THE Land Transportation Office (LTO) posted on its Facebook page on May 10, 2026, that it issued a show-cause order (SCO) against the registered owner and driver of a Toyota Hilux that was caught using unauthorized rear auxiliary lamps, which allegedly posed a danger to other motorists due to their excessive brightness.
It added that, based on a viral video circulating on social media, the vehicle could be seen traveling at night while using rear auxiliary lamps that emit intense light. It was also observed that the auxiliary lamps lit up simultaneously whenever the vehicle braked, causing a strong glare and visual obstruction for motorists behind it.
It’s about time the LTO puts an end to this kind of abhorrent driver behavior and the corresponding illegal vehicle modifications carried out by arrogant and boastful vehicle owners.
Take, for example, the proliferation of sellers offering “premium LED headlights and fog lights,” and other supposedly “ultra-bright” automotive LED lighting. I myself have been blinded, through my rearview mirror, by the superbright headlights of vehicles traveling behind me. Without any doubt, oncoming vehicles with modified headlights are a nuisance and must be banned by the LTO.
Purpose of headlights
Vehicle headlights are not there for aesthetic purposes alone. They serve a definite function that must not be altered.
The beam pattern of a headlamp defines the way in which light is projected onto the road. It serves to optimize visibility for the driver while avoiding dazzling other road users. Standards governing beam patterns include minimum and maximum brightness levels, a defined beam pattern and a specification of light color.
According to Wikipedia, “the top of the low beam shining on the wall should be at or slightly below the height of the center of the headlight lens for most vehicles. You should expect the light pattern to be higher on the right side (passenger side) to illuminate road signs and lower on the driver’s side to prevent blinding other drivers.”
To cite a specific rule, under UN Regulation 149 (effective Nov. 19, 2019), for headlamps of Class CS, the passing beam minimum is 500 lumens while the passing beam maximum is 2,000 lumens. Therefore, if a replacement headlight’s beam exceeds 2,000 lumens, it should be considered an illegal modification.
In the United States, all vehicle headlights must comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 108 (FMVSS 108) concerning the measurement and characterization of headlamp beams. Vehicle owners cannot simply change their headlights without proper compliance with FMVSS 108.
Obviously, headlights exceeding the allowable maximum beam pose a danger to other motorists due to their excessive brightness. The LTO should put a stop to this.
JAO 2014-01
On June 2, 2014, the then-Department of Transportation and Communications (now the Department of Transportation) issued Joint Administrative Order (JAO) 2014-01, the revised schedule of fines and penalties for violations of laws, rules and regulations governing land transportation.
Under Section II(b) of the said JAO, unauthorized motor vehicle modification carries a fine of P5,000, motor vehicle impoundment and correction of the defective modification.
Illegal modification “includes change in color and other unauthorized modifications of the standard manufacturer’s specification.” Clearly, increasing the brightness of headlights goes beyond the standard manufacturer’s specification and is therefore considered an illegal modification.
The LTO should not only apprehend motor vehicle owners but likewise prevent the sale of these “ultra-bright” headlamps.
‘I-report mo kay LTO chief’
A complaint reporting system was launched under the current LTO chief, Assistant Secretary Markus Lacanilao, as part of the agency’s ongoing reforms to improve transparency and public reporting channels. The platform was officially rolled out in late April 2026.
It is a citizen reporting system through which people can directly report reckless driving, colorum vehicles, road rage incidents, corruption or misconduct in LTO branch offices and other transport-related complaints.
The citizen feedback platform connects the motoring public directly to the LTO. The transport office has ensured that every report is documented, reviewed and acted upon. Let us hope that this is not another ningas cogon initiative, and that the LTO will finally bring order to our roads.
The LTO’s issuance of a SCO against the Toyota Hilux owner and driver is a welcome development, but it should not end there. Real change requires consistent enforcement, not isolated viral moments. With a citizen reporting platform now in place and a leadership that appears willing to act, the public has reason for cautious optimism. The roads belong to everyone — and every motorist deserves to drive without being blinded, endangered or bullied by those who treat their vehicles as instruments of intimidation. The LTO must rise to that responsibility.
allinsight.manilatimes@gmail.com
Facebook: www.facebook.com/All.Insight.Manila.Times
Viber: (0915)4201085