356 replies to this topic

[Pauly]

OMG I'm doomed



i spoke to my MOT tester about this a few months back and his info was;

"dont make such a big fuss about it all. they were on about this years ago and it just slowly went quiet and nothing more was heard. its the people that keep bringing it to the DVLA's attention every 5mins with phonecalls and emails that will eventually bring it into force, as the DVLA will see an easy way to get more money from the obviously scared modded car owners. keep quiet and it should go away again due to the initial cost implications of setting up the whole testing system".

(he used to work directly for VOSA)

Agreed...100%.

[leaky]

Thanks for all this info. I'm planning to do a suziki swift transplant to mine and have been wondering about all the for a while. I had planed on doing it in a standard front so I wouldn't be altering the shell to try and get round this. Although as I'd be putting in a different front subframe I would still need one anyway.

[mini93]

ok...mines on a Q plate at the moment, since it was Q plated (it was built from a smell back in 94) iv cut the bulkhead out and put in a miglia style box...full length thingy...am i spost to re-test it and get a new Q plate?

Edited by mini93, 18 February 2010 - 06:50 PM.

[Bungle]

ok...mines on a Q plate at the moment, since it was Q plated (it was built from a smell back in 94) iv cut the bulkhead out and put in a miglia style box...full length thingy...am i spost to re-test it and get a new Q plate?

i would guess yes but you can ask questions on the ACE site and they get back to you quickly (with in a week)

[Ivor Badger]

To be strictly accurate, a mini is not a monocoque. In fact niether is a Lotus 25. the first true Lotus monocoque being a Lotus 38. Just because the structure is made from sheet metal does not make it a monocoque and if the mini was a true monocoque, it wouldn't have the internal bulkheads.

That's what I was thinking. Surely the strength in a Mini is in the subframes, not the body?

This applies only to early solid mounted subframes. The subframe actually braces the front panels and the front can be removed without braces. Had this arguement with a scrutineer a few years ago when he complained about the lack of subframe braces. I pointed out to him that he had marshalled on a rally and that the front of a previous car wasn't doing much bracing and if the subframe didn't fall out on a special stage, it sure wasn't going to fall out on tarmac. The original design had the subframe taking the impact and pivoting on the main cross member bolts. The back then pivoted up and backwards, which pushed the steering rack backwards. This caused the column to pivot round the parcel shelf and the steering wheel to come out the windscreen.

The front is required for the silent subframe system as it is part of the flex mounting system.

The problem of removing the front on more recent vehicles is that it clearly alters the crash and safety tests. What is the result of hitting a pedestrian with a fibre glass front? Will it fail structurally and the pedestrian end up embedded in the fibre glass, not recommended. I consider a flip front as unsuitable for any road going mini.

[The Matt]

I've learned something of great interest today.

A guy I work with has a friend that works for VOSA. He has been working with kit cars and modified vehicles for all of his life. Allegedly, he assisted VOSA with the development of the IVA test (and the rules and regulations behind it).

I'm going to try and meet up with him soon, find out how much he knows and show him my mini.

I'm also planning (if possible) to show him the various "usual" mods that are carried out on Minis and see where we all stand.

I personally need a better understanding of the rules, but what I learn (if anything) will be posted up on here.

It would seem that the Basic IVA test would be needed for my car, not the Normal IVA.

[dave21478]

OMG I'm doomed



i spoke to my MOT tester about this a few months back and his info was;

"dont make such a big fuss about it all. they were on about this years ago and it just slowly went quiet and nothing more was heard. its the people that keep bringing it to the DVLA's attention every 5mins with phonecalls and emails that will eventually bring it into force, as the DVLA will see an easy way to get more money from the obviously scared modded car owners. keep quiet and it should go away again due to the initial cost implications of setting up the whole testing system".

(he used to work directly for VOSA)

Your tester who used to work for VOSA is tragically misinformed.

This is decades-old legislation that is being enforced more vigorously here, nothing new. Its not going to fade away, quite the opposite. And no money has to be spent setting anything up as the test centers already exist and have done for many years now. As I said before this is simply SVA with a new name, and a few relatively minor regulation changes.

The system used to be called SVA - Single Vehicle Approval.
Its now called IVA - Individual Vehicle Approval.
Do you see what they did there?

Actually, its called BIVA to give it its full name, but then we get into the various sub-categories of testing for various vehicle build styles. Its all there on The Ace website with links to the relevant VOSA and DVLA pages.

Edited by dave21478, 18 February 2010 - 07:06 PM.

[Darkscamp]

Your tester who used to work for VOSA is tragically misinformed.

This is decades-old legislation that is being enforced more vigorously here, nothing new. Its not going to fade away, quite the opposite. And no money has to be spent setting anything up as the test centers already exist and have done for many years now. As I said before this is simply SVA with a new name, and a few relatively minor regulation changes.

The system used to be called SVA - Single Vehicle Approval.
Its now called IVA - Individual Vehicle Approval.
Do you see what they did there?

Actually, its called BIVA to give it its full name, but then we get into the various sub-categories of testing for various vehicle build styles. Its all there on The Ace website with links to the relevant VOSA and DVLA pages.

He's not mis-informed as he knows all about it. He just works in colour, not black and white.

I/he never said it was new, and saying it is old legislation is exactly his point. They tried to vigorously enforce it before but it died a death and just layed dorment in the background. Yes the test centres are there but more staff will need to be employed, and not just at test centres, to deal with what will basically be a hell of alot of cars, not just mini's! According to him, the ressurection of the 'vigorously enforced testing' hasnt been passed yet and may still be left to sleep quietly due to the administritive nightmare it will definately cause.

[Meepo]

If the DVLA and VOSA are reading these, and other forums, they should by now know all the popular modifications made to our vehicles. This should enable them to compose a list of what can and cannot be modified to our so called monocoque constructed bodyshells.

Earlier this year I removed the front part of the inner wings, and replaced them with brace bars. Since reading a similar thread to this one (after the cutting was done) I had second thoughts. Not wanting to risk losing my log book and having a Q plate, I decided put the car back to its original spec, and fit new complete inner wings.

They tell us ignorance is not an excuse for breaking the law. So its about time they made things crystal clear and issue a list of what can and cannot done. Unless of course even drilling a hole will be classed as modifying the vehicle from its original specification.

I guess its a very effective way of getting a lot of old cars off the road.

[The Matt]

It's not about revenue generation, nor getting old cars off the road.

It's about making modified vehicles safe.

I am not sure if VOSA or the DVLA would be able to commit the resources to create an all-encompassing list of potential modifications to all makes of vehicle. Though I do think that there are other people with knowledge of the regulations that could create (or help to create) a list for their preffered vehicle type. Hence my idea of meeting up with this local IVA guru and showing him a list of usual mini modifications.

I was a bit shocked when I saw what I would have to comply with on my Mini, but after the initial shock I re-read the list of criteria, have worked out some acceptable means of compliance and, to be honest, a lot of it is common sense IMO.

[Ethel]

We can all give opinions, but the only way you'll know for sure is you are collared and told you need an IVA.

The ERA's were sold by Rover dealers and built out of Rover production cars so they can hardly claim they weren't approved by Rover. The production run was probably small enough to avoid any major type approval regulations, I'd think they would each have needed an SVA if their modifications justified it.

Metro Turbo was launched at the end of 1982, Q plates date back to 1983, the SVA was introduced in 1998.

[Trail of Dead]

This is all very interesting, but confusing at the same time. How does this affect me? I mean I've only got two years left in this country and then Dexter is going back to the US with me....permanently. I get so worried about this "Q plate" crap cause from what I gather if I got slammed with a Q plate then that would effectively change the year of registration on his paperwork right? IF I do swap subframes it is only going to be for another Mini subby (an MPi subby to be exact....Dexter is an '82 and the MPi subby is a '98).

The only body mods I am planning are no bumpers front or back and removing both side seams from the bottom. If I have to (due to unforeseen rot) I'll run a GRP front. How does this all affect me? I just can't wait to get him home....then I won't have to worry about this SVA,IVA,VOSA,MOT,DVLA, etc....madness!!!! It's madness!!!!

[roofless]

now have I got this right?................

if we modify our toys, we're basically just facing the same issues that kit-car builders always have, and as long as things are done properly, and to the letter of the recommendations........we're OK ?

[Darkscamp]

i'm just sticking to; 'if i they tell me i have to have a IVA then i will do' until then i'm just going to enjoy the Scamp as it is right now and worry about it when the time comes.

[Ethel]

now have I got this right?................

if we modify our toys, we're basically just facing the same issues that kit-car builders always have, and as long as things are done properly, and to the letter of the recommendations........we're OK ?

Yes, but you will have to prove you have by submitting to an IVA. (if your mods justify it, and that's the nub of it, VOSA are not going to say you can definately do X or Y ahead of the event as it puts them in an impossible situation. DVLA have their points system and falling foul of that is the most likely way you'll end up needing an IVA to register your car for the road if they've withdrawn the one you had.

I wouldn't worry about fitting a standard Rover subframe - superseded part supplied by the manufacturer. Refer to the DVLA points scheme to see how much you are allowed to change and keep still the reg.