LoggyDriver

No they didn't mate. They inspected the bits they could get at and that was it. I know it sounds silly that they didn't check exhaust, steering etc, but as the belly plate was part of the vehicle they only tested what was accessible. My mate is the author of a well known Land Rover Book.

I'll definitely be watching as I'm an ex Loggy myself.:-D

I wonder if they have paid the Army £70,000 for that one then???? I bet they haven't paid a penny. When any trucks are released they should include ALL CES equipment as part of the sale. Withams just strip everything and sell it seperately in the tender or sales. I bought the missing CES for my Bedford at Beltring last year. When I asked Paul for a deal he more or less told me where to go. It was only after I pointed out that it was CES missing from the truck when I bought it that he knocked about £30 off.

When you take a vehicle to VOSA for testing, VOSA don't drive the vehicle through the garage, YOU DO. The owner has to drive it onto the rollers for the brake test, the owner has to rev the engine for the emissions and operate the lights etc. They can only test items that are visible and accessible. So if you have an engine inside an engine bay that has access hatches that are bolted shut, they cant test what's behind it. The same goes for floor plates and covers. My mate had an armoured lightweight that had a belly plate fitted. They couldn't check the props, steering linkage, exhaust etc due to this. As it's part of the vehicle they can't ask you to remove it.

I think some people on here have the attitude that because their vehicle doesn't come under the proposal, or think it doesn't, that that's alright and they can sit back. Wake up guys. As a hobby we should be looking after everyones interest and sticking together. There is no I in team is there? I've been saying all along, just because you own (for example) a 1959 M35A2 Cargo that you can sit back because your vehicle isn't in the current list. How long do you think it will be (if this proposal comes in) before they get wise and include these? After all what's the difference between a 1959 M62 Wrecker and a 1959 5 ton cargo apart from the crane? They are the same truck and the same age, except one would be subject to an MOT and the other not. Some of you have said you have no objection to testing. Well that's fine, if the testing is going to be proportionate to the vehicle and it's age. I'm pretty certain the DoT are thinking about nice modern cranes and engineering trucks that they want to bring into line with other HGV's and all that lovely test fee money coming in, not to mention more employment of MOT inspectors to make their record look better is a factor too, but they haven't given any thought to the thousands of vehicles that are 20, 30, 40, 50 years old. If this current proposal gets in then that will be the end of private historic vehicle ownership and the hobby as we know it. It might not happen now, next year or even five or ten years, but there will come a time when more and more regulations will be added to the test requirments for these vehicles that will make it impossible to get them through. Call it alarmist if you like, I don't think it is. Once this sort of thing starts there is no stopping it. Just look at the EU!! So lets start seeing a united front and fight this the best we can TOGETHER.

Oh, how did that slip out...:wow: What I meant to say was that a vehicle, as it gets older, should be classed as "Historic" but it's not. So mine being 25 years old in 2011 should be classed as Historic, but it never will be. :red:

If that's the case they must have forgotten all the other vehicles, whether pre or post 1960 that will aslo be subject to this legislation. Don't forget that once the landslide starts, no one know's where it will stop. Anyone could be burried alive!!!

The 29th was Friday mate. As soon as I saw your link I started firing off emails. I also sent one to Preston but as yet, no reply. The only reply I've had so far is from my local MP (within 15 minutes too!! Thanks Mr Vaisey). What have the people you have spoken to said about the matter?

Thanks for that.:undecided:

A lot of people own quite modern trucks (myself included) which are not classified as "Historic" due to being under 25 years of age. I would need to wait until 2011 to clasify mine as "Historic". Also we have got a lot more complicated problems due to age, I.E. Under run and side impact equipment which changes the look of the vehicle, marker lights that were not fitted equipment from new would then need to be added, exhaust emissions and brake regulations etc. If this is going to come in without amendment then this legislation has a good chance of rendering these vehicles useless. We need to make sure we still send out the emails and letters. I find it very worrying that not even IMPS or the MVT had heard anything about this, even though they are recognised by the DVLA as having Vehicle Verification Officers that inspect and forward reports on the very vehicles they are looking at to DVLA for registration.

Haven't we got a Lawyer on the membership that could be our point man? Either that or someone who is able to hold a conversation with "the powers that be", someone respectable and in a position of authority, a Doctor, Lawyer, Government Civil Servant etc?

I've just received a reply from Ed Vaizey MP, my local MP on this matter. This was his response. Many thanks Andrew, I will write to Paul Clark next week to ensure that he is aware of the concerns of the owners of historic military vehilcles. You put your case very well, and I am sure the Govt should listen./ Ed

There may seem to be a lot of vehicles test exempt, but honestly there isn't the amount that is claimed. All the vehicles you have mentioned are local authority vehicles that are maintained to high standards whether they require an MOT or not, so the argument about road safety is a false one really. Most of the people that are going to come under this are the local authority, crane operators and wrecker companies. All the other categories are so small the numbers are hardly worth looking at. BUT, by their very nature of specialism, this will bring most of us under their shadow. I've written to my local MP and have also fired off a letter to the woman at DforT, MVT and the FBHV. I've nearly done all I can at the moment, lets hope others are doing the same?

This document also produces no evidence about the risk to public safety regarding vehicles that are test exempt. The whole wording of the consultation is based on GUESS WORK. They claim that 10% of commercial vehicles are ones that are test exempt. This is utter rubbish. Looking at two types of vehicle as an example. Mobile Cranes: These vehicles are going to come under the scope of testing under the new rules. How the hell (as mentioned) are you going to test a 1000 ton mobile crane? VOSA will have to spend millions converting their test centres as most you wouldn't even get a crane that size through the gates. It would have to be done outside with the testers lying underneath the crane. Recovery Vehicles: These are also exempt MOT testing for suspended tow capable wreckers. These could be tested without too much trouble. However look at both of these vehicles. Both will be owned by commercial operators that would have the proper garage facilities and mechanics to maintain them. So the governments argument about "road safety" just doesn't wash as both these types will be maintained to the strictest standards. All this has come about because the government is bankrupt and is looking at getting as much money as it can out of joe public. They have identified an area where people are not paying £100 a time to get their vehicles inspected and thought this is one way of making the claimed £9 odd million a year. Take a 1000 ton crane to VOSA and they will take your money and give you a test certificate without even looking at it properly as they just haven't got the facilities. As far as one off costs are concerned. Well for the fabrication and fitment of side impact bars, rear bumper and the fitment and callibration of a tachograph (even though once fitted I will not be required to use it), a day off work to take it to VOSA and the test fee I'm going to be looking at a bill of at least £1,500 to £2,000. This for a vehicle that is going to be used 8 or 10 times maximum a year!! It just wont be worth the money.

No worries mate. :-) The problem they are going to have is things like the emissions test. Most of the trucks owned by members probably don't even have any emissions data for them!!! My truck for example, passed a PRE and it's disposal inspection a month later when it was cast in May last year. I have the print outs for the brake test and emissions test as well as the inspection report and it passed with no faults. However take the same truck to VOSA (who are not to keen on seeing old trucks on the road anyway) and it might be a different story.

The MVT national show is now at Trucks and Troops.

I see there is a Hunting HiVolt 14Kva Generator in the green sheet for sale on what looks like a 1 3/4 ton trailer. Has anyone any experience of these generators in the services? Questions like how much fuel does it drink an hour, how many power sockets are there, are they reliable, etc, etc. This baby would power the whole "W&P" set up.

I've taken plenty of HGV's down to VOSA for their annual test and I can assure you that's it's not like the situation you describe above. It's not like you can take the vehicle to any station you like either. There are a lot of things that also need to be considered, like when you change the tyres on an HGV you can't just go ahead and change road tyres for all terrain tyres, you need to apply to VOSA for permission to change them and then get them inspected.

Exactly. Getting the trucks fit for modern HGV testing standards changes the whole look of the vehicle with under run protection, the engineering of a rear bumper etc. For someone who only does a handfull of shows a year like most of us, the cost just isn't worth it. Our vehicles are only of interest to other collectors so there is no commercial market to sell the vehicle on. Who is going to buy a vehicle subject to test with all the hassle that goes with it when they can spend their money on a test exempt vehicle?

As mentioned the FBHVC have nothing on their website about this proposal. I've already sent an email to their Secretary. We only have until the 19th of March to get all the relevent people interested before the consultation is closed.:wow: C'mon guys contact as many organisations as you can, your local MP, and most importantly the contact in the consultation document. We need an exemption for private owners that do not use there vehicles for business purposes, as this is what it seems to be aimed at but will effect us all if we lie back and take it.

Exactly, you have the "Showmans Guild" or whatever it is, but not one major Military vehicle Club or for that matter any Commercial Vehicle club. Even the Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs hasn't got anything about it on their website. We need to act FAST on this as it seems the clubs are unaware of it. I noticed in the questions that they are also asking what other categories should be subject to future testing, so for those of you who think this doesn't apply to them, think again.

I've just read the whole stinking document and it's going to have a massive adverse effect on those of us who own post 1960 vehicles that are currently MOT exempt. Display, Educational, Mobile Laboratory, Mobile Crane, Motor Tractors, Locomotives, and lots, lots more are all for the hatchet. Unless you own a pre 1960 vehicle you’re stuffed. How long is it going to be before they end the exemption for pre 1960 vehicles too? I don't object to having a vehicle tested but it's going to prove too expensive to bring these vehicles up to standard (side impact bars, rear bumpers etc) the need to take a day off work to drive down to VOSA to pay over inflated test fee's and all this money and hassle just to take a truck to half a dozen shows a year!!! This is the start of the slippery slope to killing off the hobby for those of us who don't own businesses or have deep pockets. If they change the pre 1960 exemption then that will be the death blow. I suggest every member on here whether they own a truck or not get an email off to the contact address in the consultation making the case to keep the exemptions for privately owned show vehicles. I've looked on the MVT website and there isn't one item on this and neither has it been mentioned in CMV. I've already sent an email off to the Chairman of the MVT and I suggest other MVT members do the same, after all what are we paying our subscriptions for? Interesting post 1960 vehicles........R.I.P:cry:

Those pictures are making the case for me to own a wrecker even more tempting!!! I could then remove my Radar Repair body so that I could work on the truck bed...:-\

Having just read the artical on this subject this is my take on the matter. Most if not all horseboxes over 7.5 tonnes will require the driver to possess an HGV class 2 (LGV Cat C) as the horsebox will be a post 1960 vehicle. This vehicle will also require an HGV MOT as it would not qualify for exemption under existing rules unless it was pre 1960. It cannot be regarded as anything other than a Goods Vehicle as the Horse would be classed as Goods. As a horse cannot be classed as personal goods under "the carrage of goods for personal use" part of the legislation then this also, I assume, wouldn't apply. To be totally honest I don't think the relevent agencys know their ar*e from their elbow. This legislation would be totally un workable and from what the artical says this is a VOSA "ruling" on the matter and is not a reference from a court case. The only organisation to make a "ruling" would be a court of law. I don't think this would stand up long as it would effect tens of thousands of people enjoying their hard earned weekend fun. Surely the MVT and IMPS etc would have picked up on this before now? Confused, I certainly am.:nut:

The question was "operating HGV's" so we are still on topic mate. Yes it certainly is a minefield and one that's best left alone and kept under wraps otherwise we would all have to give up our trucks for a Trabant.:shocked: