Another ringer.

[smallfry]

Clearly a TD5. Tax exemption dodge, or a stolen ringer ? Rear lamps been altered to look like series vehicle.

I mean, who do you report this stuff to ? DVSA dont seem to make it easy. Dont seem to have  a facility on their website, and the Police dont seem interested.

I have NOT reported it to ebay because I dont want the advert pulled. I want the correct authority to see it AND do something about it. But it seems I will be wasting my time.

Which begs me to ask why am I bothered about my old series 3 that had a new coil sprung Designa chassis back in late Nineties, that lies abandoned because its "radically altered", and why bother to SVA a 100 inch, AND pay tax that I would like to build  from it ?

[garrycol]

You might put up a link or something so we know what you are talking about.

[smallfry]

Sorry. Thought I had !

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/154460773433?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649

[ThreePointFive]

The fuel tank looks Series, the cappings are correct (both real lights and the fuel filler) and the tub length is definitely too short for a 90.

The front end from the bulkhead forwards is of course Defender and it's running on coils but we've seen that conversion before. Can't see any engine photos though so no idea what's going on under the bonnet.

Not sure it's a ringer but I'm no Series expert.

[Ozzy50]

CD-ROM the description in the ad the seller either knows nothing about it or knows EVERYTHING about it !!

[oneandtwo]

It is actually on an 88” wheelbase, tub is a proper s3 one, just disguised with chequerplate rear corners.

Still wouldn’t want it!

[Eightpot]

I've seen so much of this stuff, and being in the trade and sick of the dodgy practices going on I made a formal enquiry with dvsa to ask what the process was to report, or what thier process was to prevent it, particularly when people put mot/tax exempt registration plates on a later car. Long story short, they have no process, it's down to the police to prosecute.  I sent the same enquiry to my police force,  they will prosecute if made aware but they would need to see it on the road, though if it was on the road & exempt there would be no need to examine documents.  And as they don't need to have an MoT examination that avenue is cut off as well.  None of the agencies that should be preventing this are doing anything about enforcement, at all. 

[FridgeFreezer]

15 hours ago, Eightpot said:

Long story short, they have no process, it's down to the police to prosecute.  I sent the same enquiry to my police force,  they will prosecute if made aware but they would need to see it on the road, though if it was on the road & exempt there would be no need to examine documents.  And as they don't need to have an MoT examination that avenue is cut off as well.  None of the agencies that should be preventing this are doing anything about enforcement, at all. 

This echoes my experience trying to get any sort of information about Tax/MOT exemption on my 109, the long story short was very similar in that it really seems like no-one gives a sh**... I guess as long as it's not stolen and it doesn't owe anyone any tax the police and VOSA have enough other stuff to worry about but it still feels wrong, especially as loopholes like that tend to get exploited until it gets so bad the authorities are forced to crack down.

[garrycol]

Not being from the UK I am not understanding what the issue is with this vehicle.  Please explain.

[Bowie69]

It is a coil sprung defender masquerading a tax exempt series 3.

There is literally NOTHING Series 3 about that truck, nothing, not a thing, therefore it is a essentially a 'ringer' to use the 1980s parlance. 

[missingsid]

As another not named LR indy dealer found out. If this was exported to the US it would be seized and scrapped on the dockside as soon as it landed on US soil.

[Mo Murphy]

2 hours ago, arturradukevic453 said:

 

I don't understand at all what the problem is with this car. maybe someone has figured it out here? explain

No need to shout, chap, we speak the same language.

Mo

[Bowie69]

Who's betting he's the seller? 

[Glue]

5 minutes ago, Bowie69 said:

Who's betting he's the seller? 

Not just me thinking that then!

[sean f]

4 hours ago, garrycol said:

Not being from the UK I am not understanding what the issue is with this vehicle.  Please explain.

Basically it is not what it is claiming to be, as described by others there nothing of the vehicle it claims to be in the vehicle as such it is a fake.

This has probable been done to make the vehicle appear older than it actually is, in the UK a vintage vehicle (which this claims to be) is not required to pay road tax or undertake an annual safety check (road worthiness test I think in Aus). More sinister it could be stolen or made from stolen parts although there is no indication this is actually the case for this vehicle.

If this is actually pulled up on the road by a Policeman with knowledge of LR vehicles (or involved in a serious accident and investigated) then it is likely to get seized as it is not what it claims, the insurance would be void for the same reason. The driver could get prosecuted for no insurance, no road tax, no MOT as any documents would refer to what it claims to be but not what it actually is.

It needs to be registered with the identity of the chassis if that's not modified and enough other parts can be proven to come from that identity, if that's not possible it can be registered under the IVA system (mainly used for kit cars) but this is not cheap or simple (it would probable fail the road worthiness test which is quite involved) and it would get assigned a Q reg plate (no clear age) and be required to get an annual test and pay road tax.

[garrycol]

Ok - thanks - here we would just use the chassis number (these are forensically checked for modification) - if correct for a series 3 (1981) then documentation would be needed for the modifications.  If the chassis number shows up as a later vehicle then all is done is an advertising issue.

Thanks

[missingsid]

5 minutes ago, garrycol said:

Ok - thanks - here we would just use the chassis number (these are forensically checked for modification) - if correct for a series 3 (1981) then documentation would be needed for the modifications.  If the chassis number shows up as a later vehicle then all is done is an advertising issue.

Thanks

I like the idea of registering chassis changes but keeping the original numbers.

Here there are loads of custom cars and motorcycles that are exceedingly well built but complete fabrications with an old identity.

Somehow it is only this community (LR4x4) that cares, probably as they are easy to build and to spot.

The reason for the laws is that there are multi-million pound historic cars that have been fabricated from old parts but have been claimed as original. It is also true that there are legitimate historic cars that have been rebuilt so many times that they are hard to prove. So a legal nightmare either way, the risks are losing or making big money!

[Bowie69]

34 minutes ago, missingsid said:

Somehow it is only this community (LR4x4) that cares, probably as they are easy to build and to spot.

Not the only one, the peeps over on the Morris Minor forums often choke on their brown beer while furiously pecking at their keyboards. 

But granted, there's little interest from any authority.

[jeremy996]

The various communities get more involved when the numbers are bigger! The Ferrari and Bugatti owners get very exercised with ringers and 'recreations', but enforcement is usually by High Court writ, not the Police or DVSA.

The law around competition cars depends on one major decided case about a Bentley, Old Number One, http://middlebridge-scimitar.co.uk/downloads/The Case of old Bentley Number 1.pdf

Then there's the case that damaged Stanley Mann as a Bentley specialist, http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2010/2444.html#back12

The DVLA have got involved in the titling of Bugatti copies by Pur Sang, but only at registration.

Looking at the Telegraph today, there is a long article about Lord Brocket and his Ferrari fraud, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cars/classic/classic-car-cold-case-rare-ferraris-involved-lord-brockets-insurance/

"It’s a fact that today there exist more Alfa Romeo Monza models, more Bugatti Grand Prix cars and more Jaguar D-Types than were ever made by their respective manufacturers. Indeed, 46 well-documented Ferrari Testarossas exist – yet the factory only made 33."

[Romahomepete]

As the Series 2 Club VRO all these who are trying to fiddle the system just make life difficult for genuine people.

One place where folk fall foul is in replacing dumb irons and not stamping the chassis number or VIN on the replacement.

DVLA use the number stamped on the chassis as the vehicle identifier and if their inspector doesnt find a number he will report back that he cannot identify the vehicle..  New replacement chassis should also have the number stamped to avoid any difficulties.

I am dealing with a case at the moment where due to no stamped in number DVLA want to go down the IVA and Q plate route or the built up Classic route, neither of which will work (I will not go into details here) and so there are big problems about.

Peter

[smallfry]

26 minutes ago, Romahomepete said:

As the Series 2 Club VRO all these who are trying to fiddle the system just make life difficult for genuine people.

One place where folk fall foul is in replacing dumb irons and not stamping the chassis number or VIN on the replacement.

DVLA use the number stamped on the chassis as the vehicle identifier and if their inspector doesnt find a number he will report back that he cannot identify the vehicle..  New replacement chassis should also have the number stamped to avoid any difficulties.

I am dealing with a case at the moment where due to no stamped in number DVLA want to go down the IVA and Q plate route or the built up Classic route, neither of which will work (I will not go into details here) and so there are big problems about.

Peter

This is precisely what annoys me about the DVLA/DVSA. They will make a big song and dance about this, but completely and wilfully ignore something like the vehicle I have highlighted which is clearly NOT what it purports to be.

I approached my local office and the Police about this, and to cut a long story short, they are not interested. Not unless there is some incident on the road.

Personally I couldnt care less about someone dodging a bit of tax, if that is genuinely all it has been done for, BUT if the vehicle was somebody's pride and joy that has been stolen, and had the identity swapped or broken into parts, I care about that very much. Even more so if they have spent many hours and much money on it. Them selectively ignoring it allows this to happen easily.

I even think that traders at such things as the LRO shows and Sortouts should give a proper receipt too. But thats never going to happen.

[ThreePointFive]

Are you connected to the sale of this truck?

[Bowie69]

Seems possible, garage is this one: 

https://www.mexus.co.uk/

Companies House data:

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09755759

Director:

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09755759/officers

From the name, I don't think arturradukevic453 is related, also a quick google reveals he is spread across many, many forums, and posting rubbish. It is most likely a spambot, or possibly a poor Chinese Uyghur chained to a desk