Classic cars forum & vehicle restoration.
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Ray White
Joined: 02 Dec 2014
Posts: 6310
Location: Derby
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:26 pm Post subject: E.U. rules |
 |
|
| Trying not to be political, I am trying to recall if there are any E.U. regulations that have affected our old car hobby? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
alastairq
Joined: 14 Oct 2016
Posts: 1952
Location: East Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2018 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
White lines down the left hand edge of roads? ['Edge' lines]....These came to be stuck on our roads because of EU [or its predecessor] rules which we had to adopt. Great if driving in fog, on carbide lamps?
_________________
Dellow Mk2, 1951 built, reg 1952.
Fiat 126 BIS
Cannon special [1996 registered. Built in 1950's]
----------------------------------------------
Ford Pop chassis, Ashley 1172 bodyshell, in pieces. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray White
Joined: 02 Dec 2014
Posts: 6310
Location: Derby
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2018 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| alastairq wrote: | | White lines down the left hand edge of roads? ['Edge' lines]....These came to be stuck on our roads because of EU [or its predecessor] rules which we had to adopt. Great if driving in fog, on carbide lamps? |
I hadn't thought of that one.
How about ethanol in petrol? Was that a E.U. regulation? I know it has been around since the days of Cleveland petrol but did the E.U. make it a regulation?
Last edited by Ray White on Sun Nov 18, 2018 9:37 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alastairq
Joined: 14 Oct 2016
Posts: 1952
Location: East Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2018 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Probably...although the amount doesn't seem to be consistent across EU countries...
_________________
Dellow Mk2, 1951 built, reg 1952.
Fiat 126 BIS
Cannon special [1996 registered. Built in 1950's]
----------------------------------------------
Ford Pop chassis, Ashley 1172 bodyshell, in pieces. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray White
Joined: 02 Dec 2014
Posts: 6310
Location: Derby
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2018 9:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The M.O.T. exemption rules I think were E.U. derived because I remember they had difficulty in finding an acceptable definition of "historic vehicle".
I don't know for sure. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alastairq
Joined: 14 Oct 2016
Posts: 1952
Location: East Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2018 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The EU's proposals for MoT exemption was for vehicles over 30 years old.
_________________
Dellow Mk2, 1951 built, reg 1952.
Fiat 126 BIS
Cannon special [1996 registered. Built in 1950's]
----------------------------------------------
Ford Pop chassis, Ashley 1172 bodyshell, in pieces. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peter scott
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Posts: 7118
Location: Edinburgh
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray White
Joined: 02 Dec 2014
Posts: 6310
Location: Derby
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2018 11:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What about tyre regulations? I seem to remember at one time ALL vehicles had to comply with the minimum tread depth and this caused a problem for solid tyred vehicles with no tread!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lowdrag
Joined: 10 Apr 2009
Posts: 1585
Location: Le Mans
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 6:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| alastairq wrote: | | The EU's proposals for MoT exemption was for vehicles over 30 years old. |
The actual 30 year rule was taken from the UNESCO decision that anything over 30 years old could be considered collectable, The UK though is, AFAIK, the only country to do away with the MOT completely. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray White
Joined: 02 Dec 2014
Posts: 6310
Location: Derby
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 9:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lowdrag wrote: | | alastairq wrote: | | The EU's proposals for MoT exemption was for vehicles over 30 years old. |
The actual 30 year rule was taken from the UNESCO decision that anything over 30 years old could be considered collectable, The UK though is, AFAIK, the only country to do away with the MOT completely. |
Not to start this up again... but I don't remember WHY some cars were considered so roadworthy when they got to a certain age they didn't need testing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
V8 Nutter
Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Posts: 587
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Not to start this up again... but I don't remember WHY some cars were considered so roadworthy when they got to a certain age they didn't need testing?[/quote]
I think the problem was some testers didn't know very much about old cars |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray White
Joined: 02 Dec 2014
Posts: 6310
Location: Derby
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 10:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| V8 Nutter wrote: | | Not to start this up again... but I don't remember WHY some cars were considered so roadworthy when they got to a certain age they didn't need testing? |
I think the problem was some testers didn't know very much about old cars[/quote]
The idea that your local M.O.T inspector is incapable of checking out an old car is just baloney. These guys are have to pass a stringent exam. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MikeEdwards
Joined: 25 May 2011
Posts: 2470
Location: South Cheshire
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 11:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dragging off topic for a minute, I think the issue was that MOT testers tended to concentrate (as you might expect) on the majority of vehicles coming through, which meant they could lose track of exceptions and differing standards for older vehicles, leading to incorrect "fails", and an increase in complaints. I recall my car was tested by a new fresh-from-training MOT inspector one year, and he completely ignored several of the age-related exceptions and failed the car on a list of stuff it didn't need. I only "got away with it" because I insisted he check the testers manual.
I did always wonder, though, why the MOT computer system couldn't help them out on that. As it must know what exceptions apply based on the age of the vehicle, it seems that it would be simple enough to pop up a warning screen when they log on to do the test, explaining any special cases that apply to the vehicle on test. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray White
Joined: 02 Dec 2014
Posts: 6310
Location: Derby
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MikeEdwards wrote: | Dragging off topic for a minute, I think the issue was that MOT testers tended to concentrate (as you might expect) on the majority of vehicles coming through, which meant they could lose track of exceptions and differing standards for older vehicles, leading to incorrect "fails", and an increase in complaints. I recall my car was tested by a new fresh-from-training MOT inspector one year, and he completely ignored several of the age-related exceptions and failed the car on a list of stuff it didn't need. I only "got away with it" because I insisted he check the testers manual.
I did always wonder, though, why the MOT computer system couldn't help them out on that. As it must know what exceptions apply based on the age of the vehicle, it seems that it would be simple enough to pop up a warning screen when they log on to do the test, explaining any special cases that apply to the vehicle on test. |
That makes sense. However, now with very few old cars being tested the risk of exemptions getting missed must rise exponentially. Maybe the sheer amount of knowledge required to deal with the vastly complex vehicles we have these days which necessarily concentrates on high tech developments in componentry, we could see the exemptions dropped altogether. That would mean the M.O.T. test for many much older vehicles would be impossible to pass.
It is then but a short step to say what I have always said that ALL cars should be inspected annually and have a current M.O.T certificate to be road legal.
Mark my words; the trap has been set and one day it will snap shut.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alastairq
Joined: 14 Oct 2016
Posts: 1952
Location: East Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
According to my tame mot tester...every aspect of a vehicle's test is now controlled via online questions.
To keep the information on the website regarding every vehicle made from the year dot,ends up with a very clunky [read, HUUUUUge] amount of information....the DVSA [VOSA as was] IT systems would collapse...hence, the 40 year thing? [Which, if we had followed EU suggestions [never mind anybody else's] would have meant, vehicles registered before 1988.....[that's G platers and before]..would have been exempted from having to have a valid MoT certificate.
But, I remind folk, there is a massive difference between having a valid MoT, and being roadworthy, or road legal.
At the end of the day, it is my responsibility, as the driver, to ensure my vehicle meets all the legal requirements to be on the public highway.
Not, most of them.
Or the one's I think ought to be in place.
Of course, given the almost complete lack of enforcement these days, I am able [if not 'free'] to take a chance...although I will be aware of it...unlike the drivers of [apparently, locally] over 80% of all vehicles on the roads.
_________________
Dellow Mk2, 1951 built, reg 1952.
Fiat 126 BIS
Cannon special [1996 registered. Built in 1950's]
----------------------------------------------
Ford Pop chassis, Ashley 1172 bodyshell, in pieces. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
php BB powered © php BB Grp.
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
