New MOT legislation and more...

[Gary71]

Nowhere does it explicitly say that if you modify your already registered car then you get a Q plate, only that it will lose historic status, hence losing the no tax and MOT advantage.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KS]

Nowhere does it explicitly say that if you modify your already registered car then you get a Q plate, only that it will lose historic status, hence losing the no tax and MOT advantage.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, it's down to whether you are requested to put your car through BIVA if modifications are considered sufficiently outside the VHI remit. If so, and it is decided that your car is more modified than acceptable, you will be asked to put your car through IVA, the outcome of that being the chance of losing your current reg and being issued a Q-plate. This retrospective action has already happened in the hot-rod world – it's just that from now on, the web will start to spread wider...

[Tosh]

Mr Moss and Mr Drayson might want to become MOT test centres

[Lightweight_911]

I'm still not clear how it effects cars that were modified prior to 1988 - does the '8 point' rule still apply ?

1) Modified 'historic' cars currently MOT exempt (ie built before 1960)

2) Modified cars built/registered prior to 1988 & MOT'd/taxed annually

.

[Ollie]

I cant see this affecting my '12 but i can my split bus...

Narrowed front beam, dropped spindles, straight axle rear, beetle gearbox, 944 brakes all round, 125hp engine.

I see 5 points on the body as unmodified, 2 for steering, possibly 2 for transmission?

Engine will need detuning significantly!

Possibly a return to stock is in order!

Cheers,

Ollie

[sladey]

I think either it will become a non-issue - just meaning that some people will need to get MOTs but that's it OR the world and his dog will have Q-Plates.

If the latter then current sniffy attitude to Q-plates will change

[sladey]

Nowhere does it explicitly say that if you modify your already registered car then you get a Q plate, only that it will lose historic status, hence losing the no tax and MOT advantage.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks Gary

[smallspeed]

I wonder if weld in roll cages = "significantly modified monocoque"? Effectively the monocoque isn't modified, its been added to.. ..bolt in cages would be an interesting one too as effectively they're not a permanent modification however require welded in mounting plates, etc which are..

the moral of this story might be to slap a cage in your 997 4.0 GT3 RS NOW so that in 40yrs its a period mod?!

[BILLY BEAN]

The potential problem here are the "Jobsworths" at DVLA and their interpretation of the legislation when it comes into force. Stretch recently had an issue which he was unable to resolve regarding the issuing of an age related registration number for his car which was denied on two separate occasions.

[KS]

Adding a roll cage won't be a problem as your 'adding' rather than 'modifying'.

Andy - if it can be shown that the mods were done pre-1988 (the date the Q-plate came into effect), then it won't affect the historic status.

Interesting to note that the DVLA has now ceased, as of a few weeks ago, responding to request for vehicle history using form V888 – this allowed you to see all DVLA records of your car, including such things as an engine change, colour, etc. Now they will only respond to specific questions, such as what engine number did my car used to have, or whatever. This is because they realised people would keep quiet about mods if they found out that the DVLA had no record of changes from standard being made at any point. Of course, by asking the question, you'd be flagging up that your car may have been modified without their knowledge...

Also, the DVLA database is now tied up to the MID (motor insurance database) so if you've insured your car as a 3.8-litre RSR replica with photos provided to your insurers to get an agreed valuation, DVLA now has a complete record of everything you've done. So if you say 'no, it's a bone stock 1973 2.4 911E so I want VHI status', then they will be able to say 'but our database shows it has a 3.8-litre engine, coil-over suspension and...'.

[911hillclimber]

Now I've had a busy day driving to SPA, am I. Right..

My shell was changed to rhd 22 years and 22 MoTs ago.
It has a 3.2 engine and a few suspension mods and a bolt in cage (ex hill climb car).
Thus I am sure the car is significantly modified and of no historical interest. Are the Government interested in old cars anyway?

So, I go to the same MoT station I have been taking the car to since 1989 and seek his opinion as to whether in his opinion it is Q plate level of change. He is not stupid, understands classics is fair.

If he says no, then I pay tax and keep MoTing the car. everyone is happy.

If he says no, far too modified, then I have to prepare the car to BIVA and take it for a test. If it passes, then I have to buy some Q plates, pay the tax and MoT the car, keeping all the mods I have and do ANYTHING I chose to modify the car from that point on?

I need to find out what the BIVA test involves.

As said, there will be so many Q plates they will be seen as a badge that the car is compliant, safe and a good by, will still be 30% less value though I guess in 12 months time.

Have I got the test / tech decision right?

[911hillclimber]

Just read the IVA test document.
I hope it is just thr basic one to pass as the full IVA test even has destructive testing....

Best we all hope Parliament throws it out, but that is not going to happen is it.

What has got this all going, fake Bugattis again?

My hot rod of 25 years is suddenly not acceptable. Why not?
None of this change is based on safety grounds oddly so.....
Guess this Government needs to get more car tax despite it was them that exempted these cars in the first place!

I hope Gary is right in his overview.

[Gary71]

The purpose of this legislation is to reduce unnecessary burden, not increase it. Suddenly needing to Q plate a 1/3 of classic cars helps no one and creates more hassle than just leaving it alone.
Hence my view as above.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[911hillclimber]

I trust your take on this Gary.

Some group in the Government has spent a lot of time and effort to do all this, so there must be some reason why it is thought to be an improvement, and it's chance of being accepted by Parliament must be assured ESP as the world knows about now.
I wonder if my local MP knows or cares.

Read the passage on the subject on Heritage Insurance web site, bottom of their page!

[Gary71]

I'm still not entirely certain what problem this legislation is the answer to, but such is life!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk