|
|
Sept 30, 2008 9:33:05 GMT
|
Thought I aught to bring this thread over on the NSRA to folks' attention... Some chap wanted to do a cherished plate transfer on a sled with a roof chop and the DVLA decide its a "radically altered" chassis because its a monocoque with a chop and stick him with a Q plate (he's lucky to have avoided SVA as well on this case) www.nsra.org.uk/newforum/showthread.php?t=15601Like the man says, its not scare mongering if its actually happening. Although if the DVLA wanted to hit "us" then they just need to run through a few issues of Practical Classics, Retro Cars, Custom Car, our readers rides, etc. and they'll find plently of stuff to haul in for inspection and people openly admitting to doing things which are in contravention of DVLA rules. OK, the case in point is being fought with solicitors and the like. And they say that there were "procedural errors" and that they expect to maybe get it sorted. But I'm really thinking WTF on this one. If every time you do a roof chop or other "significant" mod you end up having to get solictors in... And procedural error doesn't mean the application of the law is wrong, only that they cocked up how they did it. Its only anecdotal but I hear more and more stuff like this now. Time for me to actually read that copy of the SVA manual I downloaded, just in case...
|
|
1941 Wolseley Not Rod - 1956 Humber Hawk - 1957 Daimler Conquest - 1966 Buick LeSabre - 1968 Plymouth Sport Fury - 1968 Ford Galaxie - 1969 Ford Country Squire - 1969 Mercury Marquis - 1970 Morris Minor - 1970 Buick Skylark - 1970 Ford Galaxie - 1971 Ford Galaxie - 1976 Continental Mark IV - 1976 Ford Capri - 1994 Ford Fiesta
|
|
|
Rob M
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,915
Club RR Member Number: 41
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 12:20:59 GMT
|
I couldnt get this link up as the server is down etc, etc. Can I be a thicky and ask how the DVLA actually know that the vehicle has been radically altered? Ok, the insurance company will know, Mr MOT man will work it out but how does such information actually get into the DVLAs domain?
|
|
|
|
spiny
Club Retro Rides Member
Wiki Admin
I am abivalent towards car electrics ...
Posts: 1,331
Club RR Member Number: 167
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 12:25:33 GMT
|
I couldnt get this link up as the server is down etc, etc. Can I be a thicky and ask how the DVLA actually know that the vehicle has been radically altered? Ok, the insurance company will know, Mr MOT man will work it out but how does such information actually get into the DVLAs domain? they come and look at it. if you want to move a reg plate, especially no prefix plates, the dvla usually send someone to look at the vehicle it's coming from, just to make sure it actually exists and has an MOT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 12:27:18 GMT
|
NSRA site is down this afternoon for an upgrade.
In this case the owner of the car was involved in a cherished number transfer. I dunno if the number was being transferred off the car or onto it. These days the DVLA want to inspect cars donating cherished numbers to ensure its all kosha. When the inspector turned up a 5" roof chop was presumably fairly obvious.
In one case a chap who lives not that far from me took his V8 Zodiac for an MOT and the tester called VOSA to check if the car had been subject to SVA as it was "radically altered" and now would not have enough points to retain its original number. VOSA contacted DVLA who swooped before the guy could even come back and find out if it passed. I didn't get to hear the end of that story. Seems to me it was pure jobsworthyness or spite on part of the tester.
Someone who has close contacts with the DVLA did let on that they were getting approval to put 400 (I think) people, most of whom were currently MOT testers, through training to spot modified cars so they could be allerted back to the DVLA at MOT time.
Like I say, they are bright enough to use eBay and various web forums to find people trading V5Cs without cars so if they wanted to really crack down on this they could do the same to find cars which were "radically altered" and had not been through VIC/SVA since.
|
|
Last Edit: Sept 30, 2008 12:30:41 GMT by akku
1941 Wolseley Not Rod - 1956 Humber Hawk - 1957 Daimler Conquest - 1966 Buick LeSabre - 1968 Plymouth Sport Fury - 1968 Ford Galaxie - 1969 Ford Country Squire - 1969 Mercury Marquis - 1970 Morris Minor - 1970 Buick Skylark - 1970 Ford Galaxie - 1971 Ford Galaxie - 1976 Continental Mark IV - 1976 Ford Capri - 1994 Ford Fiesta
|
|
fogey
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,615
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 13:53:59 GMT
|
Now that MOTs are computerised there are a number of upgrades due over the coming months / years. One will be a prompt on the computer at the start of the MOT to the effect of 'Does this car appear to have been modified from standard'. If the tester answers 'Yes' he will not be able to continue with the MOT without further checks with the DVLA/VOSA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 13:55:23 GMT
|
a couple of years back didnt a couple of the nsra forum try to get dvla/vosa to introduce a street rod class. this was so they wouldnt have to go through sva. sent of pictures of cars showing modifications.
maybe dvla used that info so they can now spot modded cars easier. talk about an own goal.
cant beleive as well the number of folks who post up photo,s of their own cars with their number plates on show.
and others for thaty matter. don't take long to blank em out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 14:01:09 GMT
|
I believe that the "Street Rod" class thing isn't entirely dead, although ACPO of all people are trying to get the "rebuilt classic or vintage" exemption killed off (this is the one which allows a "historic" car to be rebuilt using used parts and retain its original year of manufacture for the purposes of registration and not require SVA. ACPO want it to go through SVA and Q plate in all cases now. Asshats.
I don't think that sending photos to the DVLA would have any effect either way.
|
|
1941 Wolseley Not Rod - 1956 Humber Hawk - 1957 Daimler Conquest - 1966 Buick LeSabre - 1968 Plymouth Sport Fury - 1968 Ford Galaxie - 1969 Ford Country Squire - 1969 Mercury Marquis - 1970 Morris Minor - 1970 Buick Skylark - 1970 Ford Galaxie - 1971 Ford Galaxie - 1976 Continental Mark IV - 1976 Ford Capri - 1994 Ford Fiesta
|
|
horney™
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 1,289
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 14:41:26 GMT
|
Now that MOTs are computerised there are a number of upgrades due over the coming months / years. One will be a prompt on the computer at the start of the MOT to the effect of 'Does this car appear to have been modified from standard'. If the tester answers 'Yes' he will not be able to continue with the MOT without further checks with the DVLA/VOSA. That has fairly nasty repercusions for nearly everyone on this forum. Lowered? Hello DVLA/VOSA, come and see this! Pancake filter? Hello DVLA/VOSA, come and see this! Wide wheels and arches? Hello DVLA/VOSA, come and see this! Stainles exhaust? Hello DVLA/VOSA, come and see this! Bucket seats and harnesses? Hello DVLA/VOSA, come and see this! You'd hope there would be a level of discretion given tot he testers but I can see this resulting in a cull of modified cars from the road with VOSA requiring anyone from Mr BarryBoy to Mr RetroRider having to remove mods that VOSA don't agree with to get the car tested and on the road. Hopefully this is all hearsey or at least if it does come in will be half sensible as to what is "modified". Nick
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 18:37:11 GMT
|
I guess as the DVLA testing systems and computers get more complex it becomes much much easier for them to bring their guns to bear on us old car fans.
Whats the point in what they're tryng to do anyway? Is there any specific crime they're targeting? Is it really sheer bloody mindedness and jobsworthness?
|
|
1987 Maestro 1.6 HL perkins diesel conversion 1986 Audi 100 Avant 1800cc on LPG 1979 Allegro Series 2 special 4 door 1500cc with vynil roof. IN BITS. HERITAGE ISSUES.
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 18:43:13 GMT
|
My recent experience of this:
Before I MOT'ed my Celica, I printed off all the details of the VOSA radically altered vehicle info. Took it all in to the MOT station to get some clarification on the scheme. I also had a list of the mod's I'd done.
I wanted to get some definitions on the vagueness of the points scheme. Like what constitutes a 'modified' monocoque - a roof chop is a no-brainer, but could drilling holes for an aerial or mounting a bracket be considered modified?
It would seem they had knowledge of the scheme, but were not in any position to police it.
His comment was "Does it look like a 1981 Celica and do all the details on the V5 match the car?"
If the answer is yes, then they have to test the car as presented.
|
|
|
|
|
BiAS
Club Retro Rides Member
Insert witty comment here
Posts: 2,231
Club RR Member Number: 147
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 18:45:08 GMT
|
^^^Yeah, what are they trying to achieve? Do Doovla want everyone to drive a 100% stock vehicle? How does this help them? I'm a bit worried about spaceframing now
|
|
(car+wheels)-rideheight=WIN
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 18:55:21 GMT
|
Maybe its just easier to take your car to your local friendly "bent" MOT centre... Come on...I know most people here know of one locally to them. A mate in the trade. I think most modded car enthusiasts know of one!
It would completely defeat the object of what the DVLA are trying to achieve though, whatever it is.
|
|
1987 Maestro 1.6 HL perkins diesel conversion 1986 Audi 100 Avant 1800cc on LPG 1979 Allegro Series 2 special 4 door 1500cc with vynil roof. IN BITS. HERITAGE ISSUES.
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 18:56:23 GMT
|
This is really gash news, not sure wether i want all the hassle now of putting a Clio 16v lump in my Volvo if it's just going to give me grief at every MOT.
I say, if this does start becoming a regular occurence, all us modded/rodded, anything other than stock car lovers should decend on Londinium town and show the big wigs how many of us there are out there!
Plus what an amazing spectacle it would make, all makes , all sorts, all cool, stick it to em i say!
|
|
OAP drifta Volvo 340,Williams power 1960 Beetle twin 40's 1776cc
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 19:14:45 GMT
|
Maybe its just easier to take your car to your local friendly "bent" MOT centre... Come on...I know most people here know of one locally to them. A mate in the trade. I think most modded car enthusiasts know of one! It would completely defeat the object of what the DVLA are trying to achieve though, whatever it is. I wouldn't call it bent, just friendly. I wouldn't want to drive a death trap, but know of an MOT station that will be lenient on classics. You have to be a bit more creative when a car is 23 years old, as opposed to 3 years old.
|
|
|
|
BiAS
Club Retro Rides Member
Insert witty comment here
Posts: 2,231
Club RR Member Number: 147
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 19:27:21 GMT
|
I have a friendly MOT station, what concerns me is if Doovla 'discover' my car is a radically altered monocoque. Would it pass an SVA? Can anyone explain what Doovla are trying/hoping to achieve? Does anyone know?
|
|
(car+wheels)-rideheight=WIN
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 19:34:28 GMT
|
I would imagine they look to Europe for inspiration... France - engine swaps and serious engine mods are illegal unless homologated by the manufacturer. Germany - all mods are illegal unless TUV aproved. Yes there are ways to weasel around these, but its not easy and not 100% legal. Since Britain has had such easy regulations up to now as far as modifying is concerned, there are too many modified cars out there for them to introduce something like these laws in one swoop, so they are gradually making things harder to squeeze certain cars off the road. I wouldnt expect things to get any better in the future.
|
|
1986 Panda 4x4. 1990 Metro Sport. 1999 Ford Escort estate.
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 19:42:06 GMT
|
Mine is also a radically modified monocoque.......like it isn't any more and has a seperate chassis now. The only advantage that I have as far as I can see is that SVA has a start point but I can't remember which year it kicked off. If a car was modded before that date, as mine was ('80s) then it's in the clear from enforcement. How long that will last I don't know, rules are changing so often now it's a wonder that the testers can keep up with it all. Friendly testers FTW!
|
|
Aircooled is cool.......
But V8 is great!!!!!!
|
|
Rich G
Posted a lot
Keyboard Worrier
Posts: 1,059
|
|
Sept 30, 2008 20:02:41 GMT
|
A few thoughts on the postings so far:- A couple of years back didn’t a couple of the NSRA forum try to get DVLA/VOSA to introduce a street rod class; this was so they wouldn’t have to go through SVA. Sent of pictures of cars showing modifications, maybe DVLA used that info so they can now spot modded cars easier, talk about an own goal.Just like the traffic cops, the DVLA are a lot smarter than most people give them credit for (and I’m not talking about the phone monkeys at Swansea). Modded cars didn’t just appear in the 1980s/1990s, DVLA have been well aware of them since their inception back in the early 70s. Can’t believe as well the number of folks who post up photos of their own cars with their number plates on show.Totally agree. If it ain’t 100% bullet-proof, blank ‘em out! What’s the point in what they're trying to do anyway? Is there any specific crime they're targeting? Is it really sheer bloody mindedness and jobsworthness?Simple answer - tax revenue. Got a car registered as Historic Tax which should be on a Q-plate? That’s £185 a year they’re losing out on. It’s also the reason behind wanting to have proof (or an inspection possibly) when you either decrease, or now increase, engine capacity; it may affect future tax banding. One of the reasons why I always thought the “free” tax for pre-73 cars was a bad idea. Before I MoT’d my Celica, I printed off all the details of the VOSA radically altered vehicle info. Took it all in to the MOT station to get some clarification on the scheme. I also had a list of the mod's I'd done. I wanted to get some definitions on the vagueness of the points scheme. Like what constitutes a 'modified' monocoque - a roof chop is a no-brainer, but could drilling holes for an aerial or mounting a bracket be considered modified?No point asking your MoT man, or VOSA for that matter. It’ already been demonstrated that DVLA don’t even understand their own rules about what constitutes a vehicle! As was said, for a monocoque a roof-chop is a no brainer, as is tubbing, back-halving and bulkhead mods (although some clearancing with a hammer would of course be a dent wouldn’t’ it - ;D). Maybe it’s just easier to take your car to your local friendly "bent" MOT centre... Come on...I know most people here know of one locally to them. A mate in the trade, I think most modded car enthusiasts know of one! It would completely defeat the object of what the DVLA are trying to achieve though, whatever it is.Fine if you will always use the same MoT place and never sell the car. Sell the car on and the next MoT place finds something blatantly obviously “wrong” and new owner is on the poo as is your MoT station as they’ll loose their licence. That has fairly nasty repercussions for nearly everyone on this forum.Modders, Rodders, Rally boys, Barry-boys, Landy boys (already been actively targeted by DVLA for a while now), and even owners of classic specials. And that’s just for starters! Enjoy ‘em while you can!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the "crime" is misrepresentation of a vehicle.
