Chassis Plate and V5 on EBlag

[GBMUD]

You are having trouble distinguishing between actually stealing someone's car and merely having the ability to dispose of it afterwards.

No I am not.

Chris

[Guest otchie1]

The harm is when you hit someone and and they can't claim because your insurance is invalid.

Steve

That's an artificial harm created by the bureaucracy that tells you you can't re-use an old but sound chassis on the basis that a criminal 'might' do something similiar to hide a stolen car.

I once heard that someone used a van to transport the proceeds of a burglary, quick ban vans unless they are owned by properly regulated companies that can be charged an administartion fee for this valuable service.

On the freedom vs control seesaw of life you seem to be heavy on the 'tell other people what to do and send them to prison if they don't listen' side.

[steve_d]

......On the freedom vs control seesaw of life you seem to be heavy on the 'tell other people what to do and send them to prison if they don't listen' side.

Sorry, I did not make the rules that you seem to be advocating should be broken.

If we go back to your words

"..What if I want to scratch build on a new chassis and need an identity to hang on it without bothering with a Q plate? Sure it breaks the bureaucratic rules but so long as no-one loses, so long as it's done properly, where's the harm?......."

And in particular "if it's done properly"

That is what the SVA is for to check that you have done it properly. If you have, and you pass, you have the scratch built vehicle you wanted and it is legally registered.

Steve

[Steve Hiatt]

The harm is when you hit someone and and they can't claim because your insurance is invalid.

Steve

Nope, the RTA ensures your insurance has to pay a third party even if you have an Rolls insured as a Mini, you are drunk, have no licence, and have no MOT and no tax.

[Guest otchie1]

Sorry, I did not make the rules that you seem to be advocating should be broken.

If we go back to your words

"..What if I want to scratch build on a new chassis and need an identity to hang on it without bothering with a Q plate? Sure it breaks the bureaucratic rules but so long as no-one loses, so long as it's done properly, where's the harm?......."

And in particular "if it's done properly"

That is what the SVA is for to check that you have done it properly. If you have, and you pass, you have the scratch built vehicle you wanted and it is legally registered.

Steve

Land rover have already obtained type approval for all the components including the chassis so what is the point of measuring, for instance, headlamp height all over again?

If I build a chassis up from sheet then yes, it should be SVA'd but if I bolt a vehicle together with approved parts then WHY?

[Ryan]

Nope, the RTA ensures your insurance has to pay a third party even if you have an Rolls insured as a Mini, you are drunk, have no licence, and have no MOT and no tax.

From what I can gather, the insurance company will still have to cover you until such time as the "set aside" the policy, but will then only affect things that happen in the future. So if you make a false declaration e.g. Rolls Royce v Mini, or "of course I've got a licence" (at TV licence ), the policy is still valid until such times as the insurance company find out and void your cover. This is most likely to happen when involved in an accident and a claim is made - they will have to honour that claim, but when they set aside your cover, they can walk away from any future claims.

[Ryan]

Land rover have already obtained type approval for all the components including the chassis so what is the point of measuring, for instance, headlamp height all over again?

If I build a chassis up from sheet then yes, it should be SVA'd but if I bolt a vehicle together with approved parts then WHY?

I think the key bits are in bold. The Type Approval applies to the vehicle as it rolled out of the factory, as made by Land Rover. It does not cover someone gathering a pile of parts together and making one good vehicle out of it from the bottom up. This is because you have manufactured it and are therefore subject to the SVA procedures. However, as many many people have pointed out on this forum previously, SVA does not always apply and it is down to the DVLA and/or VOSA to make that decision.

[steve_d]

Land rover have already obtained type approval for all the components including the chassis so what is the point of measuring, for instance, headlamp height all over again?

If I build a chassis up from sheet then yes, it should be SVA'd but if I bolt a vehicle together with approved parts then WHY?

You may well have used approved parts but until it is inspected only you know if that is true.

If you built a hybrid have you used parts suitable for the purpose. Are the brackets you welded to the Mog portal axles made of sufficiently thick material.

It goes on.

Steve

[landkeeper]

well here is one that has got caught in whatever net was being trawled

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/LAND-ROVER-GREEN_W0Q...A1%7C240%3A1318

[Jos]

I have reported such things to ebay before, along with landrovers that are blatantly not what they are purported to be etc etc... I always get an automated email back from them but have yet to see any of the items removed...

Generally my experience too - they're far more interested in their slice than anything else.

Not unusual to see illegal stuff on ebay... if it's not stolen it's fake! (If you know about outdiir kit and want a good laugh check out the huge selection of bargain North Face stuff...)

[western]

well here is one that has got caught in whatever net was being trawled

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/LAND-ROVER-GREEN_W0Q...A1%7C240%3A1318

that one would be better broken up & sold as parts, how is the prospective 'new' owner supposed to get reciepts for all the parts used in the rebuild if the original builder hasn't got any reciepts.

[plasticbadger]

Generally I find the 'SVA' and illegal rebuild attitudes on this forum a little too over bearing. I haven't raised my concerns berfore, but here goes...

We as a land rover community should be careful of the interest we bring on ourselves (there's another thread about home working on vehicles in a similar vein at the moment) and this works both ways. I'm never going to support someone who rings, fakes tax exempt, or builds some hybrid monstrousity, but where does rebuild and type approval end. Many of the modifications we carry out change type approved items and many of the rebuilds go beyond the DVLA 'points' system. Just some things that may cross the line:

# Does welding your body mounts cause a safety issue?

# Replacing 90 axles with discovery for the rear discs? No longer type approved, for a 90

# How many series LRs have had engine, gearbox, axles, replaced over the years?

# How many people on here have fitted a winch bumper since the new frontal protection system laws were put in place?

# How many bobtails have been VOSA inspected?

The Land Rover world is not alone in sailing close to the legal wind. The MG, Mini and Classic Ford worlds have been re-shelling and rebuilding with new for years too. You can even build a 'new' MG from re-production parts and many people do while keeping their tax exempt ID. And even modern rally teams will change shells, engines, axles and gearboxes while keeping 1 ID. And Ford once offered a 'kit' to rebuild your Mk1 Escort into a new Mk2 shell!

One case I was involved in was a car that had been dry stored for many years, since before the DVLA registration change over in the early 1970s. To re-register the car the owner had to get it inspected by the DVLA type expert, who he had fallen out with some years previously over the experts own dodgy rebuild. The expert refused to inspect the car, the DVLA refuse to re-issue the registration without the inspection, so the owner used the ID from a beyond repair example he also had and restored the car. The car was the right age, had all original parts, but was technically a ringer.

By shouting about every hybrid and V5 we see for sale we only bring our hobby into disrepute and before long every Land Rover will be a dangerous illegal death trap in the general public's eyes. Only by constructive advice on correct and legal rebuild and restoration measures we will help improve the hobby. The days of people building 88" tax exempt hybrids on range rover chassis are dying, but now discoveries are now being chopped down without SVAs, so the world changes. We need constructive advice, but not 'you can't do that without an SVA' being shouted every time we get a spanner out.

I presume it is legal to sell a V5 and chassis plates for 'collectors interest purposes only, not for re-use'? I have a whole collection from cars I've broken up over the years if anybody is interested

[bobtail4x4]

Well said.

[bluespanner]

There is obviously 3 ways of looking at it... 1. needing a v5 and plate to disguise a stolen vehicle as another, and 2. needing a v5 and plate for a vehicle that is not registered, ie projects. And 3. there is i suppose making that 1973 series 3 into a 1972 model. The first wrong, the second is tolerable when excecuted properly and the third I have no problem with.

[western]

Replacing 90 axles with discovery for the rear discs? No longer type approved, for a 90

same as used on later rear disc braked 90's so don't see a issue there.

How many series LRs have had engine, gearbox, axles, replaced over the years?

loads probably quite a lot of older vehicles not just LR's have had a engine/gearbox/axle replaced due to wear/damage

How many people on here have fitted a winch bumper since the new frontal protection system laws were put in place?

any winch bumper that are now on the market since these new regs came in should comply with the regs, if bought from the vehicle manufacturer, there isn't a problem, as they have to comply.

[FridgeFreezer]

By shouting about every hybrid and V5 we see for sale we only bring our hobby into disrepute and before long every Land Rover will be a dangerous illegal death trap in the general public's eyes.

I beg to differ - Look at the reasons for the SVA coming in - sh*tty nailed together kit-cars that were still registered as a Ford Sierra or whatever and which would just about scrape an MOT but should never be on the road. By skirting round the rules they helped bring the SVA into existence. Many LR owners go along the same path with examples like that tax-exempt 90, for the sake of £180 per year the guy's basically turned a complete 90 into spare parts.

Now, granted there are plenty of examples where stuff that technically should be SVA'd isn't because it would just be a waste of everyone's time, but equally there are plenty of examples where, if something bad happened, the brown stuff would befoul the ventilation equipment due to the work carried out - the owners are often no better at declaring things to their insurance company than they are to the DVLA, and unfortunately they are often not any better at actually executing the work in the first place.

Also, the eBay advert makes a good point - there are loads of defenders being stolen at the moment and frankly I think it's a good thing that they're being picky for a change.

[sean f]

Nope, the RTA ensures your insurance has to pay a third party even if you have an Rolls insured as a Mini, you are drunk, have no licence, and have no MOT and no tax.

The insurance company are only obliged to cover you to RTA level though, technically the legal minimum cover is for injuries to other persons only, NOT cover for other vehicles, material damages, very few if any insurance companies will sell this level of cover but it is what they default to if a vehicle, or driver is clearly not as covered. If the difference is marginal which to be fair a vehicle as described but on a technically illegal number would be they may decide to honour the 3rd party cover, if not you will be taken to court personnelly for the remaining money. In theory you can take any non insured driver to court for money owed as well but in practice if they have no money it is a waste of time so very rarely done.

[Steve Hiatt]

My reading of the 1988 and 1991 amendments of the RTA suggests that third party property is covered as a minimum, but I guess it's up to everyone to do their own research.

Of course the insurance companies do have the right to reclaim the money if you lied on your application.

[B reg 90]

I don't get how this is causing so much excitement. If you think it is illegal then ring the police. Do you have nowt better to do than bleat on about it on here? At the end of the day i suspect that selling a V5 and chassis if perfectly legal. It only becomes a crime if you try and ring a vehicle and do not disclose the fact when you sell it. This is no different than clocking your car. It is perfectly legal as long as you disclose the fact when you sell it.

For all you know I could be trying to add to my collection of early 90 log books to display on my lounge wall! This woukd be a valid reason for buying - I'm not that sad though.......

Adrian

[Guest diesel_jim]

I don't get how this is causing so much excitement. If you think it is illegal then ring the police. Do you have nowt better to do than bleat on about it on here?

That's why it's called a public forum... so people can bleat on about it, if they so wish.

If you don't like it... don't read the posts!

[Les Henson]

It's not illegal to sell or buy a Log book and/or vin plate - it's what you do with it that's important. Some people buy them to authenticate show vehicles that never go on public roads, and some use them to ring a stolen vehicle or claim historic taxation classification when the vehicle doesn't qualify for it in reality. No doubt this sort of thing goes on throughout many makes of cars that were manufactured either side of the cut-off date. I can see why people do it to disguise the true identity of a stolen vehicle, cut and shut, bitsa, etc, as this is purely a criminal act, but for someone to do it in order to save £180 a year is beyond me - if you get caught you are liable to vehicle siezure/back tax/prosecution - it surely can never be worth the risk? For the cost of one years road tax - you are 100% legal.

Why would anyone want to risk so much to save the cost of an SVA/IVA road tax? - it's a total no-brainer.

I would imagine that every time you see a Police car/ANPR camera, etc - it must worry you a bit.

Not worth the worry IMHO.

Les.