RUMCars Forum
General Category => Unusual Microcar Discussion => Topic started by: Bob Purton on September 21, 2014, 02:23:57 PM
-
AndyL Alerted me last night to this announcement from Dave Watson on the IOCGB forum regarding the problem that owners of late 1959 built Isetta's have had in proving there 1960 registered cars were actually built in 59 and thus qualify for MOT exemption.
.......
Hi all,
After much time and hassle and back and forth with the DVLA i can now confirm that all UK built Isettas with a chassis number LESS THAN 321958 are eligible for no MOT
This is based on the glass`s guide and is the only document the DVLA will recognise.
I have tried arguing but all on deaf ears I'm afraid. Contacted Glass`s and they don't really want to know either.
So, if your Isetta falls into the above category please contact me off line and we should be able to get the date changed on your log book.
Thanks all
Dave Watson
IOC
As my chassis number is lower than this I'm hopeful of getting the manufacture date changed on the V5.
Many thanks to Dave for all his hard work on this and a raspberry to those Rumsters who told me mine was a "1960 built car, deal with it!" ;)
-
Are DVLA are creating a problem for themselves here? Mate has a small manufacturer's confirmation of build for his car but DVLA refuse to accept it, stating they need Glass's data as proof. Since this is a specialist car, it never appeared in Glass's guide. But how on earth can you beat the manufacturers own data, anyway? I think they will find themselves in some hot water shortly, as this is neither reasonable, nor defendable.
Trouble is as a Government monopoly they can shift ground and then call this a non production car and turn it into a Q plate or some such. In this way they can undermine a lot of interesting cars freedom to use the roads, which are currently taken for granted. Not least as the insurers follow the lead of registrations and oddball registration marks mean higher risk to them. Q plates being a case in point. Having set a precedent, what other manufacturers information is going to be ignored, in favour of some non technical middleman entity, that does not have all the answers. Will existing large manufacturers word be taken, but no one else's, creating a two tear system. This style of corporate fascism means dangerous times for the freedom to be doing what you want, or paying extra for it. Well what a surprise if that is so!
Already I see dodgy ploppers being sold as road going cars on eBay. This MOT free thing might look great, but it is very much a double edged sword. As usual the geezers will go for cash gains and it might end up blowing up in our face. Yet DVLA is very keen to cut its administration costs as it has really given up any pretense of being a service to the public, and is primarily an arm of information collection for taxation and fee purposes to enrich the Government coffers. So if the complaints come in of rampant malpractice in sales of substandard pre '60's cars do not expect any quarter for the enthusiasts who are doing it right.
-
I agree that the DVLA need to improve their logic, but I don't think it really gets in the way of that person's freedom to use the road, or forces a Q plate upon them: there is still an easier way forward - get an MoT!
Like you, Al, I see more problems in allowing vehicles without MoTs than there would be if they were still required.
-
Al I do not follow your reasoning here about dodgy cars without the pre 60 MOT it is up to the person driving the vehicle to make sure their MOT exempt vehicle is roadworthy if you buy something and it has dodgy deal written all over it
you can only blame yourself when it goes wrong and are stopped by the law
I can see Bobs dilemma but there has to be a cut of point and unfortunately some vehicles are the wrong side of this
The manufacturers records that we use are valid with Swansea
In the tractor world we have had no MOT's for years if your stopped for an illegal vehicle the buck stops with you not the dvla
as for paying there is no road tax and now no Mot( pre 1960 vehicles account for 0.05%of MOT'S) considerable saving on inconvenience and time
So put the vehicle in good order and enjoy it and stop blaming Swansea as a DVLA officer for a club I have seen all sorts of fiddles on applications is it any wonder Swansea do not trust anyone
-
Sadly there are going to be people who will buy a pre 60 car which is structurally poor but painted up. Oh its a bargain! They will either be to foolish to check the condition, or not care, and can go on to create an incident. Such people are the first to start blaming everyone else. Of course their insurance will probably be poorly research and could void of not pay out. The profiteer if he has any sense will be long gone. So who picks up the tab? Magnify that into a life threatening accident. A few of those and the law will get looked at again. Would that all folk who want classics had the skill and intelligence to run one. This is the thrust of what I am pointing out.
I do not blame the DVLC for anything. I know it for what it is, as previously described. Like a Bank it is there to collect money (which is information), it is not your friend, despite making the odd friendly noise. In its mandate is a level of public service, but that has become very much less of a factor in its management over the years. (like so many things, service has been reduced while cost increases. In real terms the public is, thus, worse off, but few notice)
-
Funny enough in my case the reason I'm so keen to get mot exempt is the fact that they invariably damage my cars during the inspection.
I'm not blind to the fact that some will take advantage and be negligent in the maintenance of there vehicles.
-
As has been pointed out, you can still get nicked if you're irresponsible enough to drive a car unfit for the roads.
