27 replies to this topic

[Cooperman]

Still no-one can tell me where the body-shell number is stamped into the shell other than the scuttle panel lip on later cars and, I think, nowhere on Mk.1 & Mk.2 cars.

So where is this ident that could result in an early car being identified as having a non-original shell change. Remember it was quite legal to re-shell with an equivalent shell, new or used, until a few years ago so for anyone to establish that an illegal shell change has taken place would require the date of re-shelling to be proved beyond any doubt.

The Historic Vehicles Federation has asked for the law to be changed to save many classics and they realise that literally hundreds of re-shells of classic cars of all types are currently underway in this country all of which will be, effectively, undetectable.

Deliberate fraud is another matter as in changing the identity of a later car to avoid road tax, but that is not the same as re-shelling to keep a classic car on the road.

[lrostoke]

I think on a like for like nobody is going to know unless you start advertising the fact.

 

My shells pretty solid, its had wings, inner wings, rear quarters, boot floor, front floors, sills, rear hinge section, scuttle so barely any original metal left so no identification left on it

 

If you start trying fit earlier shells to later cars then an expert witness will probably spot the differences, gutters, tower fittings, etc

[Carlos W]

It's against the law, and although you may not agree with the law I don't think we can start picking and choosing which laws we obey and which we don't!

 

If a burglar breaks into your house and steals your belongings as a redistribution of wealth he has still committed a crime, and I'm sure as the victim you would see it as a crime even if he says he was redistributing wealth!

 

What people do behind closed doors in their own garages is up to them, but buying cars with no identity and putting different identities on them gives a market for stolen cars.

 

This topic has been discussed many times by the team behind closed doors, and the TMF view is it is illegal!

[Guess-Works.com]

It's against the law, and although you may not agree with the law I don't think we can start picking and choosing which laws we obey and which we don't!

 

If a burglar breaks into your house and steals your belongings as a redistribution of wealth he has still committed a crime, and I'm sure as the victim you would see it as a crime even if he says he was redistributing wealth!

 

What people do behind closed doors in their own garages is up to them, but buying cars with no identity and putting different identities on them gives a market for stolen cars.

 

This topic has been discussed many times by the team behind closed doors, and the TMF view is it is illegal!

 

It is not against the law.... lets get this straight from the start....

 

You can use a pre-used shell to rebuild a car, but you must in form the DVLA of such at which point they may decide to have the car inspected, judge whether it needs a VIC, SIVA, BIVA or whatever and then the results of which will determine what registration it is due...

 

Not informing the DVLA  this is where the problem lies.... and essentially the legal issue.

[Vipernoir]

The illegal bit is not telling the DVLA to avoid getting the dreaded Q-plate and the stigma attached to it.

[minimadles]

Surely a body shell is just another part be it second hand or new the problem is the identification of the new reshelled vehicle it's one thing changing like for like but totally wrong to try and pass of a reshelled car as something else just my thoughts

[Vipernoir]

As with anything so emotive, there is always going to be a grey area.

 

Swap a damaged/rusted 1992 shell for another 1992 shell and I personally don't see a problem.

 

Swap a damaged/rusted 1992 shell for a brand new Heritage shell and it's still a 1992 car as a complete new bodyshell is viewed as a new part, same as changing a tyre, windscreen or a head gasket.

 

Swap a damaged/rusted 1992 shell for a 1998 shell and suddenly what age is the car ?
It's not a 1992 as it's got a 1998 body, but it isn't a 1998 as it's got 1992 running gear and logbook.
It's actually an age-undefined Q-plate, but nobody wants a Q.

 

Swap a 1992 logbook for a 1970 logbook on the same car without doing anything other than a pop-rivet-rebuild and thats just plain illegal.

[Rog46]

I understand that if you cut repair panel from another shell and weld them in that's ok . At what point does it become reshelling as opposed to repairing?

[tiger99]

Exactly! So you just cut out most of the replacement shell and weld it to the part of your old scuttle which has the VIN number. That is what I would do, if it became necessary, and I do like to keep things fully legal. I would also inevitably need to fit quite a few new panels, so the identity of various bits would be completely indeterminate. No-one has suggested that you need to keep receipts for any sills, A panels, and all the other bits which tend to need regular replacement.

 

I have a vague memory that on very late models there is a second VIN number elsewhere, so if anyone knows where, please let us know. It could safely be removed just by "needing" to change the relevant panel.

 

I once knew someone who had a hammer which had 3 new heads and 7 new shafts, but was still the same hammer.....

[lrostoke]

triggers broom :)

[Tamworthbay]

triggers broom :)

I have to be honest about mine. Its a one previous owner 14000 mile car. But it lived outside in Southampton for 13500 of those miles and looking back through the full history shows that there isn't that much on it that left the factory originally. It had a documented 7k resto fifteen years or so back which included a replacement shell. For a city it was well loved to say the least, bit 'completely original' it isn't by a long way!

[retired]

Apologies for jumping in on this thread.....

 

This is what I can't find a definitive answer to on the Web...

 

Remember it was quite legal to re-shell with an equivalent shell, new or used, until a few years ago so for anyone to establish that an illegal shell change has taken place would require the date of re-shelling to be proved beyond any doubt.

 

I went through this MANY years ago, as far as I can remember it was some kind of "points" system - use enough of the original parts which had different points ratings and it was all OK.

 

So I did it way back then, V5 shows I owned the car way back then, but all the paperwork got lost in several house moves since then but I had enough evidence to get a new V5 from DVLA (original registration date, change date to my ownership (before I re-shelled it), but no records of the points system).

 

After 15 plus years abandoned outside it was kind of rotten again.

 

So I've just rebuilt it (well, over the last three or more years) - nothing too major, just new sills, A panels and rear valance, Oh, and a bulkhead box - it was already changed to an FG front when I first rebuilt it as the damaged shell I used was missing the front and has a proper brace bar system (not the stuff currently on sale, way better - and before the IVA Police say anything it was quite legal back then, no such thing as an IVA/IVC/IV whatever...) and I'm not too worried about my bulkhead modifications as ERA did it with no issues.

 

My local (MOT) garage have looked at it and say they are quite happy to MOT it based on its age, modifications etc. and the paperwork I have so, apologies for the long winded ramble, but does anyone know exactly when the rules changed ???

 

I can't find a definitive answer on the web and don't really want to phone DVLA as the last time I tried that I got some jobsworth who refused to register an engine change size - UPWARDS.... as I couldn't produce a garage invoice (I did it myself....).

 

Thanks for reading.

[Bungle]

early 80's

 

there is a topic on the ACE web site with more info somewhere