Roadworthiness testing for vehicles of historic interest

[dig123]

This is worth reading and responding to if you have an older vehicle. Looks like changes are on the way.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/roadwo...

[silverfoxcc]

Bit wqowooried abot the word 'original' re engine/brakes/transmission

Unless it refers to the original design, so a recon 'original' engine ( eg diff engine number) is classed as being original to that vehicle.

And what about body panels replaced, either s/h or new ones that have been pa nel beaten?

[droopsnoot]

silverfoxcc said:

Bit wqowooried abot the word 'original' re engine/brakes/transmission

Unless it refers to the original design, so a recon 'original' engine ( eg diff engine number) is classed as being original to that vehicle.

And what about body panels replaced, either s/h or new ones that have been pa nel beaten?

I think the question there is "how would anyone know"? I know there are some manufacturers that document and serialise everything, which allows people to talk about "matching numbers", but my own car (a seventies Vauxhall) has nothing like that. Sure, the engine number is recorded, but the gearbox isn't, the rear axle and front subframes don't have numbers, and nor do any of the body panels. So other than getting a "fail" for a rusted panel due to sharp edges for example, then going back having repaired or replaced it and getting a "pass", how does anyone know?

But I do think that an appropriate answer to the consultation question about using the DVLA points system should be to point this out, and that using the phrase "as original" would be better.

It does raise the issue of having to replace with non-original items once it becomes impossible to obtain a suitable replacement item. Again, though, how would anyone know?

[Slidingpillar]

Indeed, if the car with the chassis number preceding mine still exists, and was offer for sale with matching numbers, someone has altered it. The car never left the factory with the stated engine number as my car had it!

According to a marque historian, not a unique event either as he's come across other cases of the same thing occurring.

8 point rule might make some sense if applied carefully at the time of a rebuild/restoration but not as a means for judging MOT status. As an example (made up) consider a 1926 Austin 7. Engine replaced in 1935, steering gear in 1939, chassis replaced with a better second-hand one in 1948, gearbox replaced (second hand) in 1950 and then driven on and off till 1958. restored/rebuilt and hit the road again in 1965. The car predates DVLC and the 8 point rule so none of this is documented, but to apply the 8 point rule for MOTs, require one whereas a 1959 tatty Mini is exempt is plain daft.

[aeropilot]

Slidingpillar said:

8 point rule might make some sense if applied carefully at the time of a rebuild/restoration but not as a means for judging MOT status. As an example (made up) consider a 1926 Austin 7. Engine replaced in 1935, steering gear in 1939, chassis replaced with a better second-hand one in 1948, gearbox replaced (second hand) in 1950 and then driven on and off till 1958. restored/rebuilt and hit the road again in 1965. The car predates DVLC and the 8 point rule so none of this is documented, but to apply the 8 point rule for MOTs, require one whereas a 1959 tatty Mini is exempt is plain daft.

Indeed.

As always, a one sized fits all ruling, usually doesn't end up working for all.

[droopsnoot]

I'm just filling out the online response, and this one also worries me:

the dvla said:

If we use DVLA’s 8-point rule, how many VHIs might fail to prove they have not undergone substantial changes?

I am responding that the onus should be on the tester / certifier to prove that they have undergone substantial change, not the owner to prove they have not. I've also made the comment about defining "original" in terms of the 8-point rule as "of original spec" rather than "the actual one it was supplied with", if the latter can even be proved or disproved.