Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
DVLA and Modified Cars
#21
(11-02-2019, 05:56 PM)Steve Jones Wrote: Now I read that, Mr. Spannerman, I think I know who you are. If I'm correct, you passed me in the car this morning just top side of the level crossing.

Steve Smile

Sorry not me ? Car got diff in bits doing seals getting oil on brakes ?
I'm hoping to get to a car gathering in summer ?so hoping to meet with some car owners !
My problem I ask questions that other people don't like?
Like have you got that for an investment or for fun?
Reply
#22
(11-02-2019, 01:43 PM)Phil Kingdom Wrote: Stuarts comments on the Triumph special show what the DVLA might want you to do, but strangely enough the Triumph Spitfire/ Herald cars do not have a number stamped on the chassis, only a riveted plate on the bulkhead.

That's quite correct as regards the lack of a number stamped on a Triumph chassis itself -along or most other modernish chassied cars- For the DVLA rebody process it's not an issue as the car doesn't get inspected. All they need are photos of the car with the original body showing the number plate, the rolling chassis showing the number plate, and the car with the new body showing the number plate. The Chassis/VIN number stays the same, so the car just needs a plate showing said VIN on it somewhere.

Ed's situation is different. perhaps if he looked really hard he might find a seemingly random chassis number from the 1932 model year that's been stamped on there. Then it would be able to be authenticated as a reconstructed  classic by a club's V765 rep and could get an age related registration once it's a complete car.
Reply
#23
(11-02-2019, 11:10 PM)Stuart Giles Wrote:
(11-02-2019, 01:43 PM)Phil Kingdom Wrote: Stuarts comments on the Triumph special show what the DVLA might want you to do, but strangely enough the Triumph Spitfire/ Herald cars do not have a number stamped on the chassis, only a riveted plate on the bulkhead.

That's quite correct as regards the lack of a number stamped on a Triumph chassis itself -along or most other modernish chassied cars- For the DVLA rebody process it's not an issue as the car doesn't get inspected. All they need are photos of the car with the original body showing the number plate, the rolling chassis showing the number plate, and the car with the new body showing the number plate. The Chassis/VIN number stays the same, so the car just needs a plate showing said VIN on it somewhere.

Ed's situation is different. perhaps if he looked really hard he might find a seemingly random chassis number from the 1932 model year that's been stamped on there. Then it would be able to be authenticated as a reconstructed  classic by a club's V765 rep and could get an age related registration once it's a complete car.

As a club v765 rep I could not condone any nefarious activty..... but make sure the number you "find" is not already allocated to a car on the Chassis Register! It would be handy if you happened to find a suitable buff log book at the same time. Good luck!
Rick

In deepest Norfolk
Reply
#24
buff log book ? like this ? (Please Note it is NOT my ad) [Only registered and activated users can see the links Click here to register]
Reply
#25
Forgot to say when I fitted the reliant engine and gearbox I did it without altering the
Chassis in anyway ? Took some doing but it means I can if I ever i come across a Austin engine and gearbox that is at a price i can afford I can fit with no problems ?
I did take a lot of photos when I was building it ! Think that helped when it was checked over by dvla ?
My problem I ask questions that other people don't like?
Like have you got that for an investment or for fun?
Reply
#26
And yet they still do not apply their standards with any consistency....
Reply
#27
Several people with Lotus Elans have ended up with Q plates having misguidedly informed DVLA of a new chassis. There is probably not a single Elan with its original chassis by now (including the 2 I have owned). Tell them nothing if at all possible is probably the best advice I think.
Reply
#28
Problem with dvla i think is that they don't have anybody that knows about classic cars
I think it would be hard for them to find somebody that knows about all makes and can see what has been changed so just try to do what they think is right at the time,
Was told if you want something changing in logbook only do one thing at a time
My problem I ask questions that other people don't like?
Like have you got that for an investment or for fun?
Reply
#29
(12-02-2019, 10:34 PM)Bruce Nicholls Wrote: [Only registered and activated users can see the links Click here to register]
Reply
#30
These types of organisations seem the same world over, very vague rules open to interpretation and on the day it all seems to come down to the person you end up talking to as what they happen to think is right and will allow. And god help you if you get one of the officious little ******* who will immediately get their backs up if you ever question them.

I get it with my MGB which doesn't have sun visors fitted. It gets mentioned in the WOFs sometimes. I point out to them the rule actually says if reasonable and practical:

1. A vehicle other than of class LE must be fitted with a sun visor for the driver’s use if it is reasonable and practicable to do so (Note 1).

Out of interest, and it took me 5 minutes of searching to find it, a class LE vehicle seems to be a 3 wheel half bike trike thing.

I say it's not reasonable or practical since the bloody things were fitted late in MGB production as an afterthought and are a pain in the neck. They fall down more often than not and even when not falling down block vision more than helping it. I had fitted them originally then removed them. I find it far more reasonable and practical to wear a brimmed hat and sunglasses. Luckily the place I go to now accepts that and let me get away with it.

I find the legislation seems to be written in a way that's hard to follow and deliberately vague in places. Lots of cross references, notes and use of words like 'reasonable' and 'practical' with no indication of who gets to say what that is. I bet in the case of an insurance claim the insurance company will claim it's them!

Interestingly the agency behind it all, NZTA, is in a right mess. Recently the chief exec and three directors all resigned. Something like 20000 WOF checks were found to have been done badly and need to be redone. It seems there has been no checking that the certifiers have been doing what they should be and they've know about this for a while and done nothing about it.

It worries me, with a car nearing completion, that there is going to be a backlash and everything is going to get tightened up to the point trying to get a (slightly - but period correct) modified car through might be a mission!

Simon
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)