UK Tint Laws

[Guest DapaaTints]

Found this article below on the internet and then the details below that from the department of transport website. I am trying to get hold of the report, but as it says in black and white "Tinting - Based on the detection of potential roadway hazards under various lighting conditions, the minimum level of light transmittance could be reduced to between 33.4% and 47%.

The Glass & Glazing Federation (GGF) has applauded the recent effort by a number of police authorities to prevent motorists from driving vehicles with excessively dark tinted windows.

In a statement issued today, Mr. Peter Mukherjee, Chairman of the GGF?s Automotive Window Tinting Working Group stated: ?It is excellent news that certain police bodies are actively discouraging the use of excessively dark tints to car windows. For years now, the GGF has collaborated with the police and window film manufacturers to establish a national standard for window tinting on cars.

As an industry, our targeted tint level is above 35% visible light transmission (VLT), as this level is generally recognised as posing no threat to road safety and is already adopted in most states of the USA, Australia and New Zealand where tinting has been applied for over 30 years.

The police efforts to discourage tints darker than the 35% VLT level are therefore welcomed. Dark tints can be potentially dangerous and are usually poorly fitted either by DIY-ers or by irresponsible tinters who ignore the GGF?s advice. Lighter tints, I.e. those above 35% VLT, can offer significant benefits in the way of security, safety, temperature control, glare reduction and UV elimination.

A Department of Transport, Local Governments and the Regions ?quality and field of vision? report by Ice Ergonomics Ltd in February 2002 has confirmed our long-standing position that VLT levels above 35% can be considered safe.

The GGF are committed to working with the Police to ensure a nationally accepted standard of between 35 and 40% VLT levels for driver and passenger front windows. Currently any level of tint may be fitted to the rear of the ?B? post.?

Mr. Geoff Russell, Managing Director of GGF member Pentagon Glass-Tech, the country?s leading automotive window film applicators, whose customers include LandRover, Mercedes, Bentley and Aston Martin, stated that: ?It is strict company policy to abide by GGF principles. Given that our customers include police and government departments as well as the general public, our standards have to be very well defined and consistent throughout all our 17 branches across the UK. We do not apply excessively dark tints, however insistent our client.

However until there are clearly defined guidelines, an individual may choose to ignore our advice. As industry leaders Pentagon therefore supports this police initiative.?

(from Department of Transport website)

S322E/VF Quality and field of vision

Vision, visibility and perception in driving was last reviewed more than 20 years ago. Since then much has changed. Market conditions have led to some improvements, but there are particular areas of concern. For drivers of light duty vehicles these include tinting, windscreen condition (including haze, abrasion, damage and repair), and the use and positioning of wider structural members to improve crashworthiness, aerodynamics and rigidity. For motorcyclists these areas include tinted visors.

The project was required to investigate and define the problems associated with restricted visibility for vehicle drivers and motorcycle riders and, in turn, qualify and recommend the level of visibility required to support safe driving and riding.

The project concluded that:

? Tinting - Based on the detection of potential roadway hazards under various lighting conditions, the minimum level of light transmittance could be reduced to between 33.4% and 47%. Dark tints were found not to improve detection of targets in the daytime.

? Haze - Based on tests using veiling glare luminance (VGL), the inside of windscreens should be cleaned every 859miles or 19 days.

? Abrasion - Based on VGL tests, windscreens should be considered for replacement at 110,000 miles after installation.

? 'A' Pillar geometry - 'A' pillar obscuration reduces the driver's field of vision to a greater extent in newer, as opposed to older, cars.

? The results from this project has been used to develop Departmental policy on motorcyclists' dark visors and tinting of vehicle glazing behind the 'B' pillar which is the subject of ongoing debate by the UN working group on general safety.

Contractor ICE Ergonomics

Completion date April 2002

Reports Quality of motorcyclists' vision: Summary report. December 2001

Quality and Field of Vision: A review of the needs of drivers and riders. Final Report February 2002.

Contact Enquiries at ICE Ergonomics Tel. 01509 283337

Enquiries at VSE Tel. 020 7944 8045

[Guest signandtint]

Hi Dappatints

unfortunately the government chose not to recognise this data for the field of vision report as it relates to motorbike visors in the main. as of jan 2004 the regulations of the road traffic act construction and use was changed to now implement aftermarket tint. as it currently stands a reading of less than 70% vlt on the front drivers and passengers door glass is illegal and a procecutable offense. as much as we hate it, and whatever way you want to talk your way around it, the police and VOSA can stop you and enforce you to remove tint from the said glass, even 50% vlt tint as light as it is, if they deem your glass excessively tinted, and believe me they mean 35% tint film and below they can make you stop driving it there and then, impound your car, points and a fine. they are actively doing this at the moment.

the only way to trint legally in this country and most of europe is factory tint only fronts, or clear security film, anything on the back.

regards

Kev Sign and tint UK

[Guest naughtydog]

it's a load of bollocks....I never tint below 50% and actively discourage even that, but customers vote with there feet...there is always somebody willing to tint dark, I have not had one problem with 50% film so far.

Naughty

[Guest Mrs RJE]

We managed to get hold of 70% film from our distributors so we only apply that to the front wind-ups, unless the customer is willing to sign a disclaimer saying that they know the film we've applied is not legal. Then if the customer gets stopped and told to remove it we charge them to remove it and apply the legal stuff!

Disclaimers are the way ahead!

[Guest fimmo]

sorry to be the bearer of bad news here but here goes.....

as some of you know I was actively trying to get something done about this law update back in jan,feb of this year.

some of you sent letters to support me in what I was doing (you all know who you are!) but there was a lot of uk tinters that didnt,I actually got through to the house of commons on a few occasions, I put my point across, I even offered to tint my local mp's car to prove how 50% tint,while illegal is still extremely safe but he declined,in the end I was told to stop 'harassing' the minister for transport or matters would be taken against me?? so I tried once more :inot :inot and basically got a telling off

then I gave up.to the 3 or 4 people that supported me, I thank you, to all the others - if this industry goes down it's because you did f##k all to help me (you are excused if you joined td after all this happened!!)

anyway,disclaimers are useless!!!! I learned a bit about the laws concerning disclaimers and the vosa guide lines state very clearly- that you arent allowed to have any tint below 70% on the fronts or if you are a tinter you arent allowed to install it! which means by getting your customer to sign a disclaimer means that you know what your doing is illegal and your trying to pass the blame onto the customer,but vosa arent interested in that,in fact a disclaimer helps them!!!

dont understand what I mean??? simple,if they get their hands on a written disclaimer from you, it's evidence that you know what your doing is illegal,but your trying to let someelse take responsability for it.

if you want to apply tint to the fronts, just dont put it on the receipt, always put b pillar back only on the receipt.

I'm glad I'm getting more people asking for legal tint (b pillar back) the more I do, the less I worry

[Guest DapaaTints]

I did some digging around on this matter and approached VOSA and the department of trans from a fictional basis that one of my customers who had 50% installed had been asked to remove it because the vlt was 43%. The vosa enforcement guidlines to there officers is anything over 45% advice only no prohibition. I explained to vosa that my cust had found this report and was going to challenge the removal as the report clearly states that 33.4% to 47% is safe. Everyone I spoke to in vosa from the local officers in my area to a guy in the dept of trans were a bit twitchy as to if this guy would be successful in front of a judge. I questioned how did vosa believe and come to a conclusion that 45% should be an advice only when the law clearly states that the vlt must be 70% and postioned that fact that a judge would also question this enforcement of 45%. Is it because they feel that 45% is safe, then if so why is the law at 70%.

No one could answer my questions and I was eventually given the number of the main guy in vosa who makes the enforcment decisions and the techi people with the dept of trans who would have reviewed the report back in 2002.

I have been unable to contact these people as yet but will keep you posted.

I may have rattled some cages I think

[Guest fimmo]

hi dapaa, I had the same thing up here when I contacted vosa!!

when I asked about the 45% to 70% advise only (I.e no removal neccesary) they couldn't answer me!!!

they did get rather twitchy about their answers!

they made this rule because some manufacturers already have cars out there on the street with standard tinted glass that was measuring down as low as 45%!! chrysler,renault and citroen being the main 3.

it would be a major headache to recall all these cars,thats why this 'advisory' was put into place!!!

would have been easier to put the vlt limit at 40% in the first place!

[Guest DapaaTints]

No joy from anyone - I eventually got the number for the girl who wrote the amendment for the change in law, Hayley Bow something and spoke to one of her colleagues. These people are very good at listening and thats all they are good at. This bloke tells me that if the industry including the industry representatives GGF believe the vlt ruling could be lowered from 70% then its the industry who need to take this forward to the Dep of Trans and prove there point using the research that has been conducted. He did also confim that as far as he was aware no review of the existing law was being undertaken.

Manufacturers, GGF and anyone else who are big players within the tinting industry - pull your finger out and do something

[Guest signandtint]

Hi fimmo

I must have joined up after your attempts to do things. it's pretty obvious its still an issue of confussion, especially amoungst the very people spearheading these riddiculous changes,. I.e. VOSA. the main people at VOSA still won't be able to give us a clear answer, but at the end of the day, they have the upper hand as a government body to say ... you can't have it get it off...bla...bla....bla.

I've had a tint company for 12 years here in Birmingham, work peeked last year, we couldn't tint enough cars, but since this change in Jan gone we had to be responsible as you said earlier and say nothing on fronts, we now tint about 35% of the cars we used to, but theres always someone willing to do it, but its a matter of time till they crack down hard on someone...

is some sort of pressure group worth looking into? I know the GGF have tried but how hard did they really try? just a thought.

regards

Kevin Sign and tint UK

[Guest Tint Wiz]

The Law is all my AR$E I did a advert in my local police diary for this year, but it was placed in middle of last year , so I did not know the law was going to be changed , so gets a phone call and it was a copper who had seen my advert in the diary, I want my P/M tinting he says you got a price on it so asked if he wanted rear tints only he said NO want the front doors doing as well, so I said it is ILLEGAL he says will come down to see you,so he does and shows me his badge and still wants the front doors doing he picks 35% for fronts and 5% for rear , so I said it is to dark for front doors 35% he said its ok if I get stopped I will just show my police card and anyway most of us have got better things to do than chase tinted windows on cars