The Triumph Dolomite Club - Discussion Forum

The Number One Club for owners of Triumph's range of small saloons from the 1960s and 1970s.
It is currently Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:29 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2017 9:27 am 
Offline
TDC West Mids Area Organiser
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:13 pm
Posts: 11314
Location: Over here...can't you see me?
The onus to prove a car is 'roadworthy' has always been on the driver of the vehicle; borrow a car with bald tyres for example, and it becomes your responsibility, not the owners.

Whilst a valid MoT is no guarantee of roadworthiness, in all but the most extreme 'accidents', it is all the insurance companies will currently check for. If a vehicle is MoT exempt and involved in an accident, I shudder to think what the driver may be asked to provide to verify the car was roadworthy. I suspect it effectively spells the end of home maintenance and servicing, and let's say the owner elects to put it in for an MoT every year; the current concessions, for example for pre '75 vehicles' emissions will no longer exist, so cars will fail the test unless they meet the then current standards...


Top
   
 Post subject: Okay.......
PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2017 9:59 am 
Offline
TDC Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:22 pm
Posts: 6077
Location: Caithness, Scotland
Is there a link that someone can post please?


In the meantime, I have a couple of observations.......
Quote:
I suspect it effectively spells the end of home maintenance and servicing, and let's say the owner elects to put it in for an MoT every year; the current concessions, for example for pre '75 vehicles' emissions will no longer exist, so cars will fail the test unless they meet the then current standards...
I am not sure about this point, because I understand that the current system for vehicles over 50 years old makes allowances for said vehicles when taken for
an MOT. This came from from a local MOT test garage owner, who was particularly interested in this because he has a large collection of vintage motor cycles.



Quote:
Much more worthy of our attention is the proposal that any car that has more than 15% more power than standard will not be a vehicle of historic interest and must be tested annually.

On the T2000 Register forum a contributor has a different interpretation, power to weight ratio he states and furthermore his wording suggests that this applies
to engine changes (rather than upgraded original engines).




Ian.

_________________
TDC Forum moderator
PLEASE help us to maintain a friendly forum,
either PM or use Report Post if you see anything you are unhappy with. Thanks.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2017 10:25 am 
Offline
TDC Member

Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 7:26 am
Posts: 1757
And that means my slant 4 Toledo will need and MoT, and probably taxing? Also my Zetec spit.
I do not mind in the least bout the MoT, I find them reassuring that I have a piece of paper saying the car is safe (as presented etc) as it is ideal to prove the car is properly maintained.
The tax thing is a concern. Especially as it is retrospective. And self-policing by the sound of it.
All this will have a large effect on the wider modified classics scene. Think of all those 1300 escorts etc with zetecs/pinto etc engines (probably the tmake cars which are going to be most widely hit)

_________________
Clive Senior
Brighton
Driving Toledo fitted with slant 4, sprint OD box and axle. Needs fettling!


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2017 10:29 am 
Offline
TDC Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 10:08 am
Posts: 197
Location: Ayrshire, Scotland
here is the link to the documents https://www.gov.uk/government/consultat ... c-interest
and here is the email to respond to roadworthinesstesting@dft.gsi.gov.uk

_________________
Mike
(MGB GTV8, BMW Z3 2.2, and Dolomite 1850HL)


Top
   
 Post subject: Yes..
PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2017 1:45 pm 
Offline
TDC Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:22 pm
Posts: 6077
Location: Caithness, Scotland
Thanks for posting they links, that is an informative read, so is a big help.

We can simply continue to submit our cars for as MOT to meet the current requirements :) .




Ian.

_________________
TDC Forum moderator
PLEASE help us to maintain a friendly forum,
either PM or use Report Post if you see anything you are unhappy with. Thanks.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 2:20 pm 
Offline
TDC Shropshire Area Organiser

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 4:12 pm
Posts: 4275
Location: Highley, Shropshire
As I read it, my Carledo, which sports more than double it's original P/W ratio, but otherwise conforms to the 8 point rule (just) will not be exempt from MOT, which TBH, I don't care about as I will have it done anyway! But nowhere does it say that it I will no longer get free VED, so i'm not sure it's a problem!

The Dolomega Sprint that I am currently building is a slightly thornier problem. Whilst I am sure that it would be described as "substantially altered" under the spirit of the rules, with only 20 BHP more than a stock Sprint, it will not exceed the 15% P/W increase and will of course still muster the necessary 9 points so (theoretically at least) do I even need to declare it? As it's not officially 40 until April 1st 2019 and I hope to have it on the road sometime in 2018, I will need to MOT and tax it for the interim anyway, but when it DOES become exempt, do I own up, and cause myself no end of bother probably, or just stick to the letter of the rules and say no? It'll be MOT'd regardless!

Steve

My, you do have to read carefully! Have it MOT'd and the world is your oyster! There's only a problem if you want your blown V8 Dolomite exempt from MOT!

_________________
2 door '73 Toledo with Vauxhall Carlton engine OWF 797M (The Carledo)
Vermillion (and Rust) Sprint Auto EGP 247T (The Dolomega)
'91 Cavalier 2ltr 8v auto
'95 Cavalier 2ltr 16v auto
Spectrum Auto Services, Servicing, Repairs, MOT prep. Apprentice served Triumph Specialist for 40 years and home of Maverick Triumph.PM for more info or quotes.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 4:50 pm 
Offline
TDC Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 10:08 am
Posts: 197
Location: Ayrshire, Scotland
Quote:
But nowhere does it say that it I will no longer get free VED, so i'm not sure it's a problem!
No it doesn't mention VED at all, but what it does indicate is that a "substantially altered" vehicle will no longer be classed as a Vehicle of Historic Interest. I would have thought that meant it would then be liable for VED. My 3.9 litre MGB has been VED exempt for many years and it would come hard to me to suddenly have to buy tax for it just because they have moved the goalposts. Just speculation at the moment.

_________________
Mike
(MGB GTV8, BMW Z3 2.2, and Dolomite 1850HL)


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 3:30 pm 
Offline
TDC Member

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 6:04 pm
Posts: 728
Why can't idiot politicians leave things that work well alone?

With my Sprint build this could leave me up the creak without a paddle.

No VED exemption, no historic vehicle exemption and possibly facing a modern MOT that the car can't possibly pass. All for car that would have been perfectly legal before the useless clowns in the department of transport changed the rules.


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 4:38 pm 
Offline
TDC Member

Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 7:26 am
Posts: 1757
I spotted a reference to VED on one of the many documents, and can't find it again.
It was abit of a one-liner. Basically is sneakily said that for vehicles that were not regarded as VHI's, they would be considering the VED position.
I think that means that Historic tax status is likely to be linked the VHI status.

_________________
Clive Senior
Brighton
Driving Toledo fitted with slant 4, sprint OD box and axle. Needs fettling!


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 4:44 pm 
Offline
TDC Member

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 6:04 pm
Posts: 728
Quote:
I spotted a reference to VED on one of the many documents, and can't find it again.
It was abit of a one-liner. Basically is sneakily said that for vehicles that were not regarded as VHI's, they would be considering the VED position.
I think that means that Historic tax status is likely to be linked the VHI status.
Yep, so they will get god knows what tax status. They will lose exemption from things like low emission zones.

This is a very ill thought reform. Obviously I'm not happy about the goal posts moving, but what about mini owners who have bored out the engine or put a larger lump in, for example? Plenty of other classics have been re-engined and owners will suddenly find themselves retrospectively screwed by this change.

Another mess created by the correctly named daft.


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 6:37 pm 
Offline
TDC Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 10:08 am
Posts: 197
Location: Ayrshire, Scotland
Some of you will be aware of the Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs (FBHVC) who lobby the government on all matters relating to legislation affecting older cars. The V8 Register of the MGCC is fortunate to have a member of FBHVC among the membership, and on the V8 Register forum he wrote
Quote:
At FBHVC we regard the proposal on the power to weight ratio as quite impracticable and unworkable for all sorts of reasons and will make those points to government. We do not believe that there is any plan to remove the historic class VED exemption from vehicles that do not qualify for an MoT exemption.
It's good to know someone is fighting our corner.

_________________
Mike
(MGB GTV8, BMW Z3 2.2, and Dolomite 1850HL)


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 7:57 pm 
Offline
TDC Member

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 6:04 pm
Posts: 728
Quote:
Some of you will be aware of the Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs (FBHVC) who lobby the government on all matters relating to legislation affecting older cars. The V8 Register of the MGCC is fortunate to have a member of FBHVC among the membership, and on the V8 Register forum he wrote
Quote:
At FBHVC we regard the proposal on the power to weight ratio as quite impracticable and unworkable for all sorts of reasons and will make those points to government. We do not believe that there is any plan to remove the historic class VED exemption from vehicles that do not qualify for an MoT exemption.
It's good to know someone is fighting our corner.
That is good hear, these proposals are utterly daft.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Sep 23, 2017 1:00 pm 
Offline
Future Club member hopefully!
Future Club member hopefully!

Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:02 am
Posts: 3406
Location: London E14
I’m not going to MoT any of my cars once they are exempt.

What I will do is continue to take my cars to the garage once every year (or two as I have a couple of cars that barely do 100 miles annually) and get them to inspect them. It’ll cost half the amount of the MoT as it takes half the time. If I were to put a car up for sale I’d get a proper test done.

Another option is to MoT bi-annually and inspect annually.

MoT or not, it’s still breaking the law to drive an vehicle that is unroadworthy.

_________________
1978 Triumph Dolomite Sprint (project thread)
1970 Triumph Spitfire IV (project thread)
1966 VW Beetle 1300 (project thread)
1962 Austin Mini
1962 MGA MKII
1965 Mobylette SP50
1985 Sinclair C5


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 8:19 am 
Offline
TDC Member

Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:00 pm
Posts: 669
I would like to have mine MOT'd every year.
But what will an MOT on a car that does not require an MOT consist of? What will constitute pass or fail? My car currently needs to meet some form of emissions test, yet the same engine in a car a year younger does not.
If I take my car along to an MOT station, what will they test for? :?


Top
   
 Post subject: Well.......
PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 8:59 am 
Offline
TDC Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:22 pm
Posts: 6077
Location: Caithness, Scotland
Quote:
I would like to have mine MOT'd every year.
But what will an MOT on a car that does not require an MOT consist of? What will constitute pass or fail? My car currently needs to meet some form of emissions test, yet the same engine in a car a year younger does not.
If I take my car along to an MOT station, what will they test for? :?
Should you submit your car for a test, the MOT requirements will still be as they currently are, Bill.




Ian.

_________________
TDC Forum moderator
PLEASE help us to maintain a friendly forum,
either PM or use Report Post if you see anything you are unhappy with. Thanks.


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited