New MOT legislation and more...

[70sThrowback]

Thanks Keith.

Engine – alternative cubic capacities of the same basic engine and alternative original equipment engines are not considered a substantial change. If the number of cylinders in an engine is different from the original, it is likely to be, but not necessarily, the case that the current engine is not alternative original equipment.

Still no clarification on this then. How does one interpret "it is likely to be, but not necessarily".

You could argue the 914 was available with a six cylinder option and if increasing the the cubic capacity is OK then does that mean 914 six conversions are acceptable as original and therefore don't require an MOT?

If anyone has an idea of who I could speak to about this I'd appreciate any information. I know the simplest option it to just get an MOT and that's exactly what I'll do but it would be nice to know for sure.

Has anyone had this clarified? I have an 912E which has a 4 cylinder 1971cc engine, which at some point I would like to improve. Now I could rebuild this engine and increase the capacity which is the cheaper option 1. Or I could put in a 6 cylinder engine in which is option 2. I am guessing that option 1 is fine from the above reading. What I am confused about is option 2, would a 2.7 from the same year be considered original equipment as the body shell is the same as the 911S? I am thinking not, but would be good to be able to confirm.

[gridgway]

It seems to me that "it is likely to be, but not necessarily, the case that the current engine is not alternative original equipment" would apply. Then there is the simple matter of asking them what that phrase means and how they would give a determination (option 1 - aka permission). Or just do it and not tell anyone (option 2 - aka forgiveness).

Are there contact details to ask for clarification?

Graham

[911hillclimber]

Yes there is.
That 'engine' sentence is ridiculously worded, and there are other parts in the Guidelines just as bad.
No wonder people have difference interpretations....

I have made contact with someone who is openly inviting a particular car to be 'appraised' against the DfT/DVLA guidance's.
Others have approached this man for help who have a 'difficult' car or indeed difficulty understanding the wording.

I emailed the gentleman yesterday about my particular car, and I'm waiting for a response.
The gent has been in the meetings with the authorities all along, so really understands the way these passages are meant to be, and to be interpreted.

When I get a response I'll post the details of the contact.

I have also contacted the DVLA but not too hopeful.

[911hillclimber]

Just had this email from the man I mention above.

TBH, now I don't care at all whatever anyone says about my car's compliance to the guidelines of this or that, I have finally got to a real expert on the subject, someone who has been involved with the DfT etc from the start, in the meetings, in the discussions.

I have read your message and would respond as follows.

Firstly, as you appear having dutifully to have reported all required changes to DVLA, the “historic” status of the registration of your vehicle is not in any doubt.

Regarding the forthcoming changes in MOT exemption entitlement, I think you may be confusing “substantially changed”, a term emanating from the EU Roadworthiness Testing Directive which is the reason for the new exemption regime, but which only comes into effect from 20th May of this year, with “radically altered”, which is the DVLA term used to decide on allocation of Q Plates and the requirement for IVAs. Your car is not radically altered so you may safely be unconcerned with the 8 point rule and its ramifications.

At the next date for relicensing of your car after 20th May, it will be possible, either using the latest version of Form V112 (of which an official draft is attached)or, if you are already online, on a system into which your form V11 will lead you, to claim exemption from the MOT for the coming year. The process will be repeated each year whether or not you choose to seek exemption.

I note you say you will be continuing with the MOT and should you elect to do so you will not need to claim exemption. Even were you to seek exemption you could always take a voluntary test. But the MOT test procedure is becoming subtly more demanding so you might in the future find you wish not to continue to take it. But so long as you do, you need simply not assert the exemption.

But you cannot claim exemption if the car has been “substantially changed” within the past 30 years; the meaning of the term is set out in both the paper Form V112 and its online equivalent. There is also corresponding DfT Guidance (attached)

The XXXXXXXXXX cannot otherwise comment upon application of the Guidance as it will always be type specific. But we will, at the request of DfT, be publishing on our website on or about 1st May, a list of “experts” appointed for just that purpose.

They will be able to advise you if, after you have read Form V112 and the Guidance, you still have any doubt whether your car should be regarded as substantially changed.

I trust that this will set your mind at rest.

[gridgway]

So what's your conclusion Graham?
Graham

[911hillclimber]

Easy.
The car is modified not radically, the car keeps it's current Historic Status, the car will continue to be subjected to an MoT every 12 months because I cannot claim MoT exemption.

When the list of experts appears, I will contact the Porsche expert and ask if he/she thinks it is Substantially Modified.
I won't bother with claiming exemption as I don't believe it is the right thing to do on classics.

In a nut-shell, carry on as I have since I put the car back on the road in 1990.

This is the result I wanted. Some may disagree, couldn't care less!

image hosting gif

What the issue was all about, a DIY RHD conversion:

[hot66]

Sorted ...... Now, stop fretting and relax


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[mycar]

Just a minute... will you be selling the 911 now or not ?

[964RS]

Thank God it didn't take 500 posts for us to conclude nothings really changing and carry on as you were.

I was worried when it got to 485....

[911hillclimber]

A long journey for me, a long time to worry due to a lack of clear information, a long list of emails to Ministers, to Government Officials.
Now at the end of it all.
A long way back I said I hoped the outcome would be I carry on as I always have, and so it is.

This is a solution for me and this car, may not be this way for others. My quest was purely selfish but I hope this lot has illuminated the road for others too.

Will I sell the car esp now?
The wife said this would not be an option, but I have found a company that hires a 240Z....
This certainty has increased the 911 value by at least...
£5.

[911hillclimber]

Just been informed that the DfT have dropped the actions to ban poor emisions engines in kit cars going to IVA.
This means that Beetle based kits like Porsche Speedsters will be allowed and not banned.
Those who responded to this proposed legislation helped stop this action.

Also, the list of Marque Experts has been released. These are the people who you can contact specifically about mods to your classic and the MoT exemption.
There is NO Porsche expert listed. Maybe someone will come forward soon.

Lobbying works!

[smallspeed]

This means that Beetle based kits like Porsche Speedsters will be allowed and not banned

Good - I'm 1/2 way through building an engine for one!

[911hillclimber]

3 May 2018

For immediate release

Road Vehicles – improving air quality and safety Consultation response

The Department for Transport (DfT) has written to the Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs today (1 May) to advise that following an overwhelming negative response to their recent consultation, the proposal to require certain classes of vehicles submitted for an Individual Vehicle Approval (IVA) following construction to meet currently prevailing emission standards, is withdrawn.

Arguments against the proposal demonstrated the immeasurably small beneficial effect on air quality that would have resulted whilst on the other hand SME’s involved in the UK Kit car sector and specialists involved in reconstructing historic vehicles would have been put out of business at a stroke.

The status quo will therefore prevail with regard to IVA testing going forward.

ENDS

Editor’s notes
1. The Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs exists to maintain the freedom of its members to use historic vehicles on the UK’s roads, hence its campaign message: ‘Yesterday’s Vehicles on Tomorrow’s Roads’. The FBHVC has over 550 member clubs representing over 251,000 individual owners.

2. For further information contact Geoff Lancaster on 07860 562659, commsdirector@fbhvc.co.uk.


3 May 2018

For immediate release

The Federation of British historic Vehicle Clubs (FBHVC) has made the following announcement on its website (1 May 2018).

Declaring your vehicle as exempt from an MOT Test
This is a new self-declaration process to be carried out as part of annual licensing by DVLA by a keeper of a qualifying vehicle who does not wish to submit the vehicle to an MOT test. By making this simple declaration you are confirming that your vehicle is at least 40 years old and has not been substantially changed in the previous 30 years.
For advice on the process you should consult the Legislation pages in recent Editions of the Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs Newsletter.
The Department for Transport (DfT) has published a set of guidelines to assist owners in deciding which if any more recent changes to their vehicle would be considered as “substantial”.
The DfT understand that owners may feel they need to consult a specialist prior to making this declaration and have asked the Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs to compile and publish on its website, a list of marque specialists who have indicated their willingness to advise owners unsure of their vehicle’s status.
The initial iteration of this list is published on the website (http://www.fbhvc.co.uk). It is intended to be continuously added to as more specialists come forward.
Before approaching a marque specialist you should study the DfT Guidelines carefully and make your own judgement concerning your vehicle if you can.
If you decide to consult a specialist you should be aware that they have volunteered to provide this advice and their time at no charge. It is your responsibility to accurately describe your vehicle as no inspection will be made. Their advice is provided solely in relation to the declaration you will make regarding VHI.
If there is not a specialist listed here for your type of vehicle you may contact the FBHVC Secretary (secretary@fbhvc.co.uk) who will advise you.
ENDS

Editor’s notes
1. The Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs exists to maintain the freedom of its members to use historic vehicles on the UK’s roads, hence its campaign message: ‘Yesterday’s Vehicles on Tomorrow’s Roads’. The FBHVC has over 550 member clubs representing over 251,000 individual owners.

2. For further information contact Geoff Lancaster on 07860 562659, commsdirector@fbhvc.co.uk.

[964RS]

I'd hate to see this thread die.

So as an update I taxed the RSR today (from the 1st of June and MOT runs out 25th June, so god knows what it's status is on the 20th May and then the 26th June?). There was some new detail during the taxation process advising about new MOTs, changes etc. There was also a link to this new document explaining substantially changed....

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... idance.pdf

and it reads as follows:-

Vehicles of Historical Interest (VHI):

Substantial Change Guidance Most vehicles manufactured or first registered over 40 years ago will, as of 20 May 2018, be exempt from periodic testing unless they have been substantially changed

A vehicle that has been substantially changed within the previous 30 years will have to be submitted for annual MoT testing. Whether a substantially changed vehicle requires re-registration is a separate process.

Keepers of VHIs exempt from periodic testing continue to be responsible for their vehicle’s roadworthiness.

Keepers of vehicles over 40 years old can voluntarily submit vehicles for testing.

Keepers of VHIs claiming an exemption from the MoT test should make a declaration when renewing their vehicle tax.

The responsibility to ensure the declared vehicle is a VHI and meets the criteria, rests with the vehicle keeper as part of their due diligence.

If a vehicle keeper is not sure of the status of a vehicle, they can consult a marque or historic vehicles expert, a list of whom will be available on the website of the Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs.

If a vehicle keeper cannot determine that the vehicle has not been substantially changed, they should not claim an exemption from the MoT test.

The criteria for substantial change:
A vehicle will be considered substantially changed if the technical characteristics of the main components have changed in the previous 30 years, unless the changes fall into specific categories.

These main components for vehicles, other than motorcycles2, are:

Chassis (replacements of the same pattern as the original are not considered a substantial change) or Monocoque bodyshell including any sub-frames (replacements of the same pattern as the original are not considered a substantial change);

Axles and running gear – alteration of the type and or method of suspension or steering constitutes a substantial change;

Engine – alternative cubic capacities of the same basic engine and alternative original equipment engines are not considered a substantial change.

If the number of cylinders in an engine is different from the original, it is likely to be, but not necessarily, the case that the current engine is not alternative original equipment.


The following are considered acceptable (not substantial) changes if they fall into these specific categories:



• changes that are made to preserve a vehicle, which in all cases must be when original type parts are no longer reasonably available;

• changes of a type, that can be demonstrated to have been made when vehicles of the type were in production or in general use (within ten years of the end of production);

• in respect of axles and running gear changes made to improve efficiency, safety or environmental performance;

This guidance is only intended to determine the testing position of a substantially changed vehicle, not its registration.

[Gary71]

I’m thankful I don’t need an MoT anymore otherwise it would fail on the hole in the sill and I wouldn’t get to go to CLM in it!