C5 Definitive advice from DVSA on MOT re LDS tank bursting

[aspire_helen]

I asked the DVSA what Vehicle Specific Information (VSI) an MOT inspector is shown when he/she logs my car on the MOT system. Today I received a response from Simon Smith (identified online as Product Owner for MOT Testing in the DVSA), in png form which is attached. It is specific to my car by registration number which I have deleted from the image. It specifies only two VIN 5-digit prefixes, one saloon (RD), one estate (RW)
As my car does not have the stated VIN prefix, nor has it an EPB, I would assume this VSI is displayed for all C5.
Re the suspension, it would appear that C5 owners cannot expect an MOT inspector to raise the suspension, remove the reservoir cap etc. Indeed, unless the C5 falls into one of those two VIN prefixes the MOT inspector will do nothing different with the suspension when jacking.
It would be helpful if someone could decode those 5 digit pre-fixes - I assume digits 4 and 5 are the important ones, RD and RW.
It would also be helpful (understatement !!) if anyone has experienced a jacking / LDS reservoir issue with a C5 with another VIN!
That said, with a 23 year old plastic reservoir, I will bring the issue to the attention of anyone who needs to jack my car, and present loose wheels to tyre fitters etc.

[GiveMeABreak]

The fourth digit 'R' relates to the Vehicle Family and the 5th digit the Body Shape.

For the Vehicle Family:

'R' = Citroen C5
'D' = Citroen C5

'R' is shown on the C5 X7 (2008 on)
'R' is shown on the C5 MK II (2004 to 2007)
'D' is shown on the C5 Mk I (2001 to 2004)

For the Body Shape:

The C5 X7 body style 'D' is the Saloon and 'W' for the Estate / Tourer.
The C5 MK II has 'C' for the Saloon and 'E' for the Estate.
The C5 MK I has 'C' for the Saloon and 'E' for the Estate.

This to my understanding should be totally irrelevant whether it's a saloon or estate (taking the Mk I and MK II for example having a different code letter to the C5 X7) and I think it's a mistake, as the Hydractive suspension systems are fundamentally the same, with the exception that the C5 X7 has 7 spheres as standard.

Further, the 1.6 C5 X7s had metallically sprung suspension, yet their VIN will still fall into the above, so is totally irrelevant advice

To be honest it's a total cock-up and they have no idea what they are talking about.

In principle, all the Hydractive C5s should have the same advice about jacking and removing the LDS cap. As we know MOT testers are not allowed to remove anything, hence the instructions, but if doing this, they should apply it to all Hydractive Citroens.

[aspire_helen]

The VINs and advice came from Citroen, according to this post on The MOT Testers Forum - https://mtaeta.info/thread/2264/safely-jacking-c5
Perhaps a Citroen dealer could inform us what Citroen have told them. And have Citroen reached out to the broader motor trades eg via the Motor Ombudsman, RMI, IMI, NTDA etc. Could this be viewed as a "safety defect", in which case....back to the DVSA.
But at the end of the day, for this thread, it is what the MOT inspectors are instructed to do. Clearly, DVSA have not incorporated Citroen's full advice. If Citroen think it is inadequate, Citroen need to address it. It may be helpful to catalogue incidents of jacking vs LDS reservoir issues on the forum.

"One of our vehicle examiners recently asked whether the Citroën C5 could be jacked safely as he had heard that there may be a health and safety issue that could impact on the MOT test. As our information was a bit sketchy, we contacted Citroën for advice.

Citroën told us that they were issuing advice through their dealer network but would send one of their engineers, along with the latest C5, to our workshop in Bristol. The problem is that when the latest versions of the C5 (those with VIN prefixes VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff] or VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]) are jacked and the wheels are hanging free, the manufacturer’s advice is to remove the LSD (suspension) fluid reservoir cap as there is a risk that the hydraulic reservoir could rupture. Citroën also advise that the C5 should only be raised using the designated jacking points.

Although the cap is readily accessible, it is not acceptable to remove it during the MOT test. As the axles are normally lifted independently at MOT tests, we asked Citroën if these procedures would still require the removal of the cap. We also asked about the possibility of using other mounting points, such as the sub-frame, to jack.

Citroën’s response was that the cap must still be removed when the car is jacked, but need not be removed where only one wheel at a time is raised. However, they would not support the use of anything other than the designated jacking points. We are therefore adding this advice to the Vehicle Specific Information (VSI) database.

Remember, it only applies to those C5s with the VIN prefixes mentioned earlier.

[GiveMeABreak]

Yes, as I said, it's totally ridiculous going by the VIN. All H3 & H3+ Citroens should have the same advice and this includes the C6. There are lots of examples here and on other Forums where LDS tanks that have become weakened through not doing this, have suddenly burst. A no brainer and the reason why we created lables for members to use:

LDS Tank Bursting Warning Labels

I can't see them making any changes at this stage of the game as they haven't been produced for 8 years+ now and in the UK only 237 sold in 2015.

[aspire_helen]

There's no point debating the issue; that's why i went to the horse's mouth - DVSA MOT Dept. The labels are pointless for an MOT, as the inspector will not (and should not) obey them! And if a tyre fitter or garage does not follow them , there is no way they can be held liable. So, the only practicable way to protect our own interests is to brief the operator personally, with a written brief and demonstration, and ask if he is willing to comply. I found one MOT tester who would and one who would not. Having worked in aviation safety for 30 years, such labels would be seen as a false reassurance.

What needs to be done is pressure Citroen for more information eg what is the engineering reason, what do they require their dealers to do, and why do they exclude other C5, C6etc. Does this forum have the clout? My experience of a personal customer approach to Citroen UK is that they can be very dismissive. Of course, their first priority is to avoid liability. I have seen where a letter in french to Citroen HQ can work.

[GiveMeABreak]

Look, we only provided them as a courtesy. They’re not intended for MOT testers, we know they aren’t allowed to remove anything.

We provided them mainly for tyre fitters and garages who may not have a clue and as a visual cue when working on these.

I wasn’t debating the MOT and the stickers, only that they are wrong as far as the advice regarding the VIN of the affected vehicles is worthless as it makes no difference as to saloon or estate, MK I, MK II, MK III or C6 - they should apply the same procedures to all these vehicles for the suspension checks and tests. They focus on the tests, not the technical realisation of the vehicles and the specifics of the systems. But I do agree that Citroen should of made this much clearer and simpler - considering they themselves specifically make multiple references to the procedures for supporting their vehicles where 2 or more wheels will be left hanging unsupported.

[Lenny]

Personally, I slacken the cap off when I park outside the MOT station and then tighten it up again afterwards.

[GiveMeABreak]

Yes, I always put the vehicle on high suspension and slackened the cap when having tyres fitted and watched them throughout the process.

[aspire_helen]

I made an online enquiry to Citroen "Customer Care" expressing my concern over LDS tank bursting. This is their reply. Did I say above that I found Citroen dismissive??? By the way, I had no "discussion" with them! They have closed my query without even asking me if I was happy with their response, which I am not, so I will re-open it. I suggest all C5 (and C6?) owners should also enquire.

Following our conversation regarding your Citroen C5, I can confirm that I have looked in your query.
Unfortunately, we don't know anything, nor do we have anything in our database about LDS Tank bursting, when the vehicle is lowered to the ground.
Possibly an authorised Citroen dealership might know something about this and can give an advice.
As discussed, I am now closing your case however if you need any further support on this matter, it can be reopened at any time within the next 14 days.
We really hope to have helped you to be completely satisfied with our service and that your feedback will represent this in the short survey we will send you soon. Many thanks!
Vladimer K.
Citroën Customer Care
0800 093 9393
Opening Hours: 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday

[aspire_helen]

Mark, firstly I find your response staring "Look......" condescending.
You clearly have more information re "they themselves specifically make multiple references to the procedures for supporting their vehicles where 2 or more wheels will be left hanging unsupported".
What do the procedures require? To which models do those references refer? All C5? All C6? Specific VINs or ages? If Citroen apply their advice themselves more widely than just the VINs they have told the DVSA about, that is evidence that can be fed back to DVSA.
I suggest Forum Administrators take this up with Citroen (France) directly.

[GiveMeABreak]

• Not intended to be condescending, but you did almost close the topic off by saying there's no point debating the subject.... and hence my reply and that the labels were never intended for MOT testing purposes - just general garage use, which many members have found useful.
• I could of told you that Citroen Customer services personnel are about as useful as a chocolate teapot regarding anything technical - they are not technically trained and that's why they've referred you to a dealership. That's because the dealership have access to the technical documentation.
  
  Yes, I do have access to many of Citroen's own technical documentation that mention the procedure in multiple documents:
  
  Click Images to Zoom
  MK III (X7) - On multiple operations, this statement is listed on just about every procedure requiring the vehicle to be raised:
  

  

  MK 1 & II Reference in General Safety Instructions:

  

  C6 - Again listed in multiple documents - even this one for replacing a suspension cylinder:

  

My own thoughts are that there is not so much documentation for the MK I and MK II procedurally, as it didn't become apparent that there were potential issues of the LDS tanks bursting - that is until they started doing so, generally years later after the LDS tanks had become weakened.

The return pressure of the LDS drawn into the suspension struts as a result of the wheels hanging, without the suspension on High to lock the electro valves closed to prevent return of the fluid to the reservoir - resulted in weakening of the LDS tanks as the weight of the car was slammed back to the ground causing fluid under pressure to return to the tank in an uncontrolled manner.

As I said the system is principally the same for all 3 models, so should apply equally in any guidance. However Citroen are unlikely to go back and amend thousands of documents to make reference to this on those older models, so that's why you'll find more reference to this in most procedures requiring lifting of the vehicles on the C5 X7 and the C6 and they were produced at or around the time this issue started to become an issue.