Government petition

[pbottomley]

In terms of the historic vehicles the Feds claim to represent you, however this is not true, when claiming in one hand to represent the rights of ALL historic car owners (by claiming to be being the lobby group for the UK government, smoozing up to political types at members costs), and in the other back stabbing anyone with a view that doesn't match theres.

As the voices of the modified community raised themselves the Feds said they would represent all parties and indeed said the "Charter of Turin" was nothing more than a political tool and wouldn't ever be made into law, trust us to represent your concerns.

At the same time those Hot Rod groups that had got together to question this, were right royalty dealt with by the Feds who played a lot of dirty games to ruin the reputation of those organisations (if anyone can remember Armageddon and the outcome was that ACE were branded "scaremongers"). I was there when it was happening, and I can say for one that low blows were being dealt to protect the Private limited company that is the Feds.

So where are we today with representation to government departments? well blow me down if it isn't the Feds again and with a newly worded aim.

The FBHVC are members of the “Fédération Internationale des Véhicules Anciens” (FIVA) which was founded to represent the interests of historic vehicle enthusiasts globally. Currently FIVA has over 85 member organisations in more than 62 countries throughout the world, which represents more than 1,500,000 historic vehicle enthusiasts.

FIVA are working with UNESCO and the International Committee for the Conservation of Industrial Heritage (TICCIH) to formally establish FIVA as the NGO for historic vehicles. The aim being to achieve global recognition of historic vehicles as an important part of world heritage.

This is based on the the FIVA Charter of Turin. The FIVA Culture Commission have produced a glossary to assist with defining the terms used. They are also working on a handbook which will show examples of restorations that have been undertaken in sympathy with the charter.

Basically if it isn't original, it isn't used often and is culturally important, then it isn't historic. The DVLA listen to the feds as they use members money to cream up to the political classes and wine / dine those with influence, to protect their view point. (see Charter of Turin).

So where is the benefit? well the FEDs promote FIVA to become a NGO (gravy train), and by the way many of the FEDS are also linked directly the the FIVA (self serving) so thats the positive.

Negative, you get screwed over because you didn't build your car to the regulations, which seem at this point in time to be retrospective (but are not as the regulations have existed since 1988), its just that the DVLA lacked the will . ability to enforce them. The Charter of Turin indirectly gives them the push to enforce and the method seems to be forming around self declaration.

[vauxhallbitz]

you answered your own question in your previous post... ON ALL COUNTS....

Exactly my point, there is no benefit for us.

[Colin]

My understanding of this issue is that it's not about central government seeking to help or to hinder classic car ownership. It is simply about public funding cost saving.

The DVSA as we know is a publicly funded Government agency responsible for driver and vehicle testing - that is the testing of HGV, PLG, IVA and (until now) Historic Vehicles.

HM government recently embarked on a 'rationalisation' programme (a euphemism for 'cost cutting') involving the closure of DVSA run HGV and IVA (Individual Vehicle Approval - kit car and one off) test facilities nationally.

HGV testing will now be 'contracted out' to private business - in the same way that PLG MOT testing has for many years taken place at approved MOT test stations run by private business. The same will also now apply to IVA testing. You will have to take your home built Caterham or V8 T-bucket to an MOT testing station for IVA inspection from next May - not to a DVSA testing facility because they will all have been closed.

A part of the study undertaken in 2015 identified the fact that over the previous twelve months only two (or possibly three - memory fails) injury collisions were recorded nationally involving Historic Vehicles (currently those registered prior to 1977). There were no collision fatalities involving Historic Vehicles.

Which gave rise to the question by central government; if enthusiast owned and maintained Historic Vehicles are so safe that injury virtually never occurs, why are the DVSA providing unnecessary testing of such vehicles? Can a saving be made by abolition? The answer of course being that yes a saving could be made.

Hence the decision by HM Govt to abolish Historic Vehicle testing because it is simply not needed. In 2014-2015 no one died or was seriously injured as a result of the occasional presence on the roads of the 300,000 odd vehicles registered as Historic vehicles.

However, HM Govt have then gone in exactly the opposite direction by moving 'significantly modified' Historic Vehicles - determining modification as 'significant' if it is a departure from original specification - to the IVA category, which will still require single vehicle approval and MOT, and unfortunately possible allocation of the dreaded Q plate.

The last few months' consultation process is not really a 'consultation' - in that it's not about seeking people's views. The consultation is a means by which government let people know what's coming a few months ahead to allow a chance for any glaring omissions to become apparent.

So, with the greatest respect, unless national outcry is so extreme as to generate literally millions of petition signatures, this is already a done deal. Implementation is well underway.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... troduction

[Fred Dukes]

I understand what you are saying hear Collin - its an attempt at a balanced cost saving exercise - as a cynic the consultation document was put out, maybe as you say, to let people know what is coming but also to tick the box in the process schedule which says you need to gather public opinion, not that any notice is taken of the result
So if it is a cost saving exercise can we assume that existing modified will be left as is on the basis that they have not been the cause of accidents or loss of life. Should they decide to pull in all the modified and give them this IVA test this in itself will be a highly cost exercise
If I loose the Historic Vehicle classification on The Baron I don't mind continuing an annual MOT but if he is put on a Q plate I presume he will have to pay road tax - I will be right *Bleep* off if that is the case and it will undoubtable effect his resale value

[Colin]

This is the part I don't understand Fred.

Firstly, registration numbers -

I can't see a need to change a Historic Vehicle's registration number when the vehicle has a verifiable and documented registration history - just because the vehicle now falls into a 'modified' IVA tax class?

I always thought the point of a Q plate was that it's issued to a vehicle whose date of manufacture cannot be accurately verified, either because it's unknown or because the car is made from a mixture of old and new parts making it probably more new than old - like the proverbial heavily customised V8 T-bucket.

To forcibly remove a historic car's registration number, when the car has a known and documented registration history, then re-allocate the car with a Q-plate and no doubt then allow the DVLA to re-use or sell the car's original historic number, would appear to me to be simply government sanctioned theft!

Secondly, IVA modified Historic Vehicle examinations,

How on earth are they going to enforce it?

Other than in the case of the proverbial V8 T-Bucket with numerous obvious modifications, how is an IVA examiner going to be able to distinguish modified parts from original specification without expert knowledge of the particular vehicle being examined?

I honestly can't see how the DVSA will be able to reclassify any but the most obviously modified vehicles...

[Fred Dukes]

lets hope you are right

[Colin]

A part of the study undertaken in 2015 identified the fact that over the previous twelve months only two (or possibly three - memory fails) injury collisions were recorded nationally involving Historic Vehicles (currently those registered prior to 1977). There were no collision fatalities involving Historic Vehicles.

I suspect this information will have been wrongly recorded at source. There will probably have been many more injury collisions involving Historic Vehicles. However, a non-classic car enthusiast cop attending the scene of an Escort up a lamp post will in many cases have unknowingly ticked the 'PLG' box rather than the 'Historic' tax class box on the RTC recording forms (if a 'Historic' tax class option yet appears at all on the police collision forms).

There are lies, damn lies... and statistics - Mark Twain

[lord13]

The following is an excerpt from a letter I received from Mr Mark Vickers of the DVSA following a request I made for information regarding modified vehicles. I outlined two scenarios, one involving cutting the bodyshell, and one did not, this was the reply, in part, for both scenarios:

"When a vehicle is rebuilt or modified, its original identity can be called in to question. Have so many new or different parts been used in the rebuilding process that the original vehicle has been effectively broken up ? Could the vehicle be viewed as the "Ship of Theseus" ? To this end, the DVLA will inspect vehicles notified to them, that have been substantially rebuilt or modified, to decide if they can retain the original registration number allocated to them. It is a legal responsibility for the owner of the vehicle to notify the DVLA of such changes. If they decide that the vehicle has been modified, or substantially altered, from its original specification, but is not a kit conversion, a points system will be allocated to the major components to establish if the vehicle can retain its original registration mark. If the components score less than eight points, or a modified chassis or frame (or altered monocoque body shell) is used, the vehicle will require an Individual Vehicle Approval (IVA) test and will not retain its original identity or registration number. It will also be issued with a new chassis number which will start with DVLASWA."
-Mark Vickers Eng Tech MSOE MIRTE | Technical Officer IVA M1 N1 O1
Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency

This is what effectively killed my model Y restoration, and scuppered plans for my estate mods . . .

He also pointed out later on that a re-shell of a vehicle, unless a brand new shell from the original manufacturer or a 'type approved' shell, would also require an IVA.
Of course, this will only apply if you notify the DVLA of all changes.... but, with them bringing in all these changes regarding VHI status and the fact that you must notify of all changes when you apply for tax then i can see a lot of DVLA letters being sent out requesting provenance of classic vehicles.
This has already happened to some owners of prestige vehicles such as AC cobras and bugattis, in 2015 there are documented cases of such vehicles being issued with Q plates, it is now filtering down to us, and this legislation is their way of implementing it.

[Colin]

That does help to clarify things, Mitch. The responsibility of notification will be placed on the vehicle owner - and woe betide any who fail to disclose - in much the same way that Sec 172 RTA 88 imposes a duty on a registered keeper to notify who was driving when the camera was activated...

The relevant point in relation to Q plates would seem to be that only those vehicles modified to such an extent as to call in to question their provenance will score eight points or fewer and be re-registered with Q plates - E.g: the Firenza upper shell placed atop a BMW floorpan with Subara running gear.

If my understanding is correct this should mean that Fred's V8 Firenza - The Baron - a substantially unmodified Firenza shell fitted with V8 running gear should score more than eight points and be able to retain its chassis number and registration? Would that seem correct?

To answer my own question I guess we would need to see the points chart and criteria around how points are awarded. Has that been published by the DVSA?

[Fred Dukes]

So your view is that this will be retrospective If that is the case how can I accurately say what modifications have been implement prior to my ownership -I bought a Firenza with a V8 engine and 5 speed gearbox and a set of Avon Safety wheels (ex HPF ) - the V5C correctly identifies the chassis and engine no. - it is classed as Historic Vehicle - It has passed ever MOT since I had it with no advisories - I don't know what else was done to it - as far as I know - as a non mechanic - layman - all else is as it was built in the factory and I hazard a guess that is the case with a good percentage of the Classic Car owners.
we can second guess this till the cows come home - the outcome will be far less serious than it is for those poor buggers who are projected to have an HS2 line running through the middle of there farm/ business destroying their livelihood