MOT fail - rear transit suspension

[monique.hubrechtsgm]

Yes they can if the original ride height is given by ford. Also Vb air.

[monique.hubrechtsgm]

About 4 cm free space under a real bunp- stop.

[Derek Uzzell]

I can’t see why ‘ride height’ measurement should be relevant to Mr Motorhome’s problem, nor that SVTech might be able to assist.

 

Earlier in this thread Mr Motorhome stated that the MOT tester that failed his Hymer motorhome (and who also owns the NCC Approved workshop) had said that he (the MOT tester/owner) “...has also contacted a friend who works at/for DVSA who advised him to speak to Ford technical team which he has done, and provided my vehicle chassis number to Ford who have told him that bump stops are fitted to my MH and not suspension spring assisters. Ford are, apparently, putting this in writing. The workshop owner has stated that this will prove unequivocally that my MH is fitted with bump stops...”

 

The simple fact is that Ford(UK) refers to the conical plastic component (Ford Part No: 4519477) that has caused this controversy as a 'bump-stop' and there are absolutely no Ford data to suggest that the Ford component might legitimately be referred to as a ‘spring assistor’.

 

Consequently, although the MOT Inspection Manual advises testers that "A suspension bump stop must not be confused with rubber/synthetic suspension spring assistors”, if Ford(UK) defines component 4519477 as a ‘bump stop’ and is unprepared to confirm that 4519477 is a ’rubber/synthetic suspension spring assistor’ as mentioned in the MOT Inspection Manual, it’s understandable that the owner of the NCC Approved workshop can choose to take the stance that he was correct in failing the Hymer because its bump-stop clearance was inadequate.

 

This link refers to to Part No: 4519477 as a “REAR BUMPER SPRING”

 

https://shop.febest.eu/rear-bumper-spring-fdd-trr.html

 

but it’s not a Ford webpage.

 

If the tester/workshop owner cannot be persuaded that he was wrong to fail the Hymer, it might be better to concentrate on the expensive follow-up modifications that were made to the Hymer’s rear suspension to allow it to pass a 2nd MOT test. As Robinhood mentions in his posting of 8 March 2018 8:02 PM, replacing the original single-leaf springs with twin-leaf springs + a third ‘helper’ spring conflicts with Ford’s advice to converters and (one might reasonable think) should also apply to any workshop considering altering a Transiit-based motorhome’s original rear suspension specification.

 

If Ford(UK), or Ford(Europe), won’t budge on the bump-stop/spring-assistor semantic aspect, they should be prepared to say whether it was technically acceptable to Ford for the NCC Approved workshop to modify the Hymer’s original rear suspension in the way that was done.

[andytw]

Derek Uzzell - 2018-04-13 9:39 AM

 

I can’t see why ..... SVTech might be able to assist.

 

 

'cos I hadn't realised that it had been established earlier in the thread that Ford had been provided with the chassis number of this vehicle and had stated that this vehicle had bump stops. I just thought that SVTech might be able to assist in establishing what they actually were.

[Derek Uzzell]

When this potential Ford Transit MOT test-related issue was discussed in 2010

 

http://forums.outandaboutlive.co.uk/forums/Motorhomes/Hints-and-Tips/Ford-suspension/19542/

 

Brian Kirby contacted VOSA and I’ve copied VOSA’s reponse below (“VTS” means “Vehicle Test Station” and “VSI” means “Vehicle Specific Information”.)

 

....................................................................................................

 

"Dear Mr Kirby,

 

Thank you for your e-mail enquiry dated 5th May 2010, concerning Ford Transit Suspension.

 

Some vehicles such as Citroen Relay and Peugeot Boxer, have extended rear 'bump stops' which may have little or no clearance between itself and the spring leaf. These 'stops' are designed as spring assisters (the lower section is compressible) and should not be considered as a failure under 2.4A1 just because there is little or no clearance.

