As I mentioned earlier, hopefully someone will be attending the meeting at DVLA Swansea on 23 September and will be in a position to report back "straight from the horse's mouth".

Rick

Location: Deepest Norfolk

Hi Tony,

As Hedd says, someone else has mentioned this thread, but not me. I have however added my comments to the Practical Classics Facebook page. Hopefully if the journalists on the magazine get behind the story, we might see some action.

The latest edition of Practical Classics has an article on the restoration of a Ruby by one of their readers and there's an update on the black Ruby that the PC team have been messing about with for some time.

Jeff.

Location: Almost but not quite, the far North East of England

A newly built trike with a brand new body and chassis with a 1988 engine and gearbox from a motorcycle donor, subjected to a motorcycle IVA which it passes and gets an age related reg.(not a Q reg)
A 1930s car with genuine and original chassis,axles,engine,gearbox,wheels but a new body gets a Q reg because It originally had a different body? Can the latter vehicle's owner allow it to be subject to an IVA, successfully pass and then get an age related plate?
How stringent is this IVA and can it be used for older vehicles? Yet another set of questions for which I am not expecting an answer!
Dave .

Location: Sheffield

Hello Dave, happy to help with what I know!

The IVA (BIVA) is very stringent indeed, and an Ulsteroid simply will not pass unless it is fitted with seat belts, correct EU approved lighting, no external excrescences that could damage pedestrians in the event of a collision and all glass, including the screen will have to carry EU markings...and that's just for starters!

Then, guess what? you get a Q plate!

Location: Near Bicester.

Mike, I can't be 100% sure, but I believe the motorcycle SVA is a very different kettle of fish to the car test and as the Aero is a trike, it doesn't have to jumpo all the hurdles a car does...

Location: Near Bicester.

Interesting article on Page 12 of this months "Classic and Sports Car" regarding the DVLA and BOC cars.

Location: Bristol

I may be taking on the restoration of a 1930 Austin Swallow Saloon - like my existing car - and I am now unsure if I will have difficulties with the DVLA rules. Although the car has a V5 it has been off the road for 50 years. Much of the original Ash body frame is really only good for patterns so the previous owner had much of the timber cut and shaped in readiness for the rebuild. Certain parts of the body like the windscreen and glass and those aluminium panels which are not too corroded can be used in the rebuild but essentially it will be a new body with wings and running boards re made.

What I find confusing, is that the DVLA seems to make no distinction between a car of unitary construction and one with a separate chassis and body. I can appreciate that if the body is welded to the chassis there may be a problem but how do they view cars like these Austin Sevens, for example, which were originally supplied to Swallow Coachworks in chassis form. Is it possible that someone has wandered into the area of 'historic' vehicles with insufficient knowledge? Perhaps there is embarrassment at the DVLA?

Although the car has the original chassis and engine, the original body number may be lost unless it is somehow transferred to the replacement timber. Does it look like I will be able to retain the original registration plate or will I fall foul of the DVLA rules and end up with inspections etc. and an age related number?

Location: Derby

I don't think you will have any problems Ray as you are restoring the vehicle to its original specification, do you have a current V5C for the Swallow in your name?

Location: Near Bicester.

Thank you Ivor. i don't own the car although I may become the owner eventually. The Swallow is completely dismantled and It is registered in the name of a family member who has sadly passed away. Is there anything that I may need to be aware of if the car is transferred to me by his Widow?

Location: Derby

As long as their is a V5C and the chassis and engine numbers match, together with the details regarding body style, you should have no problems at all as the basic details of the vehicle haven't changed, you've simply "repaired" the original body and leave it at that.

Despite the bad press that the DVLA get, I'm pretty sure they are really only after those that are abusing the system and it's up to those of us that aren't to ensure that we do our best to make sure that we aren't caught up with it.

It would be great to see another Swallow back on the road!

Location: Near Bicester.

I agree - I cannot believe you will have any problem with that one, Ray. The biggest problem for us seems to be the assembly of components, possibly from different cars, into a complete car requiring the issuing of a new (hopefully age-related) registration. This has been possible in the past using the chassis number as the identity and major dating component, but now it seems that DVLA will not accept the dating even if all the major components are from the same age of vehicle - hence the concern from numerous enthusiasts who are hoping to rebuild their components into a new entity (special or replica).

There has just been a development with regard to my pending acquisition. I was informed that the car had a V5 but I have just put the reg number into the DVLA vehicle enquiry search and it has drawn a blank. I am wondering if the upgrade from V5 to V5C has been missed.

Does this mean that the original number has been removed from the car? Can it be retrieved?

I know Michael Worthington Williams has recovered many "lost" numbers over the years but whether he is still doing it, I don't know. This will certainly affect the car's value I would think?

Location: Derby

Ray,

If the vehicle definitely had / has a V5 then it won't have been removed from the DVLA database just because it hasn't been updated to a V5c. However if, back in the 1980's it wasn't placed on the Database - DVLA requested all owners of collectors cars not currently taxed / on the road at that time to send their old log books to Swansea and they'd be issued with a V5 and the vehicle would be placed on the computer database so as to retain the registration number - so if your deceased relative never did that, then it won't be there, nor will it have a V5. Try keying the registration number into mycarcheck, if it's listed there say as an Austin Swallow (Saloon) then key that phrase into the DVLA site and see what you get.

Jeff.

Location: Almost but not quite, the far North East of England

Jeff,

I recall the previous owner telling me that he had obtained a V5. because he was concerned. It's good to know if that was the case, then the number would not have been lost with the change to V5C. The Widow recently confirmed that she thought it did have a V5 so I hope it can be found.

I put the number into the DVLA's own search service trying a variety of Austin Swallow, Austin Seven Swallow, Austin Swallow Saloon etc. Is 'mycarcheck' the same thing as the DVLA check?

Location: Derby

Ray,

I believe mycarcheck draws it's information, not only from the DVLA database, but other sources - insurance company records etc. It's useful in so much that if you key in a registration that turns out to have been stripped from an old car and transferred to a modern, it'll tell you what make of vehicle now carries that reg, be it a BMW, Range Rover whatever - the DVLA site won't tell you that. Also the vehicle description given by mycarcheck is often what it's described as on the DVLA site - for example 'Austin Seven (Sports)' rather than just 'Austin'.

Jeff.

Location: Almost but not quite, the far North East of England

To clear up any confusion regarding modern specials or reconstructions here are my experiences with VOSA and DVLA.
My 4 wheel Pembleton was submitted for SVA (pre IVA) and the 3wheeler was tested under MSVA regs.
The both passed and were then classed as new cars which needed registration.The 4 wheeler was taken to the LVLO after sending in the old V5, the V5 of the engine donor and a photographic record of the build. As it had the original suspension, transmission,steering and brakes of the 2CV donor, it met the criteria for an age related plate and was given a D reg as the donor was a D
The Trike passed MSVA and the same procedure (except for the LVLO inspection the office was closed three years ago) was followed ending up with an E reg.
The "Morgan" Guzzi trike should have a plate related to the donor of the major components, probably the bike and, unlike the Pembleton which is a motor tricycle, will be regarded as a motorcycle combination, being a bike derived rather than car derived vehicle.
Any error on inconsistency in the paperwork submitted to DVLA will result in a Q plate being issued. There is no chance of having this undone I gather.

I think I can state confidently that the majority of vintage or pre-war cars would fail contemporary test standards for both IVA and MSVA.

Unfortunately, the above relates to modern chassis, self-build cars all of which have new bodies. The DVLA are trying to solve a previously non-existent problem retrospectively by changing long-established terms of reference.
We can only hope that FBHVC and other owners clubs will prevail.
I've written to my MP. Have you?

Location: Ripon

Location: North Yorkshire

Well that's a pity. I entered the reg number into "mycarcheck" and still drew a blank. It looks like the original number must have been withdrawn.

The situation is delicate so I will play the long game and see what develops.

Thank you for the sound advice.

Location: Derby

Worth trying here as well...

http://www.cartell.ie

Location: Derby

I don't think there's any cause for alarm Ray. First of all, my own Austin Seven is not listed on mycarcheck and it has a current V5C, however, it is on cartell.

Furthermore, I have an old Puch Alpine scooter that was put in a barn half a century ago (yes really!) I have the buff log book and an old 1961 tax disc, together with a clear VIN and the Vintage Motor Scooter Club believes I should be able to retain the original number, non transferable of course, which in my view is a good thing, so all is not lost with the Swallow!

Location: Near Bicester.

Thanks, Ivor. That has cheered me up! I can prove that the Swallow has been in the family since about 1963. Soon after purchase, It was comprehensively torn down by another family member who thought he was doing a favour! The dismantled car has remained at the back of an old garage ever since. Over the years, the "vintage car" has acquired a legendary, even mythical status with certain family members. Doubtless what is no more than a pile of parts will be deemed worth a small fortune!

All the more important, then, that the original number is retained if a comprehensive and expensive restoration is to be undertaken. The trouble is that it is much easier to sell off the parts than to commit to a proper rebuild. A familiar story.

Location: Derby

About 5 years ago I bought a Citroen SM rolling shell that had been fire damaged about 30 years previously. It had then been stripped for spares and passed through several hands. I started a restoration using parts from a very rusty donor car. I knew the registration number and believed it was on the DVLA computer. I had no documents, but filled in the appropriate form and a V5C duly appeared. I was also able to get the details of all previous owners.
If a car is on the DVLA computer, ie a V5 or V5C has been issued, I don't think there's any problem.

Location: Melrose, Scottish Borders

Jim, if you have taken on the restoration of a SM I take my hat off to you. You must be one darn good mechanic, that's all I can say.

Location: Derby

If it's any consolation Ray, our RN which has been taxed since 2001 is not known on the DVLA site.

Location: Derby

Just found this on Facebook tonight, its what we already know but does explain a few bits.

Classic Car? Prove it.

A crack down on the unsuspecting classic car owner seems imminent as Westminster discuss inconsistencies in the way in which classic cars are registered by the DVLA

If you are a classic car owner then no doubt your vehicle will have its original age related registration number, although over the years you may have had to change certain components as part of the expected maintenance of the car.classic car

Well it would seem that according to the DVLA this may not be good enough to satisfy them that your car is indeed a classic! What’s more your pride and joy could wind up with the dreaded Q plate, seriously affecting its value and provenance. With many classic car owners receiving correspondence from the DVLA targeting their vehicle by demanding evidence of its history to substantiate its classification.

This enforcement is all to do with alterations made to a vehicle that deem it “non-standard”. Potentially it would seem if your classic car has had replacement parts fitted then it may have to be re-registered as a Q-plate if the DVLA feel it is not original enough, which is clearly opening up the proverbial can of worms. As a classic car enthusiast you are probably all too aware how difficult it would be to replace certain parts like for like, some components may not even exist anymore therefore leaving the owner with no alternative but to replace with after-market parts.

So how do you manage to keep your original plate?

Having researched Government Legislation on this matter it appears through all the bureaucracy there are three possible options if you are restoring or altering a classic car.

Option 1- Rebuilt Vehicles: there’s no mention on line as to whether this applies to classic, vintage or modern cars (although all three definitions can be open to interpretation) it does say however a rebuilt vehicle can keep its original registration number if you can prove you’ve used:

The original unmodified chassis or body-shell
A new chassis or monocoque body-shell of the “same specification” as the original
You must also have 2 other major components from the original vehicle on the following list:

Suspension (front and Back)
Steering assembly
Axles (both)
Transmission
Engine
Option 2-Radically altered vehicles: these are vehicles (once again no classification) that have been altered from their original specification, but aren’t kit conversions.

Keeping thclassic care original registration number is based on a point system. The more original the vehicle the higher you score deeming your vehicle acceptable to maintain its age related plate. However you must have the original or new unmodified chassis and monocoque body-shell. 8 points or more allows you to keep your original plate.Take a look at the points system.

Chassis, monocoque body shell original or new and unmodified – 5 points
Suspension (front and back) original – 2 points
Axles (both) original – 2 points
Transmission original – 2 points
Steering assembly original – 2 points
Engine original – 1 point
Option 3- Reconstructed classic vehicles: the DVLA will only allocate an age-related plate if the vehicle meets the criteria below

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 marquee
Has been inspected by the appropriate vehicle owners’ club for the vehicle type (marque) and confirmed in writing it has been inspected, is a true reflection of the marque and comprises of genuine period components all over 25 years old
Disclose manufacturer dates for all major components
The DVLA will then assign an age related plate but not necessarily for the original year, it will be based on the age of the youngest component used.

So as you can see it gets a little complicated to say the least.

So with the DVLA sending out letters randomly to classic car owners asking for justification that their vehicle deserves to keep its original plate, the Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs have replied by saying “this would seem to be an inappropriate use of public money” especially when you consider how unclear it is to rectify this matter based on their confusing guide lines. The Vintage Sports-Car Club are now involved as well and are fully aware of the potential implications for the historic car movement in the UK. A representation is intended to be made to the DVLA.

Location: Pembrokeshire.

Classic &Sports Car September 2015
Controversy between the DVLA and BugattiOwners' Club is threatening to throw the subject of age-related registrations into turmoil. For many years, the BOC has been issuing its own BC-series chassis numbers to Bugattis of indeterminate origin-most obviously, vehicles built up from spares. Approximately 185 such numbers are beleived to have been issued and with them owners have, until now, been registering the cars in the UK as historic vehicles.

The DVLA then became aware that recently constructed Pur Sang recreations had acquired BC chassis numbers, and that those cars had been allocated age-related numbers. Although these replicas may be largely indistinguishable from Molsheim-built examples, as far as the DVLA is concerned they are brand new, and not entitled to a historic registration.

Following several years of negotiation between the BOC and Swansea solution has been reached. In a letter issued by the BOC, the club has advised its members that pre-war s Bugattis will be placed under scrutiny by the DVLA, with the onus being put upon owners to prove that their car is genuine if they hope to retain its age-related registration. In the case of an unrestored car with well-documented provenance, this should be straightforward. Problems could occur, however, with vehicles that have been restored or if the history is less well known.

The DVLA states that Reconstructed Classic Vehicles (which importantly, it differentiates from Rebuilt Vehicles) must be built from genuine period components from more than one vehicle, all of which must be more than 25 years old. A car built from new and used parts, or a replica employing some original components, is not entiltled to an historic registration.

The DVLA declined to provide C&SC with an official definition of what it considers to be a component, but without clarification of this point owners and restorers are at risk of falling foul of the law.

Anyone attempting to register a genuine rolling chassis of unquestionable provenance yet fitted with a replica of the original body- no matter how accurate it may find their application refused, with their only recourse being to apply for a Q plate.

The process of obtaining such a number throws up further complications in the form of type approval (IVA). A number of specialists that we spoke to speculated that it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for a classic or vintage car to pass the test. Any car stripped of its registration could therefore end up in a state of limbo where it can’t be re-registered.

The DVL has began sending letters to small number of owners, requiring them to provide detailed information about their cars, including the age and origin of major components, as well confirmation of whether they have been rebuild, restored or entirely constructed in the last 25 years. It warns that “in some case Individual Vehicle Approval may be required and/or a Q registration number may be appropriate.

It also advises that while investigations are ongoing, applications to notify a change of vehicle keeper will not be processed.

Bugatti guru Tim Dutton reports that in 2014 his company suffered 30% drop in turnover, which he attributes directly to the rumours and uncertainty surrounding the controversy.

Location: Berkshire

Location: Derby

I think we need to wait for the result of the September meeting before we jump to conclusions.

It is interesting that the DVLA refused to comment on what a 'component' is, this suggests to me that they are fully aware of the issues with the poor wording of the rules.

Change a spark plug = Q plate as is, given it is a 'component' after all, but I can see no reason why this would persist as it defies logic.

Given that the FBHVC is now involved I can see the result of the September meeting is that the DVLA will re write rules to be more specific as to what componentry must be 'original' and unmodified, and what can be new.

I would expect these defined components to be based on the list of 'major components' in the radically altered vehicle rules. Perhaps too with points allocation. I guess the big question is with respect to bodywork on pre war cars with separate chassis.

A sensible stance would be to keep the 5 points for an original and unmodified chassis or monocoque body. Allocate an amount of points for an original body and raise the 8 points accordingly. But it needs to be possible to get enough points to keep the number without an original body, say if the majority of the other bits are original.

Just my thoughts, but it is clear that the efforts of the few has already spoilt the game for the many. I shall look down my nose at BOC members from now on. Well done boys

Hedd,
Isn't it always the case, reference your last sentence.
Greed has no bounds!
The DVLA's reaction has been a long time coming, BUT they do need to get their act together before THEY spoil it for us all.
Always the innocent that suffer when unaccountable bureaurocracy gets involved, not having thought things through properly.
Their 'component' says it all.

Geoff - This saga has legs.

Location: South Norfolk - Next to Suffolk

It might be an idea for the FBHVC to draw up a list of definitions as to what constitutes a component to present to the DVLA at the September meeting.

It would seem the DVLA has a reasonably simple and fair solution with their points system at the moment, an expanded version of this to include period modifications and reproduction components could be introduced for rebuilt/ modified vehicles. This would at least cover existing specials and rebuilds.
As for the modern replicas or non provable origin vehicles that may only have minimal original components but are owners club approved, the easiest solution would be to give them them a suitably modified IVA age related test, issue an age related number or Q plate and charge a them the appropriate road fund licence fee.

Location: Pembrokeshire

And let's not overlook the fact that this whole problem is down to DVLA (or their predecessors)'s incompetance. If ALL the original registration records had been transferred to the computerised records, as we were assured they would be at the time, then DVLA would have all the details at their fingertips, and would not need to refer to marque experts or owner's claims to verify a revived vehicle.

The replica business is not a new thing in the 1930s replica Rolls-Royces were sold by several company's 1920s RR chassis with new 1930s bodies and these were sold to the public as replicas. In the case of the Bugatti's there would appear to be a collection of new replica spare parts with the odd original part thrown in, the BOC and I assume the VSCC seem to think that these new vehicles are as good as the old originals, they look, perform and handle like the originals and as such have the same inherent safety issues as the originals. As long as all the new spare parts are interchangeable with the originals, I cannot really see a problem with them apart from them passed of as genuine original cars.

An age related IVA would be simple enough to police, as we are not talking about the current safety and emissions regulations, as long as the vehicle complied with the original manufacturers specifications it would be OK. The date of the replicas manufacture noted and an appropriate tax rate applied to it.

The main issue we have here is not really the vehicles themselves, the new/old cars, specials, rebuilds and registration prefixes,all these have been around for ages, it is that the DVLA / Government feel that they are loosing tax revenue to these vehicles, by declaring them as replica historic and excepting them as such they will be able to reclaim their lost revenue.

Just as a footnote, a few years ago there was a batch of new Austin Maestros found in kit form that did not get exported, although these were original manufactures parts they were still new old cars when they were assembled.

Location: Pembrokeshire.

"Oh! what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to decieve". ---------Sir Walter Scott (Marmion)

Location: Derby

Every year I get a V11, reminder to get vehicle tax form, and I duly go on the DVLA site and put the 16 digit number in and tax my car. I can return to the site to check that my car is taxed and all I get is "Vehicle details could not be found
Vehicle details could not be found as it has not been possible to locate the vehicle details, your enquiry cannot proceed and has been cancelled."
I am mere mortal Ray, who doesn't understand the workings of H.M.G.
This occurs with quite a few Sevens but I don't have this problem with our 2 other Sevens.

This is a very interesting thread, although it doesn't affect me seeing as my RP is now French Registered. I wonder though if when I first acquired the car in the early 80's when it seemed to have dubious provenance (the log book that came with it was for a 1930 A7)whether the nice lady from Sheffield's LVLO would have looked upon it so favourably given the new protocols, even though the car is manifestly original (almost)

By the way, the French registration is NOT age related although it does have the right to wear silver on black number plates due to its age. It has "vehicule de collection" status and is subject to Controle technique every 5 years. I don't know whether if I ever sold it the new owner would have a new style french number issued (without the departmental marker) perhaps Renaud can clarify, not that I have any intention of selling.

I wonder if all those rich people with dodgy Bugattis can register them in Monaco (for a fee of course)....

Location: Le Gard where it's bloody hot.

The latest FBHVC newsletter - 2015 Issue 4- available here devotes a lot of space to the origins of this farce, discusses the actions of a certain club - which they tactfully decline to name - and outlines their future action.

IMHO it should be read and digested by all interested parties.

Rick

Location: Deepest Norfolk

Hedd Jones

I think we need to wait for the result of the September meeting before we jump to conclusions.

It is interesting that the DVLA refused to comment on what a 'component' is, this suggests to me that they are fully aware of the issues with the poor wording of the rules.

Change a spark plug = Q plate as is, given it is a 'component' after all, but I can see no reason why this would persist as it defies logic.

Given that the FBHVC is now involved I can see the result of the September meeting is that the DVLA will re write rules to be more specific as to what componentry must be 'original' and unmodified, and what can be new.

I would expect these defined components to be based on the list of 'major components' in the radically altered vehicle rules. Perhaps too with points allocation. I guess the big question is with respect to bodywork on pre war cars with separate chassis.

A sensible stance would be to keep the 5 points for an original and unmodified chassis or monocoque body. Allocate an amount of points for an original body and raise the 8 points accordingly. But it needs to be possible to get enough points to keep the number without an original body, say if the majority of the other bits are original.

Just my thoughts, but it is clear that the efforts of the few has already spoilt the game for the many. I shall look down my nose at BOC members from now on. Well done boys

Location: East Sussex

FBHVC article states

"On Wednesday 23 September the Driver and Vehicle
Licensing Agency will be holding a Historic Vehicle Event at
Swansea. The three hour event aims to provide guidance
on various matters relating to the registration of historic
vehicles including the V765 scheme, reconstructed classics
and age related registrations. There are limited places
available and invitations to FBHVC members and V765
representatives will be sent out by the Agency soon. Places
will be restricted to one representative per club. "

As to what clubs are attending your guess is as good as mine.

Location: Australia

Letter in ~Classic Car Weekly 26 August 2015

Age-related numbers
My MP approached the DVLA on my behalf regarding the issue of age-related numbers. received a reply stating that it would like to reassure me that the procedures and processes around historic vehicles have not changed. The DVLA does not intend to inspect all historic vehicles and potentially withdraw their historic status.' This does not seem to be correct. In the recent past an age-related number could be obtained provided the chassis components were all from one year and model of a particular car. This had to be confirmed by a club authentication officer. A replica body could be fitted or even one that was not to the original design Now the application form for an age-related number states the vehicle must be 'comprised of genuine period components all over 25 years old' and adds that your vehicle won't get an age-related 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. have replied that it is impossible to restore a car without using new replica parts. Nearly all old cars would have to be modified to pass the IVA test, so they would no longer be to their original design, would be devalued, and part of our heritage would be lost. Car restoration is a billion-pound industry. Firms that make replica parts, especially bodies, will be badly hit if these new rules are not rejected. have asked the DVLA to reassure me that the statements in the above paragraph are a mistake and will be removed from the application form. I await its reply
Chris Gould, via email

Location: East Sussex

Just as a matter of interest, I attended a classic car show this last weekend where there was a mid-60s Wolseley Hornet - you know, the Mini with a boot - sporting very new-looking Q-plates. Unfortunately I couldn't locate the owner to find out the story, but to my eye it looked totally authentic - it certainly wasn't a recent restoration, nor did it appear to be a hotch-potch of parts. It had a well-worn original interior and matching paintwork which, if not original, was very old.

Location: Teignmouth

Stuart
I am surprised no one has replied to this, unless I've missed it elsewhere on the Forum. The meeting is by invitation only to FBHVC members and V765 Club representatives. Looking in the back of the A7CA grey magazine there are 18 A7 Clubs listed. Probably not all have a DVLA representative but most of the larger ones do. I know for a fact that my A7 Club rep applied and has since been notified that his application has not been granted. Presumably one of the other 18 reps has. We can only hope that it has been granted to a well experienced one. Of course this will have applied to all car clubs of all makes. Some will be solus clubs, perhaps with 50 or 60 owners, but many will be like us, 4 - 5000 owners, with independent clubs around the country. Again only one will be selected to represent owners.
Do we know who is representing the A7 world?
This meeting is therefore not open to all so your father might be disappointed if he turns up to this meeting (where ever it is in Swansea as only the invited will know) and expects to get in.

Location: Inside the M25

The VHRA will be attending the meeting - they've received an invite. Applications were well and truly over subscribed apparently. I'll let you know the results once I've heard.

Location: Flatlands of Norfolk

I imagine the Vintage Hot Rod Association will be somewhat concerned about originality! The wrong outcome of this meeting will have far reaching effects on many aspects of our motoring interests.

Location: Inside the M25