The law and tinted windows

[Mrs_Pegasus]

Someone I know has recently been stopped by the Police and told that the passenger and drivers side windows on his Land Rover are illegal. A new law was introduced which states that the windows must allow at least 75% of light in. The vehicle is 3 years old and it is not a MOT requirement. The VOSA are saying the car needs to be taken off the road, Land Rover are saying they are not paying for it (it was factory fitted from new) and before they can drive the vehicle they have to transport it to the nearest VOSA office for them to approve the work!

Is there anything that can be done or has anyone suffered the same?

[Skids]

It is (recently) illegal to have your front side windows tinted more than 25%, as you mentioned. Whether the windows were tinted and fitted by the manufacturer or tinted after market is irrelevant. You cannot buy a brand new car with tinted front side windows (more than 25%) in this country, and haven't been able to since the law came in, which was only a couple of years ago or so. It is the responsibility of the vehicle owner to make their vehicle comply with the law.

[NORMANTHEDOG]

it is only a very thin piece of film on the window and is very easy to take off,you could do it yourself.

[Mrs_Pegasus]

Thank you both.

Firstly, this was an extra on the new vehicle offered by the manufacturer. Yes the law changed but I cant believe that they wouldnt have been aware of the potential change in the law. What I think I find hard to get my head around is the fact that normally laws are set that 'in future this will be illegal' but its a retrospective law which is costing people a great deal of money.

I dont think its as simple as a film over the existing glass, I believe from what Land Rover has said that its a total replacement of both windows!

This was fitted by the manufacturer of the vehicle and not something which was put on by the owner at a later date.

[NORMANTHEDOG]

well,i had my windows tinted on my new car,by the garage i bought the car from,(sept 05)not from the factory, so i think your garage might be trying it on my friend

[DirtyHabit]

I imported an American Ford just over two years ago which had to have a SVA (single vehicle approval) test carried out by VOSA. My front side windows registered 71% and the Examiner retested them several times as he found it hard to believe that they were that restricted. He even tested the machine against a sample peice of glass. He and several collegues examined the windows for quite a while as they appeared so lightly tinted. In the end they concluded that either the machine was giving faulty readings or that the glass was in some way reflecting the light. The windows passed :-) (but the car failed on something else). I would try and get a second reading somehow, these machine can be wrong and I find it hard to believe that Land Rover (Ford USA) would factory fit windows that do not comply to impending changes in construction regulations.
Good Luck

[kempie]

Firstly, factory fitted tinted windows DO NOT have a film placed on the surface; that is the process used for after-market tinting.

The amendment to Section 32 of the Road Vehicles (Construction & Use) Regulations, vis-�-vis Visible Light Transmission, was enacted during the early part of 2004 and back-dated to become applicable from 1st January 2004. It was from this date that customers of a Window Tint Installer or a Motor Retailer who enquired about window tinting should have been informed about the new Regulations. Conceivably the 3 year old vehicle could have been supplied before anyone was made aware of the 'impending' change.

Two years ago the Government and the Glass and Glazing Federation were asking Window Tint Installers and Motor Retailers which had supplied window tints forward of the B-Post to contact all of their previous customers wherever possible, to inform them of the changes to Legislation and to offer them a chance to have their vehicle returned to have the front tints removed (at a cost).

[Jay70]

When a new laws/regulations come out they sometimes only apply to things produced from a certain date, normally on or after, the law/regulation has been issued. In your case when the option was fitted it should have been legal. I can see that it would be a job to police with people with older cars fitting window film to a car after this date and stating it was factory fitted but if they cant prove it was fitted before this date then and only then should they be made to remove it. but if this is the case and you can prove it was factory fitted and the date it was fitted It's definitely worth looking into further. After all emission regulations are dependant on a cars production date - you dont have to fit a catalytic conterver to a classic car if it wasn't already fitted.

[kempie]

Although the amendment is from 2004 it specifically applies to all vehicles:

Motor Vehicles first used before 1 April 1985:
The windscreen and front side windows must allow at least 70% of light to be transmitted through them.