 

Must admit that we've never seen one on a Transit but many motorhome builders fit them as an after market conversion and use several types. This makes it extremely difficult to cite particular mfrs/models in VSI. Some such as Fiat and Citroen may factory fit them as a 'standard' option on certain models at time of order but again it is not easy to identify them for VSI.

 

There are several designs but the most common is a concertina shape (straight or conical) which allows the rubber to collapse (which can be by as much as 50% or more) as load is put on it. The concertina shape is a good indication of construction but there are others which are straight but are obviously much longer than a bump stop. They usually are in contact with the spring/axle,especially with motorhomes, which are usually close to DGW most of the time, as they assist throughout the range of the main spring.

 

Though there is a note in the database we haven't had that many calls on this but we are looking at an article for Matters of Testing.

 

I would advise you to approach the VTS and ask them to ring the Contact centre for further advice. If the VTS is unwilling to do this then we can contact them if you supply the details. However we can only advise not instruct the VTS on this and ultimately an appeal may be the final option.

 

I hope this information has assisted you with your enquiry, but if you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact us again.

 

Kind Regards,

 

VOSA Contact Centre

Operations Directorate

Tel: 0300 123 9000”

 

....................................................................................................

 

In principle, if it is known that an MOT tester needs to be aware that a technical element of a particular vehicle-model’s design might be considered to be in conflict with the test’s inspection procedure (eg. its rear suspension has flexible ’spring assistors’ fitted as standard that the tester might otherwise treat as ‘bump stops’) a VSI caveat can be produced by the MOT testing computer system.

 

I don’t know if this happens with Citroen Relays, Peugeot Boxers or Fiat Ducatos (though I suspect not) but it clearly doesn’t happen with Ford Transits. And if there’s no VSI and an MOT tester considers the Ford 4519477 components fitted to a Transit-based motorhome’s rear suspension as being ‘bump stops’ and Ford(UK) confirms to the tester that this is what Ford calls those components, it’s going to be very difficult to argue to the contrary.

[Brian Kirby]

:-D I'd completely forgotten that! Very good. Regarding your last paragraph, that tester would then be obliged to fail all Transits so equipped, or face allegations of favouritism - or worse!

 

Mr Motorhome's problem is that not only was his van failed (incorrectly) but his rear suspension was expensively re-built on I know not what basis in order to generate a "bump stop" clearance - which appears to have failed to meet its objective. Perhaps Mr Motorhome should visit a large Ford dealership, preferably one that is a "Backbone" dealer if Ford still recognise the term, that also claims to be a Transit specialist, and which carries out MoT tests, and see if he can speak to their tester about these assisters and how the tester regards them vis-a-vis the MoT.

 

Mr Motorhome's tester is now defending his decision, and declining to put the rear suspension back into its OEM condition, so it will require external intervention to change his mind for him. It seems fair to say that VOSA have made their position reasonably clear, both in their letter to me and in the notes in the tester's manual. What remains unclear is Ford's position on whether these items fall into the category of spring assistors for MoT purposes, irrespective of how they are described in their parts list, and on how they regard the unnecessary rear suspension rebuild. It seems Mr Motorhome has had no reply to his request to Ford on these issues. It think he should follow up on this.

 

If Mr Motorhome is a member of the AA or the RAC it may be that they could help, as both organisations have automotive engineers at their disposal who should be able to get inside Ford's engineering department and elicit some sense. As previously suggested, he could also/instead look and his vehicle and house+contents insurances to see if any of these include a legal advisory service, and then turn to them. This seems to me to need bringing to a head quickly as time is passing, and a failure to formally register his dispute may come to be seen as acquiescence. In short, the grass is growing!

[Mr Motorhome]

Hi All

 

Thanks again for the ongoing posts/advice. I do read them all.

 

At the moment I’m waiting for a written response from Ford Technical Information Centre as is the workshop who carried out the MOT. Having said that, I am conscious of the time scale and will be contacting the workshop on Monday for an update.

 

I have received an email reply from Ford VCAS (Vehicle Converter Advisory Service) who, after viewing the photographs I had sent them, stated that they were indeed rear spring assisters. I am now waiting for a reply advising of their function.

 

I have also received a reply from DVSA (Vehicle Testing and Roadworthiness) stating my vehicle is fitted with suspension spring assisters and shouldn’t have failed the MOT due to inadequate clearance etc.

 

I am in the RAC and The Camping and Caravanning Club, both of which offer members free legal advice. Depending on the outcome of my contact with the workshop on Monday, I will then look to seek legal advice on the situation.

 

Having had the MH MOT’d, a habitation service and a fridge service in preparation for getting out and about, at the moment I don’t feel confident in using the MH until I get this resolved one way or another which, of course, is not ideal!

 

I will update as and when I have further news. Thanks again everyone.

 

Regards,

 

[Brian Kirby]

Thanks for the update - that sounds much more positive to me. Well done.

[Robinhood]

...glad I pointed you at VCAS (and that they have replied) - patently they should know what they are talking about, as they provide the BEMM, the bible to which all converters of Ford vehicles should conform.

 

I'd be looking for them to confirm that the parts are Ford original fit (they are!) if they haven't already.

 

Frankly, I think that, and the DVSA response is enough - I'd be chasing the garage.

 

If they don't want to play ball (and they probably will given the evidence), then I'd be looking to have the original configuration restored by a third party, and reclaiming the cost of the same through the small claims court.

 

(I certainly wouldn't fancy the idea of driving on modified suspension of dubious technical merit).

[Mr Motorhome]

 

 

Thanks, Brian. I don’t think I could have done as much as I have without everyone’s help and advice. Thank you all.

 

Regards,

 

Brian Kirby - 2018-04-14 1:18 PM

 

Thanks for the update - that sounds much more positive to me. Well done.

[Mr Motorhome]

Yep, thank you for providing the info for VCAS. They did confirm the spring assister was ‘series production at Ford’, I assume they mean it was standard fit. They also confirmed that the original leaf suspension consisted of only one element.

 

Regards,

 

 

Robinhood - 2018-04-14 1:25 PM

 

...glad I pointed you at VCAS (and that they have replied) - patently they should know what they are talking about, as they provide the BEMM, the bible to which all converters of Ford vehicles should conform.

 

I'd be looking for them to confirm that the parts are Ford original fit (they are!) if they haven't already.

 

Frankly, I think that, and the DVSA response is enough - I'd be chasing the garage.

 

If they don't want to play ball (and they probably will given the evidence), then I'd be looking to have the original configuration restored by a third party, and reclaiming the cost of the same through the small claims court.

 

(I certainly wouldn't fancy the idea of driving on modified suspension of dubious technical merit).

[Brian Kirby]

Derek Uzzell - 2018-04-14 9:37 AM....................

Brian Kirby contacted VOSA and I’ve copied VOSA’s reponse below (“VTS” means “Vehicle Test Station” and “VSI” means “Vehicle Specific Information”.)

....................................................................................................

"Dear Mr Kirby,

 

Thank you for your e-mail enquiry dated 5th May 2010, concerning Ford Transit Suspension.

 

Some vehicles such as Citroen Relay and Peugeot Boxer, have extended rear 'bump stops' which may have little or no clearance between itself and the spring leaf. These 'stops' are designed as spring assisters (the lower section is compressible) and should not be considered as a failure under 2.4A1 just because there is little or no clearance.

 

Must admit that we've never seen one on a Transit but many motorhome builders fit them as an after market conversion and use several types. This makes it extremely difficult to cite particular mfrs/models in VSI. Some such as Fiat and Citroen may factory fit them as a 'standard' option on certain models at time of order but again it is not easy to identify them for VSI.

 

There are several designs but the most common is a concertina shape (straight or conical) which allows the rubber to collapse (which can be by as much as 50% or more) as load is put on it. The concertina shape is a good indication of construction but there are others which are straight but are obviously much longer than a bump stop. They usually are in contact with the spring/axle,especially with motorhomes, which are usually close to DGW most of the time, as they assist throughout the range of the main spring.

 

Though there is a note in the database we haven't had that many calls on this but we are looking at an article for Matters of Testing.

 

I would advise you to approach the VTS and ask them to ring the Contact centre for further advice. If the VTS is unwilling to do this then we can contact them if you supply the details. However we can only advise not instruct the VTS on this and ultimately an appeal may be the final option.

 

I hope this information has assisted you with your enquiry, but if you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact us again.

 

Kind Regards,

 

VOSA Contact Centre

Operations Directorate

Tel: 0300 123 9000”

...............................................................................................................................................

In case it may help, this is the text of my e-mail to VOSA which generated the above response:

..........................................................................

"Dear Sirs

 

I wonder if you could please comment on this?

 

The attached photograph shows the rear suspension of a front wheel drive Mk 7 Ford Transit 350, registered 2007, unmodified in any way. The vehicle in question is a motorhome, and the chassis is the platform-cab variant. That is to say it is the floorpan of a van, but with no bodywork except the cab (similar to a chassis-cab, but with the van floor structure retained in lieu of chassis rails). It is as supplied by Ford to numerous motorhome converters in Europe, but is apparently not supplied by Ford UK to UK converters. The converter then builds his coachbuilt body to this platform: numerous examples are imported into UK in right hand drive form.

 

As you will see, the rear suspension incorporates what appears as an oversized bump stop, that is, in fact, a dense synthetic rubber foam helper spring, or suspension aid. This unit is in more or less permanent contact with a plate on the rear axle, and the photograph shows the suspension in the unladen state.

 

MoT test stations are interpreting this unit as a bump stop, and failing vehicles at their first test, because there is no clearance between the helper spring and the axle.

 

I understand there may be some direction on such units from VOSA that can only be accessed by testers that clarifies how they should be viewed, and that not being bump stops, they are not grounds for failure. Once the fail notice has been issued, testers are reluctant to discuss further their grounds, and resist the suggestion they should check the MoT updates section of your website accessible only by them. Is it possible for you to quote the reference for this direction, and if possible, replicate the exact wording?

 

I know a number of motorhomers with three year old Transit based MoT failures who would be very grateful for this, as they are presently off the road and being advised their only solution is to appeal!

 

Kind regards, and thanks

 

Brian Kirby"

........................................................................................

My query was dated 04/05/2010, and their reply 07/05/2010. The photograph referred to is the one I posted above, on 19/03/2018.

 

In my subsequent acknowledgement I added:

......................................................................................

 

"If it will assist your deliberations, I can confirm the item in the photograph carries a “Ford” imprint, and is original equipment.

 

It seems these are commonly fitted to 3.5 tonne (350) front wheel drive transits.

 

I will pass you comments, contact details, and suggestion, to those affected.

 

Thank you again"

[Mr Motorhome]

Thanks, Brian. That could come in handy.

 

Regards,

[Mr Motorhome]

Hi All

 

A quick update.

 

On Sunday evening I emailed the workshop requesting an update and whether they had heard back from Ford. Depending on their reply will determine whether I start seeking legal advice.

 

This afternoon I received an email from Ford/VCAS in response to my request for them to confirm whether my vehicle is fitted with suspension spring assisters or bump stops. My interpretation of the email is that they are confirming my MH is indeed fitted with suspension spring assisters but I’d be interested in how others interpret it. They also gave information on when the revised camper suspension came into effect, something I wasn’t aware of.

 

I have copied the text of the email below and attached (if I’ve done it right) the suspension diagram they also sent me.

 

I am still waiting to hear back from Ford Technical Information Centre who I wrote to supplying the VIN number, registration number and photographs of the suspension set-up.

 

Regards,

 

[Mr Motorhome]

Email received from Ford/VCAS:

 

‘Please find official announcement of revised camper suspension. The first picture is showing your rear suspension on the vehicle. Hopefully this is enough document to assure the MOT that the yellow part is not a bump stop. This is a rear spring assistor which is supporting the leaf spring’.

[Robinhood]

Your vehicle base is a 'cab van floor' (Ford's equivalent of the Sevel platform cab), and the diagram is applicable.

 

Your 'van is pre- the modification detailed in the document, and thus the top diagram applies. It looks exactly as expected, and with the 'spring assister' touching the beam axle.

 

The diagram of the modification is also useful for the contrast of a newer version not touching the axle in the same state.

 

I don't think you could have a better response, I'd send them a big thank you.

 

(Incidentally, I think my last van was Sept 2009 build, so would have been one of the last before modification.)

[Mr Motorhome]

Thanks for your feedback. Yes, I fully intend sending a big thank you ;

[monique.hubrechtsgm]

And what will be clearance in case of the shorter Jounce and the unchanged ride height at full axle load in new showroom condition?

[monique.hubrechtsgm]

i checked four fiat ducatos last weekend dog festivals and all lay at stand still nearby their stops. Have they the same problem at your mot? So that we clear the problem of our ford transit drivers And fiat in one time. And thanks to Mr Motorhome on behalf of our club.

[Robinhood]

I'm reading on a phone, so concentrated on the diagram (which was evidence enough) and missed the even better bit which says "the rear spring aid no longer makes contact in static condition", thereby confirming in words that it did for pre-Nov 2009 vehicles.

 

There is now no wriggle room.

[Deneb]

monique.hubrechts@gm - 2018-04-16 5:02 PM

 

i checked four fiat ducatos last weekend dog festivals and all lay at stand still nearby their stops. Have they the same problem at your mot? So that we clear the problem of our ford transit drivers And fiat in one time. And thanks to Mr Motorhome on behalf of our club.

 

Fiats also fall foul of tester's lack of knowledge from time to time. Fiat issued a service bulletin several years ago, updated in 2015 to confirm its application to both 250 and 290 models, which says:

 

"It should be noted that, even if the load conditions fall within the allowed limits, contact between the rear suspension buffers and the leaf springs is to be considered standard".

 

 

[Mr Motorhome]

 

Hi Monique

 

I’m not able to advise on Fiats/MOT unfortunately but, hopefully, your Fiat owners can benefit from my experiences.

 

monique.hubrechts@gm - 2018-04-16 5:02 PM

 

i checked four fiat ducatos last weekend dog festivals and all lay at stand still nearby their stops. Have they the same problem at your mot? So that we clear the problem of our ford transit drivers And fiat in one time. And thanks to Mr Motorhome on behalf of our club.

[Mr Motorhome]

 

Yep, that was a happy read for me, too.

 

 

Robinhood - 2018-04-16 5:03 PM

 

I'm reading on a phone, so concentrated on the diagram (which was evidence enough) and missed the even better bit which says "the rear spring aid no longer makes contact in static condition", thereby confirming in words that it did for pre-Nov 2009 vehicles.

 

There is now no wriggle room.

[monique.hubrechtsgm]

To include a alko torsion bar axle in this topic at the rear on a fiat front pull. They have not even clue where the bump stop sits. And they may not even lift it up on their axle, or i will sew them for it. Just check ride height. But even on this they are just looking and wish me farewell.

[colin]

Mr Motorhome - 2018-04-16 6:48 PM

 

 

Hi Monique

 

I’m not able to advise on Fiats/MOT unfortunately but, hopefully, your Fiat owners can benefit from my experiences.

 

monique.hubrechts@gm - 2018-04-16 5:02 PM

 

i checked four fiat ducatos last weekend dog festivals and all lay at stand still nearby their stops. Have they the same problem at your mot? So that we clear the problem of our ford transit drivers And fiat in one time. And thanks to Mr Motorhome on behalf of our club.

 

I recall some years back when x250's started to be MOTed a van being failed at a Fiat garage, IIRC even thou the manager didn't think it a fail the tester was adement and it required info from Fiat UK.