Sorry to be a drag, but if you could spread the word?

[mk1]

A number of them that Nick has been in touch with and ecoclassics are putting together a focused defensive involving their mps etc. it is the more litigious approach but in parallel to my approach.
They have all suddenly had a lot of problems similar to mine, which they had not had up until now, which reinforces the idea that dvla have changed the application of their rules.
These businesses have a lot more to lose than I!

In a round about way this is probably a good thing. What is needed here (apart from getting a reversal of the ridiculous decision on Ed's conversion) is Clarity!

[Bitsilly]

Agreed! I would be OK with letting sleeping dogs lie but would hate to see them running free at the next car show with a camera and a grin?

This is what I put on the other forum:

"it would be a good idea to get clarification on whether they intend to carry on regardless of my case as they could easily use same interpretation of rules to hit say max power gang or hot rods etc etc. "

Someone else also pointed out sun roofs!

So I want to fight them on this even if I do need to scrap the car.

[johnv]

have sprint/broad speed shells come under scrutiny? (sorry, may not have kept up with all the posts on this )

[Pandora]

There is no doubt that a properly sprinted shell would fall foul of the 'radically altered' monocoque description. Whether it is actually stronger or weaker would be a discussion that would fund an engineer's comfortable retirement I suspect.

conversely, any home restored shell to standard spec using new panels would on the face of it be OK, but that is not to say it has been done competently let alone well......

The problem is, as it's always been, DVLA don't understand cars, mechanics, or any of this stuff - they are a licencing agency, in the nicest possible way, faceless administrators / burocrats. Any of these rules are primarily aimed at car crime (ringers etc) and to a much lesser extent, kit cars. They don't really understand restoration, so it doesn't fit their 'one size fits all' system. And to compound the problem, as systems people, they see anything that doesn't fit the system as being the problem, not the system itself.

What about conversions of LCV shells into campers, ambulances, Welfare units? There are so many cases where a simple additional hole is needed, de it for a bolt or a sunroof

The saving grace with a Sprint is that they don't know enough to recognise the changes........

Al

[mk1]

This is exactly why I sold my Sprint when I did at the price I did.

Sooner or later, the DLVA are going to cotton on to this & it will become a major issue for some owners.

[mk1]

I have received the following via PM from a forum member who would rather remain anonymous.

I suspect the 'two drilled holes' is a red herring and the conversation about sprints, sunroofs, campers etc on here is just muddying the waters for people - I suspect it may be that people are trying to lump the electric issue in with holes and sprints to drag everything down.


My personal opinion is that the DVLA issue is not with holes, sunroofs, sprints in this case, rather its the home conversion to electric, i suspect that they are worried about people messing with the high voltages etc and the liabilities that ensure in accidents, particularly if the cars have been inspected by the DLVA, who lets face it, will probably be the first to admit that the guys they are sending out will not be 100 percent up on what's safe or not

I guess this is why they are steering these cars towards a IVA, as it has better legal standing if a car has been correctly inspected and signed off?

I do wonder what the possible liabilities will be when one of these home (or bought kit) conversions is involved in an accident and a third party or a member of the emergency services is seriously hurt

I do think that the DVLA have maybe realized this and are quietly shutting the conversion market down

An acquaintance of mine works in a body shop, and repairs, on occasion, electric cars, he says everything has to be in bright orange sheaths to show the high voltage parts and there has to be numerous interlinks and safety cuts outs, all of which are know by people working on them - I wonder what the fire brigade would do if met with a electric classic mini sparking and fizzing away in a crash....where do they cut the power for example?

I suspect there may be a good deal of truth in this.

As I said above, what we need most of all is CLARITY!

[mk1]

It looks like the "Vintage Voltage" electric Mini OBJ 460E has had it's logbook pulled!!

https://vehicleenquiry.service.gov.uk/V ... ?locale=en

[mk1]

As has the Vintage Voltage Isetta.

The Delorean is however still registered.

[wantafaster1]

Specialist in padiham is marketing reversible conversions now .........

[Pandora]

With the cost of electricity now, does anyone know how to stick an old diesel into a Tesla?

How hard can it be? I'm thinking if I can drain old oil from the chippy through some J cloths and an old pair of tights, I won't need to buy one of those fancy £20 ketttles

Al

[Pandora]

I strongly suspect your mysterious correspondent is of course correct, Mark.

The issue then is that the DVLA are not being open and honest about the reasoning, causing uncertainty and confusion.

The fire service don't like the problems when major manufacturer's EVs catch fire with monotonous regularity. I expect they relish the prospect of home brew conversions even less, but the regs haven't kept pace and that gives DVLA a problem when it comes to justification.

Not their fault, but neither is it the man in his shed's (or his swanky Welsh factory).

As you say, clarity is what is needed. And of course the risk is the responsibility of the builder, the owner and the Insurance company, NOT the DVLA.

Personally I can see it falling to the Insurance companies to 'regulate' this, simply by being pushed to not offer cover for aftermarket EV conversions, or only at such a high price that the market evaporates

Al

[Bitsilly]

I agree too.
And I also think Al is correct.
If anon is correct and of course he is, the dvla should shout out that they don’t know what they are doing, and look at finding necessary expertise to help.
With my car, yes it has holes, but I have made it clear in my correspondence that the electrical system was designed and checked by a doctor of engineering who previously worked with Ford as global chief technical officer for developing the electric Transit, and his partner has a doctorate in electronic design.
The system had all the required safety lock outs, orange masters correct coloured ducting and armour etc. I perhaps should have stressed this in the build thread.
I myself just built it and handed it back for inspection. But in my defence I have worked for BRitish airways avionics and have designed test rigs for Rolls Royce.
I believe the car is as safe as mainstream electric cars. I would like to be given the chance to prove this, not to be fobbed off with lies if the holes are a red herring.

[Bitsilly]

Perhaps the petition could be titled ‘let’s get government officials to tell the truth’, or is that pushing it a bit?

[Peter Laidler]

I said many months ago, that these ain't government officials and they don't make the laws. These are QUANGO or agency officials there to interpret the laws of the land as set by parliament. As I found several times, they are a law unto themselves and so far as I seem to remember, the only body that can overturn them are the Magistrates. THEY are the people who enforce the laws of the land.

Just sayin'

[BucksMk1]

With the cost of electricity now, does anyone know how to stick an old diesel into a Tesla?

How hard can it be? I'm thinking if I can drain old oil from the chippy through some J cloths and an old pair of tights, I won't need to buy one of those fancy £20 ketttles

Al

According to BoJo you'd be better off in the long run with a £10 kettle...

[Bitsilly]

Peter,
Any idea how I can get this issue to a magistrate?

[Peter Laidler]

Good question Bitsilly.

You have to tell the QUANGO that you are using the car, with the number allocated originally allocated by the secretary of state for transport OR his authorised representative - in this case XYZ County Council back in 19XX. Commencing on XX/XX/22. It is tax exempt and registered to you. It has been inspected and passed fit for use on the road by your own independent vehicle examiner. And, as I said before, tell them that if they choose not to registed the vehicle with the original registration, for whatever reason, then that is a problem for them - and not you (see last paras).

They will shout and ball, throw their teddies out of the pram and jump up and down like frogs on fire. Then they will threaten to take you to the magistrates court. That's the way to do it. Better still, when you win, they will have to pay all your costs. They don't like that.......

They won't get very far because by then, you will have all your paperwork in order, all your expert witnesses lined up etc etc....... As for their.....

Look, I've been through this as a man-stuck-in=the-middle. They have to prove EVERYTHING. You have to prove absolutely NOTHING.

As my sister, a wise, old and now retired barrister used to often say (probably to her clients.....) They've got to prove you stole it. You haven't got to prove you bought it. Not the best analogy but pretty good

[Bitsilly]

It sounds good, I don’t think I have anything to lose.
I would love for it to work.

[surfblue63]

The problem with Peters idea is that you risk having your car impounded as it is not registered and thus not insured. Never mind the risk of points on your licence and higher insurance costs for ever more.

[Pandora]

What Surfblue63 said.

All it needs is for a Police car ANPR to pick it up, you'll get pulled, at which point your insurance provider will no doubt have grounds to run a mile.

And how far will you get with Dixon of Dock Green and your claims of "well, you need to take that up with DVLA, not me. They are a Quango you know......" About as far as you will before a visit to the station.

Whilst I agree that you have been an innocent victim of bureaucracy here, I think what Peter describes is a VERY risky approach to take, and you could stand to loose far more than you might yet be able to get back by a more measured approach.

Letting them paint you as irresponsible, with a reckless disregards for authority will only help them, not you, even if it isn't the case.

Al