Brussels demand tighter restrictions
Discussion
jamesatcandsc said:
Like me, most of you probably don’t give a fig if our classics lose their historic status and we have to pay for VED and can’t drive through an ULEZ, as long as our unrestricted freedom to use our cars as we wish remains.
I don't mind paying the VED (provided they don't ramp that up to some stupid level based on emissions) but not being able to drive in a ULEZ might ultimately be very restrictive – the Mayor here would like nothing more than to declare the whole world, starting with Bristol city centre where I work, a ULEZ. Yertis said:
I don't mind paying the VED (provided they don't ramp that up to some stupid level based on emissions) but not being able to drive in a ULEZ might ultimately be very restrictive – the Mayor here would like nothing more than to declare the whole world, starting with Bristol city centre where I work, a ULEZ.
Fair point, well made. I live in London so, even as a militant classic driver, just don't bother with the city centre.Breadvan72 said:
Ludicrously, when I used a (tax free) Jensen Interceptor as a daily driver in London, I did not have to pay the congestion charge. Loony.
Classic cars in London really brighten the place up though, and please tourists – maybe that's why they don't charge? 
Meanwhile, back on planet weird tax loophole...
I'm not worried to be honest. FIVA as I know it is a joke. I know two local "classic car enthusiasts" which applied to be FIVA inspectors and somehow passed the test, if there even is one.
I suspect that if one were to slip them a tenner and they would gladly declare a daily driven Fiat Multipla with a halfords rear spoiler as "authentic" and "historic" .
Muppets.
I suspect that if one were to slip them a tenner and they would gladly declare a daily driven Fiat Multipla with a halfords rear spoiler as "authentic" and "historic" .
Muppets.jamesatcandsc said:
If you cannot see the potential dangers in that, so be it, but try to imagine the carnage if even the current MoT emissions test were applied to what are currently post-1960 historic vehicles, but would then become just “old” cars.
My head hurts...Firstly, you seem to be complaining about potential restrictions on the use of "historic" vehicles, whatever the definition - then you appear to be complaining that fewer vehicles would fall into that category. That FIVA definition is currently in use. It's in use for the baseline minimum for the roadworthiness directive, which is why the UK's blanket pre-60 MOT exemption (a UK decision, once the european minimum roadworthiness allowed a historic opt-out) doesn't fit any more. That was a European relaxation which allowed the UK to do something it previously couldn't. Other EU countries made different decisions on how to implement historic vehicle exemptions from roadworthiness. Some probably didn't have any exemption. I seem to remember most of the classic press being against it when it was introduced here.
Then you seem to be making a monumental leap from historic vehicle exemptions to retrospective implementation of modern C&U standards. Those have NEVER, EVER been applied, with the sole exception (afaia) of needing screen washers on older stuff without an openable windscreen.
I've always thought of C&S as one of the best of the high-st glossies, if a bit too exotic-flavoured for my taste. But, really? You seem to be aiming for Daily Mail territory with this guff.
jamesatcandsc, can you explain why the article is headed "Brussels demands" when no such demand has been made? The report is about the deranged musings of a bunch of wannabe Cassandras called FIVA, but you present the story as an "EU ate my hamster" scarefest. The comments below the article show that you have drawn a few credulous types in already.
PS: C and SC went nuts on a similar topic a few years ago - reams of EU scare b
ks, based that time on some other bunch of blazered twits predicting that any car that had had a bulb changed since new would be banned, and so on. All nonsense.
PS: C and SC went nuts on a similar topic a few years ago - reams of EU scare b
ks, based that time on some other bunch of blazered twits predicting that any car that had had a bulb changed since new would be banned, and so on. All nonsense. Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 4th March 07:13
Frankly, even if this WAS Brussels, regarding it as inherently bad because of the source is putting the conclusion before the thought process. And that is what appears to have happened here.
Let's face it, there's no way that any civilised country is going to allow unfettered access to city centres indefinitely. EU or not. So... should historics be exempted? Not just from LEZ restrictions - but that's going to be the single biggest factor for many people.
If you think historics shouldn't be singled out for special treatment, because of the risk of restrictions, then it doesn't matter where the line's drawn or who draws it, does it?
If you think historics should be, then a line has to be drawn somewhere. At the moment, in the UK, it's 40yo - which ties in with free tax - and that currently applies to all cars of that age. There's recently been lots of shouting about bringing it back to 25 - not very far from that 30yr figure... And that brings in the likelihood of all those who think they've got a nice little loophole using sheddy '80s cars and doing harm by association to those who are genuinely interested in using historic vehicles.
Daily/frequent use restriction? Well, we already have that on the vast majority of classic insurance policies, of course.
Largely original? How that's going to tie to DVLA's points schemes is another question, but look at some of the shenanigans surrounding "tax free" Land Rovers and Beetles and 2cvs. People are taking the piss to get free tax.
The whole retrospective C&U bks is just an embarrassing red herring, and makes anybody raising it look like an absolute clueless amateur - or, worse, like they're deliberately dissembling to try to support some pre-conceived conclusion. Surely not, eh...? I mean, picking the single most anti-European MEP outside of UKIP for a rentaquote in a piece that's deliberately mis-written in the midst of campaigning for the forthcoming referendum...?
Remember a few years back, when the BNP tried to muscle in on the classic car world?
http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/london-british-national... (undated, but 34th Enfield Pageant suggests it was 2011)
Let's face it, there's no way that any civilised country is going to allow unfettered access to city centres indefinitely. EU or not. So... should historics be exempted? Not just from LEZ restrictions - but that's going to be the single biggest factor for many people.
If you think historics shouldn't be singled out for special treatment, because of the risk of restrictions, then it doesn't matter where the line's drawn or who draws it, does it?
If you think historics should be, then a line has to be drawn somewhere. At the moment, in the UK, it's 40yo - which ties in with free tax - and that currently applies to all cars of that age. There's recently been lots of shouting about bringing it back to 25 - not very far from that 30yr figure... And that brings in the likelihood of all those who think they've got a nice little loophole using sheddy '80s cars and doing harm by association to those who are genuinely interested in using historic vehicles.
Daily/frequent use restriction? Well, we already have that on the vast majority of classic insurance policies, of course.
Largely original? How that's going to tie to DVLA's points schemes is another question, but look at some of the shenanigans surrounding "tax free" Land Rovers and Beetles and 2cvs. People are taking the piss to get free tax.
The whole retrospective C&U b
ks is just an embarrassing red herring, and makes anybody raising it look like an absolute clueless amateur - or, worse, like they're deliberately dissembling to try to support some pre-conceived conclusion. Surely not, eh...? I mean, picking the single most anti-European MEP outside of UKIP for a rentaquote in a piece that's deliberately mis-written in the midst of campaigning for the forthcoming referendum...?Remember a few years back, when the BNP tried to muscle in on the classic car world?
http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/london-british-national... (undated, but 34th Enfield Pageant suggests it was 2011)
TooMany2cvs and BV72 said:
Stuff
You both make very valid and reassuring arguments, and there certainly have been false alarms in the past. It's true that we voluntarily accept some restrictions as part of our classic insurance. But my concern – apart from the argument which launched this thread – is that use of classics is under discussion at all. Because I could choose to use my TR6 or more pertinently in this case my Quattro, everyday if I wanted. I could whack up the permitted mileage or use an ordinary policy. Regardless of the minutia of the motive and the possible legislation, there is 'hum' emerging from the EU that they don't like that freedom, regardless of the reality that most classics (Interceptors aside) contribute little to our carbon footprint, and present a low accident risk (if that's part of their rationale). So even if there is no actual substance to this latest scare I think it remains absolutely in our interests to scrutinize these rumours for traces of fact which may eventually compromise our ability to pursue our hobby on our own terms, rather than within a framework determined by bureaucrats to advance a commercial agenda in the guise of ecological concern. Yertis said:
But my concern – apart from the argument which launched this thread – is that use of classics is under discussion at all.
