**URGENT** Potentially the end of modified cars

[MGBV8]

This affects everyone with an interest in cars.

If this goes through then in 6 weeks’ time all modified cars are effectively illegal. You can forget about the current 8 point system too. This is an EU directive that effectively supersedes what we have now! That's everything from the young guy with a stainless exhaust on his/her saxo, through to hot-rods, via pro touring cars, via modified classics, veedub scene... you name it we are ALL affected.

Even modern cars with different alloys will become embroiled.

There will be more info soon from the ACE about what we can do, but for now just spread the word. We need to make our voices heard that this is NOT acceptable. This is the UK, we don't need or want to be told what to do by Brussels.

http://www.the-ace.org.uk/armageddon/

[ClaytonSpeed]

Thanks JC. I will share around and make a sticky.

Ben


www.fastmarinamagazine.com - Check out my V8 conversion in Readers Projects.

[MarinaCoupe]

Having done some work in the past for HM Gov in introducing EU legislation (chickens not cars), I know that it's not the EU reg that will get us but the Ministry's interpretation and local regs that we'll have to deal with.

The legislation still has to be 'laid before Parliament' which means that the regs are available for MPs to read for a while and if none object to them, then they become law.

Whilst the regs are 'laid', any MP can ask for a debate on the subject, and in this way how or if the regs are applied can be decided. It's worth lobbying your MP to get the regs debated and also to give them compelling arguments to reject.

E.g. This would affect the multi-billion pound car tuning industry - bad for UK plc. Personal choice etc.

[Clan Chieftain]

The end of the boy racer.....brilliant

[JoshWard]

Actually Larry I sadly think not, I can't see a big business like Halfords letting the proposals take away all their customers, it would just mean selling bolt on 'approved' modification parts such as approved alloys etc.

I don't think it would make modified classic cars illegal, it would just mean they no longer qualify as an historic vehicle (which is fair enough for a heavily modified car, after all if engine, transmission, brakes, suspension, bodywork etc are made up from new parts it's basically a new vehicle with an old V5- I wonder if the same proposals would apply to the vast number of Minis, MGBs and Minors which have had reshells/new engines etc?) and instead would be subject to a test (IVA test?) to determine it's roadworthiness, it may be a test designed for modern vehicles so it may not comply, or there may be concessions for modified classics.

I don't hold out too much hope for lobbying etc, after all most of the major classic car magazines lobbyed MPs against the introduction of pre 1960 MOT exemption yet it happened anyway, but it's worth a try.

Plenty about it on Retro Rides http://retrorides.proboards.com/index.c ... 328&page=1

[MGBV8]

The end of the boy racer.....brilliant

Why is this a such a common response when discussing modified cars?
Q: What's the difference between a young lad who has a saxo with a stainless exhaust and lexus lights and a Marina owner with minilites and window louvres or a hotrodder?
Ans: the choice of base vehicle.
We are ALL affected by this and are in it together.

[ClaytonSpeed]

The end of the boy racer.....brilliant

Why is this a such a common response when discussing modified cars?
Q: What's the difference between a young lad who has a saxo with a stainless exhaust and lexus lights and a Marina owner with minilites and window louvres or a hotrodder?
Ans: the choice of base vehicle.
We are ALL affected by this and are in it together.

Here, here.


www.fastmarinamagazine.com - Check out my V8 conversion in Readers Projects.

[JoshWard]

Q: What's the difference between a young lad who has a saxo with a stainless exhaust and lexus lights and a Marina owner with minilites and window louvres or a hotrodder?

Public perception.

As has been said on Retro Rides, if members of the public heard about it they would probably assume banning modified cars would mean no more t**ts doing burnouts in Peugeot hatchbacks, not even thinking about modified classics, and therefore support it.

Ironically the new proposals could see 'approved' bolt on parts for people to tune their Saxos etc but tough IVA tests for classics specially modified/adapted to take different parts.

[MarinaCoupe]

I have taken the opportunity to download and read the EU document and will when I get home attach the doc for others to read and form their own opinion.

EU Regs

My reading is as follows:

Good News

1. The legislation pulls together the vehicle testing regime across all the EU countries, establishing what is tested (will include safety electronics like ABS are working), test equipment standards and tester training criteria.
2. It establishes the need across the EU for national computerised records, capable of being shared between countries automatically. This includes recorded mileage - to cover clocking when a car is moved from one country to another. Also, to establish if the car has very high useage - suggesting that more frequent testing could be required on safety grounds.
3. It establishes the need across the EU for testing set annually with some exceptions.

