Thread: LED Replacement Defender headlights

Originally Posted by JDNSW

The requirement for self levelling (either suspension or lights) and washers/wipers is tied to the light output and not the technology. And applies to low beam only.

John

Yes, I think that's correct - low beam has to be self-levelling to avoid blinding oncoming drivers.
I just wonder how many vehicles are running around with aftermarket HID/LED lights which are actually illegal. If it ever becomes an issue, say in a head-on crash, would their insurance be void? Could they actually be charged with causing an accident? Could they actually be successfully sued by another party and find their third party registration was void because their vehicle had an illegal modification and they were up for a huge bill?
I don't know, but it's an interesting question.

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Yes, I think that's correct - low beam has to be self-levelling to avoid blinding oncoming drivers.
I just wonder how many vehicles are running around with aftermarket HID/LED lights which are actually illegal. If it ever becomes an issue, say in a head-on crash, would their insurance be void? Could they actually be charged with causing an accident? Could they actually be successfully sued by another party and find their third party registration was void because their vehicle had an illegal modification and they were up for a huge bill?
I don't know, but it's an interesting question.

I think all of this is the case, at least in theory. And the liability could spread even further - the sellers, unless they were marked for off road use only, and in many cases the mechanic who passed the car at annual inspections required in some states.

However, if the lights are aimed sensibly, it is unlikely that they would either be a major factor in an accident, or even if they were, be shown to be such in the investigation. The worst that is likely to happen is a roadworthiness defect by a policeman who thought they were too bright and had nothing better to do. There are many cars driving round that are technically unroadworthy, but few defects advertise their fitting quite so prominently!

John

John

I spoke to both an automotive engineer and an insurance assessor about this. If you make a claim, or one is made against you that is of a reasonable size they will inspect the vehicle. Anything non-standard and they will call an engineer. This costs them engineers rates but will be worth it if they don't have to pay out a claim. If the engineer declares it an illegal mod your insurance is void - period.

Tires are apparently the most common mod - I'm sure headlights will get that way.

I get flack each time I say this stuff but you also invalidate your 3rd party personal insurance - so you would be up for medical bills of others. Not worth it IMO.

Originally Posted by flagg

an illegal mod ...

This is quite interesting. How do you know if what you are doing is an illegal mod or a legal mod. Are there any guidelines? For example, lets assume you remove your std bulb of whatever wattage it is, and replace it with one either higher or lower wattage or a different temperature. Is this illegal/Legal. What is it?

I don't know, but its an interesting question.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

Hi,
I would imagine if you had the lights aligned professionaly and they could be adjusted to the calibration required, that would be the tick of approval.
Cheers

There are only a few aspects of car modifications that are specifically covered by regulation - and these include both tyres and lights, although as far as lights are concerned the rules are less specific - but they do have specific rules about headlight wipers and washers for low beam lights above a specified brightness, and are also quite specific about the allowable beam pattern for low beam.

But they are not as specific as the rules on tyres, where it is pretty much laid out exactly what you can do as far as diameter, width, track etc .

I rather doubt that insurance can be made void where a modification is illegal unless it can be shown to have contributed to the loss, and the same for the compulsory third party. They will use engineers to try and attribute the cause of the accident to a modification, for example, but if the modification has no bearing on the accident (e.g. lighting in a daylight accident when lights were off), the insurance company cannot use this to escape liability (law changed from memory ten or fifteen years ago).

Which does not mean they won't try, and certainly you could expect them to point out to police any illegal modifications, which they may or may not act on. I saw the same sort of thing in a fire claim on my son's house several years ago - the insurer employed an investigator who freely admitted that what he was looking for was to be able to show that the fire was due to a faulty appliance and they would be able to sue the maker. (Fire cause is unknown, but probably a child + matches)

John

Still interesting, and trying to keep this thread on topic re lights. Would you need to inform you insurer you have changed to LED lights? I mean, they ask you if you have made any mods. Is changing a bulb from non-standard issue LR brand bulb to say a Philips a mod?