fv1609 Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Is this real & if so how will it effect us, especially if it seems retrospective? http://www.the-ace.org.uk/armageddon/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marmite!! Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 http://fbhvc.co.uk/2012/08/23/eu-roadworthiness-testing/ [h=2]EU ROADWORTHINESS TESTING[/h] Posted by admin on 23-08-2012 It should be remembered that this is still just a proposal. It has to have approval by each EU member country before it is adopted. Some media commentary on this topic has tended towards the ‘we’re doomed’ end of the scale. It is certainly a serious issue and FBHVC is treating it accordingly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian L Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 I can't see it affecting MVs or restored historic vehicles to much but kit cars & home builds might be a problem in the future ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biscuits_brown Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 This comes up fairly regularly, I can remember a kerfuffle about it twenty odd years ago when I was into custom scooters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philb Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 I believe there is already UK law which limits the degree of modification allowed to a vehicle before it has to be submitted for Single Vehicle Approval and re-registered ( A process, I'm sure, that Gritineye is familiar with . Sorry, Bernard, couldn't resist it. ). So, I guess they are just intending to tighten the limits? The only real snag (technically only) is that current C&U standards apply to almost every aspect of the SVA except emissions (which are engine-age related). Having read the proposal (or whatever it is called), I couldn't see anything relating to re-registering, did I miss it? So, maybe, they will just insist on the test and updating the records following it? If the annual MoT test is a good idea, why isn't SVA for modified vehicles? I've seen some frightening examples of pre-SVA specials (kit cars in new-speak. Doh! new-speak is now old-speak, but you might know what I mean) which aren't trapped by the MoT test. Anyway, as said before, it shouldn't affect many of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike65 Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Just read some of that and luckily I would be exempt as it applies to vehicles that exceed 25 kph. So should be safe with a Series 3 Land Rover:laugh: Seriously though I doubt it would be enforceable. Would require a load of court cases to resolve a modification. Is a replacement exhaust (non OEM) a modification, what about tyres etc Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerry275 Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Just read some of that and luckily I would be exempt as it applies to vehicles that exceed 25 kph.So should be safe with a Series 3 Land Rover:laugh: Seriously though I doubt it would be enforceable. Would require a load of court cases to resolve a modification. Is a replacement exhaust (non OEM) a modification, what about tyres etc Mike I was going to keep out of this one (and probably should) but not that long ago insurance companies were charging for the modification of putting on winter tyres in the winter (crazy i know) and also lower speed rated tyres as a replacement for higher rated ones. Nothing will suprise me! I sold my Mk1 Escort Mexico (genuine) last yr as I can see the time, when it would only be for track days and that was never my goal! Moan over! Gerry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berna2vm Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 I look at how the TUV test works in Germany and it sends a shiver down my spine. Lets hope we never have something like that here... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g0ozs Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 Clive, all I will be writing something to my MP and MEP to post on Tuesday. In my case I have an unmodified (as far as the 8 point test for DVLA vehicle identity goes anyway) French SUMB truck but a literal interpretation of the historic vehicle exemption requiring original spare parts and original appearance would mean removing what I consider essential safety equipment added since it came to the UK such as a passenger (right) side wing mirror, reversing light, left dipping headlights (an MoT failure if not changed as I learned the first year I had it) and rear fog light ! I think as a minimum modifications necessary to meet safety standards that would otherwise apply to vehicles of similar size and type should be permitted (and encouraged?) to historic vehicles as they are in the public interest as well as the owners' interest - I haven't seen this aspect of the problem mentioned anywhere yet ? Regards Iain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lauren Child Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 exemption requiring original spare parts and original appearance would mean historic vehicle removing what I consider essential safety equipment added since it came to the UK such as a passenger (right) side wing mirror, reversing light, left dipping headlights (an MoT failure if not changed as I learned the first year I had it) and rear fog light ! Similar position here - I'll be pulling the indicators off and going back to blackout lighting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b2414 Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 (edited) Hi I who’d not be too complacent about any new law from the EU regarding any vehicles Mot as this will not only include your daily car but also your hobby take for instance you changed your tyres on your car for low profiled tyres this will mean a mot fail as they will not be the same as when it left the factory that to me means that any upgrades ore changers you make on any vehicles that you have will not be allowed so we cannot just say it will not effete me we need to do something about it and not let someone else do it for us before it is too late . Bill Edited August 27, 2012 by b2414 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TooTallMike Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 To all those who mocked when some of us expressed concern about MoT's no longer being required for pre-1960s, this is exactly the sort of legislation that was predicted would follow. - MG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
griff66 Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 would be interested mike ,to hear you explain why this thread validates any of the issues you raised in the pre 1960 mot exemption thread? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marmite!! Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 To all those who mocked when some of us expressed concern about MoT's no longer being required for pre-1960s, this is exactly the sort of legislation that was predicted would follow. - MG Mike, I don't think anyone was mocking you or anyone else, just putting their point of view forward.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b2414 Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 Hi if you think that this is a storm in a teacup have a look at Armageddon on http://www.the-ace.org.uk/chat_with_ace/index.php it may make you think. I for one will be righting to my MP. Cheers Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzkpfw-e Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 I wonder who put this idea into the minds of the Eurocrats? Vehicle manufacturers? Protecting their sales of spare parts? That new body panel from (Insert name of manufacturer) costs a bomb?, identical one made by (Insert name of alternative manufacturer) costs 1/4 the price? Ditto water pump? Headlight bulb? "Sorry, can't use that one, it'll fail its MoT" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtistsRifles Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 The manufacturers probably had a hand in it!!! I used to work for a US manufacturer also associated with Jeeps (amongst other things) and the bane of our life was the German TUV which only allows factory specified parts to be used on a car - i.e. if your car left as a model range with Goodyear tyres you could not turn up at the TUV station with Firestones fitted. Some even took it as far as the light bulbs........ Put another way - the vehicle had to be presented for test exactly as it left the factory! Given this manufacturers policy since 2007 - set forth by the German head office - is that all parts for vehicles who came out of production 10 years old go to the crushers you can all see the problems owner then face... Can't get replacement factory parts so can't go for TUV...... OF course - the TUV requirements might have change since I last worked.... :-D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike65 Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 I wonder who put this idea into the minds of the Eurocrats? Vehicle manufacturers? Protecting their sales of spare parts?That new body panel from (Insert name of manufacturer) costs a bomb?, identical one made by (Insert name of alternative manufacturer) costs 1/4 the price? Ditto water pump? Headlight bulb? "Sorry, can't use that one, it'll fail its MoT" I believe I mentioned before that this would be unenforceable legislation. OOPS probably means we will get it then. When is a new part not or a modification. Example: A 1982 Lotus Esprit rear light cluster (in the 80s) from Lotus was £200 yet you could get the exact same part from Rover for £30. Which is genuine which is a modification. For record the difference is the Lotus had the SD1 clusters but mounted upside down on the opposite side. Cost may not always be an issue, back in the 80s my brother needed a new distributor for a Rover V8 cost from Rover wad about £110 pounds and it was made by Lucas. Surprisingly from Lucas it was £180. He replaced it with one from an independant supplier for £35, guess what it was made by Lucas. But which is it a modification? You better be careful as I am sure Tesco petrol is not standard and could therefore be deemed a modification. Worse still they could deem parts from 3rd parties are acceptable, god help us Land Rover owners as they are bound to approve a certain supplier. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rog8811 Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 god help us Land Rover owners as they are bound to approve a certain supplier. Hmmm... blue wrappers? According to a couple of MEP's who have responded to questions this is a done deal in the EU parliament, to stand any chance of getting any kind of sensible deal we need to fight it here at home with the people we elected to serve our interests....... Yeah right:embarrassed: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scammell4199 Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 True it seems most of this won't affect us as military vehicles enthusiasts, but i think we still need to take heed. Legislation like this has been expected for a long time, and this will only be the thin end of the wedge, before we know it all vehicles more than 10 years old will be taken away for scrap!!. What gets me with all this is why our government goes along with it. what's to stop our government putting two fingers up to european law that we don't like? if they had the balls that is. Can you all imagine how many poeple are employed in vehicle modifying and restoration, who will all be out of jobs when laws like this gather pace? Aren't the government supposed to be helping British industry and small businesses in these difficult times, instead of putting up more red tape? I feel the need for a motorway blockade coming on Richard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rog8811 Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 what's to stop our government putting two fingers up to european law that we don't like? if they had the balls that is. Do it the French way, sign up for everything then ignore it. They don't implement half the things we do, camembert and Brie in the cold compartments in the UK on the stone slab in France..... who has it right? Take a couple of minutes to sign this if you feel this legislation might yet bite HMV's. http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/37784 It ahs a long way to go, 100,000 signatures ad at least our elected need to discuss it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scammell4199 Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 Do it the French way, sign up for everything then ignore it. Take a couple of minutes to sign this if you feel this legislation might yet bite HMV's. http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/37784 It ahs a long way to go, 100,000 signatures ad at least our elected need to discuss it. Here here. Yes, i certainly will sign up, about time these ba%*^&ds started doing what we want not what they think is best, they are our elected servants after all. I'm getting on a roll here in case you hadn't noticed, lol. Richard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
private mw Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 its disgusting i will have to remove my cibie oscars and my sponge bob air freshener :sweat: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Degsy Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 Do it the French way, sign up for everything then ignore it. They don't implement half the things we do, camembert and Brie in the cold compartments in the UK on the stone slab in France..... who has it right? Take a couple of minutes to sign this if you feel this legislation might yet bite HMV's. http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/37784 It ahs a long way to go, 100,000 signatures ad at least our elected need to discuss it. Our Government should take a leaf or three out of the French book but we seem to be the ones who end up in the European Court whilst the French get away with it:mad:. The implications of this could turn out to be very serious and it needs to be publicised as much as possible, petition signed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtistsRifles Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 Do it the French way, sign up for everything then ignore it. They don't implement half the things we do, camembert and Brie in the cold compartments in the UK on the stone slab in France..... who has it right? Take a couple of minutes to sign this if you feel this legislation might yet bite HMV's. http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/37784 It ahs a long way to go, 100,000 signatures ad at least our elected need to discuss it. Signed! Without drifting into the dreaded "P" word - it's seemed to me for the past dozen or more years our unwashed and unloved elected leaders (??) have no idea what constitutes industry - other than the banking houses... Perhaps if they knew more about making things instead of making money this EU proposal, along with many others, would not stand a chance???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.