Motor Vehicles first used on or after 1 April 1985:
The light transmitted through the windscreen must be at least 75%.
The front side windows must allow at least 70% of light to be transmitted through them.

http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/publications/tinted%20windows%20information.pdf

[qapmoc]

Hi Jay70, yes but surely the point is that the dark windows are dangerous (legally at any rate) so it doesn't matter how old the car is, it will still be dangerous and must and can be changed.

The design of the engine in an old car on the other hand cannot be easily changed to comply with modern emission regulations. I suppose if somebody caused enough noise about that the govt would just say - OK if an old car could not be updated then it must be taken off the road.

[Mrs_Pegasus]

Interestingly, when reading the many pages dedicated to this problem! I discovered that the window tinting saga had been running for quite some time. Many of the motoring profession were asked to comment on a proposal many years before the law came into being.

I would therefore, have expected manufacturers to maybe show a duty of care to future customers and maybe toned down their tint as a precaution or at least pointed it out. After all Joe Public may not have been aware of an impending change but the manufacturers certainly were.

BTW it is not a tint film, it is actually part and parcel of the actual glass.

I dont think anyone would argue that it does impede vision and I read somewhere that it protects pedestrians and interestingly motorcyclists - maybe if more was done to curb their illegal visors there might be a drop in RTAs involving them.

There was also a recommendation to ALL manufacturers that they should recall models which had been fitted with the tints just prior to the legislation i.e. those who bought new in March 03 and the new law coming into force as at April 03!!! That is a little too close for comfort - surely they knew at that point?

[slimjim]

Just a quick response on motorcyclists wearing tinted visors. It is illegal but there is a good reason why many bikers wear them. Bikes don't have sun visors fitted as standard! You try riding into the sun with no means of shielding the glare.

[Mrs_Pegasus]

I have!!!! LOL

Its just the degree of 'tint' I object to!

[kempie]

You are a year out with your date for the legislation being passed. The amendment was not even made until 4th December 2003.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2003/20033145.htm

[Jay70]

Hi qapmoc, I totally agree its dangerous but I just think it's unfair that the owner of a vehicle thats had something fitted legally now has to be the one to fork out now the law has changed. I think the manufacturer should cover the cost.

[cornishman]

VOSA in UK do have a pamphlet on this subject. It applies to windows level with or forward of the driver. VOSA state it s not included as part of the MOT because of the cost of compared to the size of the problem. It is a s previously stated though, a legal requirement.

A manufacturer (OEM) fitted tint is more than a film and it would be unusual for an OEM to exceed the minimum 75% light transmission limit. .

[bazrav]

I bought my 1998 Range Rover 12 months ago. Special edition fitted with tinted windows when new. I was stopped and written up by 18 'uniforms' Police CSO and traffic wardens and vehicle towers who had taken over a car park and were spending 4 weeks targetting tinted windows. This was the first I have ever heard of the law re. this. I was able to pursuade the police not to tow my vehicle away. I have been trying for 5 hours with a razor blade to get rid of the tint on one window and have had to take the door apart. IIT IS NOT EASY!Any suggestions re. a solvent? Also has anyone heard of an accident caused by tinted windows. There seems little or no evidence and I see that some States in the USA are reversing the law and allowing heavy tints.

Barry

[Mrs_Pegasus]

Bazraz - the vehicle in question had tinted windows from scratch i.e. there was no tint film added it was part and parcel of the glass.

To update all who took the time to answer. Land Rover have replaced the windows free of charge but the owner had to fight them for it. The VOSA were not very flexible i.e. not allowing the car to be driven to the test centre AFTER it had been fixed by an approved garage!

Baz you should be able to find plenty of sites that should help you with your problem. Its quite a hot subject on all the tint suppliers.

[drivertribe]

I noticed recently while watching the TV that the Prime Minister got into a car with front blacked out windows (At least 75% tint). I was under the impression that he, and his driver had to obey the same laws as the rest of us?