Now the BOC (Bugatti Owners Club) has finally published the DVLA position on historic cars just contemplating the effect on the hobby and the business. Every Historic vehicle to be re-examined, about 1,000,000 they reckon, re-dated at the age of the newest major component (body counts as a major component) and if that component is less than 25 years old a Q plate which means passing an IVA test. can't see how a special is going to keep a registration and will be Q plated if they apply the rules ...as per their web site. Given this is going to affect all Historic registered vehicles my guess is car sales of anything but perfect cars are going to go on hold while this shakes out, it has been that way with BC chassis numbered cars for the last couple of years. Big changes coming our way, the end of built up cars, hot rods? Reduced sales of new parts so they won't be available to "real" cars when they need them.

Maybe a bit more info on the DVLA, BOC have been in discussion with DVLA for the last 2 years because there was a problem with cars registered as historic that were not Historic according to the DVLA process. This is shown on the .gov website. Certain cars have had their V5's retained by DVLA prior to satisfying them that the cars deserve historic status. The reason is that Historic cars receive exemptions on vehicle testing and the EU have asked the DVLA to confirm all cars ...that have Historic registration deserve it prior to the implementation of the European Roadworthiness Directive in 2017. DVLA were going to draw a line in the sand and only rigidly apply the rules going forward but a body got involved and insisted that the rules be applied equally to all Historic vehicles. The process they have agreed is that they (DVLA) will send a letter to all owners of historic registered vehicles asking them to prove their cars deserve to be registered as Historic by proving the provenence of the major components, meaning a letter from the appropriate car club confirming which parts are new and the relative dates of the major components. The process is then as described on the website.Quote "Your vehicle won’t get an age-related registration number if it includes new or replica parts" with regards to cars built up from parts all over 25 years old quote "DVLA will assign an age-related registration number to the vehicle based on the youngest component used". The letter from the BOC outlines the process as applied to Bugatti owners letters are in the post from DVLA. But the same approach is to be rolled out to all Historic registered vehicles, there are at least 2 cars which are all original rolling chassis that have been assigned Q plates recently because they have had new bodies fitted to the car. One was told to grind off the original factory VIN number and stamp in the new 16 digit VIN assigned by DVLA when the car was Q plated.

Location: Berkshire

Very interesting Ben.

I wonder by what process the 2 Bugatti cars gained a Q plate? As far as I am aware an IVA test has to be passed to get a Q plate. A test which NO vintage or indeed even pre 1970's car could possibly pass without considerable modification.

Location: Devon

V627/1 is the correct form for registering a "built up vehicle"

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/278783/V627X1_270913.pdf

This does NOT list the body as a major component, rather , it says "Chassis/Bodyshell" allowing for Bodyshell to be crossed out for a non unitary construction vehicle.

Location: Devon

Guidelines from DVLA.

10. Reconstructed classic vehicles
Your vehicle must comply with the road vehicles regulations if you use it on the road.

How to register
You must follow all the instructions for registering a new vehicle.

You must include the following with your application:

written report from the appropriate vehicle owners’ club
form V627/1 - ‘Built up vehicle inspection report’
evidence of type approval, if necessary
official receipts for any parts used
Get an age-related registration number
DVLA can only recognise your vehicle as a reconstructed classic vehicle if it meets certain criteria. It must be:

built from genuine period components from more than one vehicle, all over 25 years old and of the same specification as the original vehicle
a true reflection of the marque
The appropriate vehicle owners’ club for the vehicle type (‘marque’ must inspect the vehicle and confirm in writing that it:

has been inspected
is a true reflection of the marque
is comprised of genuine period components all over 25 years old
They must also give manufacture dates for the major components.

DVLA will assign an age-related registration number to the vehicle based on the youngest component used.

New or replica parts
Your vehicle won’t get an age-related registration number if it includes new or replica parts. DVLA will give your vehicle a ‘Q’ prefix registration number. Your vehicle must pass the relevant type approval test to get a ‘Q’ prefix registration number.





