IVA/registration
Discussion
Hi
I purchased a Mini earlier this year that was renovated for a TV programme. All went well until I sent off for the V5 document. The vehicle at some point in it's history has been reshelled into a later shell and is running a different A series standard engine.
The DVLA are now telling me that the vehicle must be re registered as a Q plate and undergo an IVA test. Obviously this will cost hundreds and will loose it's historic status.
Does anyone know of a less painful solutio?
Thanks guys.
Mark
I purchased a Mini earlier this year that was renovated for a TV programme. All went well until I sent off for the V5 document. The vehicle at some point in it's history has been reshelled into a later shell and is running a different A series standard engine.
The DVLA are now telling me that the vehicle must be re registered as a Q plate and undergo an IVA test. Obviously this will cost hundreds and will loose it's historic status.
Does anyone know of a less painful solutio?
Thanks guys.
Mark
Hmmm. Minefield I suspect.
Registration is different to IVA; a vehicle must be approved (in some form) before it can be registered.
Reshelling an old vehicle should be fine providing it's not "radically altered":
https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/radically-...
It all seems to hinge on whether the new shell is new from the manufacturer; if not, it looks pretty clear that they will make you IVA it.
Registration is different to IVA; a vehicle must be approved (in some form) before it can be registered.
Reshelling an old vehicle should be fine providing it's not "radically altered":
https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/radically-...
It all seems to hinge on whether the new shell is new from the manufacturer; if not, it looks pretty clear that they will make you IVA it.
I think a heritage shell doesn't have a chassis number. If the current shell does, or has a plate over it and with the none original engine, as far as DVLA are concerned it's a home build from parts of unknown age. If it doesn't have the original engine and shell, the provenance you are trying to hold onto isn't particularly convincing...
This is kicking off a bit one one of the Facebook groups, as a lot of hot rods, have very dubious papers. New chassis / engines / suspension and the V5 Often not even matching the body type. It is also pretty common across land rovers and minis.
With no tax / mot on historic vehicles you can see the attraction, but also the potential to be abused for anything from free tax to losing the requirements for any vehicle checks whatsoever.
This is kicking off a bit one one of the Facebook groups, as a lot of hot rods, have very dubious papers. New chassis / engines / suspension and the V5 Often not even matching the body type. It is also pretty common across land rovers and minis.
With no tax / mot on historic vehicles you can see the attraction, but also the potential to be abused for anything from free tax to losing the requirements for any vehicle checks whatsoever.
rmarks09 said:
Hi
I assume an old shell. I have a book of info but no receipt for a new shell unfortunately.
Hmmm. Is it worth speaking to the people who make new shells and seeing if there are any numbers or anything you can use to "prove" it's a new one?I assume an old shell. I have a book of info but no receipt for a new shell unfortunately.
Re-shells must have gone on a lot, but normally the DVLA doesn't know about it. Presumably this one has caught their eye, perhaps because it was on telly.
It’s worth saying don’t rely on anything the DVLA tell you as fact, they are full of s
t. If it’s they who have told you it’s a replacement shell then don’t take their word for it, disprove them if you think they’re wrong.
They have self proclaimed experts on vehicles types who often don’t have a clue. I imported a South African Defender for a mate who is a PHer, they tried to put it on a Q plate telling us that the 2.8i model didn’t exist even though it even has its own listed identifier code in the Land Rover VIN database
Then they tried to say it was a fake VIN plate because it was dot marked and not stamped, wouldn’t accept it even when we sent over photographs of two other SA imported vin plates (one of which was my 50th, brought over and UK registered 20 years prior) which were dot marked to show that the SA plant used DOT marking
Then to top it all they actually LIED, telling us it was on a list of stolen vehicles in SA, even though we had the local authority document specifically clearing it for export by the police, which we then had to go through the rig-moral of getting confirmed by the SA police.
Basically the self proclaimed Land Rover expert didn’t like being proven wrong and was just being vindictive, trying to use every excuse he could to block it. It was only when my mate escalated it to an evidenced legal threat that they backed down.
t. If it’s they who have told you it’s a replacement shell then don’t take their word for it, disprove them if you think they’re wrong.They have self proclaimed experts on vehicles types who often don’t have a clue. I imported a South African Defender for a mate who is a PHer, they tried to put it on a Q plate telling us that the 2.8i model didn’t exist even though it even has its own listed identifier code in the Land Rover VIN database
Then they tried to say it was a fake VIN plate because it was dot marked and not stamped, wouldn’t accept it even when we sent over photographs of two other SA imported vin plates (one of which was my 50th, brought over and UK registered 20 years prior) which were dot marked to show that the SA plant used DOT marking
Then to top it all they actually LIED, telling us it was on a list of stolen vehicles in SA, even though we had the local authority document specifically clearing it for export by the police, which we then had to go through the rig-moral of getting confirmed by the SA police.
Basically the self proclaimed Land Rover expert didn’t like being proven wrong and was just being vindictive, trying to use every excuse he could to block it. It was only when my mate escalated it to an evidenced legal threat that they backed down.
Edited by The Wookie on Wednesday 12th August 16:01
rmarks09 said:
Car was purchased by the TV company in 2017. They purchased the vehicle from the previous owner who made the disclosure so anytime before that really.
That's about as much I can establish.
Ahhh I think I know which TV show it might have been.That's about as much I can establish.
In which case as has already been mentioned, get on the case to some experts on the marque to see if there’s any way establish categorically whether it was a factory supplied replacement shell, as presumably the issue the DVLA have is that it looks to be one from a newer model than the plate proclaims it to be.
The DVLA are clearly well aware of that particular car so they will know what they are arguing against, but as I’ve said they can be difficult for the sake of it and will try and front it. If you’re confident in your evidence and the experts you’ve used then don’t be fobbed off and don’t back down.
If you can’t prove it then unfortunately you might have to swallow the Q plate, as it may have been rebuilt into a shell from a newer vehicle. Ultimately that is one of the main reasons the Q registration exists.
Think this has been in the classic car press regarding 1920's Bugattis 'rebuilt' now being denied age related plate. see this thread which may help
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=15...
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=15...
The Wookie said:
If you can’t prove it then unfortunately you might have to swallow the Q plate, as it may have been rebuilt into a shell from a newer vehicle. Ultimately that is one of the main reasons the Q registration exists.
I don't think it's so much it being newer, it's because anything other than a new shell direct from the manufacturer is of unknown provenance, may have been modified etc. It kinda makes sense, if there's any doubt that it's all correct and hence safe, it should be inspected. The only things where there is no doubt, are if it's come from an approved source.They're much more strict about monocoques because obviously the safety relies on the whole structure being correct, and that's harder for an amateur to judge than a ladder frame or whatever.
rmarks09 said:
Hi
I purchased a Mini earlier this year that was renovated for a TV programme. All went well until I sent off for the V5 document. The vehicle at some point in it's history has been reshelled into a later shell and is running a different A series standard engine.
Not the Drew Pritchard show Mini is it, as I recall that was a G-reg Mk2 with a later Mk.3 shell?I purchased a Mini earlier this year that was renovated for a TV programme. All went well until I sent off for the V5 document. The vehicle at some point in it's history has been reshelled into a later shell and is running a different A series standard engine.
Anyway, I know someone that still has a rally prepared Mini, that is on at least it's 4th shell after he stuffed it into a tree once, and rolled it twice......all reshelled with repaired used shells. It's also running an A+ plus engine that came out of a Metro Turbo IIRC.
Granted it's not been on the road for a couple of years now, through laziness on his part, but he's owned the thing since the mid 80's. Its on a Nreg IIRC (maybe a M) and originally had been a 1275GT when new, and the last two re-shells were with a non-clubman shell as they were getting hard to find by then.
What happened in the end with this?
Lots of Escort owners now getting letters off the DVLA saying their cars need inspection due to the modifications.
People are guessing the DVLA are looking at social media and looking at peoples car build threads etc then taking action.
Lots of Escort owners now getting letters off the DVLA saying their cars need inspection due to the modifications.
People are guessing the DVLA are looking at social media and looking at peoples car build threads etc then taking action.
aeropilot said:
Not the Drew Pritchard show Mini is it, as I recall that was a G-reg Mk2 with a later Mk.3 shell?
Anyway, I know someone that still has a rally prepared Mini, that is on at least it's 4th shell after he stuffed it into a tree once, and rolled it twice......all reshelled with repaired used shells. It's also running an A+ plus engine that came out of a Metro Turbo IIRC.
Granted it's not been on the road for a couple of years now, through laziness on his part, but he's owned the thing since the mid 80's. Its on a Nreg IIRC (maybe a M) and originally had been a 1275GT when new, and the last two re-shells were with a non-clubman shell as they were getting hard to find by then.
Did he tell the DVLA about the shells though,I doubt it,so he will get away with it until the DVLA become aware. Anyway, I know someone that still has a rally prepared Mini, that is on at least it's 4th shell after he stuffed it into a tree once, and rolled it twice......all reshelled with repaired used shells. It's also running an A+ plus engine that came out of a Metro Turbo IIRC.
Granted it's not been on the road for a couple of years now, through laziness on his part, but he's owned the thing since the mid 80's. Its on a Nreg IIRC (maybe a M) and originally had been a 1275GT when new, and the last two re-shells were with a non-clubman shell as they were getting hard to find by then.
Coskev said:
Lots of Escort owners now getting letters off the DVLA saying their cars need inspection due to the modifications.
People are guessing the DVLA are looking at social media and looking at peoples car build threads etc then taking action.
Almost certainly that is what is happening.People are guessing the DVLA are looking at social media and looking at peoples car build threads etc then taking action.
I know people that stopped social media posting, especially build stuff, before Covid happened because of this possibility.
aeropilot said:
Not the Drew Pritchard show Mini is it, as I recall that was a G-reg Mk2 with a later Mk.3 shell?
Anyway, I know someone that still has a rally prepared Mini, that is on at least it's 4th shell after he stuffed it into a tree once, and rolled it twice......all reshelled with repaired used shells. It's also running an A+ plus engine that came out of a Metro Turbo IIRC.
Granted it's not been on the road for a couple of years now, through laziness on his part, but he's owned the thing since the mid 80's. Its on a Nreg IIRC (maybe a M) and originally had been a 1275GT when new, and the last two re-shells were with a non-clubman shell as they were getting hard to find by then.
I suspect if DVLA went round any rally paddock and investigated all the cars there would be very few that had the original engine and shell and I don't imagine all the owners keep the V5 up to date and follow the rules, if you're replacing engine and shell frequently you'd never keep up!Anyway, I know someone that still has a rally prepared Mini, that is on at least it's 4th shell after he stuffed it into a tree once, and rolled it twice......all reshelled with repaired used shells. It's also running an A+ plus engine that came out of a Metro Turbo IIRC.
Granted it's not been on the road for a couple of years now, through laziness on his part, but he's owned the thing since the mid 80's. Its on a Nreg IIRC (maybe a M) and originally had been a 1275GT when new, and the last two re-shells were with a non-clubman shell as they were getting hard to find by then.
Coskev said:
What happened in the end with this?
Lots of Escort owners now getting letters off the DVLA saying their cars need inspection due to the modifications.
People are guessing the DVLA are looking at social media and looking at peoples car build threads etc then taking action.
Good. There are lots of dodgy as fLots of Escort owners now getting letters off the DVLA saying their cars need inspection due to the modifications.
People are guessing the DVLA are looking at social media and looking at peoples car build threads etc then taking action.
k "builds" that are illegal as hell and should (as the rules currently stand) be on a Q. I've stopped following a couple (not Escorts but same principle) because while I love the idea and build, it's blatantly illegal. That said, I don't think Q should be the immediate default purely because the chassis has been *modified* or parts replaced, it is IMO part of the problem, *because* people want to avoid the Q plate they don't go the legal route. There should the ability to keep an appropriately age related plate but changed to reflect the modifications. There the DVLA are a law unto themselves as well, the rules are inconsistently applied and maliciously in places.
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff