log book

[Rob Navin]

Probably because he advertised for one on an open forum ?    

Not knowing the full details I woulc not know but as stated there are lots of others who have not been fined and are still able to tax, test and insure the westfield they built in this way.

[wilsonch]

"so that i can build my car the way i want it and not worry about sva test if so let me know thanks"  

We would all like to do this BUT the law is the law, do what everyone else does now, build it to the SVA spec then when its passed change the bits you dont like.

The prime reason for the SVA is SAFETY yours and those arround you.

IF some one did sell on an identity and if was put on a badly built kit, we have all seen them, and it then killed or injured someone could you live with yourself ?

Chris...getting off soap box

[Mark Stanton]

oki doki I see now Rob     ............... just covering   's     in case someone is daft enough to publicly post saying they have a logbook for sale           in the knowledge of what it may be used for   as the original thread starter clearly stated that the need for a logbook was to circumvent the SVA  

Mark - use of a logbook from one vehicle without using a high percentage of components from same vehicle means you cannot have the registration of original vehicle    

Others may have done it, others may still do it - and not be fined/found out and be built to a high standard ................. however it may be prudent to seek full clarity of the law and those that know full details prior to going down the route you intend  

First port of call would perhaps be to WSC Ltd - they have built and registered far more vehicles than anyone else    

[Rob Navin]

The prime reason for the SVA is SAFETY yours and those arround you.

Is it though ?

It is easier to get a car through the SVA without a RAC roll bar on, indeen its easier to get one through without any roll bar on at all.  How is this helping your saftey?

In my opinion the SVA has made a joke of itself by the way it has developed, as I recall its intention when started was to make sure grey imports were legal to use on UK roads, ie could take british fuel pumps, rear fog light etc.

I stand by my point that a good MOT is more to do with saftey than a good SVA.

[wilsonch]

Alot of the SVA is to test safety for others, protruding sharp edges and alike.

There are also alot of things that the MOT doesnt check to the extent of the SVA.

Brakes for example, MOT doesnt check front/rear ratio

No noise test

wing mirrors.

self centering

light positioning (i.e visability to other road users)

etc

Dont forget there is another revision that is in consultation to the SVA called the IVA have a look at the VOSA web site, This (i hope) will bring an end to the ambiguity that we have all encountered between SVA stations.  

and if you dont like the draft write and voice your opinion.

chris

[jeff oakley]

The issue here as I see it is one of clarity. Now if you buy a Kit to build the SVA is £250 IIRC and the car would be registered appropriatly and would have a higher value than say an 88 car. If you make sure the car the reg is off is destroyed and cannot be put back on the road "technically" I see no differance than rebuilding a write off.

However the finances just don't stack up, a log book and or a damaged westfield will cost much more than the SVA will.

The clarity issue is this, you will have a car which is older than it needs to be, you will never be able to sell it as anything other than the age of the reg number and unless you can be 100% sure that the car cannot reappear then it is not worth it.

Several examples of this have appeared on the Locost/Dutton sites where people have used Dutton regs for a Locost, only to find later that the Chassis re surfaces and then the long arm of the law is there waiting. By all means do it if you want but be aware of the potential pitfalls