Classic cars forum & vehicle restoration.

[Penman]

Just in case you missed anything, I still get notification as a consumer panellist.

https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/UKDVSA/bulletins/33e709c
_________________
Bristols should always come in pairs.

Any 2 from:-
Straight 6
V8 V10

[Penman]

Lawrie from LMM picked up a car from Scotland for a friend who wanted the engine.
IT is an NSU RO80 and he is showing just how badly bodged an MoT exempt car COULD be and yet still driving about (Before he brought it down from Scotland)

He asks at the end "Is this the worst bit of "bodging" (I don't like that term because Bodgers are skilled artisans so can someone suggest another?)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwWmBlWPbX8
_________________
Bristols should always come in pairs.

Any 2 from:-
Straight 6
V8 V10

[Ray White]

I know not everyone agrees with me but I still maintain that if the Authorities require all MOT exempt cars to be road legal, then they should not have placed the onus on owners/drivers who are not necessarily qualified to know.

In that respect we should be glad that the law doesn't require owners/drivers of historic vehicles to be qualified.

All of which is no excuse for deliberate deception where there is a safety risk The vendor of my TC, for example, had packed the wheel cylinders with grease to hide leaks. Even an MOT inspection may not have picked that one up.

Que sera sera.

[alastairq]

[Ray White]

Not to put too fine a point on it, Alastair, what you are implying is that as everyone is legally liable to ensure that their vehicles are fit for purpose, they need to be able to ascertain WHEN to repair their vehicle - or have a qualified person inspect it and advise them if repairs are needed.

Clearly, as most people are not able or willing to do this then to stipulate that their vehicles be inspected by a qualified person on a regular basis would seem to be a sensible, reasonable - if imperfect - requirement. Hence the need to have a current MOT certificate to show that a qualified person has fairly recently found nothing dangerously wrong with it.

The belief by a small number of politicians that simply because a vehicle is old it will be in the hands of people who will correctly maintain it, is in my opinion a mistaken one. They are relying on statistics that show the casualty rate amongst owners of particularly old vehicles is very low.

[alastairq]

[norustplease]

We should all be clear that every time that you take your car ancient or modern, onto the road, the law says that you, the driver, are responsible for its roadworthiness.

The MOT is a useful periodic check but it is not the insurance against ongoing condition issues that many seem to think, and many of us will have had the experience of an MOT being passed one day and there being a significant issue only a few miles later. What it should be used as is a pointer to things that need specific attention and owners should be prepared to service their cars properly at regular intervals.

The MOT is not a guarantee of roadworthiness. It cannot tell you whether your brake linings are about to go down to the rivets, whether your brake hydraulics are filthy and full of moisture and about to fail, etc. A car with six months MOT could be as big a death trap as one without any.
_________________
1953 Citroen Traction
1964 Volvo PV544
1957 Austin A55 Mk 1
Boring Tucson SUV

[alastairq]

I would add, in the UK, not having a current valid MoT isn't a 'serious' offence.

Whereas, being found in charge of an unroadworthy vehicle [as required by Law] is far more seriously treated.
_________________
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.

[bjacko]

MOT's are like testing lights. you switch them on and they are fine, then next time you switch them on a bulb has blown.
Accidents due to not being roadworthy are very rare, other than the clowns who drive on worn out tyres.
_________________
1938 Morris 8 Ser II Coupe Utility (Pickup)
1985 Rover SD1 VDP

[Ray White]

I think some people object to paying for a positive outcome. I do.

[norustplease]

There is a far more serious issue, as identified by FBHVC in their Newsletter no 2. of 2023, reporting ongoing discussions with DVLA. Below are four items extracted from a much longer list of recently stated 'new' policies as expressed by DVLA in connection with Historic Vehicles, in many cases without any further consultation with FBHVC , or, it appears, anyone else. The first would also affect those building a 'new' period replica body on to an original chassis, as is Ray White.
The second of these is the most damning and is clearly as much a surprise to FBHVC as everyone else.

• Refusal to register cars with recently constructed but period typical bodies in apparent contradiction of agreement previously reached with Vehicle Policy.

• Contrary to long-standing practice that like-for-like repairs to a vehicle were not considered to affect its identity or status it now appears that any repair to a chassis or monocoque will be regarded as a modification and the vehicle will no longer be considered as historic

• Making holes in a monocoque is also considered to be a modification with the same consequences.

• Refusal to accept that a historic vehicle is most unlikely to be able to obtain an IVA and that as a result the allocation of a Q registration to such a vehicle renders it incapable of registration in the UK.

(The list is verbatim.)
The issue of a hole in a monocoque has already bitten the owner of an electrified Mini, a case recently widely publicised by Hagerty, amongst others. Most correspondents were puzzled by the refusal to accept the car even if the hole was welded up! Item three above perhaps explains this.

If pursued as an active policy, this means that most 'project' cars that have been extensively repaired or restored, are probably no longer legally Historic Vehicles and would need to be submitted for an IVA, which would in most cases, mean the end of the line for that particular car. This is a potential extinction event for much of the Classic Car movement, particularly those involved with post war cars.
How would DVLA know that you had repaired your car body with new cills, outriggers, etc?. Well, potentially as a result of your car being submitted for an MOT and having repairs reported back to big brother.

I'd steer clear of the MOT man until this is sorted out.
_________________
1953 Citroen Traction
1964 Volvo PV544
1957 Austin A55 Mk 1
Boring Tucson SUV

[alastairq]

[alastairq]

[Ray White]

I am the sort of person who will ignore officialdom until it catches up with me. I can see me ending up in prison for failure to obey Big Brother.

[Ray White]