November 2011

‘The End of Life Vehicles Regulations 2003 implemented the requirement of the EU End of Life Vehicles Directive (2000/53).

The law states that all End of Life Vehicles must be taken to an Authorised Treatment Facility (ATF) to be destroyed and de-polluted in an environmentally friendly way. The ATF will notify DVLA that the vehicle has been destroyed and issue the person presenting the vehicle for scrapping will be issued with a Certificate of Destruction (CoD) which closes down the vehicle record at DVLA and ends the registered keepers' responsibility for the vehicle.

Because of this, vehicle keepers cannot "scrap" a vehicle themselves and so DVLA no longer accepts notifications of scrapping made on the V5C.

The removal of the scrap box on the new V5C was in accordance to the End of Life Vehicle Directive requirement, in that all vehicles must be taken to an ATF to be destroyed and issued with a CoD.

Over recent years the salvage industry has campaigned for the removal of the scrap box on the V5C. DVLA realised that the scrap box should be removed at the earliest convenience, and was therefore removed during the wider review of other changes needed to the certificate and was incorporated with the re-design of the V5C.’

‘With regards to the points made in your consultation response regarding the difficulty historic vehicle enthusiasts find in notifying DVLA. I hope you find the following helpful.’

For vehicles outside the scope of the ELV requirement, such as historic vehicles, the V5C can still be used. If parts are delivered to an Authorised Treatment Facility (ATF) then the V5C/3 ‘selling or transferring your vehicle to a motor trader, insurer or dismantler’ part of the V5C should be filled in with the ATF’s details and sent to DVLA. Alternatively, if the ATF is reluctant to fill in the V5C/3 or a keeper is self scrapping, then the whole V5C can be sent to DVLA with a covering explanation letter, dated and signed. Within 4 weeks DVLA should confirm receipt that the person is no longer the keeper of the vehicle and this discharges the requirement to tax or SORN each year.’

E-petition to restore a rolling 30 year old exemption to VED

On the face of it, this is an understandable move to eradicate the invidious gap between the VED treatment of pre-1973 vehicles and more modern classics, caused by the actions of Gordon Brown who, when Chancellor, stopped the rolling nature of the Historic VED category. The FBHVC have consistently asked for reinstatement on a thirty year basis (originally it was 25 years) but whilst Labour were in power it proved impossible.

Prior to the election last year the Conservatives acknowledged the anomaly and agreed to review it if they gained power, while warning that it would probably need to be fiscally neutral. (That’s before they opened the books!) The political climate (Coalition) and economic situation have deteriorated dramatically since the change of government. With the programme of deficit reduction adversely affecting government spending, including that for vulnerable sections of society, it is, in my personal view, the wrong time to raise the profile of this anomaly and could prejudice any future change for many years.

The theory behind e-petitions is that if the petition gets 100,000 signatures, and gets the support of the Backbenchers’ Committee, it will be debated in the Commons. It is inevitable that the coalition would be against change at this juncture since it cuts across the main government policy and would give away revenue to a minority interest. You can also imagine the reaction of the opposition; it would be perceived as giving away revenue to ‘Hooray Henrys’ in their expensive classics whilst at the same time cuts to expenditure on the NHS, Social Services, concessionary fares for OAPs and libraries continue. Issues raised in any debate would leave a lasting bad feeling against our movement and make it politically impossible to change the concession for many years. It is also possible that some opposition members might question the continuing existing concession. It is vitally important to retain public and political support for our movement and to avoid any accusations of being a blinkered self-interested minority. Adverse press coverage would be inevitable.

The FBHVC board will debate the merits of this petition at its next meeting on 21 September and no doubt it will also be a topic for discussion during the AGM.

ORIGINAL NUMBER CLAIMS (V765 SCHEME)

The identity of a vehicle starts with the chassis, or monocoque. The V765/3 Scheme Guidance Notes indicates that: ‘you must be satisfied that the vehicle is genuine’, and: ‘you must be satisfied that the evidence linking the vehicle with the number is genuine’. Should the criteria contained in INF26 (Guidelines on how you can register kitcars and rebuilt or radically altered vehicles) Section 2, called ‘Vehicles that have been rebuilt using a mixture of new/used parts’ also be applied?