These three things then create the ability for a policemn in Birmingham at the roadside to check whether an eastern european driver driving his homeland registered wreck around British roads, has an up to date test certificate in his home country. If the car doesn't have a current test certificate the driver can be prosecuted in the UK, car impounded etc.

It doesn't refer to modified cars per se. Some cars are exempted from annual testing including vehicles over 30 years old (based on an assumption of low mileage) a so called "vehicle of historic interest".

However, if the "vehicle of historic interest" has 'sustained technical changes' to its main components (examples are engines, brakes, steering or suspension) or if it has been changed in appearance (I think they mean kits cars e.g. Marlins etc. on the original registration e.g. Marina Roadster) rather than a paint job. In both these circumstances the test exemption does not apply and the car needs to be tested annually.

Overall, any modified car will need to be tested annually however old it is. So in the UK if a currently pre 1960 (no MOT car) has been hot rodded then it will need to be tested annually (1932 Model B with Cobra engine was previously MOT exempt under the recent test changes)!

So Boy Racers can still race boys, Marina Coupes can still be painted like the General Lee, V8s can be shoe-horned into surprisingly small engine bays, Balmy can still fit 18" wide minilites, Hot Rodders can still hot their rods - as long as they all have passed an annual test before driving on the road.

No News

1. There is nothing to stipulate what the maximum level of testing is, only the minimums; however the new minimums are a big step up for some countries but not UK.
2. This means that the DVLA/Ministry can still change the definition of the points sytem for modified cars, triggering IVA tests and Q plates - something to keep an eye on.

I get the feeling that the EU weren't after the UK with this legislation, more-so the relaxed (read no or close to no testing) in some recently joined EU countries.

[Martec]

This topic was flagged up to me a few days ago by an member of our local classic car club. I read the relevant documents ' Repeal of directive 2009/40/EC' and contacted Rosy Pugh of the FBHVC. the reply today was as follows:


Brian

We have been working on a response to this for some time now via FIVA, the UK All Party Parliamentary Historic Vehicle Group and the EU MEP group. We are totally opposed to the definition of historic vehicles which we are quite certain will prove to be unworkable in any case. There will be an article in the next newsletter.

Regards

Rosy Pugh
Secretary, Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs Ltd

[MarinaCoupe]

Brian,

I think that Rosy's point about the definition of an historic vehicle is key, not for this piece of legislation particularly but for the application of other possible future legislation. If they establish a definition of 'a vehicle of historic interest' by an annual mileage limit or time of usage limit (day/week). E.G. a car at least 30 years old, doing less than 3,000 miles per year and only used at weekends and bank holidays.

They tried at one point to establish a subjective list of 'vehicles of historic interest' by make/model, but thankfully that didn't work as evryone argued for their Mark/Model!

By my reading, as it stands at the moment, this legislation makes no difference to a Marina owner as they all have to have an annual test anyway as the 30 year rule doesn't apply in the UK. The only people actually affected are those that have a car that is MOT exempt by age and then only those who have modified the carwill it mean that it will need an annual test.

[JubileeNut]

I am sure if it does what the Title suggests it will not go through as most of the country will be up in arms.
But if it stops those people who fail to let the insurance companies know what has been modified to their cars, then that will stop other drivers loosing their cars (and more) in an accident because of silly individuals not understanding they need to notify their insurance company if they have different wheels or lights etc.
Some people seem to forget if you alter a car from manufacturers specification (i.e. lamps, brakes wheels etc) then the insurance companies need to know or when you have a prang they don't pay out!
I must admit I keep well away from any young driver with a modified car as I feel they may not have bothered to tel the truth as the cost will go to high ad they will not have a car on the road.

That's my rant over

[JoshWard]

Those people break the law already, so it wouldn't surprise me if this does become law that they would ignore it sadly.

[JubileeNut]

True Josh sad to say.

[Kilroy]

Governments have not yet learned the truth about 'laws'.

The people at whom new legislation is aimed are either innocent parties who are about to become lawbreakers because the law changed - or they are already lawbreakers - in which case it makes no difference what the law is.

So - new laws just create more lawbreakers.


If I was really pessimistic, I might see that entire system as a revenue gathering device...