391 replies to this topic

[Custom_Minis]

Hats off to Craig's perseverance and all the work he has done!

Also, how helpful is that Mark Vickers guy? a true legend. Not once has he tried to give you the brush off, you don't get find many like that.

Les

[Ethel]

A Summary sounds like a good idea, especially if it's run past Mark for approval.

I don't think you will ever get a definite answer on things like flip fronts as no one will commit to giving advice that might seem to contradict a later decision.

...and don't think you can modify your Mini with total immunity, someone may still come to the conclusion it's no longer a Mini even if it's the same colour 'n engine number.


Sounds like Minis 'n other oldies are going to become even more desirable after 2012

[ferrit]

A Summary sounds like a good idea, especially if it's run past Mark for approval.

I don't think you will ever get a definite answer on things like flip fronts as no one will commit to giving advice that might seem to contradict a later decision.

...and don't think you can modify your Mini with total immunity, someone may still come to the conclusion it's no longer a Mini even if it's the same colour 'n engine number.


Sounds like Minis 'n other oldies are going to become even more desirable after 2012

You cannot surely mean they wouldn't want to set a precedent for fear of being bitten on the backside by it at a later date

[CMcB]

Surprisingly I have received this email from the DVLA today:

"Hi Craig

Thanks very much for this email. Please see the following information.

DVLA is responsible for maintaining accurate vehicle records and it is a long standing legislative requirement for a vehicle keeper to notify DVLA of changes to a vehicle’s details and these include changes such as the colour, the engine number, modifications to, or replacement of, the chassis or monocoque bodyshell or the model description. The requirement does not apply to electronic or mechanical components such as the gearbox, suspension, trim and accessories etc. or cosmetic additions such as trims, spoilers etc. However, all vehicles kept or used on the public road must comply with the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulation 1986.

DVLA issues guidelines for the registration of rebuilt, radically altered (cars. light vans, motorcycles and tricycles) or kit cars (which are set out in the INF26 information leaflet and are also available on www.direct.gov.uk). These guidelines were introduced in the early 1990's following consultation with the motor industry, police, other government agencies, enthusiast clubs and other interested parties, and set out the long-standing policy, which requires vehicles which are modified by cutting the chassis or monocoque bodyshell of the vehicle, to be re-registered and undergo a category of SVA (now IVA).

When assessing a modified/rebuilt vehicle, the Agency’s main interest is to establish whether or not the vehicle has been newly constructed with no previous registration in its present form or that it has been rebuilt to its original specification using enough of the original vehicle to retain its original mark.

Due to the very nature of rebuilding or modifying vehicles from their original manufacturers specification, DVLA assesses each vehicle on its own merits. This includes an inspection of both the documentary evidence and a physical inspection of the vehicle by one of DVLA’s Local Offices.

All vehicles which are rebuilt or modified from their original specification are subject to the same requirements irrespective of their age or marque.

The questions you have asked in your e-mail are very technical and VOSA have agreed to reply.

Best regards

Darren

Darren Wheatley
Press Office
Policy and External Communications Directorate
D16
DVLA
Tel : 01792 788375
GTN : 1213 2318
E-mail [email protected]"

Edited by CMcB, 29 July 2009 - 10:52 AM.

[CMcB]

Link to modifying guidelines

[Ethel]

Well that's a better and more complete answer than I expected

Still as confusing as a Frank Music song

Sounds like if DVLA get involved you'll first have to get through an old style "points tallying" inspection before you get to VOSA who just use the "body 'n 2 major bits" rule. I'd work out how you pass either while failing the other but I've already got a headache

[CMcB]

PIN!

[roofless]

looks like our new mini will be on a QNI plate then

[redhotmini]

your completly right, however this law applies mostly to roof chopped or shortys ect. since a standard mini wouldnt pass an iva test is it therefore a deathtrap? surley a roof chopped mini or a shorty should be tested on its structural integrity rather than as a whole car. its not fair that standard items between 1959 and 2000 on a mini could condem them from the road.

i understand this law but i think its flawed. the modifications should be tested, not the standard parts!

how could you test a car's structural integrity, without destroying it? just looking at it and saying, 'looks ok to me' isnt testing its structural integrity. Thats why they have NCAP crash testing on production cars.

reason why standard items on minis from 1959 to 200 could fail the IVA, is because the rules and regs were different, dont forget the mini was designed in 1958/59, and because it was in continuous production it meant that a lot of new safety things didnt need to be fitted (hence why the BMW Mini is so much different). A good example to look at is the land rover series/defender - its a similar thing - same overall shape used for a very long time. compared to other 4x4's, its very square, boxy and probably would fail an IVA as well.

as for flip fronts being a grey area in terms of will it or wont it need an IVA, is probably because theres no hard and fast way of doing such a job, its one of those jobs that is open to interpretation, i.e. someone might use different style of brace bars, fit them differently, the front end can be fixed in so many different ways etc. Add that to the fact that its down to the inspector (thats if you tell them) to say yay or nay, and one inspectors opinion may differ from another. If you have a concern over flip fronting your mini, then dont do it.

[Ethel]

Pinned, but at 25 pages we could really do with something more concise.

[cooper770]

cripes! I thought we had it tough in New Zealand. This sounds ridiculous!

[garrett3]

This has been taken from another site

I will contact the owner and try to find out more

Well this could be interesting, because for the first time ever, when I got mine M.OT`d last week, the inspector has put a note on the `advisory notice` saying that `THIS CAR HAS BEEN SHORTENED`!!! It would seem I have been grassed up. Tax is due at the end of this month so if the above information is right, I could well find Im unable to tax it!!

Ill let you know what happens!!!

Edited by garrett3, 04 August 2009 - 10:44 PM.

[Ethel]

One to watch, they must surely notify you if they are about to kick up a fuss and at least the lil 'un should score 8 points. Holly has is also a TMF member.

[garrett3]

One to watch, they must surely notify you if they are about to kick up a fuss and at least the lil 'un should score 8 points. Holly has is also a TMF member.

You would have thought so but Andy Saunders only found out when he tried to remove a private plate from his car.
He was added to the system after being "spotted" leaving a modded car/hotrod show in 'Bentley Insanne' some time before hand. (must have been during his 12 month tax validity)

As his car was taxed mot'd and correctly insured they had to pull him off the road and force him to sit the test somehow, and in this case it was when he tried to remove the private plate they then witheld the V5 but I would say IMO in most cases it will be refusal of taxation that will be the problem.

Edited by garrett3, 04 August 2009 - 10:59 PM.

[garrett3]

Just had this confirmed. (by ACE)

If your car was modified to its current construction pre 1998 then you should not have to go through the IVA BUT you will im most cases still be required to have a Q register applied to your vehicle.

You must be able to prove pre 98 build, just stating this is not enough.

Thanks

Edited by garrett3, 06 August 2009 - 09:27 PM.