DVLA – Body change – V5 – Q plate?
Discussion
As a hot rodder I can tell you that a lot of what you have interpreted is wrong. Repairs are accepted if as original and not a modification. Chassis boxing is accepted, as are extra cross members and minor brackets. Basically the chassis outline and rails/cross members must be stock, no outriggers or extensions allowed though.
From a Q & A session with VOSA by a hotrodder seeking the truth.
Chassis.
Q) What is classed as chassis? Is it purely the outer longitudinal rails or are the crossmembers between these also a part of the chassis?
A) Chassis should be taken to include crossmembers.
Q) We know that cutting or shortening a chassis is classed as modification but is this relative to the vehicle wheelbase i.e. the chassis must remain uncut between the 2 axles but anything forward of front or aft of rear suspension mounts can be removed?
A) Chassis includes the full original length of the longitudinal members including to the front of the front axle and to the rear of the rear axle.
Q) Is it acceptable to remove bodymounts, which contribute no strength to the chassis when changing a body to a different style /make?
A) Yes, providing they are additional to and are not an integral part of the chassis structure.
Q) Is it acceptable to strengthen a chassis by the addition of boxing plates a process that involves turning a 3-sided open chassis rail into a fully enclosed 'box' chassis?
A) Yes, providing the original structure remains unchanged.
Monococque.
Q) What is the definition of a monococque ?
A) A design in which body and chassis are all one unit.
Q) Why does cutting into a monococque affect the vehicle identity if it retains the same shape /profile as before.
A) Cutting is considered to be modifying the vehicle from its original specification. Any modification to the chassis/monocoque body is considered to render the vehicle no longer original specification or of original identity.
Q) Is it acceptable to modify a vehicle bulkhead and/or transmission tunnel when performing an engine change or fitting another make?
A) No, Assuming this is in relation to a monocoque structure. This would be considered a modification to the structure.
Q) Is it acceptable to fully weld sections that are spot-welded as part of the original construction methods, to increase the strength of the body?
A) Yes, providing the original structure is retained.
ACE felt that further clarification was needed from VOSA so we sent more questions.
The following responses are from the VOSA Press Office:-
The answers to our chassied vehicle rules queries seem mainly straightforward, However, we have further questions based on the answers supplied.
Q) As chassis strengthening is allowed, are we correct in assuming that additional crossmembers would also be allowed?
A) It is important that the original chassis structure is retained unmodified, and while it is acceptable to strengthen areas and include additional brackets or crossmembers, It would be limited to additions within the existing chassis frame structure. Additional chassis structures, i.e. extending the outward parameters of the original chassis structure would be considered a modification.
Q) It is the monococque rules that need the most clarification.
Your reply states that any cutting of the monococque" is considered to render the vehicle identity no longer original specification or of original identity ". This would suggest that any crash repairs necessitating cutting and removal of panels or chassis sections, or restoration work would call the vehicle's identity into question?
We presume that the point should really be that any cutting... other than in factory designed joining areas...would be the actual criteria?
A) In this respect it is necessary to differentiate between modification and repair. Any repair process that is in line with manufacturer's recommendations and that returns the structure to its original specification would not be considered to be a modification.
Q) Would the modification of wings to allow clearance for larger wheels fall foul of the regulations?
We presume not as the common fitment of sunroofs does not create issues as this is a non stressed item of the monococque, the same as wings?"
A) When considering a monocoque structure, it is necessary to consider what constitutes cosmetic panels that do not significantly add to the structural strength and which panels provide structural integrity. In general front wings modified in this way would not constitute a modification to the monocoque structure.
With reference to the further query, VOSA have advised that they would prefer the following statement:
What constitutes a monocoque is that of how an OEM manufacturer would view it. The chassis or `cage` assembly and all components that form it, less any cosmetic panels or infills that make no structural consideration to the monocoque or its component parts.
However, we must emphasis that this information is given for general guidance and each case will be judged on its merits.
Whilst none of this is definitive, and it contains the usual 'Judged on it's own merits' criteria, it does answer a lot of questions where the modifier has only been able to speculate in the past.
It means we are aware of what we can or cannot do and still retain the 5 points from the start of any modification process.
So, to summarise the above information:
Chassis
It is acceptable to box original chassis and also to add additional crossmembers but not to alter the existing chassis in any way to allow for their installation.
It is acceptable to remove NON STRUCTURAL body mounts and engine / gearbox mounts.
It is NOT acceptable to shorten, or lengthen the chassis, either in between standard suspension points or fore and aft of these.
Any additional items welded creating a longer overall chassis are classed as modifications. It would however be acceptable to bolt a reasonably sized additional subframe to existing mounting holes.
Any outriggers (as opposed to continuous chassis frame) fore or aft from the chassis would need clarification from VOSA as to their purpose before removal or alteration was accepted. This would be based on their purpose and whether they formed part of the vehicles original Type Approval.
Monococques
It is NOT acceptable for the bulkhead, or transmission tunnel area, to be modified.
The specification for a monococque will vary with each manufacturer and the decision on what are acceptable modifications will be based on those criteria for each vehicle.
It is acceptable for additional seam welding to be carried out.
Should there be any further questions relating the above information on specific vehicles ACE would be willing to assist in further clarification on an individual basis.
The above information relates to only 5 points (awarded for original unmodified chassis / monococque) of the 8 points system for retaining vehicle identity and we will be clarifying other sections in the future
From a Q & A session with VOSA by a hotrodder seeking the truth.
Chassis.
Q) What is classed as chassis? Is it purely the outer longitudinal rails or are the crossmembers between these also a part of the chassis?
A) Chassis should be taken to include crossmembers.
Q) We know that cutting or shortening a chassis is classed as modification but is this relative to the vehicle wheelbase i.e. the chassis must remain uncut between the 2 axles but anything forward of front or aft of rear suspension mounts can be removed?
A) Chassis includes the full original length of the longitudinal members including to the front of the front axle and to the rear of the rear axle.
Q) Is it acceptable to remove bodymounts, which contribute no strength to the chassis when changing a body to a different style /make?
A) Yes, providing they are additional to and are not an integral part of the chassis structure.
Q) Is it acceptable to strengthen a chassis by the addition of boxing plates a process that involves turning a 3-sided open chassis rail into a fully enclosed 'box' chassis?
A) Yes, providing the original structure remains unchanged.
Monococque.
Q) What is the definition of a monococque ?
A) A design in which body and chassis are all one unit.
Q) Why does cutting into a monococque affect the vehicle identity if it retains the same shape /profile as before.
A) Cutting is considered to be modifying the vehicle from its original specification. Any modification to the chassis/monocoque body is considered to render the vehicle no longer original specification or of original identity.
Q) Is it acceptable to modify a vehicle bulkhead and/or transmission tunnel when performing an engine change or fitting another make?
A) No, Assuming this is in relation to a monocoque structure. This would be considered a modification to the structure.
Q) Is it acceptable to fully weld sections that are spot-welded as part of the original construction methods, to increase the strength of the body?
A) Yes, providing the original structure is retained.
ACE felt that further clarification was needed from VOSA so we sent more questions.
The following responses are from the VOSA Press Office:-
The answers to our chassied vehicle rules queries seem mainly straightforward, However, we have further questions based on the answers supplied.
Q) As chassis strengthening is allowed, are we correct in assuming that additional crossmembers would also be allowed?
A) It is important that the original chassis structure is retained unmodified, and while it is acceptable to strengthen areas and include additional brackets or crossmembers, It would be limited to additions within the existing chassis frame structure. Additional chassis structures, i.e. extending the outward parameters of the original chassis structure would be considered a modification.
Q) It is the monococque rules that need the most clarification.
Your reply states that any cutting of the monococque" is considered to render the vehicle identity no longer original specification or of original identity ". This would suggest that any crash repairs necessitating cutting and removal of panels or chassis sections, or restoration work would call the vehicle's identity into question?
We presume that the point should really be that any cutting... other than in factory designed joining areas...would be the actual criteria?
A) In this respect it is necessary to differentiate between modification and repair. Any repair process that is in line with manufacturer's recommendations and that returns the structure to its original specification would not be considered to be a modification.
Q) Would the modification of wings to allow clearance for larger wheels fall foul of the regulations?
We presume not as the common fitment of sunroofs does not create issues as this is a non stressed item of the monococque, the same as wings?"
A) When considering a monocoque structure, it is necessary to consider what constitutes cosmetic panels that do not significantly add to the structural strength and which panels provide structural integrity. In general front wings modified in this way would not constitute a modification to the monocoque structure.
With reference to the further query, VOSA have advised that they would prefer the following statement:
What constitutes a monocoque is that of how an OEM manufacturer would view it. The chassis or `cage` assembly and all components that form it, less any cosmetic panels or infills that make no structural consideration to the monocoque or its component parts.
However, we must emphasis that this information is given for general guidance and each case will be judged on its merits.
Whilst none of this is definitive, and it contains the usual 'Judged on it's own merits' criteria, it does answer a lot of questions where the modifier has only been able to speculate in the past.
It means we are aware of what we can or cannot do and still retain the 5 points from the start of any modification process.
So, to summarise the above information:
Chassis
It is acceptable to box original chassis and also to add additional crossmembers but not to alter the existing chassis in any way to allow for their installation.
It is acceptable to remove NON STRUCTURAL body mounts and engine / gearbox mounts.
It is NOT acceptable to shorten, or lengthen the chassis, either in between standard suspension points or fore and aft of these.
Any additional items welded creating a longer overall chassis are classed as modifications. It would however be acceptable to bolt a reasonably sized additional subframe to existing mounting holes.
Any outriggers (as opposed to continuous chassis frame) fore or aft from the chassis would need clarification from VOSA as to their purpose before removal or alteration was accepted. This would be based on their purpose and whether they formed part of the vehicles original Type Approval.
Monococques
It is NOT acceptable for the bulkhead, or transmission tunnel area, to be modified.
The specification for a monococque will vary with each manufacturer and the decision on what are acceptable modifications will be based on those criteria for each vehicle.
It is acceptable for additional seam welding to be carried out.
Should there be any further questions relating the above information on specific vehicles ACE would be willing to assist in further clarification on an individual basis.
The above information relates to only 5 points (awarded for original unmodified chassis / monococque) of the 8 points system for retaining vehicle identity and we will be clarifying other sections in the future
Edited by Morrisboy on Wednesday 13th March 16:22
Morrisboy said:
Monococques
It is NOT acceptable for the bulkhead, or transmission tunnel area, to be modified.
So, on that basis, every Grp 4 spec Ford Escort that has a reg has lost its 5 points for chassis, given that the works spec ZF gearbox tunnel, the 'turrets' for the vertical rear shocks, as well as the boxes for the 4-link bars for the Atlas all involve cutting and modding the monocoque It is NOT acceptable for the bulkhead, or transmission tunnel area, to be modified.
Morrisboy said:
As a hot rodder I can tell you that a lot of what you have interpreted is wrong.
I haven't interpreted anything. And that's the trouble, the "guidance" is too vague. And if taken literally, means many many vehicles are not strictly legal. But clearly they still exist.And there is no definitive of what is or isn't aloud. Even if you speak to someone at the DVLA, it will only be their opinion or interpretation. Ultimately it would probably take a court case to establish case law for a given vehicle and modification.
.Morrisboy said:
VOSA's words not mine.
Just to show how vague it really is.This is the answer I got from the DVLA. I asked specific question and gave an actual use case vehicle with very specific changes.
Sadly the reply couldn't be more vague if they tried. I think in essence they are saying, they can't say yes or no. But if they decide too will prosecute you, regardless of any info you have been given. And that each vehicle (even if the same mods have been done elsewhere) will be assessed totally independently.
DVLA said:
When assessing a modified/rebuilt vehicle, the Agency’s main interest is to establish whether or not the vehicle has been newly constructed with no previous registration in its present form or that it has been rebuilt to its original specification using enough of the original vehicle to retain its original mark.
Due to the very nature of rebuilding or modifying vehicles from their original manufacturers specification, DVLA assesses each vehicle on its own merits on completion of the rebuild/modifying. This can include both an inspection of both the documentary evidence and a physical inspection of the vehicle.
However it seems there is no way to establish if a vehicle needs assessing/inspecting without actually conducting an inspection. Making it impossible to find out if something will be ok before you actually do it Due to the very nature of rebuilding or modifying vehicles from their original manufacturers specification, DVLA assesses each vehicle on its own merits on completion of the rebuild/modifying. This can include both an inspection of both the documentary evidence and a physical inspection of the vehicle.
I have also spoken to the DVSA (aka VOSA). They were a little more helpful, although highlighted the insanity that they test the vehicles, but only the DVLA can determine if something needs testing....
DVSA said:
Although DVSA carry out the IVA testing we cannot make a decision on which vehicles require the testing prior to registration as a modified vehicle, the DVLA are the authority who will register the car so it will be their decision. I advise you to contact DVLA to get a definitive answer, but from your description if the chassis is unmodified then an IVA should not be required.
Radically altered vehicles: https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/radically-...
Contact DVLA: https://www.gov.uk/contact-the-dvla/y/vehicle-regi...
Kind regards
Tony Selwood Approvals Technical Engineer
Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency | Ellipse, Padley Road, Swansea, SA1 8AN Office: 0300 123 9000 | F : 01792 454214 | E : approvals.technical@dvsa.gov.uk
For the record, the example I inquired about was taking a Land Rover Discovery 1, removing the body, fitting a full rollcage mounted to the chassis and/or replacement out riggers. And fitting a "Defender" style body, by fitting new chassis outriggers and the rear cross-member (as the rear cross memeber is also the rear body mount for a Defender body).Radically altered vehicles: https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/radically-...
Contact DVLA: https://www.gov.uk/contact-the-dvla/y/vehicle-regi...
Kind regards
Tony Selwood Approvals Technical Engineer
Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency | Ellipse, Padley Road, Swansea, SA1 8AN Office: 0300 123 9000 | F : 01792 454214 | E : approvals.technical@dvsa.gov.uk
I think that is one case where I would have kept quiet! I'm guessing that the rear cross member would be the sticking point.
In my world it tends to be more black and white (although historically just ignoring the issue has been popular).
The problem with DVLA is actually getting the ear of some one who knows what they (and you) are talking about. I have found Kits and Rebuilds helpful but only with a direct line number from initial paper work submission.
As you say though, it would make life simpler if they would list does and don'ts, even if it were just common ones to enable an informed decision.
In my world it tends to be more black and white (although historically just ignoring the issue has been popular).
The problem with DVLA is actually getting the ear of some one who knows what they (and you) are talking about. I have found Kits and Rebuilds helpful but only with a direct line number from initial paper work submission.
As you say though, it would make life simpler if they would list does and don'ts, even if it were just common ones to enable an informed decision.
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff