Question re. the points system

Hi, It would, because you have changed two qualifying items/categories (axles and steering), two points each so four in total. You mustn't go below eight points.

Colin

Taken from the gov.uk website

www.gov.uk/government/publications/historic-classic-vehicles-mot-exemption-criteria/historic-classic-vehicles-mot-exemption-criteria

Acceptable changes
It does not count as a ‘substantial change’ if:

changes are made to preserve a vehicle because the original type parts are no longer reasonably available

they are changes of a type which can be demonstrated to have been made when vehicles of the type were in production or within 10 years of the end of production

axles and running gear have been changed to improve efficiency, safety or environmental performance

changes were made to vehicles that were previously used as commercial vehicles, and you can prove the changes were made when the vehicle was used commercially

Hi, Not necessarily, You could try speaking to DVLA/DVSA and explaining and see if they would be amenable to a substitution on a case by case basis. However don't go cutting the chassis rail about to fit it.

Colin

Edit: Beaten to it and better explained.

Modify the new subframe so it bolts on to the factory mounts on the chassis, and don’t bother telling them. No one will really care and if anyone ever does, point to the exemption on parts availability.

It’s one of those instances where trying to do ‘the right thing’ will only cause you grief.

Just to throw a bit of confusion into the ring...

All of the above relates to MOT exemption. The term 'substantial change' is used, whereas for vehicle identity the term 'radically altered' is used.

My understanding is that the 8-point rule for vehicle identity is stand-alone from the MOT exemption rules, and doesn't make any allowance for parts being unavailable.

Of course, on a standard car with a new front axle (and unmodified monocoque) you'd still have 8+ points overall, so it would be able to retain the original ID.

Try working for DfT and understanding the UNECE and GB adopted (formerly EU) type approval legislation for new vehicles

I suspect that at a point in time, someone decided that there should be a way to define when a vehicle is no longer considered to be the original vehicle.

At another point in time, someone decided some vehicles should be MOT exempt, but not if they're substantially modified.

Someone probably wrote some rules, taking no heed (or being unaware) of the similar ones for something else.

Now not that I'm condoning this, but there's an element of enforceability here. How the hell is anyone going to find out? It's MoT exempt (and MoT testers don't get trained/paid/expected to enforce these rules), and a policeman at a traffic stop (or even an insurance inspector) isn't going to know a 1959 Bedford subframe from an MGB one.

It's a nonsensical system without even the slightest consideration made to its practical application, and stupid rules poorly applied should be treated as stupid rules poorly applied.

Maybe I am condoning it!

I'd agree, you are only ever going to get in trouble if it breaks causing an accident, make a good job of it and properly maintain it and you'll be fine.

Not saying this is the case here but legislators / enforcers often create accounts on forums to ask questions like this to see what people in the car world do in reality with the rules. I wouldn't condone or advise on ways around legislation on an open forum. That being said, there are quotations above from the official texts stating what is required in the original post would be legal anyway so no laws would be broken in this case.

You get similar questions about insurance from people who've only just joined to try and find out how people get insurance discounts or make claims in ways insurers would not be happy with.

You would not get in trouble personally for things you say but bear in mind that talking in a casual carefree manner about whether or not you could get caught for breaking certain rules on a public forum cannot possibly be helpful to classic car owners generally if the wrong (anti-car) people get to read what you've said!