dazee
Part of things
Posts: 96
|
|
May 22, 2024 12:50:08 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
oilyt
Part of things
Posts: 174
|
|
|
I think people need to get on board with this . This will be a game changer and possibly the last chance to save the hobby / lifestyle we all love .
|
|
|
|
dazee
Part of things
Posts: 96
|
|
|
One Reply ! Come on people, wake up.
|
|
Last Edit: May 23, 2024 9:38:35 GMT by dazee
|
|
|
|
|
I'm very dubious about this sort of thing because the government will cherry-pick what they want out of it to spin to their own ends, which ever political persuasion that may be. Although it will be the civil service that will have a view on what they want to do and will obfuscate if the aforementioned are not in accordance with that.
Colin
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 23, 2024 10:03:35 GMT
|
I've downloaded the original DVLA consultation document to review, which I'll do alongside the FBHVC response proposal/template.
My immediate "red flag" in respect of their position is the statement "preserve our ability to restore, register, and use historic vehicles efficiently and fairly for tomorrow’s roads." which outwardly suggests supporting modification isn't central to their response.
The key to positioning any response is to highlight the overall industry is of great social and economic value to the country and draconian measures will harm that. From a personal viewpoint the tuning and restoration arms of the industry(in this context it's beyond a hobby) of the UK is renowned internationally and should be represented both at the cutting edge of new technology but maintain it's heritage.
|
|
2014 - Audi A6 Avant 3.0Tdi Quattro 1958 - Chevrolet Apache Panel Truck 1959 - Plymouth Custom Suburban 1952 - Chevrolet 2dr Hardtop 1985 - Ford Econoline E350 Quadravan 2009 - Ovlov V70 2.5T 1970 - Cortina Mk2 Estate 2007 - Fiat Ducato LWB 120Multijet 2014 - Honda Civic 2.2 CTDi ES
|
|
tofufi
South West
Posts: 1,458
|
|
May 23, 2024 10:27:02 GMT
|
A few instant thoughts:
FBVHC are insistent that historic vehicles are not used everyday.
Q1 "which is not used as means of daily transport and which is therefore part of our technical and cultural heritage"
I'd argue frequency of use doesn't necessary relate to whether it is of historic value or not. There are plenty of historic buildings, structures, bridges etc which are both of historic value and used everyday.
Q13 This is effectivly the '8 point' rule, at which a vehicle loses it's ID. The FBVHC response seems to restrict modifications to those done in period, or at least not mention other modifications other than those to major components.
Q20 Why would a change of powertrain affect the identify of the vehicle? If it looks like (for example) a classic Mini and was built new as a classic Mini, to me it's a classic Mini, even if it has twin carbs, a Honda VTEC engine, or an EV conversion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 23, 2024 10:33:29 GMT
|
A few instant thoughts: FBVHC are insistent that historic vehicles are not used everyday.Q1 "which is not used as means of daily transport and which is therefore part of our technical and cultural heritage" I'd argue frequency of use doesn't necessary relate to whether it is of historic value or not. There are plenty of historic buildings, structures, bridges etc which are both of historic value and used everyday. That has been their position for years, but what it actually says is 'we're just playing with toys, and there's no need to take us seriously'
|
|
|
|
tofufi
South West
Posts: 1,458
|
|
May 23, 2024 13:22:08 GMT
|
A few instant thoughts: FBVHC are insistent that historic vehicles are not used everyday.Q1 "which is not used as means of daily transport and which is therefore part of our technical and cultural heritage" I'd argue frequency of use doesn't necessary relate to whether it is of historic value or not. There are plenty of historic buildings, structures, bridges etc which are both of historic value and used everyday. That has been their position for years, but what it actually says is 'we're just playing with toys, and there's no need to take us seriously' Indeed. I think the intention is to show that because the vehicles aren't being used everyday, they're not trying to evade the rules (tax, MOT etc) that apply to everyone else for an everyday car. However, there are lots of us who don' use them everyday, or have modern cars which are taxed and MOT'd, but still use historic vehicles frequently too. I've got one garage queen, but all of my other cars (both those under and over 40 years old) get used as and when they're needed. Not daily, but some of them are typically used at least weekly. Just the insertion of the word 'typically' in the FBHVC wording would be enough to keep everyone on board, however frequently (or not) they use their vehicles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 23, 2024 16:35:33 GMT
|
Yes, this problem over ‘modified’ vehicles has been mentioned on other sites too!
|
|
|
|
stealthstylz
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 14,926
Club RR Member Number: 174
|
|
|
As usual with FBVHC suggestions it smacks of "Timothy has a vintage Bugatti that we promise isn't modified even though it's actually just a vintage Bugatti engine and axle and everything else was made less than 10 years ago and he wants to take it up the polo club twice a year so can you please let that happen and F**K everybody else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 25, 2024 13:34:37 GMT
|
I presume the coming general election and the dissolution of parliament renders this consultation null and void anyway. It may well be worth putting your point of view to the FBVHC anyway but the future government (of whatever party) will have no obligation to continue with a consultation exercise started by the present transport secretary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 25, 2024 15:42:30 GMT
|
In many ways we're probably better off pushing someone like PAAA : www.paaa.eu.com/ to represent us than FBVHC. FBVHC are great for awareness of up coming consultation and legislation, but don't really represent the modified and aftermarket side of classics. PAAA would be the people for that I expect, in the way SEMA is in the US of A. I suspect this consultation will float back around again after an election as converting old cars to electric is going to raise all sorts of questions and potentially issues for a regulatory framework that is built around more traditional engines and modifications.
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 25, 2024 17:01:15 GMT
|
I filled it in , and afterwards wondered why I’d bothered!!!!
|
|
|
|
oilyt
Part of things
Posts: 174
|
|
May 26, 2024 18:57:20 GMT
|
I filled it in , and afterwards wondered why I’d bothered!!!! Why ?
|
|
|
|
oilyt
Part of things
Posts: 174
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure I like this bit;
The HCVA’s opinion is that the term Radically Altered should only apply to vehicles so drastically altered that the original Historic vehicle has ceased to be. The point at which that line is crossed should be decided by a stakeholder group of experts alongside DVSA and DVLA. The current points system is not fit for purpose.
Call me cynical, but who chooses the 'stakeholder group'?
To use stealthstyles's analogy, Timothy with the hooky Bugatti is mates with Rupert on the owners club board, all good. The old retired engineer who has spent 30 years building up a genuine car from an old wreck in his single garage, does he end up on a Q plate still, as Timothy has his original engine and axle, or if the points system isnt fit for purpose, which is the genuine car.?
I dunno, the whole thing seems a bit change for the sake of change, with lots of waffle but no real plan?
|
|
|
|
oilyt
Part of things
Posts: 174
|
|
|
I'm not sure I like this bit; The HCVA’s opinion is that the term Radically Altered should only apply to vehicles so drastically altered that the original Historic vehicle has ceased to be. The point at which that line is crossed should be decided by a stakeholder group of experts alongside DVSA and DVLA. The current points system is not fit for purpose. Call me cynical, but who chooses the 'stakeholder group'? Not sure who the stakeholders would be , possibly a group built from representatives of the restoration. part suppliers . motorsport industry ect ?.
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 30, 2024 17:03:37 GMT
|
I dunno, the whole thing seems a bit change for the sake of change, with lots of waffle but no real plan? Ultimately I suspect it is to be able to probably classify EV converted classics for the purposes of LEZ/ULEZ and Tax. Or at least that was the starting point and it evolved in to a wider consultation. There has been quite a few of them over the life time of this forum. Really the old ACE organisation which we attempted to promote in what small way we could would have been ideal to represent "our" point of view, but that ended in 2016.
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 31, 2024 19:21:41 GMT
|
Because I’m wondering if it’ll make the slightest bit of difference? Who knows?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect it will not. Govt will have a predetermined outcome and the "consultation" will be largely window dressing to make the public think their input is of value.
|
|
|
|
|