The definitive Bobtail SVA thread

[treebloke]

i was told if i remove the chassis number ........ i could be prosecuted for tampering with the original.

What happens if you have the chassis galvanised, do you put the number back on in the same place yourself or do DVLA have to do it.

Do you need to bother at all ?.

[Guest WALFY]

When my 90 was re-chassied before I got it, it had a brand new genuine TD5 chassis fitted. That came with NO chassis number. Still doesn't have 1 either. On a Defender the chassis number is on the outside of the O/S chassis leg. So if it rusts out and gets replaced No chassis number.

Cover the chassis with waxoil. Does the inspector scrape the wax away to look at the number? Think not.

It's all academic now as Bish has started on the strip down but there must be food for thought for others going down this route.

[Guest diesel_jim]

When i had my 90 SVA'd, i was originally using the VIN from a 110 i had broken up ahem, converted into a 90....

i duly stamped the old 110 VIN into my 90 chassis leg, and the SVA gears turned, and on one occasion when the 90 was inspected, and i was informed that the old 110 VIN could no longer be used, but as i'd already stamped the chassis things couldn't be "undone", the inspector said to me...

"Next time, you'll not nother to inform us will you, oh, and did you know that you can buy these chassis legs 'new' with no number on?"

so between the lines he was telling me how to cheat the system.

as it was my chassis was galv'd so i didn;t bother, and back then i suppose the rules were much more slack than today, as it passed no problems.

[steve_a]

Bish,

a real bummer mate. I've pointed a mate at this thread since he is starting the uphill part of bobtailed (both ends) range rover with cage he is building, he is fingers crossed about it, but I'm hoping that if he takes some action now he might scrape it through by maybe doing a bit of a strip down.

He is/was getting the issue that until the motor is finished noone wants to make a statement, and after it is complete it's all too late. I can appreciate that they are trying to avoid wrecks on the road, but like a lot of these things it will probably only be the legit people who care anyway..

More trailer queens from now on?

[Hybrid_From_Hell]

More trailer queens from now on?

Hmmmm

Maybe

But highly likely more trayback, / bobtailed / chassis altered / "Specials" / some Tax exempt ...........all Illegal .............where the owners don't worry and shove their heads in the sand going la la la will be about, they will belive its nonsense and they are not going to get caught / have any problems / ignore the writing on the wall

A few (as per Bish) will go the legal route, some will find the way the law works, and work with it, to it, around it, but (a la Filthyboy) only a very few will get it right and get a SVA'd legal 4x4, unfortunately for Bish he's come up to a wall, and decided to stay legal and go another route.

Those who have the trayback, bobtailed chassis altered "Specials" some Tax exempt .....all Illegal with no SVA 4x4s ...will continue to ignore the law / the consequences at their risk, ......soon someone will be made a scapegoat just a matter of time and who.

One of the reasons the Hybrid I used to have got cut up

Respect to Bish...sense above blind ignorance and lala headphones...few have his insight and can see the risks they run

Nige

[Steve Hiatt]

I'm not convinced the problem is as bad as we perceive on this forum, having spoken to two MOT inspectors and a traffic policeman who had no idea what a bobtail was. No one I spoke to was aware of any clampdown or impending widespread snatch and crush.

For most people I would imagine that insurance is the biggest issue. My understanding is that if you have paid your insurance, they must pay out on a third party claim, regardless. You can be speeding, high and drunk and they will still pay. They have the right to try and reclaim this money from you, but it is extremely rare.

So i would contend that if you have advised of all modifications it's not worth losing much sleep about. After all, how many drivers manage even one day without breaking at least one motoring law, and to my mind I'm not convinced any law is being broken.

Look at the kit car forums; they have SVA engines, bodywork and lights, passed from one car to another, the cars are changed after test, withot widespread litigation or insurance issues.

[pat_pending]

I'm not convinced the problem is as bad as we perceive on this forum, having spoken to two MOT inspectors and a traffic policeman who had no idea what a bobtail was. No one I spoke to was aware of any clampdown or impending widespread snatch and crush.

For most people I would imagine that insurance is the biggest issue. My understanding is that if you have paid your insurance, they must pay out on a third party claim, regardless. You can be speeding, high and drunk and they will still pay. They have the right to try and reclaim this money from you, but it is extremely rare.

So i would contend that if you have advised of all modifications it's not worth losing much sleep about. After all, how many drivers manage even one day without breaking at least one motoring law, and to my mind I'm not convinced any law is being broken.

Look at the kit car forums; they have SVA engines, bodywork and lights, passed from one car to another, the cars are changed after test, withot widespread litigation or insurance issues.

It's been previously discussed, MOT and SVA are two completely separate issues.

If the law requires your modified truck to undergo an SVA and it hasn't, you're breaking the law.

At what rate they catch up with all the modified trucks remains to be seen, but they will. At that Point it's too late.

MOT examiners are obliged to report seriously modified vehicles,(even if they pass them) though in practice most are unaware or dont bother.

You wont know yours has been reported until you get a letter requesting a vehicle examination.

If you happen to have built a hybrid and been running it (illegally) as tax exempt, it's always possible they may try to do you for the back tax you should have paid if you'd registered it properly when you built it.

[sean f]

I have commented on this in the past but..

If you have a modified truck which should be SVA'd and is not, you may get away with it and never have any problems as has been pointed out most Policemen, MOT testers wouldn't notice or know how much modification was allowed etc, although don't forget some policemen drive land rovers as well so they will know and will notice.

The real problem will come if you are involved in an accident, particularly if people are injured or killed (the accident doesn't need to be your fault, it could be some one commiting suicide under the front of your truck). After this the investigation people will look at the vehicle in detail and decide if any of the modification MAY have contributed in any way, this is why you MUST notify your insurer about any modifications. If they decide the vehicle should have been SVA'd and isn't you can be prosecuted for having any unroadworthy / incorrectly regestered vehicle (due to a lack of paper work) the vehicle could be impounded and potentially crushed.

As for the insurance, it is your responsibility to ensure the vehicle is road worthy with the correct paper work, and maintained in a safe manner, there is a clause to this effect in the small print of all policies I have seen, there is also a clause which says you MUST reveal any other relevent information (wonderfull coverall), needing an SVA and not having one would be covered by this and ignorance is not a defence, it up to you to confirm if you do or not. If you haven't they can decline to pay out, as Steve has said they are obliged to pay out BUT most policies are only obliged to pay to Road Traffic Act level which only covers injuries to other parties (minimum legal cover) if they believe the policy was incorrectly or faudulently obtained, not revealing convictions etc IS fraud, or you were not driving in the correct manner covered by the policy i.e. business driving isn't always covered unless asked for particularly on "special/restricted" policies, driving whilst unfit (for what ever reason) to do so would also be covered by this get out. It may not cover damage to other vehicles which would leave you being chased in court personally for any other damage by the other parties insurance.

In my view driving a vehicle with out the correct paperwork is just not worth the risk involved.

[Bull Bar Cowboy]

Hmmmm

One of the reasons the Hybrid I used to have got cut up and the minor irritation that I multiple rolled it and every panel, cage, and chassis was well and truly mullered…………oh, and Jon White has never been the same since……. And no it wasn’t driver error, the ground just gave way, honest guv ………..

Nige

[Steve Hiatt]

If the law requires your modified truck to undergo an SVA and it hasn't, you're breaking the law.

Yes of course, but what is the legislation? I can't find it on the net, I suspect it may be enlightening.

As Bish said of SVA men at VOSA "They were a little curious as to why the DVLA wanted an SVA done" There is a lack of consistency between the DVLA and VOSA which suggests they are viewing the requirement of the law differently.

[pugwash]

As Bish said of SVA men at VOSA "They were a little curious as to why the DVLA wanted an SVA done" There is a lack of consistency between the DVLA and VOSA which suggests they are viewing the requirement of the law differently.

both VOSA and DVLA are laws unto themselves and do NOT communicate in any meaningful manner.

unfortunately it is ourselves who are affected by it!

[JST]

Hey Puggers, may be an idea to put your 'vapour' build on hold for a while until this ones sorted!!!

[Corrode Finger]

Cover the chassis with waxoil. Does the inspector scrape the wax away to look at the number? Think not.

DVLA man did scrape the new chassis paint off my Hybrid when he amended the V5 at the VIC.

[Les Brock]

I had to wire brush all the paint off to bare metal confirm my chassis number..so yes they do make you go through the hassle to prove it

[dollythelw]

This has in fact happened for quite some time as an SVA fix for rallycars(no joke). Until the Vosa watched a rallyvideo and didnt see any disabled drivers and they fixed that hole in the rules.

Daan

disability discrimination act 1995(?), as the government has confirmed that smoking in the workplace is now illegal and extended the definition of the workplace to cover vehicles ergo a rally car becomes a place of work. in order to comply fully with disabled access rights any vehicle classed as a work place could be modified for disability therefore rendering it an SVA loophole exploiting joy bus.

the laws an ass. just read the thread, sorry to hear Bish, you could fill it with lead plates, make an A frame and bolt it to the back and become SVA and MOT exempt - the setup is that daft. I can understand you having enough and going the way you've gone, but having said that "they" waved all this carp at the bike world in the 90's and lost. we spend a lot of time staring at our navels and beating our chests about how carp it all is, perhaps learning lessons from other walks of life and fighting back might stave off or slow down the total police state this country has descended towards. Still we're all safe from tuur-rer-ris now so thats ok

[pat_pending]

Yes of course, but what is the legislation? I can't find it on the net, I suspect it may be enlightening.

As Bish said of SVA men at VOSA "They were a little curious as to why the DVLA wanted an SVA done" There is a lack of consistency between the DVLA and VOSA which suggests they are viewing the requirement of the law differently.

I think you may need to plough through the construction and use regulations with all it's amendments.

Of course it is possible that DVLA/VOSA are applying the rules incorrectly. But if they are, you would have to be prepared to take them on in court to prove it.

In the mean time flouting the rules and just ignoring them (whether they're right or wrong) can do the modified vehicle movement no good at all.

[Milemarker Type S]

Sorry to hear the bad news Bish... Well done for taking the honest and upfront approach- yes I know that it did not work out for the best this time but you never know what could have happened if you had just kept motoring with your head in the sand...

The trouble with this situation- as is the case so often- is that the rules/ laws have been implemented, and subsequently tightened up, to try to control idiots... (Not you Bish) Yes there are lots of very well constructed modified vehicles which have been carefully and thoughtfully modified by skilled people, however there are an awful lot of unroadworthy and downright dangerous ones out there as well. The rules/laws are there to try to control the latter but unfortunately the former also get caught up in them... The most annoying thing is that the only people who are likely to bother to get the paperwork (SVA etc) done properly are the former... the latter again just carrying on without a care...

On the insurance side of things- not only might you find that your insurance will not payout in the event of an accident if your vehicle should have been SVA'd and hasn't, you may well commit traffic offences as well- No insurance etc. But even worse you may also commit other criminal offences...'Fraud by false representation' if you lie to them about anything, and 'Fraud by failure to disclose' if you neglect to tell them anything... They kind of have you by the b@lls either way

[Guest WALFY]

So where would you stand if you had a trayback/bobtailed/kingcabbed vehicle and provided photos of all the work done, declared all the work in writing. Surely you have given the insurance company all the info they need to make a quote. You haven't hidden anything or tried not to disclose any information

[steve_d]

You may well have given the insurer every conceivable detail but if the vehicle is, by some interpretation of the law, in fact not legal for use on the road then your insurance, bar the minimum third party injury, will be null and void.

Steve

[pat_pending]

So where would you stand if you had a trayback/bobtailed/kingcabbed vehicle and provided photos of all the work done, declared all the work in writing. Surely you have given the insurance company all the info they need to make a quote. You haven't hidden anything or tried not to disclose any information

OK, let's play Devils advocate.

I, as the insurance company would say...YOU should have been aware that your truck was required to have undergone an SVA test. Had it done so, and subsequently been issued with a Q plate, we MAY have assesed the insurance risk differently.

In this case we MAY declare your policy void due to the non disclosure of a material fact that could affect our risk.

[Guest WALFY]

OK, let's play Devils advocate.

I, as the insurance company would say...YOU should have been aware that your truck was required to have undergone an SVA test. Had it done so, and subsequently been issued with a Q plate, we MAY have assesed the insurance risk differently.

In this case we MAY declare your policy void due to the non disclosure of a material fact that could affect our risk.

To reply in a similar advocate styleee.

If they come that tact then they must be aware as to wether an SVA or something similar is required, therefore they must shoulder some blame as well. They accepted the risk on the information that I gave them. And I've been honest with all the mods I've done. Bobbed/traybacked etc. Not as clear cut as it first seems

[pat_pending]

To reply in a similar advocate styleee.

If they come that tact then they must be aware as to wether an SVA or something similar is required, therefore they must shoulder some blame as well. They accepted the risk on the information that I gave them. And I've been honest with all the mods I've done. Bobbed/traybacked etc. Not as clear cut as it first seems

Ah yes, they may well be aware that SOME vehicles require an SVA, but the onus is on YOU to have checked.

They would make the assumption you had and it wasn't required.

They have huge legal dept's that will fire off arguments like these for months on end. However right you feel you might be, it's no consolation while your truck sits rusting in a compound.

Anyone who's had to wrangle with an insurance company knows what a bunch of a***holes they can be.

[Steve Hiatt]

I think you may need to plough through the construction and use regulations with all it's amendments.

Of course it is possible that DVLA/VOSA are applying the rules incorrectly. But if they are, you would have to be prepared to take them on in court to prove it.

In the mean time flouting the rules and just ignoring them (whether they're right or wrong) can do the modified vehicle movement no good at all.

I don't have a problem as my 4x4 went through the SVA as it is a collection of bits on a new frame, there was no dispute on that one!

However, I contend that the onus is on the DVLA to detail which aspect of what law they are applying when insisting an SVA is required for a bobtail. It's up to them to prove why we need one, not for us to prove that we don't. It seems perfectly reasonable to request that the DVLA tells you what part of which law they are trying to interpret and apply.

[Corrode Finger]

I don't have a problem as my 4x4 went through the SVA as it is a collection of bits on a new frame, there was no dispute on that one!

However, I contend that the onus is on the DVLA to detail which aspect of what law they are applying when insisting an SVA is required for a bobtail. It's up to them to prove why we need one, not for us to prove that we don't. It seems perfectly reasonable to request that the DVLA tells you what part of which law they are trying to interpret and apply.

This is the approach that i took with my Hybrid, i took it too the DVLA, presented it, and let the DVLA determine whether it was in need of SVA or not..... in my case, they decided that it was not in need of SVA, and amended the V5 to the correct designation, in there opinion.

However with reagrds to the insurance, my insurer has a engineers report and a full list of the mods as it was initially insured as a RRC Hybrid, mods being those to make it a Hybrid, once i got the new V5, i sent that to the insuance company for their records to prove that it was registered correctly in the opinion of the DVLA.

The fact that i have not been requested to SVA my truck by the DVLA, but it is registered correctly, does that mean that i am falling foul of the law, i dont know, but all i can say is, i did everything in my power to get the Authorities that govern the modified vehicles to decide what my Hybrid should be registered as, under their classification system.

All i know from my previous experience of SVA with a Lotus 7, was that the SVA was required by the DVLA to determine what a vehicle is when its registered, it is not kept by the owner/ modifier, therefore a correct V5 for the vehicle is the proof that you are legal..... how else do you prove it?

The other unfortunate problem for Bish, as has been highlighted, and as i encountered myself with the DVLA, is that they find it hard to classify a modified vehicle that retains one donor chassis, engine, box, axles etc, as this is how they classify the vehicle, in there eyes it is still the same truck, they only way i could 'prove' the point i was trying to make was with a photo of before and after.

I understand from my dealings that the 'problem' with a bobtail RRC is that it is still a RRC and still has the same classification categories before and after surgery, therefore it is still the same vehicle..... if it was pickup RRC, that might enable them to reclassify the vehicle, under its body style.

It is a case of not fitting the 'boxes' that they require the vehicle to comply with..... very unfortunate for Bish, and i have sympathy as he asked about my experience several months ago before this thread began. I appear to have been the exception when dealing with the DVLA etc for Hybrids.

[simonr]

In order for a vehicle to qualify as 'Amateur Built' are we better off keeping or removing the chassis number? If you've significantly modified a chassis - can it just be considered as a lump of metal that you've re-used?

If it has a chassis number - it's probably still a chassis. Without one, is it a lump of metal?

Si