Precisely! The chassis and its number is the basic identity of a vehicle; if a vehicle receives a new chassis frame, then it is considered to have been rebuilt onto the new chassis, not to have had a replacement component. The chassis frame IS the basic identifiable entity - all other components are period-identifiable replacements.

Dear FBHVC,
I hope you are noting this discussion and they are used to put a very valid case to the DVLA. What would be so wrong in keeping the points system and just how relevant is a body,as long as it is made to a style and using the same construction method as an Austin Seven of that period and similar to commercial coachbuilders who fitted their wares on many an A7 in the 1920's and 1930's? Would this be an example of the DVLA's "True to the marque"? This would be in line with the DVLA's philosophy of "keeping cars on the road".
Dave

Location: Somewhere in the Northern Powerhouse

I may not have assimilated all the facts so perhaps someone can help me with a question. According to the current register of Austin Swallows, there are seven cars which have had a replacement chassis at some point in their past; only one of which has retained it's original engine. Are these cars possibly going to be affected?

In terms of relevant importance, the "Swallow" coachwork has usually taken priority over the Austin Seven mechanical parts.

Location: Derby

Hello Ray, unless the DVLA receives a report that a particular car has questionable provenance, those cars that have had replacement chassis, as long as they have informed the DVLA in the past and the details are correct on the V5, should be fine, I imagine.

Location: Near Bicester.

Thank you for that Ivor. I have no idea whether or not the paperwork for these re chassied cars meets with DVLA approval. I do know that two of them have been re registered so I suppose they at least are in order?

I was personally interested in the VSCC report of the meeting stating that "there had appeared to be a revised interpretation of accepting new bodies on existing vehicles, either as like for like or bodies of an appropriate style, even if changing from a saloon to a tourer for example".

I expect to see this confirmed (or not) when the DVLA publish their report.

Location: Derby

I think it will boil down to what becomes the accepted norm for what is acceptable as ''appropriate style'' and ''True to the marque''.

Rebuilding your Ruby chassis as an 'Ulster' with a new body may be that little far from those definitions for some people.

Whearas rebuilding a short wheelbase mag engined rolling chassis as a chummy, or perhaps a c type van with new bodies would fall squarely in those definitions.

Accepting of course that the definitions are far from clear, and only one is stated as a rule as it stands!.

This isn't in my book (remember it?)



Charles

I remember that.

It was interesting, but I think the question for me was not so much "what?" as Why?

Location: Derby

I think that, now the furore has blown itself a little, we should perhaps revert to the default "keep our heads down " position until there is a clear and unambiguous definition of the policy.
I won't be holding my breath!
Another letter to the MP might not go amiss..

Location: Ripon

Are we going to see more people reporting their fellow enthusiast to DVLA? it remind me of the Gov department who encourage people to report the benefits cheats.
Just imagine if I dislike David and I report him to DVLA. he may have a proper car etc but it will create a big problem and years of fighting for him to prove that his car is 100 pct genuine.

Location: Southport

What about this
http://www.classiccarsforsale.co.uk/detail/motors/classic-cars/bugatti/type-35/140497

What do you make of this one in Australia
http://www.prewarcar.com/classifieds/ad180699.html

Location: Southport

As mentioned before the chassis is the car, like it or not, it is the part that is numbered and registered and is identifiable in most cases, the body like axles, wheels, suspension is only another variable component. Individuals, clubs and the DVLA need to accept this as fact for all our sakes. If the chassis has a number it's heritage is/should be traceable and it should be allowed to be registered as such once it providence is proven even if it is just a rolling chassis.

If a pile of OLD bits that can be identified and aged,without a chassis number it can be said that at some point they must have come from a once registered car and therefore should not be a problem in getting them re-registered as well, age related and made from parts would seem appropriate in this case.

Our current problems stem from new chassis being passed of as old and being accepted as old by people who should know better. There has to be a limit as to how many replacement new parts can be used when reconstructing an old car. In the case of a replacement chassis an identifiable large part of the old chassis should be available to the DVLA or reliant club as proof of existence of a vehicle in the first place and proof of scrap-page of said chassis needed after approval.

