Of course, many of the major lubricant manufacturers create high quality products that are correctly described and deliver exactly what they claim. But increased competition, including from new market entrants, has given cause for concern.

In the past few months, VLS, the independent U.K. organization responsible for verifying lubricant specifications, has seen a spike in complaints of oils not meeting quality claims, taking the total number of cases investigated to 54 during the last five years. Four cases were received in November and December 2017 alone, while only one was reported in the previous 12 months.

New Case Load

When compared with past cases, these new complaints present new challenges that require more costly physical testing to determine infractions of standards. Four or five years ago, the first cases investigated by VLS often related to simple claims, such as the use of date markers, which is allowed in the trade but not for the end user, or claims that were not in line with the latest ACEA oil sequences. These were simpler issues, though they required strict enforcement.

Until VLS was established, less scrupulous manufacturers and marketers could not be easily held to account. Of the first few cases investigated, a number had to be passed on to the U.K.s consumer protection agency, National Trading Standards, due to non-compliance by the company concerned. Companies may have thought the regulator lacked teeth and that they could ignore the problem. But Trading Standards was involved to ensure companies were sent a clear message that non-compliance was no longer an option.

In every case, the required action was taken, products were withdrawn or relabeled accordingly and the case was resolved. In some cases, high quality manufacturers seemed to have a genuine lack of understanding about the complexity of specifications and the importance of adhering to them, which education was able to resolve.

Though some cases were resolved through simple desk research, others did require testing, presenting more complex technical issues. One high profile case related to the low-temperature properties of an engine gear oil. Independent laboratory testing revealed that the product turned solid at minus 40 degrees Celsius. This was the second case ever investigated by VLS in April 2014.

Whilst the temperature in the U.K. rarely stays below freezing for a sustained period, in certain parts of Scotland very low temperatures are not uncommon. An engine gear oil must be able to maintain its flow in order to protect bearings and moving parts of the vehicle.

With pressure on margins, blenders may be tempted to reduce the amount of additives in the product or to use cheaper base oils, but lubricants must remain within specification in order to avoid damage to vehicles and protect users. Cutting corners must not be allowed to compromise engine protection.

In recent years, there has been a trend towards more original equipment manufacturer lubricant specifications leading to increased fragmentation in the market. All of the latest product complaints involved SAE 5W-30 passenger car motor oils and their ability to meet their own technical specifications, as well as the performance claims they make regarding OEM specifications.

Whilst the specific details of the current investigations are strictly confidential, a case might require testing for the levels of sulfated ash, phosphorus or sulfur, collectively referred to as SAPS, in a product that may be claiming low or medium SAPS levels. For vehicles fitted with a sensitive catalytic converter or a diesel particular filter, there is a real risk that high levels of sulfated ash can block a filter or poison a catalytic converter. With exhaust emissions being such a high profile area, slight formulation variances such as this could have lasting ramifications.

Another example of complex claims requiring more physical testing, alongside, SAPS levels, would concern their high-temperature, high-sheer properties, which must meet particular minimum levels in certain categories. For example, for the ACEA C3 standard, HT/HS viscosity must be greater than 3.5 millipascal seconds.

Another would be Noack evaporation levels, which must meet particular levels to meet certain OEM specifications, for example, for a product to claim Mercedes Benzs MB 229.51 (a low-SAPS oil for diesel engines with particle filters meeting Euro 4 emissions standards), the evaporation level must be no greater than 10 percent. These levels can only be ascertained through specialist laboratory testing.

Complaints Dominated by Motor Oils

Both the latest cases, as well as the vast majority of all 54 cases investigated by VLS, relate to passenger vehicle engine oil, which has accounted for more than three-quarters of all claims. This is in line with expectations, as automotive products account for as much as half of all lubricants sold.

However, cases have been raised against transmission and gear oils, as well as automotive transmission fluids and hydraulic fluids. Two thirds of cases have related to non-compliance with ACEA specifications, which suggests there is still a need to educate the sector for these sequences to be fully understood and correctly embraced. (It remains to be seen what impact the U.K.s withdrawal from the European Union may have on this.)

Stringent, Anonymous Testing

With increasingly technical cases to investigate, the right process is critical. Anonymity is key to maintain the credibility of the regulatory organization. As soon as a new case is received, the product details are anonymized and sent to an independent Technical Review Panel. The panel is composed of technical experts from across the lubricants industry who review the product against relevant industry and OEM standards. They review the products technical specification and its performance characteristics, assessing the lubricant solely on its technical merits.

Following validation of its claims, the product is independently sourced and physical testing takes place. The Technical Review Panel reviews the test results and makes its recommendation to the VLS Board, which comprises industry leaders whose membership is distinct from that of the technical panel. The board considers the panels recommendation and makes a final decision. Even at this stage the company, brand and product are still confidential.

Once the board decides on a case the named party responsible for the product will be contacted with details of the complaint, any technical evidence for the basis of the decision, and requests that the company sets out its steps for bringing the product into compliance. The company has 28 days to respond.

It is likely that VLS will enter into a period of dialogue with the named party as it is their intention to encourage greater compliance in the marketplace and not to penalize non-compliance. The steps taken by the named party are then reviewed by the technical panel and agreed. Only at the end of the process, final and full details of the case are published on the VLS website as a matter of public record.

Reliable Testing House

Since the formation of VLS in October 2013, the process for handling cases has not changed. Reliance on a reputable, independent testing house has always been essential to gathering the technical knowledge used to adjudicate on products or case complaints.

Any testing provider needs to have the correct understanding of the intricate chemical formulation of these lubricant products and the capacity to deal with cases. Tests must be performed to the current, specified standards set out by ASTM and the laboratory must carry certification from the official U.K.s accreditation body, UKAS.

The U.K. isnt alone in facing concerns over lubricant product standards. ATIEL, the technical association of the European lubricants industry, has its own compliance program to verify lubricant specifications. Individual countries, such as Spain, are also looking at mandatory testing of all products to ensure compliance, in addition to the existing system already in operation in Germany.

As engine technology advances and emissions regulations tighten, the demands on lubricants increase. All parties must work together to embrace these changes, delivering better performance for consumers and a transparent marketplace for suppliers.