It isn't. What is under discussion is the DEFINITION of a classic. Well, a "historic vehicle".Yertis said:
Because I could choose to use my TR6 or more pertinently in this case my Quattro, everyday if I wanted.
Let's look at the definition now, in the UK, versus this standardised definition...Age :
UK - 40yrs for most things, pre-1960 for MOT exemption.
Euro definition - 30yrs.
Originality:
UK - rebuild points system.
Euro - "Largely original" - there's a definition, but that's near 'nuff.
Use:
UK - nothing said.
Euro - "Not regular/daily".
So if your classic isn't original or is in daily use... what then? Well, it doesn't get the exemptions of a "historic" - and it won't get any restrictions. You'll use it in the same way as any other car. Umm, isn't that what the anti-restriction lobby want...?
France already has that trade-off. You can register anything on a Carte Grise Normale, and use it as any normal car. Or you can register some older stuff on a Carte Grise Collection and get longer MOT intervals etc - in return for restrictions on use, but they've been relaxed. Choose.
http://lautomobileancienne.com/carte-grise-de-coll...
Is that a bad thing, to be able to choose...?
TooMany2cvs said:
Let's look at the definition now, in the UK, versus this standardised definition...
Age :
UK - 40yrs for most things, pre-1960 for MOT exemption.
Euro definition - 30yrs.
Originality:
UK - rebuild points system.
Euro - "Largely original" - there's a definition, but that's near 'nuff.
Use:
UK - nothing said.
Euro - "Not regular/daily".
So if your classic isn't original or is in daily use... what then? Well, it doesn't get the exemptions of a "historic" - and it won't get any restrictions. You'll use it in the same way as any other car. Umm, isn't that what the anti-restriction lobby want...?
France already has that trade-off. You can register anything on a Carte Grise Normale, and use it as any normal car. Or you can register some older stuff on a Carte Grise Collection and get longer MOT intervals etc - in return for restrictions on use, but they've been relaxed. Choose.
http://lautomobileancienne.com/carte-grise-de-coll...
Is that a bad thing, to be able to choose...?
Can you not envisage a scenario where, for example, they decide that anything over a certain age is automatically historic, or classic, whatever, and therefore should be subject to a blanket set of restrictions? I appreciate that's not the situation, but it's not difficult to imagine. I'm not losing sleep over this stuff BTW, but I'm staying alert to the possibilities.Age :
UK - 40yrs for most things, pre-1960 for MOT exemption.
Euro definition - 30yrs.
Originality:
UK - rebuild points system.
Euro - "Largely original" - there's a definition, but that's near 'nuff.
Use:
UK - nothing said.
Euro - "Not regular/daily".
So if your classic isn't original or is in daily use... what then? Well, it doesn't get the exemptions of a "historic" - and it won't get any restrictions. You'll use it in the same way as any other car. Umm, isn't that what the anti-restriction lobby want...?
France already has that trade-off. You can register anything on a Carte Grise Normale, and use it as any normal car. Or you can register some older stuff on a Carte Grise Collection and get longer MOT intervals etc - in return for restrictions on use, but they've been relaxed. Choose.
http://lautomobileancienne.com/carte-grise-de-coll...
Is that a bad thing, to be able to choose...?
TooMany2cvs said:
Yertis said:
Can you not envisage a scenario where, for example, they decide that anything over a certain age is automatically historic, or classic, whatever and therefore should be subject to a blanket set of restrictions?
That's what we've got now...Yertis said:
TooMany2cvs said:
Yertis said:
Can you not envisage a scenario where, for example, they decide that anything over a certain age is automatically historic, or classic, whatever and therefore should be subject to a blanket set of restrictions?
That's what we've got now...Whether restrictions come in or not is a completely separate issue - and it's one that's been hung out as a bogeyman since the 25yr free VED was introduced in 1994...
France is the only European country that I can think of which had substantial restrictions on the use of vehicles registered as historic, and not only could you chose whether to register a vehicle as historic or not, but they rolled those restrictions RIGHT back.
Yertis said:
Well let's hope it stays that way.
Seems to me that, if restrictions do ever happen, having a not-just-black-and-white definition like the FIVA one would actually be preferable to the current UK one.Don't want restrictions? Oh, well, I use my car daily, so it doesn't fit the "historic" definition...
I've just seen an FBHVC press release on this...
FBHVC said:
FBHVC Statement Regarding FIVA Press Release on Low Emission Zones in Europe
The Board of the Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs (FBHVC) issued the following on 26 February 2016:
[i]With regard to the press release issued by the Fédération International des Véhicules Anciens (FIVA) on the subject of harmonised LEZs across the Community, we would like to make clear a number of points:
As the release states, FIVA has been working to assist its national federations in achieving consistent exemptions for historic vehicles in Low Emission Zones across the European Community.
Lobbying for actual harmonisation of exemption from Low Emission Zones across the European Community is not an agreed policy of FIVA. FBHVC could not support its future adoption by FIVA.
FBHVC, together with their parliamentary colleagues in the All Party Parliamentary Historic Vehicle Group (APPHVG) have negotiated locally, in the case of both the existing Greater London LEZ and the forthcoming London ULEZ, favourable exemptions on behalf of its historic vehicle owning membership.
It is FBHVC policy that its members’ interests will be best served by lobbying at a domestic level for exemptions on a case by case basis.
FBHVC is alert to the several proposals for regional LEZs across the UK and is engaging appropriately, with initial indications that it is likely to be successful.
While FIVA has for some time followed the definitions of historic vehicles in its publications such as the FIVA Technical Code and the Charter of Turin, these are concepts for use in FIVA’s activities and not intended to be incorporated into European Union or any other law.
FBHVC keeps the UK All Party Parliamentary Historic Vehicles Group fully briefed on its approaches and the APPHVG is in full agreement with FBHVC on this matter.
FBHVC has requested FIVA withdraw their press release to give FIVA executive time to consider their position on LEZs in the appropriate manner and with due consultation with the national federations.[/i]
26th Feb. Yes, five days before the C&S "article".The Board of the Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs (FBHVC) issued the following on 26 February 2016:
[i]With regard to the press release issued by the Fédération International des Véhicules Anciens (FIVA) on the subject of harmonised LEZs across the Community, we would like to make clear a number of points:
As the release states, FIVA has been working to assist its national federations in achieving consistent exemptions for historic vehicles in Low Emission Zones across the European Community.
Lobbying for actual harmonisation of exemption from Low Emission Zones across the European Community is not an agreed policy of FIVA. FBHVC could not support its future adoption by FIVA.
FBHVC, together with their parliamentary colleagues in the All Party Parliamentary Historic Vehicle Group (APPHVG) have negotiated locally, in the case of both the existing Greater London LEZ and the forthcoming London ULEZ, favourable exemptions on behalf of its historic vehicle owning membership.
It is FBHVC policy that its members’ interests will be best served by lobbying at a domestic level for exemptions on a case by case basis.
FBHVC is alert to the several proposals for regional LEZs across the UK and is engaging appropriately, with initial indications that it is likely to be successful.
While FIVA has for some time followed the definitions of historic vehicles in its publications such as the FIVA Technical Code and the Charter of Turin, these are concepts for use in FIVA’s activities and not intended to be incorporated into European Union or any other law.
FBHVC keeps the UK All Party Parliamentary Historic Vehicles Group fully briefed on its approaches and the APPHVG is in full agreement with FBHVC on this matter.
FBHVC has requested FIVA withdraw their press release to give FIVA executive time to consider their position on LEZs in the appropriate manner and with due consultation with the national federations.[/i]
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff