New MOT legislation and more...

[KS]

Sunroof delete? The roof is part of the structure of the car, and not as left the factory.
just curious.

That's been covered by DVSA - as long as none of the original strengthening to the underside of the roof is removed then it is OK.

[Darren65]

....DVSA has stated that it does NOT regard the rear wings as structural, even though they are welded in place, as there is an inner wing which forms part of the unitary body.......So you're safe with RS/RSR/ST arches on a hot-rod 911!......

......but we already knew that!

......personally I would be comfortable in declaring a wide arched Porsche as not being substantially modified and defend it from an engineering standpoint.

[KS]

Yes, but whatever anyone else says is irrelevant - it's down to how DVSA see it, unfortunately.

[Darren65]

....thought it was all down to 'opinions'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHPOzQzk9Qo

[23e Heure]

And just as some of us start to relax a bit about the BIVA / Q Plate stuff, for those of us into participating in or simply following motorsport, there’s this...

[URL] https://www.autosport.com/national/news ... port-in-eu[/]

We should just enjoy our cars on and off track as much as we can, while we still can.
In that spirit, I’m bunking off work and heading for the welsh valleys tomorrow in the 914!

[KS]

....thought it was all down to 'opinions'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHPOzQzk9Qo

Indeed - the opinion of SGS, the inspection operation employed by DVLA to decide what is and isn't acceptable within their interpretation of the rules. Originally, DVLA employed their own inspectors based at Local Offices. When they closed they first used VOSA to do inspections before putting out an open tender, which SGS won.

As an example, we know of a car inspected by SGS which was rejected as the unitary body had been cut to move the position of a gear lever as a result of a change of gearbox yet others which have been passed with only a cursory check by comparison.

This is their website: http://www.sgs.co.uk/en-GB/Public-Sector.aspx

Looking on the bright side is a good thing – keeping an eye on what might be is equally wise.

[911hillclimber]

Fore warned is fore armed, and despite my critics of doom, this is all bad news if you are in the barrel, just the 2 of us so far...

[Nick Moss]

Fore warned is fore armed, and despite my critics of doom, this is all bad news if you are in the barrel, just the 2 of us so far...

I am doubly affected. My Carrera 3.5 has a carbon roof and my BMW 2002ti is highly modified. My electric Range Rover may have some issue as well.

[KS]

Here's some interesting info (I've seen the paperwork evidence)...

Somebody declared their car as a 'Historic' for registration purposes and received a request in the post for evidence of the car's originality in the form of photographs. OK, so that's easy to 'fake' – just take some photos of a similar car and send those. The DVLA is one step ahead of that and requested photographs showing the obvious points (such the chassis plate and stamped chassis number, engine etc, but also details of the rivets used to secure the chassis plate... And then it gets weird. The entire dashboard, the photo to include a portion of the headlining; a close up of the driver's door handle; a close up of the petrol filler with the cap on and off, and a few other oddities...

OK, so why did they ask for photos like that? Because they are aware of people sending in photos of stock parts found on the internet. By using Google reverse image search, they can track down instances where people have used other people's photos of different cars. Details such as the fuel filler with the cap on and off are unlikely to be readily available, and are typically parts which are changed by people building a street rod (fuel tank location and details of the filler are covered in the IVA regs). In addition, they have also built up a huge database of photos gathered at car shows across the country to record what is standard and what isn't.

Now obviously not every car that registers as a historic (VHI) will be scrutinised in such minute detail, but if there is any suspicion on their part, these are some of the steps already being taken. Looking at social media and enthusiast forums is also a source of information, making it harder for those who feel so inclined to be economical with the truth when they get to the part where you have to say it's a VHI...

Please, if you wish, ignore everything I've written here as I am only scaremongering, as some people clearly feel I am. Except I've seen the evidence of what's happening in other fields of the enthusiast car scene. I suspect the Porsche fraternity will largely get away lightly compared to others, but there are likely to be some caught in the net and it will pay to be ready if the worst happens. There is one recently updated build thread on here that I suspect might be a likely candidate for inspection...

All I say is, please don't shoot the messenger. Well, not unless you really hate him...

[911hillclimber]

You are doing a great job for us in the firing line.
Anyone who thinks this is a joke is on another planet and should stay there.
People on here say I'm a doomed person on this subject, but challenged cannot give me an upside to all this!

There is an interesting page in this week's Classic Car Weekly about the modified classic position and the representation now made to the DoT by the FBHVC.
Seems the penny has started to drop with cars upgraded for many reasons and the effect it will have.
It confirms that the definition of Substantially Modified will be issued in Nov BUT that some sources say it will be next year. It will certainly have to be before May 18.

So there are now 3 of us in this barrel on DDK.

It is tempting to simply sell my car, wife does not like it now. It has become a pain due to all this, and the Boxster is so good.

Thus, 73T, Coupe, full MoT, 3.2 and SS gearbox, latter Bainbridge rebuilt, modified suspension dead quick, utterly reliable, mine since 1989, agreed value £60k, truly modified and recognised by the Government as such. Oh, and it has fewer than 8 points.

What is it worth gents?

[sladey]

5 bags

[Winston Teague]

I am worried you are all pointlessly and needlessly panic confessing in public, in writing, to things that are not yet crimes. Publishing letters to other people, without blanking out the names, is ONLY acceptable if you have cleared it with those in question. If you have done this KS then your above post is simply daft, if you havn't please edit it immediately. Keep your mouths shut and your heads down. The niavety of this thread astonishes me. W

[Winston Teague]

Phew that's better, now we are just talking amongst ourselves, as opposed to 'on telly'. As you were chaps!
W

[Bootsy]

Thought it best

[KS]

Winston - any mods done outside the 8-point ruling have been 'crimes', as you describe them, since 1988. It is surely a fair point to make people aware that things are changing, and that DVSA is now enforcing the ruling?

It is probably best that, from now on, I don't post any more on the subject and leave it for individuals to find out any information for themselves.