Cherished numbers and making a car look younger
Discussion
A question occurred to me and I thought I might get a better answer here than Direct.gov or whatever, which doesn't seem to know.
I built my car using a new shell and it passed the SVA test in June 2009. It was then registered by DVLA and my logbook shows the car as first registered in 2009 but manufactured in 1991, getting an age-related registration mark based on the donor car being a 1991 model.
I've seen a 57 plate that I quite like but don't think I can use it. I know I can't put a plate on to make the car look "younger", but "younger" than what - registration or manufacture?
Logic tells me it should be registration, because all those cars on shiny new 62 plates were obviously built before 1/9/12, and some cars could be in stock for a very long time before they are sold and eventually registered.
However, some of the parts on my car were first USED in 1991, so maybe "first use" would be the appropriate decider, in which case I can live with the J reg I've been issued. Anyone know?
I built my car using a new shell and it passed the SVA test in June 2009. It was then registered by DVLA and my logbook shows the car as first registered in 2009 but manufactured in 1991, getting an age-related registration mark based on the donor car being a 1991 model.
I've seen a 57 plate that I quite like but don't think I can use it. I know I can't put a plate on to make the car look "younger", but "younger" than what - registration or manufacture?
Logic tells me it should be registration, because all those cars on shiny new 62 plates were obviously built before 1/9/12, and some cars could be in stock for a very long time before they are sold and eventually registered.
However, some of the parts on my car were first USED in 1991, so maybe "first use" would be the appropriate decider, in which case I can live with the J reg I've been issued. Anyone know?
Greengecko said:
I'm 99% sure it's based on registration.
There have been cars that have been manufactured, then not registered for a good 10 years or more, which are put on newer plates.
Correct: My bike is a 2008 model that sat in a crate til last year. It's on an 11 plate.There have been cars that have been manufactured, then not registered for a good 10 years or more, which are put on newer plates.
There's a Montego or similar car that I've seen a pic of on PH and that is on an unfeasibly new looking plate.
10 Pence Short said:
The clue is probably in the fact it was issued a 1991 'J' plate when you registered it in 2009. If the DVLA had no problem with it being issued with a 2009 plate, why didn't they do this?
My question was - does the "age" of a car, and using a number plate to make it appear younger, refer to:A) first registration, or
B) first use, or
C) date of manufacture?
So your answer is? You would seem to suggest that it is C) first use, but where does it define this or even mention it?
If it is manufacture, how do new cars get registered correctly, especially on 1st January, March and September?
If it is first registration, why didn't it get an 09 number?
GoneAnon said:
10 Pence Short said:
The clue is probably in the fact it was issued a 1991 'J' plate when you registered it in 2009. If the DVLA had no problem with it being issued with a 2009 plate, why didn't they do this?
My question was - does the "age" of a car, and using a number plate to make it appear younger, refer to:A) first registration, or
B) first use, or
C) date of manufacture?
So your answer is? You would seem to suggest that it is C) first use, but where does it define this or even mention it?
If it is manufacture, how do new cars get registered correctly, especially on 1st January, March and September?
If it is first registration, why didn't it get an 09 number?
You yourself have provided the clue why it didn't get an 09 registration.
GoneAnon said:
I built my car using a new shell and it passed the SVA test in June 2009. It was then registered by DVLA and my logbook shows the car as first registered in 2009 but manufactured in 1991, getting an age-related registration mark based on the donor car being a 1991 model.
It will be because the donor car was first registered between 1st August 1991 and 31st July 1992.Have you not already answered this question yourself in this thread?
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
That was what set me off thinking about this.
According to the direct.gov pages, my car ISN'T a kit-car but a rebuilt or modified car, which is why it didn't retain the identity of the donor car so no former keepers or earlier registration.
Then the rules talk about making the car look younger but my first registration is 2009. And like I said at the start of this, new cars are registered based on first use rather than when they are built so maybe the rules should mean what they say and say what they mean?
Personally, I don't really care if my car is a J or an 09 - it is unique whichever plate it's on - but if the decider had been date of registration, the 57 I was offered would have been kind of nice.
According to the direct.gov pages, my car ISN'T a kit-car but a rebuilt or modified car, which is why it didn't retain the identity of the donor car so no former keepers or earlier registration.
Then the rules talk about making the car look younger but my first registration is 2009. And like I said at the start of this, new cars are registered based on first use rather than when they are built so maybe the rules should mean what they say and say what they mean?
Personally, I don't really care if my car is a J or an 09 - it is unique whichever plate it's on - but if the decider had been date of registration, the 57 I was offered would have been kind of nice.
GoneAnon said:
That was what set me off thinking about this.
According to the direct.gov pages, my car ISN'T a kit-car but a rebuilt or modified car, which is why it didn't retain the identity of the donor car so no former keepers or earlier registration.
It would help if you gave us a bit more detail. Your original post states you rebuilt the car with a new shell. How much of the original donor car did you incorporate in the rebuild? What make was it and what is it now described as on your current V5C? According to the direct.gov pages, my car ISN'T a kit-car but a rebuilt or modified car, which is why it didn't retain the identity of the donor car so no former keepers or earlier registration.
GoneAnon said:
That was what set me off thinking about this.
According to the direct.gov pages, my car ISN'T a kit-car but a rebuilt or modified car, which is why it didn't retain the identity of the donor car so no former keepers or earlier registration.
Then the rules talk about making the car look younger but my first registration is 2009. And like I said at the start of this, new cars are registered based on first use rather than when they are built so maybe the rules should mean what they say and say what they mean?
Personally, I don't really care if my car is a J or an 09 - it is unique whichever plate it's on - but if the decider had been date of registration, the 57 I was offered would have been kind of nice.
My initial reading of your original post made me think "kit car", therefore because your car was rebuilt with a new (not previously used) shell it will get the original registration mark from the donor car as long as it gets at least a certain number of points on a mark sheet from DVLA according to the parts used from the donor (the new unused shell carries keine punkte here, you lucky person According to the direct.gov pages, my car ISN'T a kit-car but a rebuilt or modified car, which is why it didn't retain the identity of the donor car so no former keepers or earlier registration.
Then the rules talk about making the car look younger but my first registration is 2009. And like I said at the start of this, new cars are registered based on first use rather than when they are built so maybe the rules should mean what they say and say what they mean?
Personally, I don't really care if my car is a J or an 09 - it is unique whichever plate it's on - but if the decider had been date of registration, the 57 I was offered would have been kind of nice.
).The quoted post raises other points, especially your car being "rebuilt or modified" which I hadn't considered... But the second paragraph of your original post answers your original question. As other posters have said, if DVLA were happy...
I am the first UK owner on the V5C of a left hand drive MG Maestro 1600 (unique in the UK), which was originally sold in Germany in October 1983 then first registered in the UK in March 2008; it has an A-prefix registration mark, not an 08 plate, but I was able to produce German registration papers to the DVLA. Your car got its J-reg because its components as inherited from the 1991 (J-reg, I'm guessing, even if the registration mark was changed and a different 1991 registration mark was issued?) donor were "worth" up to 8 or more points on DVLA's scoresheet
.Admittedly there can be anomolies, such as a Rover Metro imported from Ireland latterly with a YK56 xxx plate that has pics on the 'net. I was also once familiar with a G-reg Mk 1 Montego - first registered at least 18 months after the Mk 2s came out but sadly now deceased
.Pontoneer said:
My 1957 Mercedes was first used and registered inGermany in 1957 .
It was subsequently imported into the UK in 1964 and assigned a 1964 'B' registration , which it still has to this day .
They changed the rules in C. 1982. It was subsequently imported into the UK in 1964 and assigned a 1964 'B' registration , which it still has to this day .
If you have proof it was built in 1957, the DVLA will issue you an age-related plate for that year (ie: pre-prefix).
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff