RUMCars Forum
General Category => Unusual Microcar Discussion => Topic started by: Rob Dobie on May 21, 2012, 08:25:56 PM
-
Just found this on Yahoo! Cars.
Anyone know anything more?
************************
CLASSIC and historic vehicles are to be exempted from the annual MoT test, the Government announced today.
From November 18 this year, owners of vehicles manufactured before 1960 will not have to have to take them in for an MoT, Roads Minister Mike Penning said.
Pre-1960 licensed vehicles make up about 0.6% of the total number of licensed vehicles in Britain, but are involved in just 0.03% of road casualties and accidents.
Mr Penning said: "We are committed to cutting out red tape which costs motorists money without providing significant overall benefits.
"Owners of classic cars and motorbikes tend to be enthusiasts who maintain their vehicles well - they don't need to be told to look after them, they're out there in all weathers checking the condition of the engine, tyres and bodywork."
He added: "Owners of classic vehicles will still be legally required to ensure that they are safe and in a proper condition to be on the road, but scrapping the MoT test for these vehicles will save motorists money."
The decision follows a campaign by the All-Party Parliamentary Historic Vehicles Group, led by East Yorkshire MP Greg Knight, its chairman.
Mr Knight said today: "I am delighted by this announcement. Accidents involving historic vehicles are extremely rare and the majority of owners are meticulous in keeping their vehicles in good condition. Having to have an annual MoT test for a vehicle which may only travel a few hundred miles in a year was costly and absurd."
AA president Edmund King said: "Cutting the red tape of an MoT requirement for classic pre-1960 cars is a victory for common sense."
-
been talked about for a bit but i hadnt seen the announcement . thanks rob
-
Blast! Two of my cars are 1960! I dont suppose it means 1960 and before?
-
Interesting news, cheers Rob.
-
Michael Penning was in my class at school - Just thought I would mention it.
He was a bit of a rough diamond, wanted to be in the Royal Marines, perhaps he was? I knew he would come good in the end. Cheers to Mike Penning.
I need to sell the numberplate on my Velocette LE (very poor condition) but I need an MOT first.......not any more? SLK 479 could be up for grabs £££££££
Now what are the insurance companies going to do - old cars with no control over maintenance and roadworthiness, must be worth a few more quid on the policy.
-
I would not think it will make a lot of difference on the insurances we drive vintage tractors on various road runs no MOT on these
Interesting point on the number plate especially if they do away with the local offices for inspection of the vehicle my minitruck was robbed by swapping the i.d. plate however wIll they make it like the tractors and you cannot transfer the number because no M.O.T
-
Number one on my list - Get an MOT on the Velocette!
-
All the reports I have read say this will apply to vehicles "manifactured" before 1960, say ones car was registered early in 1960 this would mean that it was most likely made in 1959>. If this could be proven via records of the chassis number etc I wonder if you could still claim exemption?
-
Blast! Two of my cars are 1960! I dont suppose it means 1960 and before?
I can't find an offical release on the policy, but the consultation and the EU regulations state "manufactured before 1st January 1960".
http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/dft-2011-27 (http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/dft-2011-27)
-
Interesting. I just checked my Nobels V5 and that said 1959 so that ones off the hook. If I can find an Isetta that has a chassis number that is below 321692 and registered in late 59 It will prove that mine was manifactured also in 59. Time to consult the Isetta owners club.
-
;)
-
I will believe it when I see an official document. Cannot help thinking there is a sting in the tail on this. However my diesel Borgward Isobella Van looks a much more practical prospect! Free MOT, tax and not effected by rubbish petrol. It does over 50 to the gallon. Not interested in driving most of the 1960 stuff and younger, so Schmitts and stuff OK. I think only the Saab is going to come a cropper on this. Also possibly my Pod. With trike MOTs tricky it will be a great help not top need an MOT.
It could distort the market a bit. I think my Magnette ZB might gain a bit being '58.
AS to insurers it is ideal for them to cop out of a claim. They will insert a paragraph insisting on regular maintenance and reserve the right to proof. In the event of an accident of fault to the covered car they could then inspect the condition and site a defect as a reason to mitigate their loss. Watch out and read your policy on this law being changed!
-
Yes it all sounds too simple and good to be true. I did read that you would still be able to voluntarily have your pre 1960 car MOT tested and maybe this is what some insurers will require?
-
For car tax a "historic vehicle" is classed as being one made pre 1 Jan 1973, yet for the MOT they are using 1960.
Surely the two should tie up?!
-
I would imagine with pre 1960 cars being at least 52 years old they assume they have been looked after ,making it as late as 1973 would possibly mean loads of not so well maintained vehicles.Now to get that austin seven thats been laid up 30years dragged out of the shed ready to hit the highway in november,no brakes ? they were not that good anyway.
-
If you read the reports by FBHVC there would be a sharp rise in the number of cars still on the DVLA system and used on the road after 1960 and into the seventies so this is the reason for the cut off
-
Interesting. I just checked my Nobels V5 and that said 1959 so that ones off the hook. If I can find an Isetta that has a chassis number that is below 321692 and registered in late 59 It will prove that mine was manifactured also in 59. Time to consult the Isetta owners club.
Do you mean a chassis number that is above yours? If so, I can quote you five higher chassis numbers of 1959 models or 1959 registered Isettas. In fact I have details of another two but they are in the three thirties and definitely later cars.
-
For car tax a "historic vehicle" is classed as being one made pre 1 Jan 1973, yet for the MOT they are using 1960.
Surely the two should tie up?!
I have to say I'm baffled by that as well. The tax was something the Conservatives introdued as a rolling 25-year exemption and Labour fixed to 1973 in 1998. There are numerous petitions, some with over 20,000 signitures calling for a reintroduction of the rolling 25 year exemption along with support from the classic car industry which is completely ignored. This change had a consultation which 477 people responded to and it's a done deal!
The EU legislation would make it more complicated to drop the MOT for post 1960 vehicles, but as far as I know the tax is a purely local issue.
-
The Government would lose to much money if they carried on with a rolling tax exempt date there are figures about but it was a very large sum and they have to find the money to give away to all and sundry from somewhere and it is usually the motorist who loses
-
Interesting. I just checked my Nobels V5 and that said 1959 so that ones off the hook. If I can find an Isetta that has a chassis number that is below 321692 and registered in late 59 It will prove that mine was manifactured also in 59. Time to consult the Isetta owners club.
Do you mean a chassis number that is above yours? If so, I can quote you five higher chassis numbers of 1959 models or 1959 registered Isettas. In fact I have details of another two but they are in the three thirties and definitely later cars.
Of course wilksie, that exactly what I meant. It was late at night when I wrote that, my excuse anyway! Thats good news then and defo proves mine was manifactured before 1960. Any chance of forwarding me the details via a private message? CHeers, Bob.
-
For car tax a "historic vehicle" is classed as being one made pre 1 Jan 1973, yet for the MOT they are using 1960.
Surely the two should tie up?!
Maybe the members of the All-Party Parliamentary Historic Vehicles Group only have vehicles from before 1960, so why make it any later date.....?
-
Yes it all sounds too simple and good to be true. I did read that you would still be able to voluntarily have your pre 1960 car MOT tested and maybe this is what some insurers will require?
As a buyer would you not ask for an MOT as an engineering check before buying a car? It is still a cheap way to get a car checked out. I believe the French system actually demands this of old vehicles before a change of ownership but no MOT thereafter. Makes perfect sense or else folk will be tucked up with dangerous cars assuming they can drive them.
-
For car tax a "historic vehicle" is classed as being one made pre 1 Jan 1973, yet for the MOT they are using 1960.
Surely the two should tie up?!
I have to say I'm baffled by that as well. The tax was something the Conservatives introdued as a rolling 25-year exemption and Labour fixed to 1973 in 1998. There are numerous petitions, some with over 20,000 signitures calling for a reintroduction of the rolling 25 year exemption along with support from the classic car industry which is completely ignored. This change had a consultation which 477 people responded to and it's a done deal!
The EU legislation would make it more complicated to drop the MOT for post 1960 vehicles, but as far as I know the tax is a purely local issue.
We are out of step on this one with many countries. It has helped destroy our position as the world centre for classic cars, which has cost a lot of tax revenue to the State. If they are squeaking about a further loss of revenue then I have very little sympathy as it was a dumb move in 1998 by, oh yes, that financial whizzkid Gordon Brown. You know, the one who lost everyone money equally as a good socialist should, except himself of course.
So we should be on 1987 now. All those cars that have survived to be usable are, in fact, the greenest cars on the road if you include pollution debt. Greener still if owners were encouraged to invest in them so they are bung perfect. So fine, have an MOT, but why tax them as a more modern car? Yet this green agenda is not recognised and the State seems to be hostile to the notion that they remain in use by altering fuel etc to finish them off. The only reason can be fiscal and pressure to bring new cars to the market for turnover of industry, which is not green but lucrative. Many of the owners of these older cars would not buy a newer car anyway so I wonder quite who is kidding who here. Fortunately my interest is pre '73 but to loose the best ranges of cars featuring well designed economic pre computer rubbish engines to the current policy on older cars is boneheaded. My feeling is grab some of the better ones, Pugs 205 405, Citreon BX, etc left before they vanish or face up to paying excessive maintenance charges for tasks you can no longer do on moderns. That or changing your car frequently for a newer version at considerable write of cost. Not playing here.
-
I didn't want to change the registration numbers on my Morris or Velocette but also didn't want to throw away their 'cherished number' value in November if they could no longer be transferred.
It says on the .gov website that if you want to retain or transfer the reg number the vehicle must have tax and MOT.
There is not much information on exactely what will happen after 18th Nov? (or is it 17th)
I have put the Morris number on a retainer. I didnt want it to loose its original number but decided to play safe. I could always put it back on again!!!!
I got an MOT on the Velocett yesterday and tried to tax it today - it is not registered as an Historic vehicle so I phoned Swansea to see how I could get it taxed (without spending £36).
The deadline of 18th Nov is getting tight to change the logbook and retain the number.
It seems Swansea don't really know what will happen after 18th Nov.
My thought was - no MOT = no transfer of reg number.
The lady said that after Nov 18th will just need to tax the vehicle. you should still be able to transfer the number but will not need an MOT. I said that I wasn't sure about that, and I don't think she was.
I asked for some written details - she did not have any. email your enquiry on www.gov.uk/emaildvla and they will write back.
She said that most classic car owners keep their cars in good condition so everything would be all right.................
I suggested that there are lots of old wrecks out in peoples sheds and gardens. Provided they have a V5c, does that mean you simply have to tax them and then sell/retain the number plate. no need for MOT?
This could be very good news for people with old scrappers.
It could be bad news for your pre 60 classic with a £30,000 number plate.
I don't think Swansea know the answer. They said it would be clearer on November 18th?
-
What a mess. If Scotland get independence they could offer MOT free MOT motoring up until 1965 just to be annoying. And we all wonder why these burks in charge have got us into a rather nasty economic situation? 'Which way did it go. George? Which way did it go'?
Well the transfer thing could go one of three ways couldn't it.
You cannot do it as no MOT.
You can do it to anything as an MOT is not valid any more.
Or the most likely as the law still exists and it will act as a check on DVLA's lucrative little sideline. You need an MOT test to transfer the number, nominating the tester as the agent of DVLA to check the car's details in the absence of LVO's and that it is roadworthy. (never worked out why a number had to be roadworthy rather than the donar car but, hey, we are talking Government bollocks here so sense has nothing to do with it).
but........
Worst of all you can transfer the number but the car then has to be scrapped by a licensed company or put in for re registration thus keeping old car haters happy. You know, the ones with a personalised numberplate.
-
I suppose it only affects a few people because most of the valuable registration numbers have long gone onto BMW M5's etc.
My numbers are probably only worth about £1000 - £2000 but that is still quite a (virtual) loss.
COM 1C might make £2000?
HoHoHo - I wish
-
Surely not allowing registration transfers off pre 1960 vehicles would be a good thing.
I thought true classic car enthusiasts might value the fact that a car retains its original registration number.
-
always had mixed feelings on this one trident . people in other countries without a lifelong registration number have no problem valuing there vehicles have they ? never sold one - but never had one with a valuable reg - unless you know better 837RVX , 219CLR , HHF684H , UKR696 , etc etc ;)
i know some have sold the number knowing that if they sell the vehicle for i.e. £1000 the buyer will then recoup by selling the number alone for more - perhaps that is the the answer then - ban selling numbers . DVLA wouldnt like that would they ;)
-
I sold the number on my old Austin A35 in about 1980 for £2000 (33 MHK)
The money then went towards the restoration of my Morris Isis.
