DfT and DVLA launch call for evidence around registering historic, classic and rebuilt vehicles

[SteveB21]

Thought this was worth posting as kit-built vehicles get mentioned - not had a chance to look at it myself:

 

https://www.fbhvc.co.uk/news/article/dft-and-dvla-launch-call-for-evidence-around-registering-historic-classic-and-rebuilt-vehicles

 

From the FBHVC website:

 

Today, 9 May 2024, the Department for Transport (DfT) and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) have launched a call for evidence around the existing policies and registration processes for historic, classic and rebuilt vehicles.

The aim is to seek expertise and knowledge about whether these policies need updating to reflect evolving technologies that support the restoration and rebuilding of these vehicles.

DfT and DVLA are very keen to tap into a range of experience, views and research to help identify areas of potential change, whilst ensuring that road safety and accurate vehicle records on the national register remain a key priority.

The call for evidence asks for evidence on a number of topics including:

• historic/classic vehicles registration
• rebuilt and restored vehicles
• kit-built vehicles
• vehicles converted to electric propulsion
• Q registration numbers
• the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN)
•  

This call for evidence runs until 4 July 2024 and you can respond by visiting the link below.

https://www.gov.uk/government/calls-for-evidence/registering-historic-classic-rebuilt-vehicles-and-vehicles-converted-to-electric-call-for-evidence

 

 

[Richard (OldStager)]

As long as this does not affect my cars ability to become a "classic" in just 9 years now. I know an MOT will always be needed  ( on a Q plate)  and I would always get it done anyway but would be handy to ditch the darn road tax, my car since it's existence must have resurfaced many many roads in that time, yet my road is dreadful !!.  Not sure what I put on that form thing though, as it may come back to bite me on the bum...

[jeff oakley]

I have had a quick scan but reading this does raise some issues as I see it.

for example if you have an accident according to how I read this in a Westfield repairing a chassis could lead to a new Biva. Whereas if you replace a damaged chassis with one from Westfield then you can still keep the identity.

This is the problem with something like this as why should it be an issue to fit a new front end on a chassis.

A lot is in the wording as to what the interpretation will be.

A lot of this is being driven by the trend to electrify classics and possibly to stop the ludicrous situation where a handful of bits become a sought after classics with old registrations to add value.

i will read more as time allows

[Richard (OldStager)]

I think all classics that have ditched the ICE should be registered as a "replica " of sorts, as it is no longer the classic it once was. Yes, folks are now cashing in with modern tech and free everything, its not on to be fair.

 

[DIY-Si]

21 minutes ago, Richard (OldStager) said:

I think all classics that have ditched the ICE should be registered as a "replica " of sorts, as it is no longer the classic it once was. Yes, folks are now cashing in with modern tech and free everything, its not on to be fair.

 

 

How does that differ from an engine/gearbox change? The tax class may well alter, which is a separate issue, but it's still an engine change (potentially) making it no longer the classic it once was......

 

There are many gaps and holes, but on the whole, I suspect the system is currently working.

[Richard (OldStager)]

Well for me, and I am biased here i loathe electric cars, but to be honest as I see it, folks are buying old classics, throwing the ICE engine away and fitting electric , now that is different in my eyes to an engine or gearbox change which at least is trying to be as close as possible to what the car was, I do not disagree with resto mods as long as they retain some form of ICE engine. I agree its complicated, but perhaps this evidence gathering may lead to a change in the law, we wait to see what happens.

[DIY-Si]

But that makes it an issue with the electric stuff only, and does sound a little biased, as by that logic I could put a great V8 in a Midget and that's nothing like the original but would be OK.

[Richard (OldStager)]

Is bias a bad thing ?. And I have no issue with a V8 in any car, great engines , stunning sound.

[jeff oakley]

My problem with these things is in principle they are fine and then they grow arms and legs and become something they are not meant to be.

The issue is the civil service. I had experiance with the DOT who were consulting on MOT's and right to repair. The manufacturers sent lobbyists to try to restrict everything to favour them and it was clear their slick message was winning these people over.

 

I asked the DOT people what experiance they had with vehicles and it was none, they were career civil servants who had moved from DEFRA a few weeks prior.

We won but they were ready to accept something that was bad. Same with this no one wants bad cars on the road, but how do all those reshelled Mini's and MGB's keep their identity when the consultation says they can only be replaced with one from the manufacturer, when BL is no more?

 

As I said earlier where is the line drawn on what is an acceptable repair, for me jigging and fitting a front chassis section is fine as that is how they are made, but you can imagine the mental gymnastics  some might feel is required.

 

This consultation is meant it would appear for experts like Westfield and others who restore manufacturer cars. Individuals are not asked for their view. Time will tell but the government has a habit of doing this, to just confirm what they want. A recent change to waste was put out for consultation yet only 224 organisations replied and over 100 were councils who were for it as it reduced their costs.

[Two7]

Section 3.23 to 3.28. Are very relevant to westfield kit cars in future and if we repair.   Should we as a club have an agreed response to these sections.   Sorry if i have missed it,  but Is there a committee or member representing us all on this or should we all respond with an agreed text.  

[Richard (OldStager)]

 

 

@Two7 I am not sure who this is aimed at if I'm honest, as @jeff oakley above points out I think its for the main players not us the end user, no idea really.

[Richard (OldStager)]

What about if we had our own debate here on this thread , but for now take out Historic and Classics, just discuss Westfields or kitcars in general. As I a member of a classic club we are doing something similar on Whatsapp. 

 

The problem is, I have no experience of either registering a kit car or re-building one, so I may not join in much.

 

[p k]

On 10/05/2024 at 11:10, jeff oakley said:

A lot of this is being driven by the trend to electrify classics and possibly to stop the ludicrous situation where a handful of bits become a sought after classics with old registrations to add value.

i will read more as time allows

A few years ago a court case occurred over the identity of a classic car (possibly a Bentley ) as a car had been built up and the identity of a car attached to it , the case revolved around how much of a car had to be included in a restoration of a car to retain its identity and from memory the judgement was that 2% of the original car was required.

[Richard (OldStager)]

Wow, is that all, not much is it.

Should be far more

[Stuart]

I have a little bit of experience in Government 'calls for evidence' and 'consultations' and IMHO there is very little chance of changing anything unless you have a big lobby machine behind you. 

Also 3.23-3.28 seem to just be asking whether relaxations should be made to existing regs not suggesting a tightening up.