Jump to content

Russell1972

Members
  • Posts

    28
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Russell1972 got a reaction from poppyman in My VW Camper - An epic story of human misery & suffering....   
    They hide the rot incredibly well. I've just finished restoring a 1968 Single Cab pickup. What I thought would be just sills, ended up needing the middle third of the truck replacing. Sills, strengtheners, lower bulkhead, upper and lower loadbeds, complete side panel, new 'treasure chest' door. Even after a bare metal repaint, from a distance, and in photos, it doesn't look a whole lot different to when I bought it!
    3 photos attached, as bought (with the whitewalls), half-way through the horrors, and what it looks like now.
    Russell.



  2. Thanks
    Russell1972 got a reaction from Mathew in 2000 estate tow bar   
    The main cross bar that runs behind the bumper, is sandwiched between the bumper mounts and the body and attached with the existing bumper bolts. The thinner bar that runs down under the rear is just bolted through the floor. I think I had to drill a couple of holes, so that part doesn't bolt to anything in particular.
  3. Haha
    Russell1972 got a reaction from Bfg in That was a year that was..   
    Well done Peter, glad you finally got it sold. Your experience only goes to reinforce my mantra, of "never sell anything - just build more sheds"
    Hopefully see you Tuesday.
  4. Thanks
    Russell1972 got a reaction from Waynebaby in MoT exempt and I'm being prosecuted for no MoT   
    The MoT History Checker always shows the unfriendly red banner, even for my pre-1960 Ford Pop. That site is run by the DVSA.
    The DVLA tax and MoT checker shows the green boxes. Apparently there is little correlation between these 2 systems.
    Bit more of an update, courtesy of the FBHVC, I have a definitive statement from the Department for Transport, which I've attached.
    statement on declaration.docx
    I quite like point b)
    is of a type no longer in production.
    Does that mean old Morgans still need MoTs? :-)
  5. Like
    Russell1972 got a reaction from dave.vitesse in MoT exempt and I'm being prosecuted for no MoT   
    The MoT History Checker always shows the unfriendly red banner, even for my pre-1960 Ford Pop. That site is run by the DVSA.
    The DVLA tax and MoT checker shows the green boxes. Apparently there is little correlation between these 2 systems.
    Bit more of an update, courtesy of the FBHVC, I have a definitive statement from the Department for Transport, which I've attached.
    statement on declaration.docx
    I quite like point b)
    is of a type no longer in production.
    Does that mean old Morgans still need MoTs? :-)
  6. Sad
    Russell1972 got a reaction from poppyman in MoT exempt and I'm being prosecuted for no MoT   
    Yes, although more specific guidelines are on the NTTA site. My trailer falls into this  
    i. A secondary coupling as per “f" must be fitted to a braked trailer manufactured before 1982 that has a manual handbrake arrangement. 
    So the officer knew his law on trailers. 
    I just have to wait for the letter to arrive now. 
     
  7. Like
    Russell1972 got a reaction from JumpingFrog in MoT exempt and I'm being prosecuted for no MoT   
    Hi all, I have an update. I emailed the FBHVC this morning and had a phone call this afternoon from Bob Owen, the Director of Legislation, which he followed up with an email, which is below : 
    ----
    The Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs is very interested in your predicament.
    Your vehicle, if not substantially changed, is exempt from the MOT and the prosecution is misconceived.
    You have understood the procedure correctly; it is not possible to declare that a vehicle is not substantially changed and therefore eligible until the date of next licensing following the expiry of the existing MOT. I understand your MOT expired in August, i.e. nearly eleven months before the next licensing date. In fact, DVLA do not record declarations, (or submission of a V112) so it is not clear how the policeman could have checked whether or not you had declared!
    The official Guidance on Gov.uk is also unambiguous , making no reference whatsoever to declaration.
    What is really annoying is that when the exemption procedure was announced the Federation predicted  that this would happen and we were assured it could not, as the police were fully aware of the position..
    With your permission we would wish to take this up, anonymously at first, with both the DfT in London and DVLA, who are responsible for the process, though of course DVSA are responsible for testing.
    ----
    I have given him my permission to raise it with the DfT and DVLA.
    It's interesting that he says the declarations are not even recorded.
    More info as and when I get it.
    Russell.
     
  8. Like
    Russell1972 got a reaction from poppyman in MoT exempt and I'm being prosecuted for no MoT   
    Hi all, I have an update. I emailed the FBHVC this morning and had a phone call this afternoon from Bob Owen, the Director of Legislation, which he followed up with an email, which is below : 
    ----
    The Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs is very interested in your predicament.
    Your vehicle, if not substantially changed, is exempt from the MOT and the prosecution is misconceived.
    You have understood the procedure correctly; it is not possible to declare that a vehicle is not substantially changed and therefore eligible until the date of next licensing following the expiry of the existing MOT. I understand your MOT expired in August, i.e. nearly eleven months before the next licensing date. In fact, DVLA do not record declarations, (or submission of a V112) so it is not clear how the policeman could have checked whether or not you had declared!
    The official Guidance on Gov.uk is also unambiguous , making no reference whatsoever to declaration.
    What is really annoying is that when the exemption procedure was announced the Federation predicted  that this would happen and we were assured it could not, as the police were fully aware of the position..
    With your permission we would wish to take this up, anonymously at first, with both the DfT in London and DVLA, who are responsible for the process, though of course DVSA are responsible for testing.
    ----
    I have given him my permission to raise it with the DfT and DVLA.
    It's interesting that he says the declarations are not even recorded.
    More info as and when I get it.
    Russell.
     
×
×
  • Create New...