All of this started as a way of getting cut & shuts off the road and also dealing with someone who would buy say a 1997 BMW and then buy a 2004 BMW which was a write off and transfer the ID over and sell the 1997 car as being a 2004 car... obviously the '04 car is worth lots more.
There was also no specific law against ringing stolen vehicles up until the late 1990s. Only the actual offense of stealing them or knowingly handling stolen goods which is harder to prove.
So on the back of consumer protection the wheels of government started turning.
SVA was already on the way in as a way of regulating kit car builds and low volume manufacturers. Again, its consumer protection and public safety concerns pushing this one though. And when you look at some of the gash home build stuff which was about in the 80s theres no wonder why...
So the DVLA comes up with thier now infamous "points" system. Requiring so much "unmodified" and "original" components to remain on a car so it can keep its original ID / number / etc. This is ignored by the modified car world as "we already have an ID for our cars, lets just keep our heads down and none of this will affect us" yet then a couple f years ago SVA and vehicle ID became linked as a method of ensuring people were not building kits or "specials" and avoiding SVA.
And some people were taking the pish. One local rodder used to have a '32 Ford which ran a '63 Mini log book. Now if we turn a blind eye to that, that car could be stolen and someone just get a '65 Hillman log book or a '71 Toyota one and carry on regardless. Cars should be attached to a log book, the two should not be exhangeable enteties...
Anything space frames would require an SVA regardless of how many other original components it has.
Air filters and the like are not of interest to them, stuff like non-original braking systems, non original axles or suspension, engines, boxes, etc. are. and technically even if its a "stock" item but bought used from a donor car you lose points for it and could end up on a Q plate. This is hard if not impossible to prove technically, but if you then get a feature in practical classics or retro ford magazine where you state you reshelled your rusty RS2000 using a nice rust free 1300 Deluxe 2 door you rbought cheap, then thats a Q plate for you too son.
The argument in this case is that it is no longer an orignal RS2000 but a mongrel mix of RS2000 parts and a 1300 Deluxe body. The FBHVC supports the DVLA on this as well I belive, as I recall from an arguemnet with them years ago)
|
|
1941 Wolseley Not Rod - 1956 Humber Hawk - 1957 Daimler Conquest - 1966 Buick LeSabre - 1968 Plymouth Sport Fury - 1968 Ford Galaxie - 1969 Ford Country Squire - 1969 Mercury Marquis - 1970 Morris Minor - 1970 Buick Skylark - 1970 Ford Galaxie - 1971 Ford Galaxie - 1976 Continental Mark IV - 1976 Ford Capri - 1994 Ford Fiesta
|
|
Rob M
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,915
Club RR Member Number: 41
|
|
|
Ok, so basically, it looks like we are all going to be up the creek without a paddle. So how does this all dovetail into the business of building Hearses? What about Limos? Both are cut and shut, both have non standard body work added etc. I'm curious to know exactly how they can be classed differently to, say, a roof chop? The major manufacturers don't build these cars, do the Hearses and Limos of this country have to meet certain criteria? How much safer is a 25 year old cut and shut Limo compared to a 2 year old roof chop, done with full work shop facillities and professionally welded? I suspect ,as this country is being flushed down the bog financially all these new rules are going to have a big impact sooner rather than later. It has already been stated in the recent passed that the Motorist is going to bear the brunt of Tax hikes in the coming years. We may as well be living under Kim Il Jong.....
|
|
|
|
|