The letter from the BOC to members regarding DVLA;

Location: United Kingdom

Thanks Austin. Unfortunately I cant seem to be able to blow it up enough to read it!

Re the guide lines. The "replica parts" referred to are major components as listed on the form. Of course a Bugatti made up of many "re-manufactured" parts may have a problem, but luckily most of our humble Austins will not.

Location: Devon

It's the DVLA use of the word "all" that had me worried, but as you say the body appears to not be considered a major component on the form.

Full size version of the letter is here;
http://i729.photobucket.com/albums/ww292/austinh7/BOC%20letter_zpsni61ywpw.jpg~original

Location: United Kingdom

with the aid of a magnifying glass I have been able to read the letter, Thank you Austin for posting that.

Location: Devon

If they ever get to them, there are going to be some MGB, Mini and similar cars owners feeling a bit sick, when their expensive heritage shelled rebuild gets to be put through an IVA test for a Q plate......

Location: Devon

Location: Devon

Austin,
I can't access your link. I have an error message on each of the six times I have tried it. Pity as I am very interested. My special is about 80% complete and is made of all A7 spare parts except body.
Dave.
Ok Austin. Now managed to decipher it. Must have another look at INF 26 or whatever they refer to. I have a copy somewhere.

Location: Sheffield

Sorry it auto-linked. Try this

Letter link

Location: United Kingdom

Austin,
Thanks very much. That's even better.
Dave.

Location: Sheffield

Hi Ben

I think the Bugatti club letter refers to reconstructed classics (DVLA parlance). There is another category "rebuilt vehicle". I would be interested to know if these new rules would apply to these.

Current regulations (DVLA 7th April) states that for reconstructed classics ALL components must be over 25 years. For rebuilt vehicles there should be an original chassis and 2 other original major components (the body isn't mentioned) albeit the presence of an original log book or suitable evidence of the cars period existence is also required. Many specials built on a chassis kit or by stripping off the body from a car fall in this category

My special also falls into the second class (although in my case the body had rusted into oblivion) and I guess many others will be in a similar situation. If these new rules apply to both categories then huge numbers of rebuilt vehicles will be affected, old chassis cabs converted into motorhomes Is one example.

Howard

Location: Mid Wales

Completely confused ?
No one is telling me to put my DY plate on a Q plate ?
I have an original 1929 Austin Seven with all the history and that it will stay.
Thank God for a EU referendum is all I can say and even better I look forward to the protest drive we will all do to London and stop the traffic in protest of such stupid laws.
But once again I tell you right now - no one is taking my DY plate away from me.
The least I will do is fight for the car to a bloody end.
Can we clarify this post please?

It notes-

"built from genuine period components from more than one vehicle, all over 25 years old and of the same specification as the original vehicle"

I have just put a 'new' coil, spark plugs and a set of tyres on my complete original Saloon - basically the same specification as the original vehicle but definitely not 25 years old - under these badly worded rules this would give me a problem in the UK, or is there a let out for wearing parts?
I will stay with our recently updated Victorian Club Permit Registration (red plate) system thanks! (it is defined as a 'registration' on the document)
Maybe I can only drive for 90 days a year (with three cars that is 270 days!) but I can retain the original road registration plates if I want and the system is so much easier to comply with than the above proposal.

Tony.

Location: Malvern, Melbourne, Australia.

Location: Auckland

Is it the first of April?

Sadly not

Location: Devon

In that Bugatti Club letter, the fourth paragraph on the second page reads:

"The DVLA have also confirmed that where an owner of a correctly registered historic vehicle needs to replace an original component, due to accident damage, failure, safety or other reasons, then this will not invalidate the vehicle's historic status or registration. They accept that original cars will, during their 'life-span', require replacement components and will be assessed in line with the Agency's leaflet, INF 26."