The reply from DVLA was:

‘The INF 26 procedures are in place purely to assess the identity of vehicles which are currently registered on DVLA’s system.

‘The V765 scheme is intended to ensure that the vehicle being registered for the first time on DVLA’s computerised system is reunited with its original identity. If, prior to applying via the V765 scheme, a historic or classic vehicle is rebuilt (rather than repaired) from parts taken from a number of donor vehicles, or where the donor vehicle may not be known, the correct course for registration would be the Reconstructed Classic route – providing the criteria are met. However, DVLA relies on the integrity and expertise of the owners club to ensure that the vehicle being registered is what it purports to be. Whether the clubs apply the INF26 principles as a guide is a matter for them.’

In practical terms, I would suggest that using the principles in Section 2 of INF26 does have a lot of merit. In particular for a chassis-based vehicle, the body does not come into the jigsaw.

There was concern expressed at the clubs’ meeting held in March at DVLA’s Theale office about owners who change the body type prior to a claim for that particular number. Provided that the chassis and mechanical components come from the same vehicle that used to display the registration number, the new type of body should not adversely affect your judgement on that claim.

In an ideal world the pre-1982 documentary evidence which links the vehicle to the registration number would also contain the model and chassis number. Where no chassis number is shown is it reasonably likely that these documents could relate to the physical vehicle? DVLA will take into account your decisive recommendation when deciding whether to allocate the number to the vehicle on a non-transferable basis.

SORNING REMNANTS OF VEHICLES

This is a question relating to vehicles used exclusively for historic track racing events. It is not unusual to have an historic racing vehicle paired with a second donor vehicle used for spares. It is accepted that the main vehicle needs to be SORNed. As the donor vehicle is used up, when does it technically no longer exist and so does not need to be SORNed?

DVLA have indicated the following:

‘If you still have the key remnants of the vehicle, e.g. the chassis or bodyshell, and two other major components e.g. front and back suspension, both axles, transmission, steering assembly, or engine, you will need to keep declaring SORN.

A vehicle keeper must notify DVLA immediately if they rebuild or modify their vehicle. In cases where a registered vehicle is rebuilt or modified from its original specification it will be assessed under the INF26 guidelines and a physical inspection of the vehicle by a DVLA local office will be required.

If a vehicle is rebuilt using a second hand chassis or monocoque bodyshell from a donor vehicle or from an unknown source, the identity will change irrespective of how many components are retained from the original vehicle and it is advisable for anyone intending to carry out such a build to familiarise themselves with the INF26 before work begins.

In the scenario described, where a car is used for off road race or speed events, and is repaired/rebuilt from parts of another registered and SORNed vehicle, SORN must be declared on both vehicles and must continue to be until the vehicles are destroyed. Such vehicles should not be relicensed for use on the public road until DVLA has been notified of the rebuild/modifications.

REINCARNATED VEHICLES

Vehicles that have been driven by a well-known personality, or have won a number of races are typically recognised by their registration numbers and/or chassis numbers. The value of these vehicles can be on the high side. However, some of these vehicles that were written off in severe crashes subsequent to their moments of fame are occasionally ‘found’ again in a remarkably intact condition. I would expect that the majority of specialist clubs will be wary of these ‘found’, formally written off vehicles, and would treat any claim for that number in the appropriate manner. Possibly an age-related number application could be more appropriate.

If specialist clubs come across cases like this, it would be helpful if they could send in the V765 form to DVLA, with the rejection box ticked, together with an explanation on how this conclusion was deduced. This could prevent DVLA accepting a later recommendation for this number from a non-specialist club, who may not be quite so knowledgeable.

The Federation is keen to maintain the reputation of the V765 scheme. If a club is aware of any such vehicles they may wish to pass this information on to the Federation, together with some background information. The Federation will then pass this information onto the appropriate section at DVLA.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Two Irishmen flew to Canada on a hunting trip. They chartered a small plane to take them into the Rockies for a week hunting moose.

They managed to bag 6. As they were loading the plane to return, the

Pilot said the plane could take only 4 moose.

The two lads objected strongly. "Last year we shot six. The pilot let us take them all and he had the same plane as yours."

Reluctantly, the pilot gave in and all six were loaded. The plane took off.

However, while attempting to cross some mountains even on full power

The little plane couldn't handle the load and went down.

Somehow, surrounded by the moose bodies, only Paddy and Mick survived the crash.

After climbing out of the wreckage, Paddy asked Mick, "Any idea where we are?"

Mick replied, "I think we're pretty close to where we crashed last year.

SHVR magazine January 2011

FBHVC NEWS

RESEARCH ACTION NEEDED!

Yes, it’s survey time again and FBHVC needs all clubs to encourage their members to take part by maximising publicity about what FBHVC is doing, and why.

Nothing captures politicians’ attention more effectively than big, or valuable, numbers. To be effective in its work, FBHVC must have up-to-date facts and figures about all aspects of the historic vehicle movement. These include the numbers of people and vehicles involved as well as the movement’s economic value.

The last set of such data is now five years old and needs to be brought up to date to meet the challenges of the next few years. FBHVC is thus embarking on a new survey of the movement in May.

In 2006, clubs were asked to distribute paper questionnaires. This time it’s easier - the survey is on-line, but this will only work if clubs encourage their members to take part. The panel below contains some suggested text - please use this on websites and in all publications being sent out between now and July.

Separate questionnaires will be sent to traders, club secretaries and museums during April.

The results will be analysed during the summer, and results should be published in November.

SHVR members who have access to online facilities are urged to fill in the online survey in an attempt to protect our hobby.

FIVA are proposing a globally-accepted definition of an historic vehicle. The results of this proposal could make the UK classic car fraternity worse off as it specifically excludes classics used for daily transport. Plus you will have to pay €25 for a FIVA ID card (valid for ten years)

FBHVC/DVLA NEWS

Owners of classic and historic cars will shortly be able to notify the DVLA to make the number plate on their car ‘non-transferable’ through a simple request process.

 This action from the DVLA is in response to a request from the Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs to make this facility available to owners, to quell the rising tide of dissent regarding classics being parted from their original registration numbers.

 The FBHVC asked the ministry to consider owners being able to request non-transferability, rather than a mandatory requirement. This should ensure that future generations researching the history of these cars have the ability to understand the difference between geniune issued plates and age-related numbers.

 John Vale, from the DVLA’s Corporate Affairs Directorate explained that ‘owners will be able to make an irrevocable correction to the official record, so that the mark can never be transferred off the vehicle or ever be removed from it in the future.’

 This change should pacify owners who are concerned that at some future point, the cars they love are separated from their original registration number so that dealers and private individuals can maximise profit from a car.

 A recent survey of Ford owners from the Ford Y and C Register confirmed that 50 percent were  in favour of a voluntary scheme and 25 percent wanted original number plates to be compulsorily retained to the original vehicle.

 A vehicle which had no V60 and no log book that had the number re-united would be non-transferable anyway. Only being on the 1983 register ( held by DVLA) confirs tranferability.

UK LEGISLATION

David Hurley

It has been a much quieter time for us of late with no outstanding consultations for us to answer.

Motor Fuel Regulations

There has been no feedback on this closed, then re-opened, and then closed again consultation as yet. We understand that a report from a consultant has been submitted to DfT and should be published on their website by the end of November. We do have some news on bio-fuels, particularly relating to motorcyclists, elsewhere in this newsletter however.

Historic vehicles and MoT testing stations

Following many comments received from individuals and clubs who have experienced attitude problems with some testing stations we are considering compiling a list of MoT stations (to be on our website) who welcome historic vehicles and have the specialist knowledge to be able to deal with their particular MoT requirements. We envisage splitting the list into various specialities such as cars, motorcycles, commercials etc. We would welcome and encourage our members’ input here – please contact the secretary giving full contact details and the proposed specialist category of the garage.

DVLA

The DVLA have offered to host a question and answer session for our member clubs. Questions will have to be submitted in advance in order to ensure that the correct DVLA people are in attendance. Clubs who would like to take part should contact the secretary with their queries. So that everyone can get the most out of this event it would be helpful if the questions were on general matters of procedure and not about specific cases. For help with specific individual queries please do contact our DVLA liaison officer, Nigel Harrison.

The event is expected to take place in the New Year, probably in the Bristol area and it will be mid-week. Until we know how many clubs would like to participate we cannot book a venue, so please do contact the secretary with your queries as early as is practically possible. The event will be strictly by advance, but free, ticket only and we may have to limit clubs to just two representatives each.

EU LEGISLATION

(Extract from FIVA’s regular update provided by its lobbying service, EPPA)

Second meeting of the European Parliament Historic Vehicle Group

The second meeting of the European Parliament’s Historic Vehicle Group took place on 19 October in Strasbourg. During the meeting Horst Brüning, FIVA’s president and FBHVC’s Andrew Burt gave a presentation about the definition of a historic vehicle. They explained that a wide range of definitions are currently used in both EU and national laws and that ideally one common definition would be recognised by decision makers and in law. They then detailed the FIVA definition, explained its rationale and the importance of a definition allowing regulatory audiences to understand why historic vehicles should be treated differently to all other vehicles, especially to all other ‘older’ vehicles. Horst Brüning and Andrew Burt explained that the existing variety of definitions has not created any major practical problems to date, but that as legislation with exemptions for historic vehicles increases (which is likely because of the development of Intelligent Transport Systems and LEZs) there will be a heightened need for a common definition to avoid problems and make life simpler for owners, regulators and law enforcers in the future. They therefore urged the MEPs to help FIVA to promote and achieve a common definition for future use in EU legislation.  The MEPs expressed their surprise at the current situation and agreed that they would aim to help FIVA in its objective.

Roadworthiness Testing – Commission considered consultation responses

FIVA contributed to the European Commission’s consultation on a possible amendment to the 1996 Roadworthiness Testing Directive in September. The existing Directive allows Member States to treat historic vehicles differently to other vehicles in their national testing regimes. However, the definition of a historic vehicle in the existing Directive is not satisfactory as it is: ‘certain vehicles operated or used in exceptional conditions and vehicles which are never, or hardly ever, used on public highways, including vehicles of historic interest which were manufactured before 1 January 1960 or which are temporarily withdrawn from circulation’. In its submission FIVA has therefore said that this definition should be changed to reflect the FIVA definition. FIVA also explained that there is likely to be an increasing need for historic vehicles be to treated differently as testing will increasingly rely on highly sensitive automated machines. This lack of human intervention and reliance on equipment designed for modern vehicles may well lead to historic vehicles unfairly and unnecessarily failing tests. Hence the need for historic vehicles – appropriated defined - be allowed to be treated differently to modern vehicles. FIVA also made the point that historic vehicles include all vehicles – i.e. motorcycles and commercial vehicles as well as cars.

FIVA will meet with the European Commission before the end of the year to explain further its views. FIVA hopes that the Commission will recognise the need to maintain the special provisions for historic vehicles and recognise the need to change the definition so that it mirrors the FIVA definition. 

LONDON TO BRIGHTON VETERAN CAR RUN

Financial Impact Assessment

Roger Wrapson

Participants in this year’s London to Brighton Veteran Car Run on 7 November had bright sunshine and a cold easterly wind to contend with, in direct contrast to last year’s torrential rain. Spectators watching the finish in Madeira Drive on Brighton’s sea front were also invited to participate in a financial impact assessment survey run jointly by the Federation and the University of Brighton’s Business School.

The survey was carried out by students from the university and was designed to establish how far spectators travel to watch the event and how much they spend on the day, with the overall aim of assessing the financial value of the event to Brighton.

Over 600 spectators were interviewed throughout the day in several locations on the route into Brighton including a number of visitors from Europe. A separate survey will be carried out among the successful 433 competitors who reached Brighton and enjoyed a formal dinner that evening.

It is anticipated that the results will be available early in the New Year.

The Federation will be starting its own regular survey assessing the value of the old vehicle movement to the UK’s economy early in the new year when, this time, the questionnaire will be carried out electronically via the Federation’s web site. The last survey carried out in 2006 showed that the historic vehicle movement was worth £3 billion annually to UK PLC.       

DVLA

Nigel Harrison

Reconstructed classics - revised definition

If there is not the required pre-1983 evidence available to register the vehicle under its original number using the V765 scheme, (or if the original registration number is not known), the fallback position is to apply for an age-related number. The DVLA local office would allocate an age-related number based upon the definition contained in the recently revised information leaflet INF26, which is titled Guidelines on how you can register kit cars and rebuilt or radically altered vehicles. The most relevant revised section is headed Reconstructed Classics:

‘The reconstructed classic category is intended to support the registration of unregistered classic vehicles. Reconstructed vehicles must comprise of genuine period components all over 25 years old, and of the same specification. The appropriate vehicle enthusiasts club for the marque (make) must confirm in writing that following inspection, they authenticate that the vehicle is a true reflection of that marque and that it meets the above criteria. This written confirmation must support an application to the [DVLA] local office. An age related registration number will be based on the age of the youngest component used.

Reconstructed classics or replica classic vehicles built to original specification using a mixture of new and used components will be issued with a Q registration number. The vehicle must have IVA, SVA or MSVA.’

The major change is that the vehicle must be inspected by the ‘appropriate vehicle enthusiasts club for the marque’. If an age-related number is being applied for, the vehicle will need to comply with the definition above, and the club letter will need to contain the key phrases from the above definition.

I would also draw your attention to the likely outcome in registering a vehicle which is built to original specification, but using a mixture of new and used components. The full document is available to download at www.direct.gov.uk then search using INF26.

Failed claims for original registration numbers

During the Federation’s visit to DVLA in October, we visited the section that deals with V765 applications, and saw three examples of failed applications. It might be instructive to outline why those particular applications failed.

Case 1: a pre-war vehicle with special body. There were photographs of the vehicle and a letter from a specialist club. However, there was no V55/5 (the form to register the vehicle), no V765 (the form to claim the original number) and no evidence to link the registration number to the vehicle, (typically, a certified copy of the original old style logbook). The specialist club should have known better than to allow such a poorly prepared application to be sent.

Case 2: a pre-war vehicle.  There were photographs of the vehicle, ‘evidence’ from the internet, and a long letter from the owner. There was no V55/5, no V765, no pre-1983 evidence in ‘certified copy’ form, and no covering letter from a sponsoring club. This was a ‘full house’ in terms of how not to mount a claim for a particular number. It certainly looked as though the owner had not approached the appropriate specialist club for their advice.

Case 3: a post-war vehicle. There was a photograph of the vehicle, completed V55/5 and V765 forms, and a certified photocopy of a tax disc. Unfortunately the photocopy of the tax disc was only certified by the club. Certified copies of documentation in the owner’s possession (e.g. old style logbook, tax disc, insurance certificate, plating plate, etc) need to be certified by a DVLA local office, as defined in the V765/3 guidance notes, which every V765 scheme member club has been issued with. Copies of archive documents, e.g. registration registers, would need to be certified by the document owner, which typically would be a local authority. This application almost passed. I would expect that a reapplication with the tax disc certified by a DVLA local office would be successful.

DVLA are more than happy for the claimed registration number to be reunited with the vehicle, provided the fairly straightforward criteria are met, and there are no other reasons why this registration number can’t be used on that vehicle perhaps because the number has been transferred to another vehicle, or is on retention.

If an owner or a club feels that an application has been unfairly rejected, the Federation can look at the evidence, and possibly make suggestions about what additional information is required. However, if the documentary evidence does not exist, there is no point in resubmitting an application to DVLA.

Resubmitted Applications

DVLA make archive copies of all the documents supplied with both successful and failed applications, and the original supplied documents are returned to the owner. This means that when a failed application is resubmitted, the new application is compared with the previous one. When a resubmission is prepared, the reasons why the previous application was rejected needs to be addressed. In 2009 there were around 2800 V765 applications and around 400 of these were rejected. This is all wasted time and effort, both by the owner, the sponsoring club (if there was one) and by DVLA.

It is perfectly understandable than an owner who has never been involved with a V765 application could be unfamiliar with the actual procedure. However, I would expect that the club signatory should be familiar with these procedures and should be carrying out a vetting service on the quality of the information that is supplied. Club signatories are there to guide the applicants. If the documentary information does not fit the DVLA requirements, (as defined on the V765 form) it is a waste of everybody’s time to submit that application.

Example. On the initial application a club had forwarded documents to DVLA indicating that a vehicle had a replica chassis. When the owner was notified that this would lead to a Q plate being allocated, the owner requested that the application be withdrawn. A few months later, a slightly revised application was submitted, where the replica chassis was not mentioned, and the club letter was ambiguous. As is standard practice by DVLA, the previous application was looked at, and compared with, the new application. The club was requested to clarify the inconsistencies between the two applications. In this case, the reputation of the club was on the line.

Information distribution

The information in the Federation’s Newsletter is designed to keep you informed about what the Federation is doing to ‘uphold the freedom’ to continue to use our historic vehicles. The intention is that the information is there to be passed on to individual club members, based on the editorial judgment of a club’s magazine editor. Some clubs have a regular section using such extracts but other clubs make no mention of our work.

A good example of why this can be important came up recently. A club member wanted to have the engine number and capacity corrected on a V5C and assumed that just sending off the amended V5C would be sufficient. The additional complication was that he was in the process of selling his vehicle, and quite reasonably, the sale could not take place until the V5C was corrected. The owner was not aware that DVLA requires independent verification of engine capacity changes, which for an historic vehicle, could be a suitably worded letter from the appropriate specialist club. This subject was covered in Federation Newsletter No. 2, 2010, but the owner was not aware of this information, possibly because it had not been reproduced in his club’s magazine. The consequence of this delayed the receipt of a corrected V5C, and the possible loss of a sale. Note that changes in cylinder capacity, together with the independent verification should be made at your DVLA local office. With an historic vehicle a change in engine capacity does not affect the nil duty being paid but unfortunately the Federation has not been able to convince DVLA that historic vehicles should be exempted from the requirement for independent verification of capacity changes.

New V5C and scrapping update

When taking your vehicle to an Authorised Treatment Facility (ATF) i.e. dismantler, the key phrase in the process is ‘intention to discard’. This means that the dismantler can chose to scrap the vehicle, or treat it as a used vehicle and sell it. On the V5C you need to fill in the V5C/3 section, (the yellow part), get the dismantler to sign it, and then you, as the former owner, post it to DVLA. If the dismantler scraps the vehicle, they generate a Certificate of Destruction (CoD), and pass it on to you as the former owner. If a CoD has been obtained this ends the keeper’s responsibility for the vehicle.

If you have scrapped the vehicle yourself, with an old style V5C, just tick the scrapping box. This will no longer be shown on DVLA records as a scrapped notification but the record will be amended to show that you no longer have the vehicle.

If you have a new red V5C, which does not have the scrapping box, as explained in the last Newsletter, it is a slightly different procedure. In the original DVLA press release, the option of self-scrapping is not mentioned, and it could be implied that if you self-scrap, and don’t take it to an Authorised Treatment Facility, then forever and a day you will be SORNing the vehicle. The DVLA press release says:

‘The ‘scrap’ box has also been removed because all cars, light vans and three-wheeled motor vehicles- excluding motor tricycles, must be taken to an Authorised Treatment Facility, who should issue a Certificate of Destruction (CoD). Vehicles other than those already mentioned, should still be taken to an ATF to ensure they are destroyed to environmental standards. Anyone keeping the vehicle but breaking it up for parts, etc, should make a Statutory off Road Notification (SORN) to let DVLA know that the vehicle is being kept unlicensed and off the road.’

However, on the leaflet called Your Registration Certificate (V5C) and you (INS160, 7/10) which is sent out with the new red front V5C, is the following:

‘If you have broken up the vehicle yourself, you must either tax it or tell us you are keeping it off the public road by making a SORN, until you take it to an ATF or tell us you no longer have it.’

I would draw you attention to those last eight words, ‘or tell us you no longer have it’, which for whatever reasons were not on the DVLA press release. The logical approach is that if you still have the key remnants of the vehicle, e.g. the chassis or bodyshell, you will still need to keep declaring SORN. However, when you dispose of those key remnants, you fill in the V5C/3 section that is called Selling or transferring your vehicle to a motor trader, insurer or dismantler. If the dismantler or, for example, foreman in charge of the Local Authority metal recycling skip is reluctant to sign his section of the V5C/3, then send the entire V5C, together with a dated and signed covering letter, to DVLA. I would suggest that you make a copy of what you send to DVLA. Within four weeks DVLA should confirm receipt of your letter, and confirm that you are not the registered keeper, and the tax/SORN notices should stop arriving every year.

Continuous Insurance Enforcement (CIE)

The Federation supports the introduction of Continuous Insurance Enforcement, and elsewhere in the Newsletter is information from DVLA on this subject however there are a couple of points that are not mentioned in the DVLA press release.

Where a non-match is made, i.e. the taxed vehicle on the DVLA database does not appear to have its insured counterpart on the Motor Insurance Database (MID) then further checks are made against the other unmatched vehicles on the MID. Discrepancies caused by letters being mistaken for numbers e.g. O and 0, and I and 1 should not generate the Insurance Advisory Letter. Similarly, recently registered vehicles which produce a non-match will be subject to further checks. Some DVLA legacy vehicle data derived from early old style logbooks is particularly sketchy, but hopefully any further checks, if required, will produce a match.

CIE does not apply to SORNed vehicles, so a SORNed vehicle may, or may not, be insured, based on the judgement of the owner.

Below are examples of why a mis-match might occur.

Example 1: a vehicle has been issued with an age-related number and for whatever reason the vehicle is not insured under that registration number. This is possibly because either the vehicle is still insured under its chassis number, or under a number that has been transferred off the vehicle and is on retention. When a new registration number is allocated to a vehicle by DVLA, it is the keeper’s responsibility to notify the insurance company of this new information. In this case, contact the insurance company to get the MID corrected.

Example 2: if your vehicle is insured under some form of company or trade group policy where the insurer does not record registration numbers, then it could be anticipated that you will receive a Insurance Advisory Letter. Contact the insurance company to get the MID amended.

Example 3: overdue renewal. The normal insurance renewal notice should arrive in plenty of time to allow for comparison of insurance quotations. In practical terms, if the receipt of your insurance renewal is received by the insurance company beyond the renewal date, it is possible that you will be sent the initial Insurance Advisory letter. Once again, contact the insurance company.

CONTINUOUS INSURANCE ENFORCEMENT

Stay insured: new penalties for vehicles without motor insurance

Ian Davies, Communications & Stakeholder Management, Continuous Insurance Enforcement Project 2, Change Delivery Portfolio, DVLA.

A new law is being introduced next year that will require taxed vehicles to be insured at all times, not just when in use on the road.

Background

In July 2004 the Government published a report called ‘Uninsured Driving in the United Kingdom’ that highlighted that the level of uninsured driving was amongst the highest in western Europe. One of the recommendations of the report was to introduce a record-based means of identifying uninsured vehicles. Following a public consultation in 2009 the Government decided to introduce a means of identifying uninsured vehicles by comparing records held on the Motor Insurance Database (MID) with those held by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA).

From early 2011 a new law will give the DVLA and the Motor Insurers' Bureau (MIB), who administer the Motor Insurance Database, more powers to deal with registered keepers of vehicles that are taxed but not insured, through the introduction of Continuous Insurance Enforcement (CIE).

Continuous Insurance Enforcement

Uninsured vehicles will be identified by comparing the Motor Insurance Database with DVLA’s Vehicle Database. Where a vehicle is taxed, but apparently uninsured, the MIB will issue an ‘Insurance Advisory Letter’ to the registered keeper advising them of the actions they need to take:

·      If not insured, insure immediately;

·      If they believe they are insured, contact their insurance provider immediately to check that the Motor Insurance Database has been updated with the correct information;

·      Make a Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN) to DVLA so that the vehicle is not included in CIE;

·      If they no longer have the vehicle, notify DVLA in writing.

If the keeper fails to undertake one of the above actions and the vehicle remains taxed but not insured, then DVLA will issue the registered keeper with a £100 Fixed Penalty Notice (reduced to £50 if paid within 21 days). Failure to pay the penalty and insure the vehicle could result in court prosecution with a fine of up to £1,000, and the vehicle being wheel-clamped or impounded if found on the public road.

CIE does not replace the laws of driving whilst uninsured; that will continue to be enforced by the police.

This new motor insurance law only applies to England, Scotland and Wales (vehicles registered in Northern Ireland, Channel Islands and Isle of Man are excluded from this law as they have their own registration authorities).

For more information on CIE, please visit www.direct.gov.uk/stayinsured

When is CIE being introduced?

The exact date cannot yet be given, but will be in early 2011. Announcements will be made in the press before CIE becomes law.

Historic Vehicle Owners

For historic vehicle owners there are a number of important things to remember.

·      SORN – if a SORN is made and the tax disc surrendered because the vehicle is not in use, then the vehicle will not be subject to CIE;

·      Pre-SORN vehicles - vehicles which have been kept off-road before SORN came into force on 1 February 1998 are exempt from CIE unless they are brought back into use, in which case they would need to be insured or a SORN made;

·      Vehicles manufactured before 1 January 1973 – though the vehicle may have a ‘nil value’ tax disc, it is classed as being ‘taxed’ and a SORN should be made if uninsured and not in use;

·      Ask MID - if you want to check your vehicle is recorded as ‘insured’ on the Motor Insurance Database, visit the free service at www.askMID.com.

The author has kindly allowed us to print his email address if anyone has any enquiries: ian.davies2@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

FUEL NEWS FROM FBHVC

Consultation on draft regulations which amend the Motor Fuel (Composition and Content) Regulations 1999 to implement European Directive 2009/30/EC with respect to Fuel Quality

The FBHVC responded to this lengthily titled consultation at the beginning of June thus:

The FBHVC recognises that major policy directives on fuel quality cannot reasonably be resisted by a minority group whose principle fuel demand is linked to specialty interest activities. Nevertheless there are some points which the Federation wishes to establish as part of the consultation process:

i)     Petrol containing ethanol is potentially harmful to the fuel systems of the majority of vehicles operated by FBHVC members. The dangers of corrosion and degradation of materials used in the fuel systems of historic vehicles have been highlighted by the CONCAWE organisation. There are no benefits to FBHVC members from the inclusion of ethanol in petrol, and in general, the higher the ethanol content the greater the concerns.

ii)  Contrary to the assertion contained in the DfT consultation document that cars with carburettors can be expected to disappear quietly over the next few years, so that by 2013 there will no longer be a problem, the number of historic vehicles covered by the Federation is not expected to reduce over time. The Federation wishes to put on record that it does not accept that problems caused by the enforced inclusion of ethanol in petrol in the UK are not, or will not, be an issue in the future in vehicles it represents.

Additives for use with biofuels

Few problems are anticipated with ‘ordinary’ road diesel as none have been reported from other countries where the transition to fuel containing bio-diesel has that they take precautions to avoid storing red diesel for prolonged periods without an additive both in storage tanks and in vehicle fuel tanks and keep all storage tanks scrupulously clean. It should be noted that the use of a biocide to overcome contamination would result in a waste product defined as a biohazard.already taken place. The problems likely to be encountered with red diesel have been written about in great detail in the newsletter already (issue 6, 2009) and this information is also available on our website www.fbhvc.co.uk. Any agricultural diesel users should make sure

Additives are available to protect against the main problems likely to be encountered for petrol and diesel fuelled vehicles (corrosion inhibitors, stability improvers and biocidal products).

A product for use with petrol has been designed to be added to the tank when re-fuelling to prevent degradation in storage in the fuel tank. It provides excellent protection against the possible corrosion through increased acidity which can occur when petrol containing ethanol is stored for any length of time. One bottle should provide a season’s protection – although this is obviously dependent on the vehicle and amount of usage.

A similar product for bio-diesel fuel (e.g. containing rapeseed methyl ester) has also been developed. There is no corrosion issue here but one of fuel filter blockage, injector fouling etc. It is also designed to be dispensed from a plastic bottle (with graduated optic) at refuelling time.

These products exist but do not have a commercial outlet as yet. Any organisation who might be interested in selling these types of product should contact the FBHVC secretary in the first instance. It may also be possible to include lead-replacement additives in the marketing package.

Study into material compatibility and carburettor icing

An investigation had been started by DfT, undertaken by Stephen Wall, Senior Scientist at the Fuels and Lubricants Centre, QinetiQ, based in Farnborough, to investigate the effects of petrol containing up to 10% ethanol. Specifically this will investigate vehicle fuel system material compatibility and carburettor icing as well as other aspects such as drivability issues.

The FBHVC has been invited to submit evidence of problems to this study and we would welcome information from member clubs.