Should I have left the original number on the A35 for the next owner? The car was not economically salvageable for restoration at that time, being worth about £100
If someone has a nice original classic vehicle today with a number plate worth £10,000 should they keep it with the car or loose £10,000 on November 18th (perhaps).
At what point/value should the number stay with the car. At what point do you stop becoming a true enthusiast..............
It's nice to have the original number with the car but my Morris Isis will never be worth lots of money and is of little historic importance apart from being a Cr*p car.
So I think I should reluctantly cash-in on the number plate value.
-
thats it in a nutshell !!
-
I am all for keeping our cars (Microcars) original right down to the Registration Number if at all possible. Jean
-
sorry to disagree bob . i do agree with jeans sentiments but not you bob . complete difference of opinion thats all . why do people who want to keep original numbers with cars feel they are taking the higher ground ? just as easy to argue that they are misguided . if your car is known as being a particular car with a particularly well known history you MAY have a point but as most of us own very ordinary cars with no well known history then what does the number mean - only that its a 1955 car registered in cheshire for example . that knowledge can be kept with the vehicle either way surely .
-
where did bobs post go that i was replying to ? is it me ?
-
The name's Rob not bob and I still say it's greed to flog reg numbers.
-
i still say what happened to the post .
sorry rob you moved the goalposts didn't you ? i knew of you for many years as bob was i always mistaken , far as i know many people talk of bob dobie - where did it all go wrong ???
-
As I recall in the early days of the forum to save confusion we started calling Mr Dobie Rob and myself Bob though I think in real life we are both Bobs, correct me if I'm wrong Rob.
What is the post about that you cant find Richard? The only thing I have edited lately is deleting some spam and removing four letter words from someone elses post which is why I assumed you were calling me square? Or maybe you were talking to Rob!!?? See how the confusion starts! :D
-
sorry no agro meant just that rob dobie messaged i think just the one word GREEDY ( pertaining to selling of reg i suppose ) immediately after jeans post . i replied with my thoughts , but rob dobies message had then been withdrawn leaving me replying to something that was there no more
-
Rob must have deleted his own post then.
Let us know if you find out anything on the pre 1960 thing as I'm sure its going to effect a lot of us.
-
will do but appears the dvla are as unsure as the rest of us ! one hand not knowing etc.
-
The name's Rob not bob and I still say it's greed to flog reg numbers.
Are you sure you have not sold your name and be re registered Bob? That's the case against in a Bond nutshell.
-
As I recall in the early days of the forum to save confusion we started calling Mr Dobie Rob and myself Bob though I think in real life we are both Bobs, correct me if I'm wrong Rob.
What about wearing a Fez and calling yourself Abbu, Rob. You get a free whole country doing that!
-
Are you sure you have not sold your name and be re registered Bob? That's the case against in a Bond nutshell.
Anyone want V44 RAD? Great for a vodka drinker.
-
What about wearing a Fez and calling yourself Abbu, Rob. You get a free whole country doing that!
Abu Dhabi would be a good country to get free. Rob, Abbu, Abbu, Rob. "Just like that" Spoken in a Tommy Cooper type voice. But would Marcus like me wearing one of his bands titfers?
-
I find its nice to keep original reg if possible, easier to trace down history, and its part of the car!
When registering in France, if I'm right, you HAVE to change reg when you get a car, so no way to keep you're original number :( We will have to change our '55 schmitt we found in a barn, when the plate has been there for over 50 years...
-
i do get the point jonathan but you should not ever lose the identity . if the english number is sold the car may always be known as " previously registered as UKR 696 " for tracing purposes
-
Abu Dhabi would be a good country to get free. Rob, Abbu, Abbu, Rob. "Just like that" Spoken in a Tommy Cooper type voice. But would Marcus like me wearing one of his bands titfers?
Then change your house name to A. Dobie Hut. Lampsign Place, Randomroadfuniture, Polgate, East Suffix.
I was going to suggest a hook but the Fez sounded less rude than comparisons with Abbu 'Look No' Hansa, part of the Carl Borgward group of terrorists.
-
COM 1C might make £2000?
Isn't that owned by Jimmy Tarbuck?
-
Folk with 'personalised' number plates on the wrong car should pay extra tax a year as clearly they have to much money.
-
COM 1C might make £2000?
