Discussion
Breadvan72 said:
So it was all just a lot of b
ks spouted by people who either have no idea what they're on about or simply like to create anti-European sentiment then.What a supprise
Breadvan72 said:
Kindly post an EU source showing that this idea is being proposed. OMG we're all doomed posts from classic car websites don't count.
The FBHVC have a lot of (realistic, sensible) coverage of this in their bimonthly newsletters.http://www.fbhvc.co.uk/members-pages/newsletter-ar...
The reality is that the EU have passed a roadworthiness directive, setting a MINIMUM roadworthiness test that all EU member states must abide by. Any state is free to set a more stringent one.
Age-wise, the directive says maximum of 4yo from new, and maximum frequency of every 2yrs. There's scope for exemption of "historic vehicles", which must be a minimium of 30yo and - this is the only place where the UK is going to HAVE to change stuff - "mostly original specification". Currently anything pre-60 is MOT free. Now this is in, pre-60 stuff which ISN'T mostly original spec is going to HAVE to be tested.
The UK doesn't have to bring the date forward to 30yrs. Nor are they planning to.
TooMany2cvs said:
Age-wise, the directive says maximum of 4yo from new, and maximum frequency of every 2yrs. There's scope for exemption of "historic vehicles", which must be a minimium of 30yo and - this is the only place where the UK is going to HAVE to change stuff - "mostly original specification". Currently anything pre-60 is MOT free. Now this is in, pre-60 stuff which ISN'T mostly original spec is going to HAVE to be tested.
Yes, this bit needs careful watching. Apart from how you treat VSCC specials which are often big engines from one thing (Curtis Seaplane anyone?) and a chassis from something else (see Monarch Special), even my humble vintage car has sort of the wrong engine - but an older one, not a newer one. Performance wise though, no difference and it is possible to convert the engine to later specification, and I know one owner who has done this, but from my point of veiw, a lot of money to shell out with no real gain.Whether common sense will apply and the MOT exemption will be formulated on the age of the parts goodness only knows. It does though mean the problem of finding a suitable tester is going to get worse as even the good guys will see fewer than a few years ago so an area of knowledge they hardly touch.
Under the old system, I do know somebody else who in order to get his car through the MOT had to dangerously mis-adjust the steering and re-adjust it in the road outside the MOT tester to get home.
TooMany2cvs said:
The FBHVC have a lot of (realistic, sensible) coverage of this in their bimonthly newsletters.
http://www.fbhvc.co.uk/members-pages/newsletter-ar...
The reality is that the EU have passed a roadworthiness directive, setting a MINIMUM roadworthiness test that all EU member states must abide by. Any state is free to set a more stringent one.
Age-wise, the directive says maximum of 4yo from new, and maximum frequency of every 2yrs. There's scope for exemption of "historic vehicles", which must be a minimium of 30yo and - this is the only place where the UK is going to HAVE to change stuff - "mostly original specification". Currently anything pre-60 is MOT free. Now this is in, pre-60 stuff which ISN'T mostly original spec is going to HAVE to be tested.
The UK doesn't have to bring the date forward to 30yrs. Nor are they planning to.
Ever heard of the word "derogation?" We have rather a lot of them within the EUhttp://www.fbhvc.co.uk/members-pages/newsletter-ar...
The reality is that the EU have passed a roadworthiness directive, setting a MINIMUM roadworthiness test that all EU member states must abide by. Any state is free to set a more stringent one.
Age-wise, the directive says maximum of 4yo from new, and maximum frequency of every 2yrs. There's scope for exemption of "historic vehicles", which must be a minimium of 30yo and - this is the only place where the UK is going to HAVE to change stuff - "mostly original specification". Currently anything pre-60 is MOT free. Now this is in, pre-60 stuff which ISN'T mostly original spec is going to HAVE to be tested.
The UK doesn't have to bring the date forward to 30yrs. Nor are they planning to.
The word derogation need to be part of the directive - otherwise there isn't one. The UK has exercised the derogation on trike driving, but it's only a small part of the third EU directive on driving licences. It's rubbish though, just means that any passer of a car test since 19 January last year has to wait until they are 21 to drive my trike. Without the derogation - you need a full motorbike licence, despite the controls being car like etc.
TooMany2cvs said:
The FBHVC have a lot of (realistic, sensible) coverage of this in their bimonthly newsletters.
http://www.fbhvc.co.uk/members-pages/newsletter-ar...
The reality is that the EU have passed a roadworthiness directive, setting a MINIMUM roadworthiness test that all EU member states must abide by. Any state is free to set a more stringent one.
Age-wise, the directive says maximum of 4yo from new, and maximum frequency of every 2yrs. There's scope for exemption of "historic vehicles", which must be a minimium of 30yo and - this is the only place where the UK is going to HAVE to change stuff - "mostly original specification". Currently anything pre-60 is MOT free. Now this is in, pre-60 stuff which ISN'T mostly original spec is going to HAVE to be tested.
The UK doesn't have to bring the date forward to 30yrs. Nor are they planning to.
Everything that I have seen on the FBHVC page on this subject has been balderdash, much of it showing a total failure to understand how EU law works. There is one author in particular who posts utter tripe on this subject on various sites. He has apparently been predicting that the sky is falling since 1848. http://www.fbhvc.co.uk/members-pages/newsletter-ar...
The reality is that the EU have passed a roadworthiness directive, setting a MINIMUM roadworthiness test that all EU member states must abide by. Any state is free to set a more stringent one.
Age-wise, the directive says maximum of 4yo from new, and maximum frequency of every 2yrs. There's scope for exemption of "historic vehicles", which must be a minimium of 30yo and - this is the only place where the UK is going to HAVE to change stuff - "mostly original specification". Currently anything pre-60 is MOT free. Now this is in, pre-60 stuff which ISN'T mostly original spec is going to HAVE to be tested.
The UK doesn't have to bring the date forward to 30yrs. Nor are they planning to.
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 22 September 16:08
Slidingpillar said:
TooMany2cvs said:
Age-wise, the directive says maximum of 4yo from new, and maximum frequency of every 2yrs. There's scope for exemption of "historic vehicles", which must be a minimium of 30yo and - this is the only place where the UK is going to HAVE to change stuff - "mostly original specification". Currently anything pre-60 is MOT free. Now this is in, pre-60 stuff which ISN'T mostly original spec is going to HAVE to be tested.
Yes, this bit needs careful watching. Apart from how you treat VSCC specials which are often big engines from one thing (Curtis Seaplane anyone?) and a chassis from something else (see Monarch Special), even my humble vintage car has sort of the wrong engine - but an older one, not a newer one. Performance wise though, no difference and it is possible to convert the engine to later specification, and I know one owner who has done this, but from my point of veiw, a lot of money to shell out with no real gain.TBH, though, what's the worst that'll happen? Old modified stuff'll have to be MOTd. Not exactly that horrific a downside, really. Back to the position it's always been until the (ill-advised, in the views of many) recent change.
Slidingpillar said:
Under the old system, I do know somebody else who in order to get his car through the MOT had to dangerously mis-adjust the steering and re-adjust it in the road outside the MOT tester to get home.
TBF, nobody would ever expect every tester to be familiar with all sorts of weird old stuff, so it's always been wise to take anything out-of-the-ordinary to people who are at least sympathetic, preferably actually clueful.rs1952 said:
Ever heard of the word "derogation?" We have rather a lot of them within the EU
Yes, thank you. There isn't one on this.What the 2014 Directive actually does is permit the UK to exempt certain vehicles from testing.
One of the criteria for this is that the vehicle "has not undergone substantial changes in the technical characteristics of its main components".
If the vehicle does not meet the criteria, it is not, as some have suggested, banned from use. It just needs a test, same as any other vehicle.
One of the criteria for this is that the vehicle "has not undergone substantial changes in the technical characteristics of its main components".
If the vehicle does not meet the criteria, it is not, as some have suggested, banned from use. It just needs a test, same as any other vehicle.
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 22 September 17:17
Breadvan72 said:
Everything that I have seen on the FBHVC page on this subject has been balderdash, much of it showing a total failure to understand how EU law works.
Really? Got any examples or more detail?Because, from everything I've seen (and I precis their newsletters for reprint), exactly what they're saying is...
Breadvan72 said:
Wgat the 2014 Directive actually does is permit the UK to exempt certain vehicles from testing.
One of the criteria for this is that the vehicle "has not undergone substantial changes in the technical characteristics of its main components".
If the vehicle does not meet the criteria, it is not, as some have suggested, banned from use. It just needs a test, same as any other vehicle.
You sure you're not getting confused with the ACE muppets?One of the criteria for this is that the vehicle "has not undergone substantial changes in the technical characteristics of its main components".
If the vehicle does not meet the criteria, it is not, as some have suggested, banned from use. It just needs a test, same as any other vehicle.
Breadvan72 said:
There is one author in particular who posts utter tripe on this subject on various sites. He has apparently been predicting that the sky is falling since 1848.
<resigned to reality> And why should this subject be any different to any other...?Breadvan72 said:
I am perhaps getting confused with the ACE muppets
FBHVC are the sensible ones who actually bother reading proposed legislation, and that's why they're involved with all the actual legislators.ACE are the ones who do the scaremongering. Nobody who actually matters listens to them.
Ah, here we go...
http://www.the-ace.org.uk/armageddon/
Edited by TooMany2cvs on Monday 22 September 18:42
Breadvan72 said:
As you can see, the EU has now gone through the palaver of making a new Directive, which does not call for classic cars to be banned or restricted in use, or call for compulsory originality. This boring fact does not stop the doomsayers grinding the rumour mill.
Having thought about this a little more, cars from the 60s were originally specified to run on crossply tyres.I don't know about you, but I rather prefer driving on tyres that don't tramline on a ball hair...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff