feeling it was posted twice (there was one post that appeared twice and I'm fairly sure it was this one) so it might be that Dave tried to delete the duplicate post and both were deleted for some reason.

Gilbertd wrote:Thinking about it, it was very late last night as I had a report for work to finish and kept popping in every time I needed a break. I have a feeling it was posted twice (there was one post that appeared twice and I'm fairly sure it was this one) so it might be that Dave tried to delete the duplicate post and both were deleted for some reason.

Gilbertd - I had a post around 1am this morning that was duplicated in error.Perhaps that is the one you are referring to?

Could well have been. I finally emailed the report I was working on at 03.07 so 1am was still early in the evening for me. There was definitely a post from Dave there though at some point.

'A reminder of VOSA's viewpoint in the existing IVA guidance
"you should use an installer approved by the UKLPG association. LPG systems retro-fitted by other parties will not be accepted."'...
A viewpoint yes but not legally binding unless some legislation has been passed stating this and I missed it .

I'd say it's legally binding. It's pretty clear, if you take a homebuilt, heavily modified or imported car in for IVA test and it has a system fitted by someone who is not a UKLPG member, they will refuse to test it simple as that. If they refuse to test it then it can't pass the test so cannot be registered in the UK.

Dave K wrote:'A reminder of VOSA's viewpoint in the existing IVA guidance
"you should use an installer approved by the UKLPG association. LPG systems retro-fitted by other parties will not be accepted."'...
A viewpoint yes but not legally binding unless some legislation has been passed stating this and I missed it .

I'm afraid VOSA hold the cards here; they are the government's expert agency on determining vehicle fitness issues. I've no idea how much discretion the legislation gives them - a fair amount I expect. You must argue the toss with them about the limits and extent of their powers. I don't think you'll win though

Maybe there's a misunderstanding of what IVA is, its a rather specialist vehicle fitness inspection for oddballs that needn't concern most of us; as its conducted directly by VOSA it gives a window into what they are thinking.

In context here it doesn't matter; someone said that VOSA were unconcerned about LPG conversions or who dunnit, clearly that isn't the case by their own words. I expect we'll all be treated to a shrill argument about how VOSA must have been hoodwinked/bribed and if only they knew, blah, but no offers to correct the situation.
Frankly I am amazed that no-one has seized on this, an excellent opportunity to actually open the dialogue with VOSA.

Gilbertd wrote:I'd say it's legally binding. It's pretty clear, if you take a homebuilt, heavily modified or imported car in for IVA test and it has a system fitted by someone who is not a UKLPG member, they will refuse to test it simple as that. If they refuse to test it then it can't pass the test so cannot be registered in the UK.

Well I'd argue that only Parliament can pass laws and that I've not heard of any law that prohibits the installation of LPG kits to vehicles by any one other than an UKLPG member. That would be the law that VOSA would be upholding. They surely can't just make up laws and refuse to test vehicles ?

Dave K wrote:They surely can't just make up laws and refuse to test vehicles ?

They don't have to make up a law, they have drawn up criteria that a vehicle must meet in order to achieve Individual Vehicle Approval which is what IVA is all about. You may not agree with the fact that a vehicle must be fitted with particular types of switchgear on the dash, a specific type of windscreen washer jets, have a flat space of a certain size for the rear number plate and be fitted with a Thatcham approved alarm and or immobiliser but those are the rules and it won't pass if it isn't.

Gilbertd wrote:They don't have to make up a law, they have drawn up criteria that a vehicle must meet in order to achieve Individual Vehicle Approval which is what IVA is all about.

But they are constrained by the law.

You may not agree with the fact that a vehicle must be fitted with particular types of switchgear on the dash, a specific type of windscreen washer jets

A long time since I had a (cursory) look, but they don't. They may have rules about the characteristics of switches (ie no "sticky out" switch like the old Mini had ), but they don't have rules saying what manufacturer's products you can use.

, have a flat space of a certain size for the rear number plate

That's covered by the law on number plates I think you'll find.

and be fitted with a Thatcham approved alarm and or immobiliser but those are the rules and it won't pass if it isn't.

Ditto - I vaguely recall there are regulations on minimum security for new vehicles. No more "got one key, it fits 50% of that model on the road" like the old days of Ford … and Land Rover

Now, if they have a rules which says "you must use a specific private company for <something>" then I believe that is unlawful and breaches both the rules the UK Gov work to and EU regulations on free trade. But until someone who has both the nouse and wherewithall decides to challenge that then they can get away with illegal restrictions. That's the way the system works.

SimonHobson wrote:Now, if they have a rules which says "you must use a specific private company for <something>" then I believe that is unlawful

They're not. They're saying you must use one of a few hundred approved competitors, but not those competetitors over there. There's a whole bunch of places where similar arrangements apply, perhaps they are all illegal.
e.g. "for an MoT, you must use one of our approved testing stations"
"for a loft insulation grant, you must use an approved installer"
These are all for-profit operations.

VOSA are accorded 'expert status' and have quite a bit of leeway in what they choose to look for technically. Actual legislation like Construction & Use will say wooly things like "suitable materials". It's up to VOSA to interpret that and be specific about what is "suitable" and what is not. That's all a Good Thing in my view, e.g. if a new method or material is invented VOSA can adapt quickly without the rigaramole of tiny legislative changes.

In my view they're being lazy by turning this specific issue over to UKLPG, but I is just telling the way it is now.

This issue is at once trivial (I'd guess we are talking one, two LPG cars per year through IVA?) and important in general. If folk are thinking VOSA cannot implement acceptable LPG 'rules' in an area they tightly control (IVA), why ask VOSA to take over general LPG approvals?

rossko wrote:

SimonHobson wrote:Now, if they have a rules which says "you must use a specific private company for <something>" then I believe that is unlawful

They're not. They're saying you must use one of a few hundred approved competitors, but not those competetitors over there.

But the common factor is that whoever you go to, you are tied to a specific private company (scheme). I don't have a problem with them setting standards - but when they say the work must be done by a specific company (or group of members) then that's different.
The whole point of IVA is to ensure that custom and one-off vehicles are safe for the road. AFAIK they do not require that other elements are done by specific companies - only that they meet certain safety standards. Eg, AFAIK they don't mandate that a chassis is only created by a member of a specific trade group - only that it's suitable. Ie, as long as my welding is OK then I can weld it up myself and they'll almost certainly look at the quality of welding where it's a custom (or modified) chassis.

There's a whole bunch of places where similar arrangements apply, perhaps they are all illegal.
e.g. "for an MoT, you must use one of our approved testing stations"

I'd expect that's allowed for in law. And fees are tightly regulated, and coming back on topic, the standards are very tightly monitored for exactly the reasons we've been discussing - we all know stories of "dodgy MoTs" from the past, I doubt there are many now.

"for a loft insulation grant, you must use an approved installer"

But not a member of a specific private company. And besides, the insulation grants aren't (mostly) anything to do with government - they are mostly private arrangements by private companies (energy suppliers) who are funding them. In most cases, the nearest the government gets is in telling the companies how much they have to spend on eco schemes (through renewables obligations, carbon trading and such rubbish). Personally I think that whole area is a dogs dinner - as do most people capable of thinking things through.

SimonHobson wrote:The whole point of IVA is to ensure that custom and one-off vehicles are safe for the road. AFAIK they do not require that other elements are done by specific companies ..

Dunno, haven't read it all. Don't confuse someone explaining the status quo with someone endorsing it.

SimonHobson wrote:But not a member of a specific private company.

There are many UKLPG approved installers. UKLPG themselves do not offer conversions. Which specific company are VOSA requiring?

SimonHobson wrote: And besides, the insulation grants aren't (mostly) anything to do with government

Oh okay. I thought they were mostly local gov managed (wherever the funds come from), that was back when I suppose, like ex LPG conversion grants.

A more up to date and related example ; you can get a grant towards installing an electric vehicle chargepoint at home. You may only use one of a list of accredited suppliers/equipment, all for-profit companies.

If you type VOSA into Google, then even from the Google search results (you don't even need to open up Vosa's .gov website) you can read 'We improve road safety by ensuring drivers, vehicle operators and MOT garages understand and comply with roadworthiness standards'. It should be noted that UKLPG does not have the .gov domain suffix, because it is a trade body and is not a government setup.

VOSA's above statement is currently false because in the case of LPG converted vehicles they do not ensure anything.

VOSA ensure MOT garages comply because they directly control the MOT scheme and monitor MOT garages (which have a Vosa sign up outside their front doors) - They do not allow garages to do MOTs on the basis of the garage belonging to a particular trade body because to do so would mean a fall in standards. It is ensured that vehicle operators and vehicle owners comply because vehicles do have to be MOT'd by law.

Imaginary situation: The MOT system is now voluntary, no vehicle has to have an MOT by law. VOSA takes a back seat and doesn't get involved with MOTs but a few individuals pick up on the lack of an official government VOSA enforced scheme and start a trade body called UKMOT with the intent on re-inventing a very similar system to the MOT system and, of course, making some cash. UKMOT get paid a joining fee and subscription by it's member garages, but they don't get paid for each MOT test carried out, they only get paid for the MOTs that pass. Faults on vehicles that could in theory affect safety are noted by mechanics and there seems to be no correlation between faults on vehicles and the vehicle passing an MOT or not - Yet no crashes are notably due to any faults discussed in any case.

Obviously in the above imaginary situation I am drawing parallels between the lack of a meaningful MOT system and the lack of a meaningful LPG compliance system. Of course, in the lack of an MOT system we could definitely expect many unsafe vehicles on the road and many more crashes. In the lack of an LPG compliance system we don't see scary reports on telly about deaths due to LPG system problems, hence the last sentence - yet no crashes notably due to any faults discussed in any case, because LPG installations are inherently safe. So realistically it isn't very clear what advantages there can be in having any sort of LPG check scheme whatsoever, yet we in the trade do see some accidents waiting to happen and agree on the need that some sort of scheme is required. If we agree a scheme is required, then we must agree it needs to be a meaningful scheme. The current scheme we have from UKLPG works in the same way as the above imaginary MOT scheme - totally ridiculous. The current MOT scheme works because it is ensured to work by a government setup - VOSA. If we want a working scheme it needs to be from the likes of VOSA. It seems obvious that the current government enforced VOSA MOT system is far better than a voluntary trade body organised scheme. The MOT testers won't find every issue with an LPG system like an LPG installer could, but LPG installers (UKLPG members and none members) are making these mistakes in the first place then registering the vehicles with these safety concerns as being safe. The current system involves in some cases the same people who are making the mistakes registering those vehicles as safe.

It costs about £40 for an MOT. The check usually involves 2 mechanics at the MOT garage and takes at least 45 minutes. How much do UKLPG registered installers charge to do UKLPG's checks on vehicles they didn't convert? Let's say they charge £50 for this (actually some charge over £100). One person (the UKLPG member) does the work... so straight away the UKLPG member is being paid between twice and over four times as much as an MOT tester, yet he is looking at only the fuel system and fittings when an MOT tester looks at fuel system, brakes, emissions, seatbelts, sills, suspension, windows, lights, etc, etc... So how long does the UKLPG check take? Can UKLPG member installers please show us a list of time spent doing what? If the check is passed, UKLPG member has to pay £15 to UKLPG to register the vehicle. If the check is failed, that UKLPG member doesn't have to pay UKLPG £15. Do UKLPG members all give the £15 back to the customer? We have discussed MOT prices earlier in this thread (or the Ecotec Manchester thread where this discussion took off again). Let me ask UKLPG registered installers here how much they charge for the check and if they charge less for a fail? If anyone has visited a UKLPG member for a check, why not tell us here how much you paid for the check and the results?

Simon
Lpgc

LPGC wrote:Imaginary situation: The MOT system is now voluntary

Not imaginary - this is the case for older and brand new vehicles.
https://www.gov.uk/getting-an-mot/vehic ... t-from-mot

Are we on a new tack here - greedy corrupt installers now, instead of UKLPG HQ? That'll be refreshing Can't see how this will boost your case with insurers to get things done, I guess VOSA are out of the running now as they too are liars.

LPGC wrote:If we want a working scheme it needs to be from the likes of VOSA.

That'll be the IVA test then.....

Look, the MoT is there to check that nothing put there by the manufacturers has deteriorated to the point that it is dangerous. If VOSA get involved they will almost certainly decide that it is too complex for the average MoT tester and needs to be done by a specialist.

[quote="LPGC"]It costs about £40 for an MOT. The check usually involves 2 mechanics at the MOT garage and takes at least 45 minutes. How much do UKLPG registered installers charge to do UKLPG's checks on vehicles they didn't convert?
Simon


Simon- from a consumer's point of view , this is an interesting question. I have contacted 6 within the last 2 days - one quoted £50 but the other prices ranged from £80 - £110 !! As one who is likely to go down this route in the near future, I would be interested to know from installers on here what is involved in their individual inspections and how long this takes .

No secret, all been covered before in this very forum. Most of us would allow a couple of hours, so those prices are about right.
Involves a good pry at all parts and their installlation, may involve some dismantling, Basic function checks for shutoffs etc, static emissions check.

Note it does NOT verify the equipment or setup is suitable for the car, or involve any performance asssessment.