Rob M
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,915
Club RR Member Number: 41
|
Tell me Q plates pleaseRob M
@zeb
Club Retro Rides Member 41
|
|
Rob M - I am not sure how you buying an expensive car 23 years ago without a visible VIN tag is the fault of the car having a Q plate? Buyer beware is not anything new. Insurers can only insure something that can be validated as what it is, and without a VIN, the plate has no association with what it's hung on, same as any other plate. The OP's question simply asks "tell me about Q plates" - As the greater majority of Q plates are on kit cars I hold that actually I can "lump them into the mix" it would actually be wrong not to. "Is it 'cos i'm Q!" You may have missed the point a bit. I agree about 'buyer beware' but I was younger then and had more hair... The issue was about how the car becomes undesirable to insurers and how its value is reduced. My case just demonstrated how insurers view Q plated cars, mine went from a nice, reasonably desirable car into an undesirable one. Insurers that will insure Q plated cars that are not kit cars are fewer and its, generally, more expensive to insure one and its not considered as valuble. The OP asked about Q plates and, yes, the majority are on kit cars but its a bit slight of hand to suggest that all cars that carry or will carry the Q plate will be given the same criteria to meet when it comes to insurance as, clearly, insurers are more adept to insuring Kits but not so au fait with insuring parts bin hatchbacks. To that end, I reckon, you have to segregate the two beyond the common Q plate denominator. Personally, Id have no problem whatsoever buying a Q plate kit car (something like a Ginetta or Midas would be nice!) but a factory production car I would. I just couldn't go there. Incidentally, I had a mate in the motor trade back in the 90s who would rebuild smashed up Fords and any given a Q plate would have them going to their friendly plate maker to get the Q looking as much like a D with a tiny tail as was possible......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My understanding is that you can ADD parts to a chassis or monocoque, extra stiffening or body mounts or indeed a full cage. What is strictly verboten is to REMOVE parts of the original structure (even if you replace them with something similar but in a different place like chopping out and replacing the bulkhead and tunnel to get that RWD V8 into your MkIII Escort) The then new 8 point rule had just come out when I built my Vauxhall powered Toledo and I studied it closely as I wished to avoid a BIVA and a Q. The resulting car skirts the limits at 9 points by the strictest interpretation I could think of. But I took GREAT care to avoid removing even a sliver of metal from the standard bodyshell. I'm not happy with this rule since I think there should be some more acceptable middle ground between standard and "radically modified". But I can see where the DVLA is coming from, if you set the goalposts further out, then what is acceptable becomes a matter of engineering opinion and argument! Doing it this way makes life easier for THEM, which is all they care about! Steve Aye, I agree there should be a mid point between stock and losing the cars identity through IVA - possibly just some kind of basic inspection like a slightly enhanced MOT. My big problem with the IVA is that it gives as equal weight to having perfectly rounded surfaces in the cabin (no unshielded toggle switches!) as it does general structure. A lot of old cars, if put through the IVA as stock, would fail badly on such points. Plus losing the number plate sucks! No old car would ever have to be BIVAd , only ones modified outside the 8 points system which means ,legally, you have lost the identity as an old car . So stay within 8 points build and avoid BIVA or do what you want and put it through a test as a new car with no previous identity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You can avoid a Q plate on a monococque by creating a chassis to go underneath it, that with 2 major components from a donor car / logbook will give you an age related plate.
|
|
|
|
Badger
Part of things
Posts: 250
|
|
|
No old car would ever have to be BIVAd , only ones modified outside the 8 points system which means ,legally, you have lost the identity as an old car . So stay within 8 points build and avoid BIVA or do what you want and put it through a test as a new car with no previous identity. Note: I've modified this post in line with later posts to prevent misleading info A lot of things, whether it be tubbing wheel arches, changing an engine or just adding a box for a larger carb require some modification of the bodyshell and monococque. If I have an old chassis made out of C-section, why should I not strengthen it? Any of those would require the car to be go through an IVA and probably not get an age related plate, and I think that is overkill. Note: See later on the thread, I was wrong about welding the C-Section, and maybe tubbing, dependent upon the car. In fact I don't see why you have to lose the age related plate at all - if the vehicle is radically modified and passes the IVA then it's obvious whoever has done it has put in a hell of a lot of effort, so why the hell not let them keep it? This I'll still stick to - but it's only my opinion!
|
|
Last Edit: Feb 6, 2017 21:26:29 GMT by Badger
|
|
Badger
Part of things
Posts: 250
|
|
|
Taken from the government website just now:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It was my understanding of the rules (as someone else has already noted) that adding to the original structure is agreeable -for example 'boxing' a C section chassis, as is modification to bracketry, for example engine mountings, but further than that it's 'radically modified'. My own experience of a Q plate wasn't bad, the vehicle in question was a grey import Vitara which had been fitted with a Perkins Prima by the guy who imported it, and given a Q when he went to register it. My insurers were a little snotty about it, refusing anything more than 3rd party cover, but as it cost me the price of a head gasket and an MOT for a years running I wasn't that fussed. Would I buy another Q? I don't see why not. I bought mine at Continuum motors as they specialise in Q's I'm almost annoyed at my nerdiness for getting that straight away.... Bonus points if it went through your head in John De'Lancie voice.
|
|
|
|
Badger
Part of things
Posts: 250
|
|
|
It was my understanding of the rules (as someone else has already noted) that adding to the original structure is agreeable -for example 'boxing' a C section chassis, as is modification to bracketry, for example engine mountings, but further than that it's 'radically modified'. I've modified this post in line with later ones to avoid misleading infoYeah, I always thought that myself - I brought it up earlier in the thread - but unfortunately it would seem that it depends one who you talk to at the DVLA, the day of the week and the direction of the wind. I couldn't find anything written down about what makes a chassis or monococque class as modified (see later as ACE managed to provide some clarification); this whole system is OK for kit cars since they are new builds but sucks for anything else. With the best will in the world you can try to follow the rules, only to find someone has interpreted them differently. In reality there must be a balance struck, and whilst I'm all in favour of inspection when a car has been radically altered (e.g. floor pan gutted and a space frame put in it) I don't think you should necessarily lose your registration number, and for lighter mods an MOT or similar would probably be just as good and not worried about stupid things such as non-radiused toggle switches on the dash. Again I will stress the above is my personal opinion, and not the reality
|
|
Last Edit: Feb 6, 2017 21:28:57 GMT by Badger
|
|
|
|
|
I recall the extent of permitted modifications being clarified somewhat in an ACE consultation with DVLA.
As something written down by them it serves as a pretty solid starting point, although it's also worth having gotten a chat with the local VOSA man as they usually happy to be as helpful as possible in these matters, and as is always the case, it never does any harm to have the officials on side from the start.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
omg, never read so much bull. Please feel free to clarify any points which seem incorrect to you. *n
|
|
Top grammar tips! Bought = purchased. Brought = relocated Lose = misplace/opposite of win. Loose = your mum
|
|
hotrat
Part of things
Posts: 14
|
|
|
If you look at any Q reg vin tag It will start SABTVRO " Stolen and brought to vehicle registration office" It will then have some numbers. when It was given the Q and were in the country It was issued. I think they had to come up with 17 digits like other vin numbers. They gave / give this same vin to all cars, be it stolen recovered, kit car or a radical home build. The vin will not give you any info on make model, engine size or body colour. If you have a Q then It has to be mot'd like a car from 1976, so you can get rid of things like cats. On a one off built car the Q stands for Quality. Q's are good.
|
|
|
|
|
Badger
Part of things
Posts: 250
|
|
|
I recall the extent of permitted modifications being clarified somewhat in an ACE consultation with DVLA. As something written down by them it serves as a pretty solid starting point, although it's also worth having gotten a chat with the local VOSA man as they usually happy to be as helpful as possible in these matters, and as is always the case, it never does any harm to have the officials on side from the start. The ACE thing sounds good, but can't find it since ACE seems to have folded along with their website. I'm totally with you on getting the VOSA officials onside from the start and all; I guess I was trying to point out the flaws of the existing system more than anything else Personally I've not got a problem with Q plates, I guess I just don't see the point of losing the old number plate!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd have thought they'd have left the website online and the consultations available for all to view.
Shame it meets it's demise really.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well I know it shouldn't be about the money, but I think keeping a 40+ year old car going, in whatever form, deserves a small reward after all the money it's earned the govt in it's lifetime. So a bit of free road tax is nice! And it does seem a bit absurd to take a cars identity away for such possibly minor mods. It remains to be seen if Q plated cars will qualify as historic at 40 years from DOFR. A lot of radical customs from the 70s have lately been tagged by DVLA as having to be BIVA'd and Q'd, having previously enjoyed tax free status, what's the betting that even though the mods are already 40 years old, they won't get historic status till the Q is 40 years old, if ever? By coincidence, today I watched the wheeler dealers episode where they bought a Cobra replica and then found it needed to be Biva'd. The car already HAD been registered on a 1963 plate but obviously not as what it was! £450 odd and a day to do it! Plus a load of money spent to just squeak it through! Then, somehow or other, it got a (then new) 12 plate! Just another scam to get money from us car nuts!
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SABTVRO was replaced with DVLASWA a few years back.
*n
|
|
Top grammar tips! Bought = purchased. Brought = relocated Lose = misplace/opposite of win. Loose = your mum
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, We can talk all round this subject and say how ridiculous it is all we like but nothing is going to change now.The car modification fraternity have been pushing the boundaries for years. It doesn't help when some put series 1 LR body work onto Range Rovers and then nail the LR number plate on to get free road tax, or the 'Frankensteining' trend for a while. The Bugatti situation where there are now more Bugatti's around than Bugatti made and all facilitated by abuses from the Bugatti club seems to have been the catalyst for the crackdown.
There is a member of this forum that I understand was involved in the clarification with DVSA of their stance on the rules as written on the ACE website, he would advise anyone that asked but got so much grief because some were venting their frustration and arguing with him that he hardly ever posts on the matter now. I will not name him for that reason, but he has posted in this thread, It's up to him if he wants to identify himself.
Colin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is a member of this forum that I understand was involved in the clarification with DVSA of their stance on the rules as written on the ACE website, he would advise anyone that asked but got so much grief because some were venting their frustration and arguing with him that he hardly ever posts on the matter now. I will not name him for that reason, but he has posted in this thread, It's up to him if he wants to identify himself. Colin Was a complete shame that he got swamped after the literal years he put in. Always prefer facts to hearsay. *n
|
|
Top grammar tips! Bought = purchased. Brought = relocated Lose = misplace/opposite of win. Loose = your mum
|
|
steveg
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,586
|
|
|
There was someone who used to help kit car builders sort things out the DVLA not sure who that was though. There needs to be someone who can help. In my own experience kit car clubs are not always the best people to do this although DVLA seem to think so. There seems to be a certain amount of 'he's a good mate so even if his car is dodgy it's fine' going on while for anyone else it's tough. Subjects like this do need discussing as people are still buying kit cars that can't be made road legal any more and just going by the comments on here nobody seems too sure about what you can and can't do before a car needs a test.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I recall the extent of permitted modifications being clarified somewhat in an ACE consultation with DVLA. As something written down by them it serves as a pretty solid starting point, although it's also worth having gotten a chat with the local VOSA man as they usually happy to be as helpful as possible in these matters, and as is always the case, it never does any harm to have the officials on side from the start. The ACE thing sounds good, but can't find it since ACE seems to have folded along with their website. I'm totally with you on getting the VOSA officials onside from the start and all; I guess I was trying to point out the flaws of the existing system more than anything else Personally I've not got a problem with Q plates, I guess I just don't see the point of losing the old number plate! Yup after only 10 years banging their heads against a brick wall they folded their tents in the night and disappeared . Shame nobody read the info or there wouldn't be so much misinformation in this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There was someone who used to help kit car builders sort things out the DVLA not sure who that was though. There needs to be someone who can help. In my own experience kit car clubs are not always the best people to do this although DVLA seem to think so. There seems to be a certain amount of 'he's a good mate so even if his car is dodgy it's fine' going on while for anyone else it's tough. Subjects like this do need discussing as people are still buying kit cars that can't be made road legal any more and just going by the comments on here nobody seems too sure about what you can and can't do before a car needs a test. I'm completely sure what can or can't be done after having spent 40 years dealing with DVLA / VOSA / DVSA and being married to the manager of an LO for 10 years . I have files of correspondence with DVLA policy and VOSA tech that peope still want to argue with because it doesn't suit what they want do
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shame nobody read the info or there wouldn't be so much misinformation in this thread. thank you kev.
|
|
|
|
|