I always thought the MOT was a bit of a joke, after all the unscrupulous always knew where to get a bent ticket, and it's a open to all kinds of fraud anyway.
There's a enough newer machinery driving around sans tax, MOT and insurance to keep plod busy without worrying about a tiny amount of old fashioned micro motors.
-
Well I was not thinking Microcar. More 50's standard classic choices. The more specialised stuff tends to go to folk with some motivation to own odd machinery. Anyway while this is the rule I can enjoy it as it does help a little.
-
Funny enough in my case the reason I'm so keen to get mot exempt is the fact that they invariably damage my cars during the inspection.
I'm not blind to the fact that some will take advantage and be negligent in the maintenance of there vehicles.
fully agree , last time the Mk D Bond was tested the idiot put it on the rolling road and snapped/damaged the rear hydraulic brake cylinder , of cause then it failed the test - with repairs left to me , and they would not re-test because regulations wont allow use of the Tapply meter .
Plas Man
-
Ah, I'm not he only one then! Doesn't it make you wild!
One question though, I didn't think Mk D's had hydraulic brakes. Is this a modification?
-
Ah. I love MkC's and D's, don't care much for A's, B's and the later cars though.
-
Bob Why! I can see the reasoning for the later cars but the early ones I like them all especially the vans and trucks
-
I don't really know Gary. Its hard to explain ones tastes sometimes. I think its the styling or lack of it. The other thing is that they could so easily be invalid carriages. My wife describes them as reminding her of a shoe! The later cars are just too boxy for me but the C's and D's just float by boat. We all like different things, part of the magic of microcars!
-
Could easily be invalid carriages ! What utter bunkum Bob ! Have you ever tried to get into a Bond A or B ? You certainly wouldn't be able to if an invalid . You really can't get away with that one ;)
-
Could easily be invalid carriages ! What utter bunkum Bob ! Have you ever tried to get into a Bond A or B ? You certainly wouldn't be able to if an invalid .
No indeed. But after a while in a Mk A, you do feel you've become one!
-
Bunkum Bob, that's got a certain ring about it! ;D
Mind you weren't the early Schmitts made for that purpose, they couldn't have been to easy to get in and out of either. Anyway, I was referring to the looks not the practicalities.
-
I had a bond bug and as I parked it an elderly gent came across and asked if I needed assistance to get out as he thought it was an invalid carriage
I like Bobs new Forum name, he has explained his likes and dislikes so cannot see the problem with him not liking A/B bonds
At least he did not start on the "Gordon" Richard
-
Not this time :) but you would have to say Bob is awfully prejudiced - God help him if he ever has need of such a device ;) He doesn't actually like many RUM cars at all ..........
-
I didn't even say I disliked A's and B's, just dont care for them much as in like less than others.
Love the Bond bug story! ;D
-
Coming back to the MOT topic, I finally composed my letter to the DVLA tonight....................
Dear Sir or Madam.
I am writing to request an amendment to the DVLA records in respect of the date of manufacture of my Isetta Bubblecar. The V5 shows the first registration as being April 1960 but the chassis number reveals the date of manufacture as being 1959.
The chassis number of my vehicle is [3] 21692 and the last chassis number of 1959 was 21958. Please note that some numbers have a prefix of 3 before the number which indicates a three wheeler but the three and four wheeler versions were made in production batches on the same line and with sequential chassis numbers.
Mr David Watts, historian of the Isetta owners club of Great Britain tells me that he has been in dialogue with yourselves and that the cut off chassis number for 1959 [21958] has been agreed.
I attach a copy of the appropriate Glass's guide check book which substantiates the numbers.
I therefore formally request the records be amended to allow my vehicle to be MOT exempt.
I await your response.
My vehicle details are as follows.
Lets see what excuses they come up with for kicking out the application!
-
It may have been stronger to include a letter from David Watts, stating the historical position as known to the Isetta Club - rather than just referring to it. (The recipient will see what you say as mere hearsay, and may not have ready access - or inclination - to find the relevant correspondence.)
Good luck, though!
-
Maybe but as I'm not even a member of the IOCGB I didn't like to ask.
Still the glasses check book gives the proof they ask for so lets see. Dave did offer to intervene if they throw it out.
-
'Wish I can be like David Watts. Far, far, far, faaar, far, far, far, far.' The Buzzcocks?
Isetta guru and concours winner is Dave Watson, I think, he was not in the song.
-
Silly me, of course its Watson. Elementary!
-
;D
-
Ah, I'm not he only one then! Doesn't it make you wild!
One question though, I didn't think Mk D's had hydraulic brakes. Is this a modification?
first I note that my post has a red cross by it - to remove , please explane why .
The mk d in question has hydraulic brakes and these are bond mk g - not a home made affair .
Using Bonds in this day with roads/traffic getting faster I'm suprised that other Bonder's hav'nt done likewise .
Also my Bond has never been trailered to an event , even compleeting almost 1.000 miles from end to end .
plas man
-
Hi, plas man
I don't see any red cross - and I don't think there's such a system here, is there?
We're not all familiar with the details of different cars, and do sometimes ask each other to give further info, so I think that was all Bob was doing. He had a memory of the Mk D brakes not being hydraulic, and you confirmed for him that yours were an upgrade. A sensible one, it seems to me!
-
tell us more plas man - and by the way what IS your name :)
-
I think the red cross is to enable the poster to remove their replies if they so wish
-
Ah, yes, I see, Gary - my own earlier postings now have (for just me) a red cross, enabling me to delete what I said. And presumably the same applies for each of us.
Never noticed that before!
-
Hi, plas man
I don't see any red cross - and I don't think there's such a system here, is there?
We're not all familiar with the details of different cars, and do sometimes ask each other to give further info, so I think that was all Bob was doing. He had a memory of the Mk D brakes not being hydraulic, and you confirmed for him that yours were an upgrade. A sensible one, it seems to me!
Well it was more than a memory, I am very familiar with the MkD brakes and know they are not hydraulic. I remember how inefficient they were on my old MkD and a hydraulic conversion would be a tremendous improvement especially when the car is used as much as this one. Not a criticism at all, just wanted clarification.
-
A bolt on retro fit, I think. So the real bits can be replaced. These mods are the way to do it, even better if its 'in the family' as it were.
-
tell us more plas man - and by the way what IS your name :)
might change it to "Pr+t Man" ,
sorry , I thought you guys where Bonders , I recognised some names from club mag - but this may be coincidence , the Mk D in question is unique by having hydraulic brakes fitted , as it is used a lot over the local North York's moors and there are some steep inclines and the car to stop's if needed , most parts are standard Mk G - but if you are doing so remember to change the bulkhead casting as the Mk's C to F are lighter cast .
Should any owner have any questions regarding Bond , please ask I may be able to help .
"Plas Man"
BOC Mem No 181
Thanks Alan.
-
but alan who ? ah maybe it's an anagram - alan maps or alan spal ?
-
A bolt on retro fit, I think. So the real bits can be replaced. These mods are the way to do it, even better if its 'in the family' as it were.
yes Big Al all genuine Bond/Villiers parts , also the original parts have been kept just in case they are needed - but hopefully not , as its been OK since the late 1980's .
I'd post a picky but its abit of a 'round' the houses job , with out involving photo sites like Flickr ....
Good night from sunny Redcar
south of the Tees,
come enjoy the breeze,
hard top on -soft top off'
Bishops Bond has got the lot !
-
Ah, Redcar. Subject of the 1974/75 O&C board GCE O level Geography practical paper. I fear Geography probably is not tested as a practical entity anymore! But good old Redcar did me proud.
-
Just an update on this MOT exemption issue.
I finally got a letter back from the DVLA this morning and to my surprise my Isetta has been reclassified as pre 1960 so will now be MOT exempt. I was expecting all kinds of hassle but to their credit, they accepted the info from Dave Watson and the scans of the glasses check book.
This hopefully will make it easier for the next person as according to Dave I am the first to apply to get the manufacture date changed.
If I can be of any help to anyone with this issue drop me a line.
-
That's good news. The forty odd quid you saved will offset the cost of the new windscreen rubber!
-
excellent news
-
Just renewed the tax on My Isetta, after the DVLA agreeing to reclassify it as 1959 and not 1960 making it MOT exempt I was expecting all kinds of agro as the newly issued V5 says nothing of its date of manufacture or its class. However using the V11 renewal form online the class came up as historic vehicle and no MOT was required to renew the tax. Wonders will never cease!!
-
thanks for sharing , I'll be joining the 'mot free club' soon , question was it its first tax since re-build with no MOT required - no matter how long the vehicle has been off the road ?
also any advice on a insurance company ?
thanks Alan
-
I missed your thread for some reasons. Great news, you made it by just over 250 vehicles. I am about 4000 out, never mind. I have looked into Glass's Guide and will continue the search.
-
I agree the move to the square shape body shells takes a bit of getting used too. I am sure back in the day the better accommodation was seen as a great improvement, then bigger engine, hype, trumpet. But the early Bond has that simplistic minimalist style that marks out a true microcar. There are no great surprises, as it is simplicity, unless the great surprise is how well it works. Few will argue there are many better cars out there, but that is to miss the point. These cars were more accessible to those on limited budgets. They fit their time like the comfortable slipper they look like. With the Bond they made it work, did not fall by the wayside, and the rest is history. I do not care to own one now, but an early Bond is a stand out classic in my opinion. If I had a collection of 50 of the most interesting vehicles to show off, it would be there ahead of many more elitist and expensive microcars.