| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Simon Johnston
United Kingdom
6316 Posts |
 Posted - 16/08/2015 : 21:25:57
|
Tony,
I'm not sure where the idea of redefining historic comes from either, but I don't think there's anything in the DVLA guidance that I linked to above that implies in any way that a body, as opposed to a monocoque, is taken into account. And what is driving this can be traced to a lengthy dispute (there's no other word) between DVLA and the Bugatti Owners Club who validated new chassis so that they could obtain an age related number and, in effect, be presented as genuine 1920s cars. Someone blew the whistle on this - hence the current siuation. So it has nothing to do with Brussels (despite what the Daily Mail might say!) - this is the DVLA seeking to ensure that the rules it agreed some twenty five years ago with the historic car movement are being properly applied. If you read the guidelines you'll find how the situation you are in is to be handled. In addition to the chassis, major components are defined as suspension, steering, axles, transmission, and engine. No mention of body.
Simon J
J3437 |
Edited by - Simon Johnston on 16/08/2015 21:34:27 |
 |
|
|
MG Maverick
United Kingdom
1045 Posts |
Posted - 16/08/2015 : 21:54:13
|
I am finding all this a bit worrying ! I have parts of two J2s but not enough to build two cars !
I want to put both J2353 and J4129 back together, it was the intention of Michael Bird to build one car , that's why he kept the best bits in his garage, nicely wrapped in greased paper and crated and dumped the rest in the lock up store along with old building equipment.
Mostly J4129s parts are still in the lock up, all in very poor condition, is it worth me paying and having the hassle of getting these items back ? Especially if I am going to have problems getting her registered after spending a lot of money on getting her home to the UK and its subsequent rebuild. It would be a shame for her to be lost, especially with her competition history and the early tragic demise of her owner. 
Chris ( J2353 ) & ( J4129 )
Brighton, East Sussex & Paphos, Cyprus. |
|
|
|
Richard Verrill
United Kingdom
347 Posts |
Posted - 16/08/2015 : 22:01:12
|
This thread has given me some concern, my late father purchased P1733 engine no 1848P, reg no BKX 880 on 10th November 1972 as a non runner in very poor condition. The car has been known to the Triple M register since the 70s. I inherited the car in 1990 with no DVLA documents, I made enquiries to re-register in 1995 and was told that until the car was roadworthy the registration could not happen. Over the years I have acquired many parts including a complete new body and sold many of the original parts. I have believed that as the chassis and engine/gearbox are proper to BKX 880 then re-registration would be reasonably straight forward, am I being naive?
Richard
PA1733 YA5206 |
|
|
|
Richard Hardy
United Kingdom
2183 Posts |
Posted - 17/08/2015 : 00:31:54
|
Simon, this has apparently come from Brussels. It steemed from the EU requesting DVLA to obtain proof that all cars registered before 1972 are legitimately receiving road tax exemption. This has then opened the door to further questions being raised with regard to cars being built up from an array of parts and then being classed as authentic.
I understand that a couple of Bugattis and a Bentley have already run into trouble and been assigned 'Q'plates. In addition, letters from DVLA are apparently in the process of being sent out to all Bugatti owners. This is what I heard around 8 weeks ago.
I do have quite a bit more info on this but I suspect there will be some initial friction and then the dust will settle a little.
Rich
Vintage MG Parts |
|
|
|
Simon Johnston
United Kingdom
6316 Posts |
Posted - 17/08/2015 : 06:46:07
|
Rich,
I think you'll find that 'road tax' is not a matter in which the EU has any say - it's a matter entirely for member states. Where there could be an issue is the matter of exemption from vehicle testing, which is an area in which the EU has an interest. You will recall that the decision by the UK government to exempt pre 1960 cars from testing was taken under a derogation under EU Directive 2009/40/EC and it may indeed be that DVLA now feels that it needs to tighten up its enforcement of the existing rules in order to ensure that only eligible vehicles are exempt. But so far there is nothing to suggest that the rules are being changed.
As for the stories about vintage cars being assigned Q plates (I see we can add Bugatti and Bentley to the previously mentioned Austin and Frazer Nash) a read of the guidelines, and specifically those related to Q plates, would suggest that this is highly unlikely.
You are correct in saying, however, that all Bugatti owners are being written to by DVLA and the letter from the BOC to its members explaining this, and indeed an example of one of the DVLA letters, can be found online with minimal effort.
Hopefully the seminar next month will clarify things.
Simon J
J3437 |
|
|
|
pauly45
United Kingdom
435 Posts |
Posted - 17/08/2015 : 07:22:09
|
And to add another slight variant of question into the mix -
If a car already has a registration document where the car is detailed as a 2 seater, but it is being restored as a 4 seater, what would happen when the DVLA details are updated?
Because it is a new body, would it get tangled up in this issue?
Paul. |
|
|
|
Tony Dolton
United Kingdom
372 Posts |
Posted - 17/08/2015 : 16:14:19
|
| Thank you Simon,yr input has largely allayed my concerns which were principally about bodywork.tony |
|
|
|
Simon Johnston
United Kingdom
6316 Posts |
Posted - 17/08/2015 : 20:25:37
|
Tony,
I'm a great believer in RTFR (Read The F**** Rules!) and then making up my own mind. Much better than listening to the advice of those who haven't!
Simon J
J3437 |
|
|
|
Richard Verrill
United Kingdom
347 Posts |
Posted - 18/08/2015 : 08:05:36
|
Thanks Simon, RTFR gave a me kick to read through your link to DVLA and I am now breathing more easily. I await feed back from the September meeting.
Richard
PA1733 YA5206 |
|
|
|
Simon Johnston
United Kingdom
6316 Posts |
Posted - 27/09/2015 : 21:42:05
|
Do we have any feedback from the MGCC's DVLA representative on the outcome of the meeting on 23 September?
Simon J
J3437 |
|
|
|
DickMorbey
United Kingdom
3687 Posts |
Posted - 28/09/2015 : 08:14:41
|
Simon, our MGCC board member will be posting an update report later today
Dick Morbey
PA/PB 0743
Frieth, Oxon, UK |
|
|
|
Simon Johnston
United Kingdom
6316 Posts |
Posted - 28/09/2015 : 08:36:27
|
Excellent, Dick, many thanks.
Simon J
J3437 |
|
|
|
Eric Taylor
France
162 Posts |
|
|
rodb
New Zealand
260 Posts |
Posted - 28/09/2015 : 21:04:28
|
Dick.
Can you post a link to the report when it's available please?
RodB NZ |
|
|
|
briang
United Kingdom
218 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2015 : 08:18:02
|
For VSCC members a report from the club representative at the meeting has just been published on their e-newsletter. Comprehensive and pretty reassuring to people with cars in straightforward condition with a clear history. For some made-up cars it's a bit more complicated. It seemed to be a meeting held in a mood of co-operation.
The DVLA seem to be basically trying to be sensible and consistent, but there are a few situations still to be clarified.
A note for the Eurosceptics....it's got nothing to do with the EU!
Brian |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
