81 replies to this topic

[THE ANORAK]

But am i getting it straight - if i have two cars - use the shell of one and the running gear off the other - as long as at the end i use the reg and log book etc from the car with the shell then i am ok? But if i use the reg and logbook from the car with the running gear then im being naughty?

In which case, it sounds like all this dude has got wrong is he shoulda advertisede as "Well its basically a 199X MPi BUT it has had everything changed to Mk1 spec" and then he shoulda used the reg from the 199X car?

In a nutshell, yes. Then all the guy has to do is transfer the reg number from the the Mk1 to the SPI so the V5 shows the details of the SPI with a cherished transfer reg number. And he may well have done that.

Thats the only issue as far as I see it. The guy may or may not deserve a slating as we don't know what he's told DVLA. But he does appear to be honest and up front about how he has built the car.

In any case, this thread has been useful as its highlighted the legalities of reshelling a car - a common Mini issue.

OK, ill go along with that, but he is claiming it's a 62 car with tax exempt status, is he not ????

if he said its a 199? MPi that's been turned into a MK1 replica and has a cherished plate transferred over and that's fine in my book, but hes not doing that, is he ????

Edited by THE ANORAK, 17 August 2008 - 09:11 AM.

[VulcanBomber]

But am i getting it straight - if i have two cars - use the shell of one and the running gear off the other - as long as at the end i use the reg and log book etc from the car with the shell then i am ok? But if i use the reg and logbook from the car with the running gear then im being naughty?

In which case, it sounds like all this dude has got wrong is he shoulda advertisede as "Well its basically a 199X MPi BUT it has had everything changed to Mk1 spec" and then he shoulda used the reg from the 199X car?

In a nutshell, yes. Then all the guy has to do is transfer the reg number from the the Mk1 to the SPI so the V5 shows the details of the SPI with a cherished transfer reg number. And he may well have done that.

Thats the only issue as far as I see it. The guy may or may not deserve a slating as we don't know what he's told DVLA. But he does appear to be honest and up front about how he has built the car.

In any case, this thread has been useful as its highlighted the legalities of reshelling a car - a common Mini issue.

Retaining the original registration - the Points System

If a car is rebuilt, it must retain a certain amount of its old (pre-rebuild, not necessarily original) parts to retain its identity. This is calculated on a points system, whereby retaining the original part or system accrues points as detailed below. **Eight** points are required to retain the identity of the car.


Bodyshell* 5 points
Suspension 2 points
Steering assembly 2 points
Transmission 2 points
Driveshafts 1 point each
Engine 1 point

* The original unmodified bodyshell, or a new bodyshell of the same specification as the original supported by evidence from the dealer or manufacturer (e.g. receipt)

If a second-hand bodyshell is used, the vehicle must pass a single vehicle approval (SVA) test after which a "Q" prefix registration number will be allocated.

So if you use any second hand bodyshell, second hand being deemed as a shell that has not been sold to you directly by a BMH approved dealer - this will include a shell from ebay (even if its brand new) then the car will have a Q registration. Even if everything from the old shell is moved over it stilll has a Q plate.

If you take a 1999 MPi put all the bits from a MK1 on it then using the points system above if you have enough of the orignal car then you can use the orignal MPi registration, if you dont have enough points then you have a Q plate issues after an SVA test.

What you can not do is move MK1 parts accross to an MPi and use the MK1 registration, this is what this guy is doing. You can see its more MPi than MK1 - he could put the MPi registration on it but no way could he have the MK1 reg.

Russ, as a concerned member of the public, and you an officer of the law, I would like you to officially investigate this and get to the bottom and finally acertain if there is any wrong doing

[R1mini]

This is true - I think this more of a stealing the ID of another car rather than stealing the actual car.

No ringing is diguising the identity of a stolen car using the registration details of another car typically a damaged repairable but it also can be a well worn high mileage taxi for instance, or even a classic car that needs a total rebuild.

So you can't ring a car with another legit car.

Stealing the ID of another car is cloning

Cheers
David

[mini-man-dan]

That's really weird?? We had an old skwl Beach Buggy, that was reg'd as a Beach Buggy, but still retained the Beetle registration. I suppose it could have been a new bodyshell when it was converted The thing was it was a LWB one, so the chassis hadn't been shortedned, which we were told meant that the original Plates could be kept. Rules might have changed now though. I don't no! Lol, it's a bit strange!

[VulcanBomber]

This is true - I think this more of a stealing the ID of another car rather than stealing the actual car.

No ringing is diguising the identity of a stolen car using the registration details of another car typically a damaged repairable but it also can be a well worn high mileage taxi for instance, or even a classic car that needs a total rebuild.

So you can't ring a car with another legit car.

Stealing the ID of another car is cloning

Cheers
David

Yep I know that, if I could change the title to cloning I would but I cant.

Edited by VulcanBomber, 17 August 2008 - 09:32 AM.

[R1mini]

Yep I know that, if I could change the title to cloning I would but I cant.

This is not cloning either, this is incorrectly registering a car at worst, like other people have done, some on this forum

The points registration system your quoting is a couple of years out of date

David

[VulcanBomber]

Yep I know that, if I could change the title to cloning I would but I cant.

This is not cloning either, this is incorrectly registering a car at worst, like other people have done, some on this forum

The points registration system your quoting is a couple of years out of date

David

Hi dave,

The points system is still in use and can be found here

http://www.direct.go...cle/DG_10014199

The fact that the car is not as its registered is a point enough to raise suspicion. This is not right or legal. The fact it has 997 on the log book but has a 1.3 mpi engine fitted is wrong.

If the car had the late mpi plate then it would not be an issue at all - fact is it doesnt and it trying to present itself as a MK1 which it is far from.

[Ethel]

The points system, with various formulas, only goes back to the introduction of SVA. Before that you could get away with pretty much anything, as long as you got the details changed on the V5. There are still kit & modified cars about with registrations that don't look right, not that the registration actually means anything thanks to the DVLA's own cherished number scheme.

The regulations are a little ridiculous, I'd say good luck to the guy if he was keeping the car, but it would be disingenuous to sell the car to someone who isn't fully aware of the implications.

[panelbeaterpeter]

Unfortunately there are lots of cars on the roads like that, it's not really doing anyone any harm, and it doesn't sound dangerous so I'd just walk away and mind your own business. Probably not the best advise, but that's what I'd do.

[paulrockliffe]

I know that the points sytem can be found on the direct.gov website, but it is out of date. It is an error on the direct.gov website, as evidenced on other threads here, so please ignore it.

[VulcanBomber]

I know that the points sytem can be found on the direct.gov website, but it is out of date. It is an error on the direct.gov website, as evidenced on other threads here, so please ignore it.

I take their info over yours, unless you can direct me to where the points system has been stopped.

Edited by VulcanBomber, 17 August 2008 - 02:19 PM.

[R1mini]

VulcanBomber

You seem determined to get this guy, I see your on pistonheads as well!

David

[paulrockliffe]

I know that the points sytem can be found on the direct.gov website, but it is out of date. It is an error on the direct.gov website, as evidenced on other threads here, so please ignore it.

I take their info over yours, unless you can direct me to where the points system has been stopped.

You do realise that direct.gov isn't the DVLA website? Fair enough if you don't believe me, I accept that to you I'm a lot less credible source of info that direct.gov, but this issue has been highlighted by Dan in a number of threads and he has spoken to the DVLA to clarify things. I'm going to have a look and see if I can find one of those threads for you....

[paulrockliffe]

On this thread:

http://www.theminifo...showtopic=85106

Dan says:

Yes Scrog you have answered your own question. I'd really like to know where on the DVLA site you found that information because this question comes up quite often and every time I search the DVLA for the definitive answer I get redirected the the Direct Gov site. Unfortunately that site only carries old and out of date information about the points system under which it was perfectly legal to use a second hand or non-original shell in certain circumstances (still wouldn't apply to you though as you are essentially building a brand new car). If you use all new running gear as you said above then your car is going to be considered new and will need an SVA. The good news is that it will then be counted as a brand new car meaning no MOT for three years and all the other associated benefits.

[paulrockliffe]

On this thread:

http://www.theminifo...p;hl=direct.gov

Dan says:

That section from the Direct Gov site is incorrect, for some reason when the Direct Gov people added the 'registering kit cars' information from the DVLA they used a version that was about 6 months out of date and have never modified it since. The method now requires the original or unused new replacement body and at least two major assemblies to be kept from the original car. Or maybe it was the DVLA who were quoting it wrongly shortly before their site was absorbed, since Direct Gov is the only on-line source of the info there is no easy way to know which system is more up to date. And if you phone the DVLA and ask, the person on the phone will only check the website anyway!

In fact that was in response to a similar question from your good self.