If we can all agree that the chassis is the car or in the case of cars without a chassis the body-shell, life would become a lot simpler for everyone.

Location: Pembrokeshire

Phil I support your comment 100 pct.
Chassis was always the most important part of the car for any pre 1960 cars.
Maybe we need to hammer this message to DVLA

Whilst I agree with you both Phil and John, there is the subject of those Swallows that were mentioned earlier.

For whatever reason (I can't imagine what, because if it was due to corrosion a Swallow body would have long disappeared into a pile of dust) their chassis have been replaced and the DVLA has accepted that I assume as the cars are running around at the moment...should they have their historic status removed?

Personally I don't think they should, if their provenance can be proved, but once again, the chassis is the key to a vehicle's identity, much as a bodyshell today has a number stamped into it and if a car is "shelled" it has to be re-stamped and a new log book issued by the DVLA before it can go back on the road.

Location: Near Bicester.

As it happens, all Swallow bodies were given a unique number. Some cars like mine still have this number - it can be found etched into the wooden floor and chalked onto the inside of a door skin - however, over the years, this evidence has been lost on probably half of the surviving cars.

I can imagine an irony where the Swallow body - especially a saloon - would have been removed from the chassis and replaced with a light weight sports type. If by some chance the saloon body survived it would eventually become worth restoring and another chassis would be needed.

Swings and roundabouts.

Location: Derby

I may have missed it somewhere in the preceding 5 pages but has anyone worked out what the consequences/options are for a numbered chassis with a buff log book.

Re bodied with the origonal style but new build, refitted with an old body if available, local tip???

Confused of Cheshire

If the chassis number and buff log book match and the original body can be proved to be over 25 years old, there should be no problem!

Location: Near Bicester.

Ivor,

The problem is there is no body.
It was going to be (eventually) a special, albeit with the chassis very much as it left Longbridge.

As I see it my only 2 options now are to find a Ruby body to re-fit or to give up and find another hobby.


Rob

Rob. This seems so unfair. When you consider that specials have been built for so many years and the reason for the 750 club, for example, I can't imagine that this is the end of the matter.

Let's wait and see what the DVLA actually put into print first.

Location: Derby

Ivor, the Swallows replacement chassis would I assume not have been with new chassis but with an older existing pre-registered chassis, technically that should not be a problem as they were all the same, no one cannot tell the difference apart from the replacement rivets on the chassis plate,and who is going to know in any case, plus it's a genuine replacement part, even the DVLA would and do allow this to be done if they are so informed. Though some early cars had chassis numbers stamped on the chassis itself I believe in which case the DVLA would have to be informed.

Now with the replacement chassis the Swallow or whatever is a rolling/driving chassis with the correct numbers for the original vehicle registration documents,and is how it was sold to Swallows in the first place, it is now by definition a motor vehicle, with an engine covering, mudguards and reflectors it could be driven legally on the road, fitting a body of any type only makes it more comfortable to drive. This point is so important to our case, the definition of a motor vehicle, a driving chassis, tractor, lawnmower even a pushbike with engine is a motor vehicle,all of which need to be registered and none of which have body's or even the many veteran cars are only a seat on a chassis.

Swallows, Gordan Englands or Ulsters and so on generally rarer than the Chummy so it makes sense to build a replica if you need a new body, this is OK as long as it is not passed of as the real thing no mater how accurate it may be, by putting replica or made from parts on the V5C would solve this problem for cars with no ID paperwork.

The DVLA seem to have got it into their heads that a vehicle with a separate chassis needs a body of a certain type and consider it to be a major component, this as we all know is not the case and we MUST get this point across to them.

Location: Pembrokeshire.

Ray,

There are probably dozens of people in the same situation. As you say, sit and wait.

Or build a Trials car instead?

Rob

...except as I mentioned, two of the Swallows with replacement chassis & engine were re registered.

I am assuming re registration would not now be possible if the replacement chassis came from, say, a 1930 A7 saloon even if the Swallow body was an original 1930 2 seater sports?

As has been stated, it's always been the chassis number that gives the car it's identity, not the body.

Location: Derby

I understand the point of the chassis giving a car its identity but my dad was given a car by a widow many years ago, her husband had saved the car from a field in Potters Bar. The cars chassis was completely rotten and it had none of its original bodywork, we think the car had been used as a farm hack. Dad went to night classes in Hackney to make a new chassis (an exact copy of the original) for it and a friend helped make the new body. The DVLA allowed the car to be registered but insisted that the chassis was stamped with a new 16 digit number. Without the DVLA allowing him to rebuild and register the car it would never have been done and the only surviving car of the marque would disappeared for good.

I think the DVLA are hunting the Bugattis, Alfas et al, that have made some people a huge amount of money at the cost of others by claiming originality when very little actually exists. Unfortunately everyone else who is rebuilding a car at far higher cost than the cars resale value are getting caught. The other thing is I guess the DVLA and the VSCC is trying to stop original cars getting cut up to make a specials. I know of one case where someone bought a complete and running Edwardian to chop up and make an aero engine special, the VSCC was fully aware (I think the owner actually asked before chopping whether he would get a buff form and was told categorically no and went ahead anyway) and the buff form was refused when it was applied for. However it does puts a shadow over people who find original parts from cars that have passed away but could be put back together to make a car, special or replica, so that they can turn a wheel again which to me is a huge loss. What happens in the case of an accident when rebuild is possible?

Sorry for the long rant, breathe

Location: Eye on the Norfolk / Suffolk border

Quite agree Tom, I see nothing wrong with a car assembled from original mechanical parts even if they came from a number of vehicles, they just need to be identifiable as such in order that deception can not take place. It is not uncommon in any field of historic interest for machines to be reconstructed or even recreated from scratch, look at steam engines for example.

Location: NZ

Rant quite understandable, Tom. I also hate it when an otherwise restorable historic car gets sacrificed to make a special or hot rod. What I do admire are the guys who take a wreck or a car rusted beyond repair and make something of it. What your Dad did was admirable.

I do hope the DVLA will take on board all the consequences of their actions and come to a satisfactory solution.

Location: Derby

I am watching with increasing wonder at the rather convoluted arrangements in UK.
That said I think that some are making it more confusing- here a car has a saloon body or a tourer body - a Swallow is either a saloon body or a tourer body - it doesn't matter who built it surely.

Tony.

Location: Malvern, Melbourne, Australia.

I have understood form a number of sources that the DVLA identified their intent to give feedback after the meeting, based on the issues raised and what was discussed.

Seemingly the only sticking point is re-bodying of rolling chassis of pre war cars, which they were open about and were going to go away and re-evaluate their stance.

Presumably it is this matter which has delayed the 'feedback'.

That said I do not believe we will return to where we were, there is seemingly far more emphasis on the 'historic' from the DVLA.

Swallow didn't produce a tourer. You could have a saloon or a two seater. From my understanding of the rules, the DVLA were seemingly unhappy about replacing one with another but have gone away to reconsider their position.

Location: Derby

Lets hope they can make a decision before people start going out of business!

Spoke to one well known builder of new bodies last night and he hasn't had a single order in the last four months.

Location: United Kingdom

Sorry- roadster.

Tony.

Location: Malvern, Melbourne, Australia.

The loss of these skills would not only affect complete new bodies either. Anyone who needs specialist attention to their existing car body will be affected too. If some pleb runs into the back of my car I'm not likely to be taking it to the local bodyshop.

Location: Derby

There is a massive amount still at stake here.

Its good that the meeting has happened and that the DVLA are mulling over the feedback.

As has been stated, Special building and new bodies are still areas for concern. The FBHVC, I believe (and hopefully I'm wrong!), only represent part of what we do with old cars in that their area of interest appears to be "historical accuracy" maybe it is this has driven the DVLA's thinking to date?

There has, and still is, been a special building culture in this and other countries; this is an area where the FBHVC don't appear to be involved, but the old car world would be poorer without some of the aero specials, and hybrids that are around (and that are being built)

Location: Kent

DVLA should create a new category which take care of all our concerns. Call it Replica Special Classic for example and charge a set annual car tax. A lot of people will settle for this and will solve a big problem.

Location: Southport

Well, no, that's not the only sticking point; indeed, it's not even the major one.
There is the issue of registering a vehicle which has been assembled from components from several, PREVIOUSLY REGISTERED, cars (I'm not talking about cars built from an assembly of old parts around a NEW chassis frame, for example). This is the issue that seems to be causing most concern amongst Austin Seven owners, because there are still such a large number of old components which can be viably re-assembled into complete cars.
But let's not be too blinkered; this is not an Austin special-builders problem, this affects the wider old car movement. I was just reading an article in The Automobile detailing the rebuild of a 1908 car: this started from a chassis, gearbox and back axle found in Ireland, and required the sourcing of an engine from Australia and a radiator from New Zealand amongst many other original items. At no point in the article was there a suggestion that this was an undateable special built up from parts: it was the restoration of the original 1908 Irish car whose chassis frame was just about the last remaining component.
Just because the DVLA are unable to identify the registration details of an original car (because they failed in their duty to transfer ALL the registration details at the time of computerisation, as was promised at the time) we are now to be penalised if we produce a vehicle with no paperwork...

Very valid points Mike.

Despite very youthful years I do clearly remember the strife caused when the DVLA started to computerise in the late 1970's - the phone (a shared "party line" with our elderly neighbour!!) did not stop ringing as my father and other Officers/affiliates of the Clubs' Association attempted to spread the word to "act now or lose out" - many did and just as many lost out, it would seem. Oh for the Internet when that exercise was undertaken.

Just because the DVLA are unable to identify the registration details of an original car (because they failed in their duty to transfer ALL the registration details at the time of computerisation, as was promised at the time) we are now to be penalised if we produce a vehicle with no paperwork...

This is a very valid point and I wonder if the relevant members of parliament are fully aware of this fact, if not they should be made so. The government and DVLA need to realize that they are public servants working on our behalf and that their incompetence is now risking peoples livelihoods.

Location: NZ

On the other hand, we as the public must realise that we have been given many exemptions and priviliges simply because we run "historic" vehicles.

Personally I do not see a 'historic vehicle' when presented with a newly built Austin 7 special in many cases. In most cases it is no more than a toy.

We must be mindfull that using the exemptions designed for historic vehicles as a vehicle to create cars to the builders own specification may well not be in the spirit in which the priviliges were meant to be used.

Because as a hobby we have not been mindfull, is the reason we have got where we have.

Just because there is an industry building pretend historic vehicles is not a valid reason for the dvla to bend the rules to allow it to happen. In essence they will have been partly responsible for their own demise.

Well, it might happen Ian. On the other hand you might care to think of DVLA as a latter day Domesday book.....Incidentally, Michael and I are in complete agreement that public servants have failed to fulfill their responsibilities. Only following orders, of course.

All the best,
Stuart

I have been wondering where I stand if I want an age related number for an imported car? I have been looking at a potential 'London to Brighton' project which would need to be imported from the USA . It would need a new body (mostly) but is otherwise complete. I am wondering if the DVLA would refuse a number because most of the body - apart from the wings and seat - would be new?

The VCC of GB have their own points system but whether this is the same as the DVLA I don't know. I will have to make a few enquiries before going any further.

Location: Derby

A friend of mine did this recently. Fairly easy if you have US papers and i'd suggest that you avoid a new body but embark on a significant rebuild of the remains.

Charles

I will have to re think this idea. The Veteran car is devoid of a body but reading between the lines I get your drift. Unfortunately, there is also no title; the car having been dragged out of a barn where it has lain for the past 80 years. I am also having trouble with my lead in the States - he can't be relied on - so I think it's a dead end.

Another Veteran restoration project that took my eye - a 1904 Brennan - is advertised as being here in the U.K. but the seller is not answering my emails. probably another waste of time.

Better stick with Austin Sevens!

Location: Derby

Hedd, I hope the DVLA do not go down those lines and only see the shiny new body placed on a genuine old chassis, which presently seems to be the case until this situation is made clearer. That sort of thinking will doom us all, as any vehicle that is not as it originally left the factory could be classed as a special, even if it was just a 12 volt conversion or fitting an upgraded crankshaft if the rules were to be applied as such.

Manufacturers sold rolling chassis to coachbuilders and the public, and the choice of body was up to the customer. In the past many cars were re-bodied in different forms by company's and individuals, this is part of our motoring heritage and has been for many, many years and there are plenty of re-bodied cars, specials and kit cars around to prove the point.

The current feeling would seem to be if the body is over 25 years old it is OK to fit it, So if you want to build a special go ahead build it then wait 25 years before it can be registered, this concept is ridiculous, and in any case a body cannot be seen as a major component unless it is made of fibreglass, because it is made up of many smaller components all of which can be changed,in fact the same could be said of a chassis just to complicate matters further.

Having said all this the real problem that has caused all this trouble in the first place, is at what point does a vehicle become classed as new? We should not be arguing about the originality of the look of the vehicle, but the amount of original manufacturers parts in it. As far as I can see the best way to do this would be to have the parts inspected before the restoration or registration process has even started instead of after all the work has been done, a recognition / approval certificate could then be given to the old components and an assessment of how much will have to be changed to make a usable vehicle, based on the old 8 points system, not enough original components or to many new ones required it does not get approved.

Location: Pembrokeshire

This is not just a case of building specials - and in Austin Seven terms we are really talking about special bodies on largely original underpinnings, not something like a GN chassis fitted with MG axles and some obscure aero engine!
How do you see an authentic 1923 Austin Seven painstakingly recreated on an original 1923 chassis and all 1923 components sourced over many years from all over the globe, but of necessity fitted with a brand new body tub?

Ray, I believe as things stand at the moment you could probably still be OK, because you are talking about a complete entity (less body) rather than a collection of parts from miscellaneous sources. In your particular case, I think you need to be talking to the VCC about your specific example, as they are going to be the ones who will have to provide the authentication letter for the DVLA. Once you have suitable dating information, you will be able to register it with the DVLA before any rebuild starts; if you need bodywork, just stick a 25 year old household chair on the chassis!

Thanks Mike. Great stuff. Yes, it would need to be more or less all there as I will be at the mercy of the VCC dating committee. I'm not sure how much confidence one can have following the fiasco a few years ago but like with the DVLA we have to make the best of the hand we have been dealt.

I wonder if 'er indoors would miss the odd chair?

Location: Derby

Thinking about it,I'll revise that specification to include an original 1923 body too; any sane person would see a complete, authentic, 1923 Austin Seven, but the DVLA at the moment would consider it a collection of parts of indeterminate origin requiring IVA examination, and if you're lucky, a Q-plate!

Without a "clear" title document you wouldn't be able to export the car from the USA from my past experience: US customs will want sight of the title to ensure that you're not exporting a stolen car, or a car where the title may have a lien (outstanding finance, unpaid repair bill etc.) registered against it.

If the car does has a title, once imported, you would simply send the original title document to the DVLA along with the duty paid import paperwork and the filled in registration form and your V5C with age related plate will duly arrive. Occasionally cars will be inspected, but that inspection is only to ascertain that chassis etc. numbers match the paperwork you sent in.

Location: Kent, UK

Thank you for that Stuart. It actually answers a number of questions, not least of which is why the contact I have is being evasive.

Location: Derby

and since the Vintage Hot Rod Association interpretation of the meeting,there is a complete silence from DVLA. Has anybody heard anything?
My car is awaiting a new replica body.
Richard

Location: Southport

One information that DVLA has released during the meeting on the 23 September.
That Non reflective number plates black and white or black and silver are now permitted on classics built before January 1975 as long as the cars have been registered as Historic Vehicles.