391 replies to this topic

[mike.]

Right i see. So really the questions we need to ask need are for the DVLA. If VOSA isn't changing much, its the DVLA description of the vehicle we need to worry about.

It can't all just be a grey area to what counts are a mod. Like has been said earlier, the DVLA only care about colour, vin number etc. So the DVLA must be bringing in something so you know what you need to inform them of or not right?

[Ethel]

Do we have a source regarding 2012 restrictions on modded cars? All I've seen relating to IVA suggests that is what it's for.

My understanding of Mark Vickers replies to Craig was that the specific modifications (such as coil overs, air boxes etc) is that they wouldn't be considered a modification at all if they were the only modification to a "major component" as described by the various "is it the same car as on the V5" formulas. We already knew that coilovers on their own wouldn't force you to have an IVA as even if you lost your score for the suspension you'd still have the shell, engine, gearbox....

I do see Jordie's point of view that nothing's changed; if your MoT is abandoned you won't be putting your car on the road legally until you've sorted out the reason why and got it retested. If that means advising DVLA of a change of engine, seating capacity or whatever they might well decide to call you for a VIC. If you don't sort a retest, you can't tax it, so then you'll be filing a sorn - and the NCP clampers, or whoever, are likely to come snooping.

[CMcB]

Regarding MOT testing, and whether most Mini owners should be worried.


"
Approvals
Testing and Support Services (TaSS)
VOSA,
Ellipse,
Padley Road,
Swansea,
SA1 8AN.
Good morning Craig,

Good to hear from you again and thank you for your further enquiry
regarding this matter.

I have replied directly to a number of MoT testers who do not appear to be
aware of their responsibilities under the MoT scheme. However, as MoT
issues are not normally part of my remit, I asked for clarification on the
exact detail of these enquires from John Stephenson, Head of MOT Technical
Standards. He has confirmed my understanding, that it is a requirement for
an MoT examiner to report a Type 2 difference (Make, model and colour)
during the MoT test. In practice this means that vehicles such as a Z Cars
Mini, or Kit Cars still using the donor vehicle details, should be recorded
as a mismatch, during the test. The vehicle will then be called forward for
a DVLA inspection at a later date. As you are possibly aware, there is no
"mismatch button", as described by several different sources !

Again, we are only looking at vehicles that have been radically altered, so
minor modifications should not be an issue. However, your "informed source"
does not appear to be fully conversant with his obligations as an MoT
inspector. He should not be refusing to test vehicles that have been
modified, simply reporting the Type 2 difference on his system during the
test. He should also be notifying vehicles such as a rear wheel drive Z
Cars conversion, as a Type 2 mismatch, on the understanding that it is no
longer an Austin Mini, but a Z Cars conversion. This is nothing new, it has
been a requirement since the introduction of MoT Computerisation, several
years ago. John Stephenson has assured me that MoT testers are aware of
this requirement and I believe that if they are found not to be complying
with the regulations, the consequences could be severe. I do hope that your
MoT tester on the forum is among the ones that I have had the opportunity
to reply to directly and he is now aware of the exact requirements of the
test. It is also worth pointing out that a lot of people keep referring to
the date 2012, as if it has some major significance in the matter of MoT
testing. My belief is that this has probably come from Andy Saunders
letter, in which he makes a reference to this date as being the point that
you can no longer modify a vehicle. The only significance this date
currently has, is that on the 29th October 2012, all cars and light goods
vehicles will require full European Community Whole Vehicle Type Approval
(ECWVTA).

Please do assure your readers that they should not be unduly concerned by
this issue, unless they have radically altered their vehicles. Only cars
that have undergone chassis changes, or major modifications will be a cause
for concern. Even then, it will still be possible to modify the vehicle in
order to pass the IVA test, assuming that they are prepared to carry out
the necessary work. If any of your readers have specific concerns regarding
this matter, please do tell them to contact me directly. There are far too
many people making informed guesses as to what the situation might be,
rather than actually knowing what it is. While I appreciate that an MoT
tester may feel he knows enough to comment on the subject matter, this is a
very complex area of legislation where a little knowledge can be a
dangerous thing. Ultimately, after many years of experience, I still need
to consult the regulations on a regular basis to arrive at the correct
decision regarding these matters. With the greatest respect, I find it hard
to believe that someone who does not have access to these regulations can
make an informed and accurate decision, without them.

I do hope this information is helpful, but, as always, should you have any
further questions, please do get in touch.

Best regards,

Mark

Mark Vickers Eng Tech MSOE MIRTE
Technical Officer
Approvals
Passenger Cars & Light Goods Vehicles
Vehicle & Operator Services Agency
Department for Transport."

[Deathrow]

Thats made me feel a little bit happier.

Just goes to show that as long as I take my car to a Mini friendly garage for MOT and the car matches the log book in colour, seating, engine etc. then they can pass it and they're not even "bending" any rules for me.

Thanks for sharing that Craig.

Edited by Deathrow, 27 July 2009 - 10:35 AM.

[garrett3]

well done Craig

[CMcB]

can we pin this or something please? I will endeavour to write a summary

[tuktuk]

Regarding MOT testing, and whether most Mini owners should be worried.


"
Approvals
Testing and Support Services (TaSS)
VOSA,
Ellipse,
Padley Road,
Swansea,
SA1 8AN.
Good morning Craig,

Good to hear from you again and thank you for your further enquiry
regarding this matter.

I have replied directly to a number of MoT testers who do not appear to be
aware of their responsibilities under the MoT scheme. However, as MoT
issues are not normally part of my remit, I asked for clarification on the
exact detail of these enquires from John Stephenson, Head of MOT Technical
Standards. He has confirmed my understanding, that it is a requirement for
an MoT examiner to report a Type 2 difference (Make, model and colour)
during the MoT test. In practice this means that vehicles such as a Z Cars
Mini, or Kit Cars still using the donor vehicle details, should be recorded
as a mismatch, during the test. The vehicle will then be called forward for
a DVLA inspection at a later date. As you are possibly aware, there is no
"mismatch button", as described by several different sources !

Again, we are only looking at vehicles that have been radically altered, so
minor modifications should not be an issue. However, your "informed source"
does not appear to be fully conversant with his obligations as an MoT
inspector. He should not be refusing to test vehicles that have been
modified, simply reporting the Type 2 difference on his system during the
test. He should also be notifying vehicles such as a rear wheel drive Z
Cars conversion, as a Type 2 mismatch, on the understanding that it is no
longer an Austin Mini, but a Z Cars conversion. This is nothing new, it has
been a requirement since the introduction of MoT Computerisation, several
years ago. John Stephenson has assured me that MoT testers are aware of
this requirement and I believe that if they are found not to be complying
with the regulations, the consequences could be severe. I do hope that your
MoT tester on the forum is among the ones that I have had the opportunity
to reply to directly and he is now aware of the exact requirements of the
test. It is also worth pointing out that a lot of people keep referring to
the date 2012, as if it has some major significance in the matter of MoT
testing. My belief is that this has probably come from Andy Saunders
letter, in which he makes a reference to this date as being the point that
you can no longer modify a vehicle. The only significance this date
currently has, is that on the 29th October 2012, all cars and light goods
vehicles will require full European Community Whole Vehicle Type Approval
(ECWVTA).

Please do assure your readers that they should not be unduly concerned by
this issue, unless they have radically altered their vehicles. Only cars
that have undergone chassis changes, or major modifications will be a cause
for concern. Even then, it will still be possible to modify the vehicle in
order to pass the IVA test, assuming that they are prepared to carry out
the necessary work. If any of your readers have specific concerns regarding
this matter, please do tell them to contact me directly. There are far too
many people making informed guesses as to what the situation might be,
rather than actually knowing what it is. While I appreciate that an MoT
tester may feel he knows enough to comment on the subject matter, this is a
very complex area of legislation where a little knowledge can be a
dangerous thing. Ultimately, after many years of experience, I still need
to consult the regulations on a regular basis to arrive at the correct
decision regarding these matters. With the greatest respect, I find it hard
to believe that someone who does not have access to these regulations can
make an informed and accurate decision, without them.

I do hope this information is helpful, but, as always, should you have any
further questions, please do get in touch.

Best regards,

Mark

Mark Vickers Eng Tech MSOE MIRTE
Technical Officer
Approvals
Passenger Cars & Light Goods Vehicles
Vehicle & Operator Services Agency
Department for Transport."

which if i remember corrrectly, is what jordie has been telling you ?

[Shifty]

So, in a nutshell, if what the tester sees in front him tallys with the what the computer tells him there shouldn't be too much of a problem ie

If your log book says you own a red/white 1990 mayfair with a 1275 engine, even if its got a set of arches and alloys on it, then theres no need for the tester to report you to dvla/vosa

However..

Should you turn up in a 1966 blue mini 850, that is actually a 2007 z cars using a brand new shell, and is black then he has every chance of reporting you?!!!!

[ferrit]

So has this all been a humungous storm in a teacup?

Seeing as Mr MOT man isnt going to dob me in for anything other than mismatches between the V5 data and the car I will now crack on with what I intended ie removable carbon front end. Thank goodness for that!

[Deathrow]

So has this all been a humungous storm in a teacup?

Seeing as Mr MOT man isnt going to dob me in for anything other than mismatches between the V5 data and the car I will now crack on with what I intended ie removable carbon front end. Thank goodness for that!

Amen to that my friend! Flip fronts all round!

[garrett3]

which if i remember corrrectly, is what jordie has been telling you ?

Not really Tuktuk, In fact in many cases the opposite.

The fact is this will be enforced unlike the more relaxed SVA.. it costs much more and is tougher to pass.

If you are going into a highly modded build you need to know the laws.


"deathrow" and "ferrit" it has been explained that a flipfront "could" cause a problem. Make an informed decision before taking action (what this thread was all about)

"storm in a teacup" No not really as the IVA WILL effect alot of mini owners due to the nature of rebuilds and mods that are present on our cars that infact "may" be breaking the law.

Its a valid heads up and Craig has worked hard to help you guys, Some thanks wouldnt go amiss.


Treat this thread as valuble knowlege, if it doesnt effect you then thats great but it will effect others.

Thanks

[mike.]

Well thanks for that, its cleared alot up.

It seems andy saunders has made some mistakes and looks like hes exaggerated some of his info.

Still, at least this has come to some good and cleared up who needs to be worried about this regulations, which it seems have been in place for yonks, so thanks to garrett for bringing the subject up.


The only thing we need to establish now is what would be considered a 'serious modification' Now we have some method of trust worthy contact, i might send an email out tomorrow to see what i can establish.

[garrett3]

Thanks Mike

Craig is working on a summary that he will post up so watch this space. But if you do ever need any questions answered that have not been covered contact Mark Vickers.. he really is a great help and is only too willing to take time to help you.

The laws have been in place for yonks but its just got a touch stricter so worth keeping an eye out and knowing where you stand... Hopefully this thread will help you do exactly that

[ferrit]

which if i remember corrrectly, is what jordie has been telling you ?

Not really Tuktuk, In fact in many cases the opposite.

The fact is this will be enforced unlike the more relaxed SVA.. it costs much more and is tougher to pass.

If you are going into a highly modded build you need to know the laws.


"deathrow" and "ferrit" it has been explained that a flipfront "could" cause a problem. Make an informed decision before taking action (what this thread was all about)

"storm in a teacup" No not really as the IVA WILL effect alot of mini owners due to the nature of rebuilds and mods that are present on our cars that infact "may" be breaking the law.

Its a valid heads up and Craig has worked hard to help you guys, Some thanks wouldnt go amiss.


Treat this thread as valuble knowlege, if it doesnt effect you then thats great but it will effect others.

Thanks

No offence Garret but we have been trying to get an "informed" view on flip fronts for weeks since this came out. The upshot here is they wont tell you anything other than "could" be a problem. Is it or isn't it??? They seem to be able to give advise on everything else and Craig has asked this question directly not in a round about way to the Technical guy at DVLA, so if he doesn't know who does?

I will take my chances with most of the people who either already have a flipfront or are think of putting one on. The risk doesn't lie with the MOT man any more which is most peoples concern but with a VOSA roadside check. I personally haven't been through one of those for ages and that was on the M6 north of Carlisle. My car will be run 90% of the time on rural B roads which are not target points for VOSA and I don't intend on front hinging it or putting a Reverse flip kit on, it will be purely removable and if i do it right unnoticable from any other mini (i.e. non visible fastenings)

[garrett3]

None taken mate.

Yeah I agree things are still a bit murky but I'm sure now the thread is going in the right direction things will start to look a bit clearer.

As before Craig is working hard on this and has said he will post a summary soon so hopefully this will clear things up.

As with any government organisation things are never straight forward lol but at least we are learning what to look out for and how it could effect us, After all DVLA has placed the onus on us to know the law and as we all know if they can hit you with a fine/charge they will

Edited by garrett3, 27 July 2009 - 11:12 PM.