I think it does raise another point worth making-This is a potentially very powerful, handbuilt missile. The idea of it being considered MOT exempt terrifies me! Who knows how well done the work actually is. To be honest I don't agree with MOT exemption on any car, but especially so in cases like this.
And what about the person who buys it? They could potentially spend £16+K on something that is very dodgy indeed. If there was latterly a problem, the seller (who doesn't appear to be a motor dealer) could wash their hands of it. If it's reported, then that could save someone a lot of money and a lot of trouble.

Location: Herefordshire

I tend to agree, the CLAIM was for an historic vehicle, I'd be surprised if he could insure it without declaring all the modifications which would take him back to DVLA and VOSA. It would never pass an IVA test at the VOSA inspection and therefore would not end up on the road legally. If someone did take it on the road it would not get far without being stopped, let's hope that would occur before injury or death.

My beef was against the guy with a pointed stick poking the sleeping dog ...

Location: Ripon

Well said Ray!

Duncan, While I agree almost entirely with your most recent post, I totally disagree with your original point. The current "nightmare" has, I gather, been brought about by the failure of certain clubs and individuals to responsibly self-regulate their activities.

Surely it's better for "US" collectively to distance ourselves from gross abuses by reporting them, than to wait for their inevitable discovery by the authorities?

Why should the the rest of us be dragged down by a bunch of arseholes who, for whatever reason, operate way, way outside the rules?

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

Tax evasion and tax avoidance
One is criminal and the other is a legitimate loophole.

DVLA rules allows it and is legitimate, not kosher in our eyes.

I reckon there is over 10k which fall into this category from SS100 Jaguars, D and C types, New 4,5 Bentleys with 1952 RR engine and chassis, AC Cobra, majority of the Bugatti with BC chassis numbers etc. this is the tip of the iceberg.

Going the reporting route will only complicate things.

Location: East Sussex

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

I have to say I have a lot of sympathy with this comment.
I don't particularly want to 'poke the sleeping dog' but do we really have a choice?

Said dog is as far as we can see happy to doze in the knowledge that it is in charge and not particularly bothered about the fact that it is making life difficult for those with totally original chassis and mechanics having long lost an original registration and for whatever reason have needed to have a replacement body fitted, but are at the same time happy to ignore or permit abominations that have no legitimate entitlement.

To carry the analogy further we are currently dismissed as nuisance fleas that the dog has to occasionally acknowledge with the odd scratch to ease irritation!

If we want to be taken seriously do we not have a certain obligation to be self regulating?

I've only been following the situation since the beginning of October 2015 but this whole sorry state seems to have been going on for perhaps 2 years or more.
We're already over half way through March 2016 and at least publicly don't seem to be any further forward (it's anybodies guess what goes on behind closed doors).

Location: Polegate, East Sussex, United Kingdom

Location: East Sussex

Hang on-Isn't what you've just described EXACTLY the practice that is causing the hassle for us now?!

Location: Herefordshire

Not even from old parts - the advert claims it's built from 90% new parts!

indeed
and to put it in context I reckon there is over 10k cars which fall into this category from SS100 Jaguars, D and C types, New 4,5 Bentleys with 1952 RR engine and chassis, AC Cobra, majority of the Bugatti with BC chassis numbers, Kit Cars etc. this is the tip of the iceberg.

Location: East Sussex

What about this one
http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C704937

Location: East Sussex

I have a soft spot for replicas especially where the builder has paid close attention to detail. Whether or not they should be treated in exactly the same way as cars with a genuine pedigree is a moot point. To my mind, although they are not historic vehicles they probably deserve to be recognised by the authorities as a special case and fall into a category of their own with similar dispensations to those enjoyed by genuine historic vehicles.

I think I would argue that where a vehicle is constructed with no attempt made to follow in the spirit of an original (historic) design but reflects the builder's imagination and flair; being essentially a 'hot rod' or 'street rod' of some kind, then it should be treated differently. Where the line should be drawn between these cars and 'specials' is not something that I feel sufficiently confident to comment on.

Location: Derby

Liam, what baffled me was your comment that "DVLA rules allow this and it is legitimate".

Almost all traditional Austin Seven projects could comply with those rules as virtually all of them were mechanically of pre-war origin and re-bodying an old chassis was perfectly OK.

As far as I'm aware, DVLA rules have never allowed new, or substantially new-build cars to be registered as "historic" vehicles.

However, if what I've read on this thread is true, certain clubs and individuals have been abusing the system on an industrial scale and we are all now being punished for their activities.

A 2010 new-build with 2010 on the V5 is a replica. A 2010 new-build with 1930 on the V5 is a fake and should be treated as such. I don't care whether there are ten thousand of them out there!

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

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

FBHVC and DVLA have you been communicating or are we forever in this same old loop? A progress report would be very welcome. Has anyone read "The Castle " by Franz Kafka? It's decades since I read it but I seem to remember it was about a few peasants being controlled by a massive number of bureaucrats based in the castle on the hill where the bureaucrats were incapable of making any decision. Sounds familiar........
Dave.

Location: Sheffield

Forum members may be interested to know what the seller of the hot rod has to say about the V5c....

And I quote

" The logbook has no other information on it other than 'morris', no model or anything else on there (ideal hotrod book). Think I'm the second owner on the v5, need to pull it out to double check. It's a new v5c so no worries with it needing a check like some of the older style log books. It's obviously an mot and tax exempt book. I know a lot of owners that run their rods in this way so it's the route I was taking, but insuring it with everything disclosed. Reg is transferable too, so worth a bit!. "

Location: Herefordshire

Many years ago, yes.

His other work "Metamorphosis" is highly relevant to this thread too!!

I have just been reading the latest newsletter from FBHVC (issue 2/2016) and note there is absolutely zero progress from the DVLA on age-related registration. It is on FBHVC website for those who are interested.
Dave

Location: Sheffield

Sigh

Location: Polegate, East Sussex, United Kingdom

Stephen Voller
Dec 13, 2015 - 2:43PM
Quote Reply Re: DVLA New Rules which are going to affect us all
Is your friend trying to get the cars original number officially reissued to his vehicle or trying to get a new age related number allocated ?
Certainly seems to be a lengthy process, I dread to think how many vehicles currently involved and that's without those of us still waiting to register.
Steve V

Location: Polegate, East Sussex, United Kingdom

My friend just received a letter from DVLA requesting him to make an appointment with SGS for the car to be examined.
A good start I think. but took a year to get this letter.
Liam

Location: East Sussex

Hopefully things will progress more quickly now Liam.
Sure am glad you friend wasn't holding his breath!

Steve V.

Location: Polegate, East Sussex, United Kingdom

not at all he bought a spare V5 just in case.
The DVLA reference is : Kits and Rebuilds

Location: East Sussex

Perhaps an update, such as it is, is required.
The latest FBHVC News carries an article on Registration Matters. Firstly it would appear that the DVLA negotiator moved on and it took some time to establish with whom to deal with (!)
As we know the major issue concerns bodies on vehicles with a chassis. The DVLA has on numerous occasions rejected applications on the basis of the body not being original or consistent with the original body style - often based on the body style described in the old VE60 logbooks. The DVLA's own publication, viz INF 26 and V765/3 appear to preclude that bodies on chassis should be considered in the case of a genuine vehicle. However the DVLA continue to maintain that local authorities always had considered bodies in the past and thus would continue to do so.
Much research has unearthed a Ministry of Transport document regarding licensing, taxation and registration which clearly states that the chassis constitutes the vehicle and that it not only forms the frame but both of the axles, gears, steering and transmission. A change of body by itself does not constitute a change in identity.
A further search appears to show that this policy remains unchanged.
Thus this information has been conveyed to the DVLA in a Policy Paper and a response is awaited.

Chris Garner, VC- A7CA

Location: Melton Mowbray

At first reading this would seem to be a step in the right direction. Let's hope that common sense prevails in the face of red tape.

THIS MORNING THE INSPECTOR ON BEHALF OF DVLA CAME TO INSPECT THE AUSTIN 7. HE CHECKED ALL AROUND AND TOOK NOTE OF THE CHASSIS AND ENGINE NUMBERS AND TOOK SOME PHOTOS. IN ALL 20 MINUTES.
HOPEFULLY THAT WILL SETTLE THE MATTER.

Location: East Sussex

So it's taken nearly seven months for the inspection to happen? Unbelieveable!

Let's hope a suitable V5C arrives within the next few days, as it did for the case of the Renault Dauphine that I mentioned last year.

At this rate I will be in my woodland wicker casket before any progress is made on registering my special.
Dave.

Location: Sheffield

Sadly I was not able to retain the number from my 1925 barn find trials special unearthed after a 40 year slumber, despite sending DVLA both a 40 year old, MOT and Tax Disc, receipt of Reg file transfer from "home" authority to the final one . Plus I had the usual dating letter and inspection report from the local club.

Despite all this a a full set of photos DVLA reject my application to retain the 1925 reg number and sent all my documentation back.

When I phoned to discuss the situation the official was as helpful as they could be but said they were "powerless"
As they had a strict protocol to follow and as I had not proved a direct link between the chassis no and the registration no they had to decline my application for a V5. However the official said I had enough evidence to get an age related number, which after about two months they finally issued one , in the correct format 2 letters 4 digits.

Always try to get a personal contact at DVLA in the K& R section ( there are 14 of them!) being able to phone enabled me to negotiate this maze caused by the Govt cutting civil service jobs in LOcal licensing offices

Now need to complete the Cup Rep body and change the colour!

Happy motoring!

Having a set of original Chummy wings and a 50 year old rough trials body possibly helped , but not to retain its own number even though I had loads of data but not the crucial logbook or Licensing Office records many of which were destroyed across the country.

I must try and research the age related no!

Regards

Bill

Location: Scottish Border

After a month he received a letter from DVLA

FURTHER TO THE INSPECTION OF YOUR VEHICLE, I AM CONSIDERING YOUR CASE AND WILL SEND YOU A FULL REPLY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

Really Scandalous, Does not look very good

Location: East Sussex

Has your friend been in touch with the FBHVC? - if not he should - they keep saying they need examples of whats going on.

Location: Kent

Please don't throw things at me, but having been involved in the whole process several times myself and also taking an interest in genuine cars, I really feel for the DVLA bods because the lengths some of the fakers have gone to, in order to create desirable vintage and post vintage cars is extraordinary.

What's more, a lot of them have got away with it. There are heaven knows how many Riley Imps, Brooklands, MPH's that all started out as perfectly restorable saloons, but have now inherited some sort of "history"...the same goes for whole range of other cars including six cylinder MGs, Singer LeMans, Wolseley Hornets, Bentleys and Bugattis, where there are more around now than were actually built in the first place!

Sadly the big money cars are being used to shift large amounts of money around the globe by rich businessmen and investors, which means a) the real thing is out of a lot of people's reach now and b)Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs has tightened up the rules to the point that the DVLA are looking very, very closely at every application, virtually regardless of the value of the car, knowing that a correct registration considerably adds to the value of the vehicle, particularly where "history" is concerned...did you know Tazio Nuvolari raced my Box saloon?

I really feel for the owners of specials like Hamblins and Speedex who are trying to retain a bit of history to their cars, even though they were built in the 50's and 60's and if you are building a special today, you really do have to have all your ducks in a row.

The FBHVC is a hopeless case they only provide lip service and are not really interested in fighting DVLA. They wrote few articles about it and met with officials from DVLA when it all started but we never heard from them on this subject for a very long time.

Location: East Sussex

Perhaps you should read their newsletters! Bob Owen's report in their most recent (2016 Issue 3) explains some of the difficulties they have been having with their negotiations with the DVLA. Whilst I agree that the FBHVC may have been slow to appreciate our problems, there's not much they can do when the DVLA keeps changing their negotiators.

Another route to try to make progress with this business could be to write to the following:-
The Rt Hon Sir Greg Knight MP,
House of Commons,
London,SW1AOAA.
He is the Chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Historic Vehicles Group.

,

Location: Sheffield

A record breaking 355000 car registration "private numbers" issued by the DVLA this year according to recent media reports. Has this any bearing on the sluggish progress of allowing age-related plates for old vehicles? There will not be any age related plates left soon.Plenty pennies earned by DVLA flogging "private numbers" and no money to be earned by them sorting out age-related.
Could this be the DVLA's hidden agenda or am I just a cynical old......?
Dave.

Location: Sheffield

I don't think that there's any risk of the supply of age-related registrations.

Many authorities issued few, if any, four-digit, two-letter or three-digit, three letter registrations.

I rather fancy making a pair - the current rebuild project having 4985 VJ, alongside VJ 4985 on my existing RP would look quite cool!

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

Only in as much as that's where the money is, so that's presumably where the resource goes. Old cars cost DVLA resource with zero income.

No representation without taxation perhaps?

C

Sir Philip Greed seems to have done ok by having quite a large amount of influence on the UK and his UK ex employees without contributing much into HM's coffers. I have a cold so I can't do "n's"
Sorry, just a miserable old.......
Dave.

Location: Sheffield

DVLA GAVE IT AN AGE RELATED NUMBER THEN CANCEL IT 2 YEARS LATER SAYING IT NEED TO HAVE A Q NUMBER.

Austin 8 open top tourer.. rebuilt and drives well For Sale (1946)£3500 OR OFFER

http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C783930
This vehicle is a real eye catcher and a fun car in good running order. Built from a 1946 year four door saloon using all the original chassis,engine,gearbox,steering box and axles. DVLA originally gave it an age related plate as it was registered for two years as a tourer, now they have decided that it should be a Q plate. Converted to 12 volt with an old fashioned type claxon fitted. Old tax discs and correspondence plus spares included in the sale....Quick sale, Space required.

Location: Eaqst Sussex

I wonder what triggered the DVLA to re-classify this vehicle?

I rather assumed that once you were on the road and registered, that was the end of it.

Simon

Location: On a hill in Wiltshire

[quote="Slack Alice" Simon]I wonder what triggered the DVLA to re-classify this vehicle?

I rather assumed that once you were on the road and registered, that was the end of it.

Simon[/quote]

That's what the Bugatti people thought!

Location: Derby

That's what the Bugatti people thought! [/quote]

Bugatti people make a very small percentage of the DVLA clamp down, They have a lot of Classic 60' and 70' to deal with.

Location: East Sussex

[quote="Slack Alice" Simon]I wonder what triggered the DVLA to re-classify this vehicle?

I rather assumed that once you were on the road and registered, that was the end of it.

Simon[/quote]

Seems that most cars that have their V5C cancelled as a result of the owner wanting to sell the registration. Wanting to do this triggers an inspection of the car, anything not quite right 8 points wise means that not only can you not transfer the plate, but that you lose the right to the existing registration too.

If that was the case with this car, the inspector may have judged that the Austin Eight is a monocoque vehicle, so cutting the roof off means it has a modified chassis which equals a Q plate -usually only granted after passing a BIVA test.

Location: N W Kent

But if the DVLA had issued an age-related number two years ago, this would have been done on a non-transferable basis ...

I have heard this stated before, and it may be DVLA policy. However, I have two cars with age related plates, nothing on either V5C saying that the registrations are non-transferable.

Location: N W Kent

Interesting ... Perhaps yours have somehow slipped the net! Over the years I have had numerous cars with re-issued age-related numbers - a quick count makes it eight, but I think I have missed a couple! - and they have all been issued on a non-transferable basis(the earliest I can recall dates back to the mid-1980s). So perhaps this Austin Eight may have also slipped through with a transferable number, in which case the owner should have left well alone ...

Like a few other Austin owners trying to retain their original registration numbers( in my case HU xxxx) I was fobbed off by DVLA and given an BF xxxx number ., supposedly an age related number , but further research has revealed that BF was last issued in 1904 and was withdrawn as the county set in Dorsetshire objected to having a number plate that inferred they were Bloody fools!

I've seen lots of other BF xxxx numbers recently now on Austin 7's and wonder if DVLA have decided Austin enthusiasts are all Bloody Fools!

"Under the Motor Car Act, 1903 the Local Government Board allocated BF to Dorsetshire. These letters did not find favour with some local motorists( ed : as BF was regarded as a short version of Bloody Fool!) and representations were made by the Dorset Automobile Association in 1903, the County Council applied for a change, which was permitted and by an LGB Order of 27/12/04 the mark FX was assigned.

The order did not require existing marks to be changed, but it provided that the owner could have the mark FX substituted for BF on giving notice to the county council.The last BF registration originally alloted was BF 162 on 20Dec 1994.

42 car owners and 41 motorcycle owners did not change their registration letters, but any remaining on the roads on 1/1/1921 were re-registered with FX numbers, since BF was not allocated under the Roads Act 1920 "

The above information quoted from Philip Riden's useful booklet "How to trace the History of Your Car" published in 1991.

I think I might write again to DVLA and claim my "legal" right to get an FX number, quoting the Dorsetshire precedent!

No doubt the HU xxxx I should have been allocated will now be sold for £1500? In the regular DVLA auction?as they say follow the money.

Bill G

Sent from my iPhone

Location: ScottishBorder

They only sell previously unallocated numbers

HU was a Bristol registration .

Location: Bristol

Has anyone been through the re-registration process recently with a standard car/project that has no paper evidence?

Location: Fife