Location: Derby

Ray, the Rt Hon Gentleman has been living on the same planet as us and things might be a lot worse than they are if he hadn't.
In 2007 he was named as one of the 50 most influential people worldwide in the Historic Vehicle Movement. In 2011 he was shortlisted as the ‘Industry Champion of the Year’ by the International Historic Motoring Awards, for his work in supporting the historic and classic car movement.

Sorry Nigel. I mis read the letter. He wants to hear from anyone who is ill treated by the DVLA in future. Presumably, as he has had words with transport Ministers, things should improve from now on but if they don't, as you say,, we know what to do.

Location: Derby

Location: N W Kent

Location: East Sussex

I have noticed that the publicly available DVLA info seems to lag behind what is probably the pukka info available to the rozzers etc.

Private plates etc come up within a month or two.

I've found that the London congestion charge tool the best tool for checking numbers. - Red Unknown, Unknown Model. Sounds a bit like a pretend Ferrari to me??

Location: Herefordshire, with an "E", not a "T".

cartell.ie shows it as a Porsche 944

https://www.cartell.ie/ssl/servlet/beginStarLookup?basketId=elIZRkPg8tBJCVmMuxkXN8FpDNDhRfc8®istration=VIL+8089

Location: N W Kent

I just wonder what the (expletive deleted) we have to do to get a voice that has the power not only to represent us but also be taken seriously!
It seems that this situation has probably been in the making ever since the closure of the local DVLA offices under the premise of saving money and providing a good service but centrally - yeah right!

This thread alone has been running for 6 months!
I confess to my incredible ignorance in the DVLA situation -I only discovered what was happening 2 months ago and have felt like a one legged man in an @rse kicking contest ever since.
I can't believe that the FBHVC is no more effective than a chocolate tea pot.

Surely somehow, someone (or body), somewhere has the influence to represent us properly, especially when you think of all the clubs and hundreds of thousands of car owners involved.
Perhaps legal representation is called for, with clubs/FBHVC paying for the representation.
As for the right Hon. gentleman mentioned I would be more impressed if he was taking a more pro-active roll with our difficulties.
Aaaargghhh!

Location: Polegate, East Sussex, United Kingdom

Stephen, we all share your frustration with the situation regarding the DVLA but rest assured this will all be resolved when the E.U.proposals for historic vehicles kick in. I am sure there is something in the Lisbon Treaty for everyone. Let's all vote to stay in the German EU. Oh Joy.

Location: Derby

Thanks Ray,
I do of course live in hope of some sanity breaking out!
Steve V.

Location: Polegate, East Sussex, United Kingdom

Ray, I take it that you’re pulling our collective leg re the EU proposals.
The DVLA’s tinkering with the 8-point system is nothing less than the thin edge of the Charter of Turin – something that at all costs must be kept from our shores.

On the one hand I was cheered by the Sir Greg’s response in that it demonstrated that the problems we face with the DVLA are at least being talked about. On the other hand I was disappointed to read that the DVLA is ‘minded to judge each case on its merits’.
By its own admission, the DVLA lacks both the knowledge and resources to pursue this line and furthermore have no remit to make those judgements based on anything but the 8-point system as currently stands in law. If the DVLA persist in this thinking then every decision it makes without recourse to what’s set down in statute, must be illegal.

And who’s going to represent us? There’s no substitute for our own efforts. Don’t expect the FBHVC to stand up for us in this instance, only we can save the day so get out your writing kit and make a fuss.

The next circus in town will be the EU MOT (2017) and if we think the present problems are a farce, we ain’t seen nothing yet.

I usually read every new posting waiting for good news, but isn't it a pain in the ass having to get too it, can somebody in management reverse the posting so that new ones are at the front of the post. Ba humbug

Location: Oakley ,Hants

"Charter of Turin" ...that's it... sorry if I got the wrong piece of EU legislation. No excuses really, after all they don't produce all that much do they? Haha.

Nigel, you mention in your blog (excellent read by the way) how seldom it is that old cars are encountered on the roads in Europe. I sincerely hope your influential contacts might be able to help in some way or the same will be brought to the U.K.

I fear we are all being swept along by the E.U. tide that has so weakened our National Identity and this is just part of the cynical politics that mess things up so badly that E.U. control is seen as the inevitable pathway. The DVLA may say that this has nothing to do with the E.U. but I suspect a conspiracy. There are always political games being played out in ivory towers which have far reaching consequences for all of us.

Location: Derby

I use "Recent Posts" in the header bar because of that, several interesting threads are now so long it is the only way. I do not know if Bravenet has a Newest First order.

Location: Hampshire

Hmmm,
the Charter Of Turin is still somewhat vague especially as it is now at least 2 years old.
I can see how it could be of use if officially adopted and it may even be of use where a replica body is fitted because without the body (using their terminology) 'the remaining historic value of the vehicle to survive in a usable state is lost.

However, the charter has no legal value as far as I can see and is of little help to us in our current situation with the DVLA.

Also it does nothing at present to restore the the status quo as was (Pre disbanding of Local Vehicle Licensing Offices), in helping to get period numbers retained or getting DVLA acceptance of a vehicle that has lost it's original registration and/or body and has had to have a period style replica body made in order to be road worthy and needing a replacement period registration.

Steve V

Location: Polegate, East Sussex, United Kingdom

Steve, I can’t think that anyone on this side of the Channel would support the adoption of The Charter of Turin except of course the FBHVC who said:

‘Some, who have failed to grasp the political significance of this important development have sought to portray the charter as an example of officialdom constraining the use and preservation of historic vehicles. Nothing could be further from the truth. The freedoms that we enjoy to own and moreover use our historic vehicles are jealously guarded and valued. But as with all freedoms they come with responsibility. Freedom without responsibility is after all anarchy, and officialdom’s response to anarchy is legislation. The Charter of Turin is the very demonstration of the responsibilities that we voluntarily accept and its existence proves to international and national bodies that we can responsibly manage the freedoms of use that we enjoy without the need for
recourse to restrictive legislation.’

This nonsense turns on FIVA’s proscriptive definition of an Historic Vehicle and that alone. And surely the fact that we in the UK have in the past enjoyed our freedoms under authority without recourse to this sort of clandestine quasi-legislative constraint, proves that this is a lot of mouthwash. As for the anarchy stuff – it’s embarrassingly juvenile.

I've written again to Sir Greg Knight expressing my dissatisfaction with the DVLA being 'minded to judge each case on its merits'.

Arbitrary decisions made by an unqualified body with a history of inaccuracy in their administrative work is not a state we should accept under any circumstances, encouraging as it would the falsifying of provenance - the very behaviour the DVLA seeks to curb.

I also ask, to whom would an aggrieved party appeal following a disputed decision?

Nigel, I agree with everything you say, the Charter of Turin would appear to be either a red herring or a cul de sac as far as our freedoms in using old cars is concerned.
The big question still is - who can we look to, to support our continued customary rights and traditions in using old cars whether they be original specimens or rebuilt/replacement bodied vehicles?
Sir Greg Knight - and I'm sure he is a thoroughly decent bloke, seems to be somewhat lukewarm in his responses and the FBHVC seem to be only good for sitting on the sidelines and passing the odd comment.
Considering the FBHVC say they support over 500 subscribing organizations in turn representing over 250,000 people, we don't seem to get much achieved by them.

The DVLA now no longer have the staff and historical knowledge that came with them.
All they consist of now as far as I can see, is a legislative implementer, a mass computer database with the ability to take taxes from vehicle drivers, and a quantity of staff who probably consider us as an inconvenience and who don't have the ability or power to understand or deal with us or what we represent.
In addition, do they even have the ability to truly judge each case on it's merits? -I would say no unless they aren't serious and only intend to pay lip service to considering each case.

I really hope Sir Greg will step up and achieve a positive outcome for us but I'm not holding my breath at this stage.
Will we need to hold mass historic vehicle gatherings in Whitehall to get the right peoples understanding?
Steve V.

Location: Polegate, East Sussex, United Kingdom

A protest would be a fun day out but I don’t think it would attract the amount of support needed to make a good show of it. Better I think to present a workable alternative to the present arrangements. There is a model existing on which we could build.

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) have devolved the business of looking after homebuilt aircraft and aircraft under a certain weight, to the Light Aircraft Association (LAA). Like the DVLA, the CAA haven’t much of a clue or the manpower to do anything but look at the main event – commercial aviation in their case. The LAA, run by enthusiasts, have the knowledge base and a system of voluntary inspectors to do all the stuff that the CAA haven’t the time or manpower to attend to.

I suggest that instead of protesting, we put our weight behind the adoption by the DfT of a similar set-up to be administered by an independent body, free from government influence and who (honestly) has our interests at heart. The DVLA can then concentrate on getting its record-keeping skills up to speed.

It’s clear that the DVLA can’t manage the current system without streamlining the process to our disadvantage, so maybe it’s time for some radical change?

The FBHVC might be the obvious choice for administering any new arrangement but I think that the 8-point system as we know it, must be set in stone before it could go ahead and frankly, having read the other night the FBHVC’s latest newsletter (get to it most easily via the VHRA site) I’m not convinced that the Federation is up to the job as their acquiescence seems to know no bounds.

I thought also that their stance at the DVLA meeting which translated as ‘we’re just here to watch the boys and girls let off steam; we’ll do the grown-up talking later behind closed doors’, was deeply patronising and verging even on the offensive.

An interesting suggestion, Nigel. I doubt the DVLA would voluntarily hand over control to anyone because it would be seen as an admission of failure. If the Government directed them to do so, I wonder how it would be paid for? I can't see the FBHVC taking this on - it would probably be too much for them. I imagine the Government would just set up another quango with a whole raft of charges and fees. That way, they keep control and rake in the cash while protesting that they "are doing something".

Location: Derby

As I understand things, the DVLA 'is a Quango'
Maybe the Government should allow the DVLA to have dedicated staff to deal with things properly... oh wait, that's what we used to have before Local Vehicle Licensing Offices were scrapped and successive cutbacks brought in!

Location: Polegate, East Sussex, United Kingdom

Before we do any thing, we need to have a list of what the old vehicle movement actually want from the DVLA. There are a lot of issues to be covered here, the current DVLA system seems to have covered most points but is left to unqualified individual staff members to make decisions about a vehicles future. This must not and cannot be allowed to continue.

Appointed club officials ( at least two )would seem to be the only people qualified to do such assessments, but now with a certified legally binding responsibility to be accurate.

We also need to establish what actually defines a motor vehicle in the first place,fortunately the law has all ready been done this for us. Any self propelled vehicle that can be used on a public road. So technically a drivable chassis is self propelled vehicle or a pile of components that can be assembled into a drivable vehicle and there for needs to be registered regardless of any body type fitted to it.The same applies to a drivable body shell. Remember you cannot tow a motor vehicle with or without an engine on a public road without it being road legal with the exception of it being taken to be scrapped.
Next, how much original equipment is required for it to get an age related / Q plate or new registration. This should be established if possible before any restoration work is carried out to assess what will need to be replaced with new or replica components. ( 8 point rule )

As above a barn find car with all the correct components and numbers should be no trouble to get a V5C issued before restoration, regardless of weather or not records exist for it. The vehicle exists as a whole and the numbers are correct for the year and type.( Standard issue V5C age related or original registration number issued )

Vehicle or chassis with some traceable numbers ( V5C date of original manufacture unknown believed to be ? and age related number. )

Component parts with no ID needs to be assessed on its originality and age 8 point system( V5C states made from period component parts, age related plate )

Component parts off or vehicle with no ID does not meet 8 points but old components ( Q plate SVA exempted but MOT and road fund payable )

A vehicle / chassis constructed from mainly new major components,with some original components fitted but does not meet 8 points ( Q plate replica, SVA exempted but MOT and road fund payable )

With this type of system and re-registering a vehicle before it is restored would show how much of it is original and the BOC officials that handed out the chassis numbers would be liable to prosecution, because not enough of the car qualifies as original and the vehicles would become both taxable and MOT compliant but would not be liable to an modern car SVA test that it could not pass.

Location: Pembrokeshire

Nigel has come up with the best suggestion I've heard to date. I have an ex commercial pilot pal who now does inspections of things like old Tiger Moths for the CAA under the light aircraft banner. The existing points system which applies to new build kit cars and restored vehicles could be used as it stands with club officers doing what they already do with added training and responsibility,
Unfortunately this is probably too sensible to be put into practice but if FBHVA were to produce a suitable online or postable standard letter to be completed by members who knows what might transpire...

Location: North Yorkshire

Stephen Voller

As I understand things, the DVLA 'is a Quango'
Maybe the Government should allow the DVLA to have dedicated staff to deal with things properly... oh wait, that's what we used to have before Local Vehicle Licensing Offices were scrapped and successive cutbacks brought in!

Location: N W Kent

Location: Pembrokeshire

There is also the question of a "conflict of interest". Even District Councillors are reluctant to do much to help with issues that occur near to where they live because if the problem is on their doorstep, so to speak, it is seen in some quarters as a conflict of interest. Political correctness?Anything that is seen to be beneficial to vested interests will soon get stamped on.

You need to be playing with the big boys to get away with it.

Location: Derby

I wonder if it might be better to explore the positive side of such a devolution and examine ways of structuring an organisation that was fit for purpose, rather than focus on the reasons for its possible failure.

In answer to the question, ‘who will pay?’ - we will. It’s our hobby and if we could put forward a proposal that preserves our privileges for all time and that might cost each of us annually what road tax used to cost, it’s hardly going to kill us is it?

To kick off with a few thoughts, I would hesitate to pick inspectors exclusively from within car clubs for obvious reasons – petty internal conflicts and so forth that can influence judgements. Rather, as I envisage an entirely voluntary system of inspectors, those would-be inspectors might apply for the position independently and give references to be taken up by the authorising body.

It would be made clear from the outset that the responsibilities associated with an inspector’s recommendations would be binding and falsifying the results of an inspection would result in prosecution (obviously, if the inspector’s been hood-winked then that’s different).

There would be a set number of inspectors for each area in the UK and applications for the post of inspector would be looked on favourably if the applicant could demonstrate some relevant experience – the motor trade, engineering, a history of involvement in the Historic Vehicle world etc. and if these factors were backed up by letters of recommendation.

The inspectors would view applications for visits on a database run from a small central office that might be attached to an existing set-up in the movement – for instance, The National Motor Museum might like to get involved. The owner seeking an approval would pay a small fee for the inspection and the inspector could ask beforehand for reasonable travel expenses to be paid directly by the owner.

Following an inspection, the application would signed by the owner (whether successful or not) and the authorising office would submit the application to the DVLA. It would necessarily go through ‘on the nod’ although occasional checks might be made to verify the details and that nobody’s cheating.

We could ask for a grant to get things going and a small government subsidy to run the office until such time – like the CAA – the Historic Vehicle Association (or whatever it’s called) becomes self-funding.

I’m sure I haven’t thought of half of it but it’s a start?

I like it!

Nigel, please let me know if if there is any way in which I might be of assistance.

If we can break ground with this idea I think it will quickly be accepted by old car enthusiasts Nationwide, as the way forward. There are bound to be problems ahead but with perseverance they can be overcome.

I would be keen to put my name forward as an Inspector for Derbyshire. A steep learning curve I expect but no one said it would be easy.

Location: Derby

Whilst I believe the DVLA is being unreasonably strict in their interpretation of what is acceptable as a 'reconstructed classic', there is no doubt something needs to be done when a car like this is let loose on the roads:



Believe it or not, this is an MOT-exempt 'Historic' 1925 Singer - I have been unable to find any Vintage Singer specification which includes transverse-leaf springs and a supercharged V-8 engine!

Things seem to have gone strangely quiet on this topic - how long is it going to take for DVLA to come up with suitable guidelines so that the special-building community cane recommence their activities?

I came across this the other day, http://www.sammio.co.uk/register.aspx it would seem to be quite simple to register a historic special, assuming one has the correct paper work for the chassis, but what is involved in the inspection?

Location: Pembrokeshire

Mike,
It doesn't appear to have a body. Could this be a loophole that's allowed it back on the road?
Dave.

Location: Sheffield

Motor Trike??

Location: Wessex

Dave: No the Singer has no bodywork, wings, lights, windscreen, not even any protection of the external rotating bits of the engine! I think I suggested a few pages earlier that one solution to the DVLA problem would be to stick a verifiably over-25-year-old household chair onto a running chassis.

Ian: No, not a trike; it looks like it's got a mid-thirties Ford front axle and solid disc alloy wheels which the builder claims as Austin Seven style!

I heard today from Sir Greg Knight regarding the idea of devolving the remit of the DVLA:

'I understand that there are certain changes taking place at the moment with regard to the DVLA and how they view historic vehicles which, hopefully, should lead to an ironing out of recent problems.

I will bear your comments in mind should the situation not improve'.

Firstly, I wonder who the DVLA are consulting to effect these 'certain changes' and if that party has our interests at heart (certainly not if it's an internal departmental exercise and definitely not if it's the FBHVC).

Secondly, the 'ironing out of recent problems' will be to who's advantage?
As recent events have demonstrated, the DVLA's idea of ironing out problems is somewhat at odds with the spirit of the historic vehicle movement.

If anyone hears anything of these 'certain changes', let us know.

The VSCC newsletter contains a progress report which on first reading appears positive and hopeful

care to elaborate Duncan ?
Steve V.

Location: Polegate, East Sussex, United Kingdom

Well the way I read it, it seemed to be a statement of how things were last September, and nothing much has changed since

Thanks Alan,
so nothing new really - shame, I was getting my hopes up. :O(
Steve V.

Location: Polegate, East Sussex, United Kingdom

"Positive and hopeful" or "nothing has changed". I am confused.
Dave.

Location: "Sheffield, call centre city"

Have a read through:
http://www.vscc-newsletter.co.uk/02-16-Newsletter/02-16-Newsletter.pdf

Location: Ripon

VSCC members only isn't it?

Location: Derby

I didn't realise there was a block on it, sorry. The same info is available elsewhere on t'interweb,I'll see if I can find a link...

The link works fine for me so I don't think it's "blocked"

Location: NE Peak Corner

At this stage I can see nothing that helps those who say, have complete set of mechanicals I.E complete vehicle minus the body, but with no registration who intend to restore said vehicle remains to original condition and who also intend to add a body constructed using traditional body making skills.
That is unless you go down the reconstructed classics route - it is unclear how your application would be treated or whether you could get a period registration number.

''15. Rebodied(P) Q:Where a replacement body (under 25 years old) is used, can a vehicle still be considered under the scheme?

answer: A reconstructed classic must be built from a collection of all genuine period parts, over 25 years old.
This includes the body, which must be appropriate to the vehicle.

A vehicle built from a mix of old and new parts is not acceptable.

DVLA comment: Initial discussions underway with the Federation of British
Historic Vehicle Clubs.''



DVLA were also asked to give a list of definitions:

''16 Definitions(P) -Could definitions be provided for rebuilt, restored and repaired vehicles?

-Clubs asked for definitions of each of the terms in order to ensure correct
terminology is used on the applications.

DVLA answer: This will be considered, however, it should be noted that there is difficulty in providing definitions as they depend on the nature of the work carried out.''

Surely without some sort of guidance/definitions then it's impossible to judge or make an application?

So while it is being discussed, there is nothing confirmed and nothing new since 23/09/15.
Steve V

Location: Polegate, East Sussex, United Kingdom

This business could go on longer than the Dilnot Report.

Location: Sheffield

'This business could go on longer than the Dilnot Report.'

At that rate I may have to down the two bare seats and no bodywork route....
Yikes!
Steve V.

Location: Polegate, East Sussex, United Kingdom

“DVLA answer: This will be considered, however, it should be noted that there is difficulty in providing definitions as they depend on the nature of the work carried out.''

In the spring of 1986, Miss Whizzlong and I found ourselves in the foyer of the Department of Trade’s headquarters in Victoria St, London, as part of a planning committee.
The bicentennial of The Board of Trade was just round the corner and a bit of a beano was on the cards; HM was to unveil a plaque, Paul Channon (then Secretary of State for Trade & Industry) would say a few words following which we’d all fall on the crisps and pop.
There were 7 people arranged in a semi-circle in the foyer with Channon at one end and me at the other. The question was asked, ‘What colour should the foyer’s celebratory curtains be?’ and in a scene worthy of ‘Yes Minister’, Paul Channon consulted briefly with his aide, his aide turned to the Head of Management, the Head of Management turned to his secretary who turned to the commissioning architect, who looked at Miss Whizzlong and she turned to me.
‘Gold’.
A murmur of approval rippled its way back to the Minister.

If the DVLA would just admit that they’re out of their depth and devolve the responsibility of historic vehicles to an independent body, then things will move forward.