I have been unable to identify this INF 26 leaflet - searching the DVLA's website only produces references to Notices 221 & 232 relating to Customs Warehousing! However, the implication is that there should be no problems with replacement/new components once a car has been 'correctly registered'; the problems seem to arise if the vehicle has yet to be registered - one law for one, and another law for the other!

I can see a vast uprising of very influential owners of very expensive cars if the DVLA continues with its apparent present course - there are a lot of cars valued in the hundreds of thousands of pounds (and even multiple millions) which will be adversely affected and it would see the end of a huge export business which brings billions of pounds into the economy...

Here you are Mike, although it seems to be slightly out of date, which is probably why its not on the official web site. Being re written I guess.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/168405/response/409901/attach/2/inf26%201.pdf

As you say, DVLA may find they have a MASSIVE problem if they carry this course of action through, looking at every historic registered car. Following the rules to the letter British classics which have been re-shelled using a Heritage shell would all have to be re registered on a Q plate, however most couldn't pass IVA, so cant be registered at all ......

Location: Devon

This all sounds very serious or not or even maybe.

As nobody actually know what all this men's yet to historic car owner.

Is there anyone from the clubs, especially austin and mg sorting out with the DVLA what's actually happening here, or not happening or even maybe happening.

1,000.000 cars entitled to no tax and no mot. I remember the thread on getting rid of mots. And this may just be the reason why we should pay our way with mot and tax. It would give us more say when this sort of thing happens.

Tony

Location: Leics

Firstly I assume that DVLA may be reading this thread.

The root of the problem is that DVLA have never accepted that a car made from bits can get an age related number plate. An age related plate gives an identity to a car that has lost its history. Over time some enthusiasts have perhaps been econmical with the truth about the origins of the parts and the veracity of the vehicle source. What has changed in recent years is that you can now build a completely or majority new "old" car - and that people have continued with the belief that these can be blagged into age related status. DVLA were bound to get wise to this and make sure that nobody assumed that they (DVLA) were happy to be misguided. Nobody likes to be taken for a fool. After all if you did this stuff with a 2010 BMW you'd expect to be collared so why should old cars be different?
They tightened things up with the "25 year old component rule" for age related numbers a while back. This effectively shuts down the GE Cup and Ulster replica industries. In principle they're wrong in that one because the body on a prewar car has always been a changeable item without losing the identity. However if they believed that most re bodied prewar cars were built from parts you can understand their desire to stop age related plates going onto collections of bits.

The root of the problems is that old car enthusiasts and clubs have been too casual. Remember that Ruby bodyshell fixed to a Zetec engined Caterham-like job? That assumed the identity of the Ruby. Go to a website called BugattiBuilder.com and read their forum about building new cars. You can then start to understand the DVLA position. What remains to be seen is if ther current "hardcore" position is a negotiating start point or the rules for ever. What is certain is that DVLA are the law; they don't have to negotiate. They enforce. What we have to do is understand their reasons, our failings and to agree a way to get what we want and help to deliver what they want.

By the way the rules for rebuilding cars allow for the use of a new monocoque bodyshell but not to reuse an old one (that is a Q plate crime). So anyone rebuilding an MGB with a new heritage shell and keeping the original V5 is in the clear. No Q plate. A re-shelled MGB built from parts could be a Q plate depending in the points score.

All the right documents are on the National Archives version of the old DVLA ŵebsite. The "improvements " made by the Government Digital Service to the .gov.uk website have rendered the DVLA content largely useless.

Charles

1,000.000 cars entitled to no tax and no mot. I remember the thread on getting rid of mots. And this may just be the reason why we should pay our way with mot and tax. It would give us more say when this sort of thing happens.

Tony[/quote]


Quite right, Tony!

I seem to remember that you, I and a good many others said at the time that it was the first step to restricting the use of old cars.

Location: Herefordshire, with an E not a T

Could be I have just finished a very expensive hill climber to be trailered around,with a lovely leather interior ,,,a bit heavy though..Terry.

'By the way the rules for rebuilding cars allow for the use of a new monocoque bodyshell but not to reuse an old one (that is a Q plate crime). So anyone rebuilding an MGB with a new heritage shell and keeping the original V5 is in the clear. No Q plate. A re-shelled MGB built from parts could be a Q plate depending in the points score.'

Charles are you sure this is still the case? I know it always used to be, but as far as I can tell if they are not allowing new coachwork on an otherwise original pre war chassis, then t seems strange they would allow esentially a complete new body and chassis. It seems like the points score system has been disposed of with the requirement of all parts over 25 years old. In my opinion the points system was pretty reasonable without the 25 year old stipulation.

It seems that they accept that they no longer have the resources, knowledge or in fact don't want to bother to deal with cars on a case to case basis. Subsequently it seems they are trying to make a blanket deterrent to anyone wanting to build a car up from parts. Yes they may stop some of the questionable cars (new cars, clones and ringers), but this blanket enforcement is wholly damaging to the historic car movement, depriving many bodiless chassis or collections of parts from seeing the road again. If for example a rolling chassis turned up for a marque which no other survivors exist, the DVLA are saying that fitting replica original coachwork would mean the car being subjected to an IVA test for which it would have to be extensively modified the chassis numbers ground off (this particular part makes me sick to my stomach) and stamped with a new number. How more comprehensively could this process destroy the cars history? Acknowledging that no sane person would put the car through this it means either the car sits unused in a museum or leaves the country a real shame for the British car community. I think logic dictates these cars get registered age related and if they really feel they need to do something then just a note on the log book to say replacement coachwork or whatever.

I think Ivor is right, and I shared the apprehension when the MOT exemption was given. I am sure we would rather pay tax and have an MOT (obviously the MOT must be relevant to to the age of car) than have cars denied the use of the roads. I don't know whether a resentment of these privileges could be part of the reasoning for this action?

I think the historic car movement needs to make a stand as a whole to make our voices heard, I'm sure there are many unaware or don't feel it affects them that don't understand the gravity of the situation. If the FBHVC could draft a concise letter to be distributed through clubs, magazines, forums ETC for everyone to lobby their local MP's this alongside an on-line petition, would surely be our best chance of getting this issue talked about. I would assume that most of government have no idea this is happening or realise the adverse implications to the classic car industry in the UK. Although accepting we live in a country that let the worlds first purpose built racing track get into the state it is now, I'm not sure how much hope we have.

Location: United Kingdom

The way that I understand it:

The 25 year old part rule applies to cars that are seeking an age related number or to reclaim an original number. ( ie neither have V5s)
The reshelled MGB case is neither of these. It is a car with a current valid current registration having a new bodyshell fitted in line with the points system.

Charles

Apologies Charles and anyone else for any confusion I read the second bit 'a reshelled MGB built from parts could be a q plate depending on the points score' as meaning a car seeking a reg. It still however is a complete contradiction on the DVLAs part. as long as your car is registered you can replace parts with new, but if it's not it has to include all over 25 years old.

In the BOC letter there is a part written to the club from the DVLA, which says the DVLA will be contacting the owners of all Bugatti cars asking them to provide evidence of the age and origin of the components of their cars, along with history of the car in it's constructed form and the evidence will be reviewed to decide whether the car deserves its registration, or requires an IVA and Q plate. The way it says all rather than recently registered cars. It also sounds as if they are taking a lack of evidence of innocence as a proof of guilt. which is the opposite of the way our law works, Innocent until proven guilty. How are they intending on proving the age of components? It seems like they are treating this in a very blasé manner, and do not understand the implications of their actions, as if the cars can just have an IVA and all is ok. The modifications required for the IVA ruin the car and deleting the chassis number is sacrilege. I can understand if you're fitting a bike engine in the back of a mini it needs an IVA and the modifications for the IVA are not a problem as the car has already been modified out of period, likewise if you are building a kit car. For someone wanting to put an old car back on the road that has needed new coachwork or a new part made to original specification, the modifications required for the IVA would rob the car of what it stands for and defeat the whole point of resurrecting the car in the first place.

Location: United Kingdom

Mike

I'm reading the INF26 rules as applying to a correctly registered historic vehicle (that's what paragraph defines). The wording is deliberately precise.
In my book that means a car that has a V5 and passes the current McCarthy-ite process unscathed. That cannot mean a car without a current V5 (pile of bits) or one that the investigations suggest has acquired a V5 through some degree of fibbing.
I may of course be wrong on this. I await some comment from the FBHVC!

Charles

One small point that no-one has yet mentioned is that perhaps the stock of two letter four numbers has been sold off by the DVLA and possibly some of we A7 Friends have one on their modern vehicle(s). I see a 4 wheel drive Chelsea tractor drive up our road every day with such a reg "DS....". I have also been recently to the H&H auction where much dosh is spent on purchasing these numbers. (I went to look at the cars,not a pile of letters and numbers.)I believe you can do what you want with your own money but it does seem such a shame that it is allowed to happen purely to satisfy vanity. I am happy to be corrected on the above because I am no expert on this subject.
Dave.

Location: Sheffield

The DVLA HAVE DONE PLENTY OF SILLY THINGS.

If they have sold of the two letter reg numbers, that's as stoopid as it comes.

I've been approached by plenty of reg number sellers over the years ( and not sold to any of them ).

And they all give and get better prices for the number regs.

If you think about it, right your own initials don't, and see how many plates for sale with your initials.

Mine are APB and not to many of those reg numbers about.

Tony

Location: Leics

I feel this could be my fault

In Sept 2013 at the auction at beaulieu summer auto jumble there was a PUR SANG Bugatti 35 entered that I was bidding on. It was a 2002 creation which the auction did not deny although it had a BO chassis number. Aware of what it was I questioned the MOT as it should be subject to 2002 compliance rather than 1930 vintage,. The following January while working for VOSA I questioned its excistance in the United Kingdom providing the registration number ect. Feeling this was a mondern recantation rather than a period replica.

David

I am thinking that out there,there must be lots of Austin 7 two seater specials that are still registered as four seater saloons, and even more with the wrong engine number . So what the hell do they do. Maybe someone in authority can advise such owners.? Terry .

Location: Leics

Terence
In regards to specials still being registered as saloons I must say that it is the owner's responsibility to ensure the paperwork on their car is correct. Regardless of what these new rules supposedly are, if a special is running on the road still registered as a saloon then there is no-one else to blame if something is queried than the owner.

For my 31 Montgomery special the V5C under section S.1 number of seats including driver is left blank, but then looking at the cars old buff logbook of 1956 (probably the time it was converted to a special) thats also been left blank after seating capacity, Geoff.

Location: Sunnyish Suffolk coast

Tony,
Now I understand! Some people would like to think they don't have a middle name because they find it embarrassing. I am one of those people.
There has been so much speculation about this situation of age-related reg numbers. We will have to see what happens with a few of the test cases. Currently I am losing enthusiasm for completing my special after working on it for 2 years plus.(And planning what to do for the last 25 years.)
Dave.

Location: Sheffield

Dave, just sent you an email on the subject... Let me know if you need any further info
Cheers
R

Location: Horsham

What does is mean for this company and others who produce these D Type cars and other car make?
http://www.realmengineering.com

It must be more far reaching than we think a lot of closing down, a lot of reduncancy

Location: London

I think Charles P has summed up the problems clearly in his posts. The DVLA website describes the situation very well with clear and concise explanations of the various issues. The BOC situation is very different. Cars were being produced which were completely new across a number of factories in different parts of Europe and South America while then being registered as period. As far as I am aware this was always incorrect but as the situation regarding registration seemed poorly policed these cars were "slipping through the net"

As far as I can tell from reading the DVLA site nothing has really changed, other than the rules are now going to be inforced properly?

Location: Leics

PGS I wish you were right about nothing changing and it not affecting us, but this has been proven to be wrong on both accounts. Please read the following thread in which Malcolm Parker explains that he was denied an age related plate for his GE Brooklands replica despite the cars application being supported by the PWA7C DVLA officer.
http://pub25.bravenet.com/forum/static/show.php?usernum=2099944454&frmid=5&msgid=990301&cmd=show

Part of the Bugatti problem is, as you say completely brand new cars being registered as old cars, but is also cars which have had original parts added to fraudulently claim that these are old cars rebuilt with some new parts. In order to stop the new cars being passed off as old they are now saying all parts must be of original manufacture to gain an age related plate. This unfortunately rules out the cases where a genuine original car has required a replacement part, which given the limited life and availability of some parts is completely understandable. (the DVLA admit that parts will need replacing during a cars life in the BOC letter however will not allow the same replacements on cars seeking registration) A newly manufactured part to the original specification is sometimes the only way of putting a car back on the road, and I think acceptable as long as no fraud is involved to pass these new components off as old with identification numbers. This I think is where they should just implement the points system, if the majority of the parts are original then it makes sense its a restored/reconstructed period vehicle, if the majority are new then it is a new car (this would also deter people from putting original parts to poor use on new cars rather than going towards restoring old cars). The body on a car with separate chassis should as it always has been not affect the cars points score.

Location: United Kingdom

Doesn't the old car movement deserve a full and unambiguous statement from the DVLA, rather than people popping up and giving their interpretation of current DVLA bureaucratic 'rules' what are frankly ambiguous. Maybe the FBHVA could liaise with or assist the DVLA to produce a statement.

Mr Simon, I am thinking that your sentiments are entirely those of decent fellows but must debate that FBHVC might have headed Indians off at pass before this time if it had set of teeth. FBHVC involving itself in things at this level is not bearing fruits.
But yes, clarity is demanded by old car movement and then we can be making proper fuss and palaver correctly.
Thank you.
PS I am making four questions:
1. When old car is disrupted of its ‘Historic’ status and is getting ‘Q’ plate with IVA testing people, if now not ‘Historic’ car can pass ordinary MOT, why is IVA needed?
2. If all ‘Historic’ cars are paying tax and having MOT so becoming ordinary cars, what is problem?
3. Is Chancellor of Exchequer asleep?
4. If 1 million cars is translating to 1 million votes to jettison from EU, is it wise of Gov’t?
Thank you

Simon - an article in the latest FBHVC News contains the following

"...recent feedback suggests that these changes in the DVLA approach are leading to particular difficulties in three areas:

Age-related registration of vehicles with new bodies

Data obtained from internet sources

Expertise of clubs

FBHVC are in the early stages of discussion on these points with DVLA. Although DVLA stated a willingness to enter into those discussions, they were very restricted in what they were permitted to discuss in the period leading up to a General Election, in common with all of the Civil Service."

So they are doing something!

Rick

Location: Deepest Norfolk

Thank you for that information Rick.

I note the issue of new bodies comes up again from the FBHVC. There seems to be some confusion here, with some feeling that only monocoques are affected.

Location: Dover

Just Heard on Facebook that DVLA has written to all Bugatti owners requesting informations.It looks it is the start of a long process.
No doubt it will affect a lot of clubs.

Location: Berkshire

Perhaps those with cars with suspect pedigree should be concerned, it may be the case of chickens coming home to roost. Where cars have been 'manufactured' using very little of an original car then it is only right that DVLA should be concerned. After all, building a kit car and putting an Bugatti badge on it does not make it a Bugatti..

Those of us with cars with good pedigree have nothing to worry about, have we?

Location: Falmouth