To SVA or not to SVA?

[Tonk]

I think the change of fuel type rings alarm bells at the DVLA.

cant really see that as the engine is only worth one point in their points system, wheelbase should ring more alarm bells cos of chassis being chopped?

Isn't it about time the Read Brothers chirped into this thread

how many motors have they ringed then?

[MogLite]

how many motors have they ringed then?

I was thinking more about packing out threads with waffle

[Tonk]

ah, reputation preceeds...........

[saley]

ME TO

[B reg 90]

Chris,

not saying that I would do that...... I was just thinking that if I list what are 'as fitted' by the man on the LR production line on my 90 knowing what maintenance was done by it's prevoius owners etc I would end up with the following:

bonnet,

bulkhead,

seats (not the bases).

Every thing else has been changed at one time or another due to a crash, maintenace, tree damage, gear box failure, rear axle upgrade, fitting a TDI etc.

So what makes a bitsa motor that does not warrent the original identity:

- one that is assembled in a month from 4 donors?

- a motor that has been 'well' maintained over 20 odd years using a mixture of new parts (chassis) and other good secondhand parts?

It's a mute point in my opinion as both are clearly not as they left the factory, however I am clear that my motor has been subjected to ongoing maintenance and is hence not a bitsa. But when you think about it, it is a fine line. So if you ignore that fact that it is illegal to swap identities, how much better or worse from the safety point is either option? Assuming that both vehicles have been maintanined/built properly to the same spec they are both equally as safe.

Adrian

[FridgeFreezer]

I think the main reason ringing is illegal is people were ringing unregistered write-offs ID's onto stolen vehicles, TBH ringing a scrapper ID onto your truck to make life easier / less paperwork is hardly crime of the century, in fact it's a short step from there to the process of giving it a Q plate anyway.

[bishbosh]

I think the change of fuel type rings alarm bells at the DVLA.

From personal experience I would have to disagree with that. I just filled in the V5c and sent it off to record the change of fuel and the new engine number. Got it back last week correctly updated. B)

[Guest diesel_jim]

From personal experience I would have to disagree with that. I just filled in the V5c and sent it off to record the change of fuel and the new engine number. Got it back last week correctly updated. B)

I hope this is true as i'm about to send my V5 off to change colour to red and fuel back to good ol' diesel (far better than that petrolium distilate stuff... )

I've done a chassis up rebuild but it's the same chassis, same axles, just different body bits.

[saley]

I hope this is true as i'm about to send my V5 off to change colour to red and fuel back to good ol' diesel (far better than that petrolium distilate stuff... )

I've done a chassis up rebuild but it's the same chassis, same axles, just different body bits.

Hi Jim my advise would be to change one thing at a time ie change engine this month and colour in say october

les can correct me if i am wrong but having a conversation with les and nick at one of the challenges i thought he had changed fuel type, and wheelbase at the same time

[Les Brock]

Hi Jim my advise would be to change one thing at a time ie change engine this month and colour in say october

les can correct me if i am wrong but having a conversation with les and nick at one of the challenges i thought he had changed fuel type, and wheelbase at the same time

Nope, wheel base never mentioned.....not that daft

[Turbocharger]

From all this it strikes me that, if one was considering building a spaceframe vehicle or similar, it'd be best to get the vehicle SVA'd first, while it's still reasonably standard...

[LR90]

From all this it strikes me that, if one was considering building a spaceframe vehicle or similar, it'd be best to get the vehicle SVA'd first, while it's still reasonably standard...

So, letter box the rear x member, SVA it and then move the letter box to a space frame. Might work.

[honitonhobbit]

If the vehicle is changed from its 'approved state' it is no longer 'approved'.

No worries if like Bish you have changed the engine for an 'approved' upgrade. But if you increase the power by more than 25% - from the most powerful 'approved' fitment - us is di-approved!

All chassis mods, front lockers, suspension mods, bobtailing, axles mods blah blah blah are non approved mods.

If your insurance company says 'okay' that matters not if you are in an accident that invloves crash investigation/police/death/injury/environmental disaster. An insurance company takes it as read that you have a 'road legal vehicle'. An MOT tester takes it as read that you have SVA approval blah blah blah.

So SVA it or gamble - your choice

[Turbocharger]

But the 'approved state' isn't recorded anywhere...

[Les Brock]

But the 'approved state' isn't recorded anywhere...

Err....yes it is...when a vehicle is designed etc it has to be type approved ( given an approval number)before it can go into manufacture to ensure it complies with the correct requirements for safety etc, costs hudreds of thousands ££££££££.......

so......................

as kit cars etc are only produced in small amounts the single vehicle approval was brought in to prove compliance, one you pass the SVA (not flaming likely in my case ) you get a issued ministers approval certificate to prove compliance.

which you have to provide to get you Q plate

see here

http://www.vca.gov.uk/vehicletype/type-approval-for-ca.asp

[Guest diesel_jim]

So, letter box the rear x member, SVA it and then move the letter box to a space frame. Might work.

Can't you just fill in the "change of address" on the V5 to move the letterbox?

[GBMUD]

But the 'approved state' isn't recorded anywhere...

I guess if it was approved then it complied with the regs at that time, if it does not comply when you are stopped/have a crash then you get done for messing... at a guess.

Chris

[honitonhobbit]

I guess if it was approved then it complied with the regs at that time, if it does not comply when you are stopped/have a crash then you get done for messing... at a guess.

Chris

As a skivvy, one of my jobs is to run customers vehicles down to the MOT station. As I know the MOT blokey, I act as his assistant during the 'spection. Mike is a bl**dy good MOTist and very switched on to modded vehicles. I have been down there this morning and I thought I would chat this thread through with him. He rang his mate at VOSA - so here is the low down.

You need to SVA a vehicle for all and any modifications past standard that effect, chassis, suspension, engine, brakes, structural bodywork, steering, drivetrain, fuel type. It is your responsibility to do so and this MUST be checked by the insurance company (they hold the liability!). It is not the responsibility of the MOTist unless it fails the MOT due to the mods.

In the case of an accident the vehicle will be re MOTed/checked by an engineer if it is felt that the accident was caused by or made worse by modifiactions not SVA'd.

If you are found to be liable you will be hung out to dry. If the insurance company failed to check that you had SVA'd the vehicle then they are liable. It is there responsibility to ask you!

[GBMUD]

Starting to sound more and more like Belgium, Germany etc..

Chris

[Turbocharger]

when a vehicle is designed etc it has to be type approved

I understand that - for volume manufacture you need crash tests etc. When you modify the vehicle away from this approval, you need to undergo single vehicle approval to check the car is still safe, and if it meets the required standards then you get your SVA. If you make subsequent modifications it should be re-examined.

My question is, since the nature of the mods aren't detailed when it's SVA'd for the first time, how can anyone prove that subsequent mods weren't there when it was SVA'd unless they clearly don't meet the safety requirements.

For example - buy a classic Rangie, fit three-link suspension, SVA it. Then shorten it to 88". An 88" conversion has been around for years and is quite safe if done properly, but it wasn't in your SVA although they can't prove that unless it's demonstrably unsafe (ie if Will Warne has welded it up for you).

[Tonk]

if Will welded it up for you then i very much doubt u'd make it to the testing station alive

[Daan]

You need to SVA a vehicle for all and any modifications past standard that effect, chassis, suspension, engine, brakes, structural bodywork, steering, drivetrain, fuel type.

So how does that work with my s3, fitted with a 2.5 diesel engine (TDI)? I send the v5 of to have it changed, and we all know that a series 3 doesn't have a 2.5 litre engine. Also, the 25% rule has been completely ignored with this mod. Yet, The dvla happily changed the V5, no questions asked.

That doesn't add up.

Daan

[bishbosh]

Sorry to sound like and old woman, but surely we should be using SVA as a good thing? Don't we want to be driving vehicles that are safe?

I know it's a paperwork nightmare, which it doesn't need to be, but I think the "spirit" of the SVA should be encouraged IMHO. All we need is clearer rules and guidelines so testers and testees are better informed.

Before you ask, no I haven't SVA'd the RR as the advice at the time was that I didn't need to. My insurance company however have all the mods in writing from me and they are happy.

[Les Brock]

Sorry my mistake

Thought you was on about from the original

Yes if you go through an SVA (ie Q plate) and you modify it after then who would know...

due to the amount of variation of vech they inspect, a Caterham for example will all be similarish...Land Rover no chance

but if you havent put it through one and you have a accident they would know straight away

Now i'm in this situation I would rather go through the hassle and then "sort it out"

I understand that - for volume manufacture you need crash tests etc. When you modify the vehicle away from this approval, you need to undergo single vehicle approval to check the car is still safe, and if it meets the required standards then you get your SVA. If you make subsequent modifications it should be re-examined.

My question is, since the nature of the mods aren't detailed when it's SVA'd for the first time, how can anyone prove that subsequent mods weren't there when it was SVA'd unless they clearly don't meet the safety requirements.

For example - buy a classic Rangie, fit three-link suspension, SVA it. Then shorten it to 88". An 88" conversion has been around for years and is quite safe if done properly, but it wasn't in your SVA although they can't prove that unless it's demonstrably unsafe (ie if Will Warne has welded it up for you).

[Mark90]

The spririt of the SVA is a good thing, but in practice it is far to anal which is why people do anything to avoid it. A standard defender wouldn't pass as a car only as a commercial. So if my bog standard 110 CSW had a mod that required an SVA (eg none standard springs affecting the suspension going by what the hobbit says) it would fail on stuff that is how it was when it left the factory, mad.