New MOT legislation and more...

[carlos fandango]

So if a vehicle is registered as Historic, can it be changed back to PLG?
My Mk2 Escort is heavily modified and has some history with it so I'd like to keep the plate, I'd rather pay the tax each year than go through the grief that it may bring.

[desert rat]

Looks like Body/Chassis alteration is the big one.

[KS]

There are two interconnected problems here. One is the MOT aspect, the other the modifications. If your car has been modified from stock outside the 8-point ruling since 1988, it is liable for testing and loss of any historic status. Simply saying I'll just continue to get it MOT'd is not enough. If the vehicle is shown to be 'substantially modified', then it will need to undergo at least BIVA testing and run the risk of losing its historic licence plate.

An obvious problem area in our scene is the matter of 'backdated' cars – changing the front bulkhead and slam panel, trimming the floor to allow the engine and trans to be dropped straight down... all constitute modifying the monocoque.

[Grindon]

So..................................... I get it that you could/would lose your MOT and tax exemption status, but is it suggested that if you declare or your vehicle is deemed to be, substantially modifed, you actually lose it's current valid registration number and it is then subsequently allocated a 'Q' registration number after said inspection?

[carlos fandango]

Ok, I wondered if it was registered as PLG would it be exempt from the ruling but I assume it will cover any vehicle over 40 years of age.
As the car has been modified in one form or another before 1988, I may take this route if I can find earlier evidence of it's competition history, it might be easier.

[Bootsy]

Worth a read

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... idance.pdf

[911hillclimber]

Went to bed thinking I had over 8 points, woke in the middle of the night realising My shell was modified, albeit 24 years ago.
Thus, Q plate for me.
Good news is I keep all the mods as I can under this new stupid system.

Can a car issued with a Q plate have a simple cheap private plate transferred to it?

My car was imported from Germany in V registration (80's) so has never had a 73 number on it.
So... Q plate forced on me, cheap L plate for a few hundred, and my world carries on with my hot rod.

I would take it for an MoT anyway and it would be 6 months road tax, no big deal.

All this will increase the value of pure classic cars as so many will have Q plates!

I know of a beautiful E Type with nice mods but lightly flared rear arches for wider wheels, now a Q plate, original reg taken away, a £100k car stripped of its value, or modify the car back to stock for £15k....
The industry will be making a few shillings from this.

[fcd911]

It looks like the Motor Sport Association (MSA) saw this coming. If I understand the proposed Blue Book rule change correctly - from next year, for historic events, as long as a car is built to the eligible specification for a particular category, i.e. 1968-1974, then it can have been register after that date (Q?!).

The rulings about modifying the monocoque and the 15% power to weight ratio increases will have a huge impact across substantial parts of the historic vehicle industry.

John

[Gary71]

That's not how I read it. I've read all the documents and the key phrase is this (from the document Bootsy linked)

"Radically altered vehicles should have registration plates with a “Q” prefix, but if a keeper considers they have such a vehicle with an original registration plate they should either test it or establish whether it is a radically altered vehicle."

So if the keeper has such a vehicle with an existing registration you test it, and carry on. If you tick the 'substantially changed' box when taxing it you will now get a bill, but not a Q plate.

Importing a Hot Rod and registering it for the first time maybe a different matter.

As someone who reads and interprets automotive legislation for a living I find the way these documents are written very frustrating. I appreciate they aren't legislation yet, but it's so ambiguous that it either leads to scaremongering or complacency. Either of which maybe justified but we don't really know!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[redrobin911]

Went to bed thinking I had over 8 points, woke in the middle of the night realising My shell was modified, albeit 24 years ago.
Thus, Q plate for me.

I'm fairly positive its a Q plate for life I'm afraid.......(i know a 911 already on a Q plate), I agree that if this is the case then the value of a 911, or any car on a Q plate is going to be less than one not. Obviously how much is impossible to predict, then you only have to look at the value of Cat C D cars to see that buyers are not prepared to pay close to the market value of a car unless "correct".

This also may well lead to sellers misleading buyers with incorrect descriptions, claiming they didn't know any better.....

This issue looks like it'd going to rumble on for some time..........

[simon james]

So this was inspired by an EU directive. Has this been implemented in Europe yet?
My in-laws live in Cyprus and there are all sorts of weird things out there, like the local builders pick up with no doors and a beer crate for a drivers seat......

[smallspeed]

The document linked above doesn't seem to make any changes to the Q Plate thing? Its just saying cars that are radically altered, modified, kit cars, ones which are built from parts, etc., etc., are not exempt from the MOT test.. Which makes sense I guess, and probably isn't a major concern to most people

The Q-Plate thing seems like its exactly as it always has been? And I think probably doesn't apply to things like a 911 with a roll cage welded into it, or wider arches (which would be non-structural anyway, presumably?). It MIGHT bring more scrutiny to cars like a 356 rep built on a shortened beetle floor pan though..

[fcd911]

If the interpretation of the monocoque rules is correct and the intention of the Vehicle of Historic Interest classification is to ensure that vehicles look like they did when they left the factory – historically correct, there will be double standard to say the least.

A pre-impact car with RS rear arches would be classed as “substantially modified” despite being a period correct change, so a Q plate and all that goes with that. However take a 1988 911SC, in fact probably any 911 up to the 964 and back date it (new front and rear bumpers, engine lid and bonnet- all bolt on) to make it look like an RS (how many of those out there?) and because it does not have a “substantially modified” monocoque it can appear to be something it clearly is not and yet benefit from the rolling exemptions. What irony!!

John

[hot66]

Wonder if there will be a knock on effect in the future regarding MoT and emissions requirements ? Don't need an mot means no emmission restrictions ... cars needing MOT might have to pass a more stringent test

[fcd911]

With the removal of the requirement for an MOT and the allocation of a points based system. It means that if you have a factory correct Monocoque (5 points), relatively unmodified engine (1 point) and original Transmission (2 points) bingo you have 8 points. You can then completely change the suspension, steering and axles etc., for whatever you want irrespective of its safety and engineering integrity and there is no authority (MOT Tester) to administer a check of what has been done.

Scary or ridiculous!!

John