Isn't that owned by Jimmy Tarbuck?
I think you are right Al. When I was in Rayleigh there was a garage on the industrial estate that serviced exotic cars. COM 1C was on a red Ferrari. That's why I remember it. There were some very expensive plates going up and down the road in those days.
-
From www.mycarcheck.com We have information on our database regarding COM 1C, a Mercedes C200 Komp.elegance Auto (Estate).
-
thanks rob nice and simple checked a few out and my matchless 350 sold 15 years ago not on now - wonder why .
-
I see DVLA Auctions have a plate for Bob to grab at their latest auction. Lot 164 ---- BOB 1P. Reserve £700
-
Even I would pay £700 for that! No interest in personalized numbers really.
-
Interesting as I saw COM IC on a Roller yonks ago when I was on my way to School, be mid '70's. Tarby in Swindon. Not sure where he lives but I expect near a Golf course.
BOB IP sounds like a pit of a cheapskates number, somehow. BOB 1N would be the one but no doubt rather expensive.
-
al thats just silly - if bob bought BOB 1N he would have to change his name to bob nurton - very silly :)
-
Or perhaps Bob Notrup?
I saw a van on the A2 a few weeks ago with L 1 SFU arranged L1S FU, suggesting either a bust-up or perhaps strong anti-royalty feelings!
-
BOB 1P looks ideal for Bob - go for it.
The most economical option is to find a cheap cherished number then change your name by Deed Poll to suit.................
http://www.thelegaldeedpollservice.org.uk/?gclid=CNf-7t7VkbMCFePHtAod1EMA5Q
As advertised by the lovely Eammon Holmes (he needs the cash).
-
Just proves I am no use at this number plate thing being dyslexic. The relevance of the P completely escaped me. Most of the 'words' I cannot see as they are like text speak and not a picsal I recognise. L 1 SFU would go right passed me unless explained.
Got TBM 911 so I only need to change my name and buy a Porsche 911 to have a simply enormous willy, then.
Quite frankly I prefer 804 LOX on a square letter plate, which might find its way onto Buster if he gets built.
-
I have just cycled down hill to my local motorcycle shop that does MOTs. It was hell coming back though, (bad knees). As I have bought a few bikes from them and had mopeds MOTed there from around 2006-9 I thought that they would know all the answers. But no, they say they have had no information about pre-1960 vehicles exempted from MOTs after 18th Nov.
Strange, but maybe the authorities have told them to keep quiet.
-
Would the mot centers be the ones to know though? If anyone I would have thought the local DVLA offices would know something as they issue tax discs. I wonder if we are going to experience another government fiasco? Hope your knees feel better Rob!
-
I have just cycled down hill to my local motorcycle shop that does MOTs. It was hell coming back though, (bad knees). As I have bought a few bikes from them and had mopeds MOTed there from around 2006-9 I thought that they would know all the answers. But no, they say they have had no information about pre-1960 vehicles exempted from MOTs after 18th Nov.
Strange, but maybe the authorities have told them to keep quiet.
Ever thought of getting an IC?
-
I now have new registration numbers for my Morris and Velocette.
Wonder if the old ones, now on retainers, will ever sell. At least I now have a definite chance - roll-on the 18th November.
-
Here is part of a letter from DVLA concerning the pre 1960 exemption for MOTs. that I have seen.
From 18 November 2012, vehicles manufactured before 1 January 1960 will become exempt from the requirements to have a mandatory MoT test. I can confirm that these vehicles will still be required to be in a roadworthy condition when used on a public road. Keepers of pre-1960 vehicles will still be able to take a voluntary MoT test at all approved testing stations if they wish to do so.
This means that on or after 18 November 2012, keepers of vehicles who need to tax their pre-1960 vehicle(s) will not need to produce a valid MOT pass certificate when applying for a tax disc. Any application to tax via the Post Office or Local Office will require a completed V112 (Declaration of exemption from MoT testing) where the customer declares that their vehicle is exempt. In addition, the DVLA electronic vehicle licensing system will enable customers with pre-1960 vehicles to tax without a MoT from 18 November 2012.
This exemption will also apply to vehicles where a date of manufacture is not on the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) system, but the date of registration is recorded as being on or before 7 January 1960. We also apply this policy to the qualification criteria for the pre-1973 Vehicle Excise Duty exemption.
I can confirm that the Agency will continue to allow pre-1960 vehicles to either transfer or retain their registration mark using the current cherished transfer scheme provided a voluntary MoT has been passed. This is to ensure that vehicles are still in existence and prevent potential fraudulent claims for attractive marks.
-
Well that's all I needed from them - but they could not give me. Something in black and white (or is it still a bit grey)
Shame about the Morris number change but the Velocette will be scrapped anyway.
-
interesting rob where was the complete article - where did you see it
-
Still doesnt cover my question of what happens with a vehicle registered in 1960 but manufactured in 1959.
-
Here is the complete letter and does answere my issue as well, I need to supply copy of the factory records re chassis numbers or a Glasses guide reference to prove the car was built in 59.
This letter was recieved by the Landrover owners club, did Rumcars also receive such a letter? If not why not!
I am writing to notify you of a change in legislation that may impact a number of your members.
From 18 November 2012, vehicles manufactured before 1 January 1960 will become exempt from the requirements to have a mandatory MoT test. I can confirm that these vehicles will still be required to be in a roadworthy condition when used on a public road.
Keepers of pre-1960 vehicles will still be able to take a voluntary MoT test at all approved testing stations if they wish to do so. This means that on or after 18 November 2012, keepers of vehicles who need to tax their pre-1960 vehicle(s) will not need to produce a valid MOT pass certificate when applying for a tax disc.
Any application to tax via the Post Office or Local Office will require a completed V112 (Declaration of exemption from MoT testing) where the customer declares that their vehicle is exempt. In addition, the DVLA electronic vehicle licensing system will enable customers with pre-1960 vehicles to tax without a MoT from 18 November 2012.
This exemption will also apply to vehicles where a date of manufacture is not on the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) system, but the date of registration is recorded as being on or before 7 January 1960. We also apply this policy to the qualification criteria for the pre-1973 Vehicle Excise Duty exemption.
I can confirm that the Agency will continue to allow pre-1960 vehicles to either transfer or retain their registration mark using the current cherished transfer scheme provided a voluntary MoT has been passed. This is to ensure that vehicles are still in existence and prevent potential fraudulent claims for attractive marks.
Where keepers believe their current vehicle should be exempt due to the law change but their Vehicle Registration Certificate (V5C) does not reflect this they will need to write to the DVLA to request a change. The address to write to is DVLA, Swansea, SA99 1BA.
In order to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the vehicle records held at the DVLA, it is important that evidence provided to amend or add information already held on our system is accurate and truly reflects the vehicle for which it is issued. Therefore it has been decided that for these specific cases, requests will only be considered where it has been accompanied with either an extract from the manufacturer/factory record or an extract from the appropriate ‘Glass’s Check Book’. Both these documents will have a direct link to the chassis number that should already have been accepted and recorded on the vehicle record as part of the initial registration process. I can confirm that for these specific cases, DVLA will not accept general dating certificates as evidence to amend or update the date of manufacture. Such certificates will however, continue to be accepted for other purposes such as V765 claims and requests for age related numbers for recently restored or recently imported vehicles.
I trust this explains the situation.
Yours sincerely
-
In the light of the previously posted letter I am keen to find out for sure if
my April 1960 Isetta was manufactured in late 59 or early 1960 , it appears that
the DVLA will only accept factory chassis records or an old glasses guide to
establish this. I think I'm right in saying that the factory records do not exist.
Does anyone have a appropriate glasses guide which establishes what the last
chassis number to roll off the line was in 59 ? My cars chassis number is
321692. Any help much appreciated.
-
So all limited production vehicles, kit cars and specials are now out on a limb if they are not registered. As such they will presumably have to pass through a modern inspection process before being issued with a registration. In many cases that will prove impossible. Could be a lot of projects coming up on eBay! Much as expected with number sales needing a valid MOT. Mostly good news save I have yet to believe that insurers are going to accept the liability as unchanged. They have been put into a position of not knowing what the new rules were to be as well off course. So will there be a tightening up of classic car policy declarations etc.
-
My bruetsch built in 1954 has paperwork first registered 1961 but a recognised authority can inspect it if I want , and provide what's needed. Or I might just be old fashioned and get an mot man to test it
-
Well you say that Richard but the letter said dating letters from club etc will not be acceptable so your recognized authority may have no clout. If it the recognized authority I think you mean he has been on the phone to me this morning explaining that Glass's check book only gives chassis numbers from model change to model change so it looks like I'm stuck with MOT's although I'm pretty sire its a late 59 car.
-
what a mess i have
1954 brutsch first registered 1961
1949 bond logbook says 2007
1965 bond registered 2004
the others appear correct, in all instances i have full supporting evidence but we will see if it counts
-
oh verily you are pretty sire - who sayeth you not ? ( ref: your last line bob )
-
Thats what my wife tells me! Well she did in 1975 anyway!
-
Has anyone on here taxed their pre 1960 car yet with no mot .I have a 1959 Manhurin scooter that i got ready for mot in the spring and then broke down on way to mot station,by the time i fixed it i had heard of the exemption so left it in garage till now.I printed off v112 form for exemption that the information mentions but unless i have missed the point i can see nothing on it about the vehicle being pre 1960 .Iam sure someone on here can enlighten me.
-
i hope i can .perhaps you have an old v112 form . they must have reprinted them with the extra category on the reverse see pics att.
-
Thank you for your reply ,i had printed my form from government website early this week.Perhaps before they had changed form i will try again,thanks again.
-
Typical because I picked mine up in my local dvla 3 weeks ago
-
I now have a tax disc for my scooter ,just need some dry weekend weather to give it a run to see if it will behave now, might be a long wait !!!!!!!!!
-
great news you might be our first ! no mot no charge for tax - wait for the catch ;)
where did you get the updated v112 from eventually
-
i printed it off directgov something or other i just googled v112 again last night and the form like your example came up so i printed it quick .The lady in post office just looked at it and gave it back to me so not sure why we need it the reg document said 4th april 1959 you would think that was good enough .Better press on with my frisky now thats 1959 too.
-
I now have a tax disc for my scooter ,just need some dry weekend weather to give it a run to see if it will behave now, might be a long wait !!!!!!!!!
Especially as it has bald tyres and no brakes!
-
would be funny if true ,it actually has three new tyres and new brakes ,engine rebuilt by villers services ,new paint ,new windscreen ,it is the seat thats missing and my bar stool is too tall !!!!!!
-
Would be good to see a photo. Perhaps there is a temporary seat from something more common?
-
John Meadows has kindly sent me pictures and plans/dimensions so now to source some suitable tubing and see what i can make.Thanks again John if you read this.
-
Is it like this? or are we at cross purposes? (trouble with my jpeg and jpg)
-
Yes it is like that but red and does not have grille slats by centre of rear wheel .They were originally Dkw Hobby but then made under licence by Manhurin who were actually a gun manufacturer.Mine was sold new in Hastings ,East Sussex April 1959, they have pull cord start like lawnmower and are belt drive variomatic like a Daf car it works really well there is a safe position for starting on ignition and a contact breaker on front belt pulley that cuts ign as pulley starts to grip belt so it won,t accidentally pull away.I tried to put pictures on off topic section a little while ago but could not get them to stick.
-
Dear John
I always use a screen wipe to take greasy finger prints off my screen before I try sticking pictures on my computer.
Chris Thomas
-
I am so retro I use sticky back plastic
-
Had a few Manhurins. The DKW Hobby carried more pretty bits and thus I preferred it given a choice. Found a load of new bits at Mannheim one year. Cheap as chips as at that point no one was interested. Included a box of packaged sets of porthole trim, badges and such. There would be a punch up for that now. Pretty early for the expanding belt drive used. I was told it was the first machine marketed with it but that is a dangerous statement. It might be the first successful machine marketed with it. Certainly it opens the way for the twist and go revolution in scooters so is a little bit of history. I never liked the popular odd red colour, the green is much more subtle.
-
I bought a DKW Hobby horse from Steve Vine a few years back, It did have lots of nice aluminium trim items on it. I dont suppose it was the first bike to have a belt cone transmission though. It goes back a long way even on cars, didnt the first Bleriot Whippets have this? I owned a Triumph tina scooter with it but the system was not well executed, much vibration through the handlebars. I thought the Manurhin was more famous for being the first bike to be powder coated?
-
Was that Curry powder or Custard powder
-
I was fiddled on the purchase of one of my Manhurin so I called Yahoudi, which of course meant the other had to be Stefan, a freer spirit in motion to its more classically built partner.