Regulations regarding specials

[Tony Press]

Any relation to the world famous Royal Flying Doctor Service of Australia ? 

[Howard Wright]

Hi Stuart

Both my specials used form V765 from the DVLA web site https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/old-vehicles

In addition to this form, a photo, the standard registration form AND....a letter from an appropriate recognised club stating that the car has been inspected by the club officer and is a true representation of the marque. 

My first special was built from a Ruby whose bodywork had rusted to virtually nothing. Fortunately I had the chassis number and registration number from which I could prove the cars origins. It was registered as an Austin Seven Sports. Incidentally it had hydraulics and telescopic shock absorbers.

The Brookfields started as a chassis with number from which a “Heritage certificate” from Gaydon had been acquired.  Despite having no registration number, DVLA provided an age related number. Again the car is registered as an Austin Seven Sports.

Hope this helps

Cheers

Howard

[Stuart Giles]

Hi Howard, Thanks for that clarification, so there wasn't a V5C in existence for either of your cars? The V765 form seems to only apply where either someone is trying to register a car that isn't on the DVLA database -i.e. buff logbook or no logbook- or the car is on the DVLA database but with one of their DVLA age related plates, and they want to reclaim the original plate -i.e. one of the cars where DVLA routinely dished out age related plates to people who missed the cut off to get a V5C in exchange for an old logbook despite them having all the correct paperwork. This note on the back of the form certainly seems to be implying this:



The OP says he has a V5C, so the car is  on the DVLA database, presumably with its originally issued registration, but is down as being a Ruby or saloon, where the OP is building an open top special on the chassis. I'm not sure that the V765 process would be relevant here. I'd certainly be very interested if so, perhaps anyone of the "friends" on here who also happens to be a V765 representative could comment.

BTW, This isn't idle curiosity on my part I have a complete Ruby rolling chassis in bits here, and the V5C that belongs to it, it isn't at all likely to be rebuilt as a Ruby despite those complete bodyshells  that keep appearing for sale on ebay.

[Howard Wright]

Hi Stuart

No I didn’t have a V5c for either car.  So you may well be correct in the assumption that it doesn’t apply in that case.  As I said in my first post on this thread I’ve been guided by my clubs “DVLA” officer.  So like you I’d be interested in a more definitive response from someone more in the know.

Good luck with the chassis.  Special?

Cheers

Howard

PS In part answer to the original post question I believe (and may be proved wrong) that construction and use regulations for cars came in after the war.  I think that as long as a car meets the regulations of the day it is acceptable. An exception is reflectors that was a requirement imposed retrospectively possibly during wartime?

[Robert Leigh]

It is some years since I recorded my Ulsteroid with the DVLA. It has a shortened Ruby chassis, but the Ruby never lost its V5. When the time came I simply reported that the car now has a Tourer body, and this is what they recorded on the new V5. I suggest a phone call to DVLA asking whether a similar approach would be acceptable before formalising the situation. My general advice is to tell them no more than they want to know, but just enough to achieve your objective.

[andrew34ruby]

PS In part answer to the original post question I believe (and may be proved wrong) that construction and use regulations for cars came in after the war.  I think that as long as a car meets the regulations of the day it is acceptable. An exception is reflectors that was a requirement imposed retrospectively possibly during wartime?

I think there are various exceptions as well as reflectors.

I'm thinking that all cars must now have...

Reflectors
A rear view mirror
A windscreen wiper
Screen washers

and all after some date in late thirties have to have brake lights and indicators.

[Howard Wright]

Thanks Andrew

I think wipers and washers aren’t required if the screen can be folded or the driver can see over the top of it.  At least I hope that is the case as the Brookfields has neither ?.

Cheers

Howard

[andrew34ruby]

Thanks Andrew

I think wipers and washers aren’t required if the screen can be folded or the driver can see over the top of it.  At least I hope that is the case as the Brookfields has neither ?.

Cheers

Howard

I think you are correct Howard.

[Reckless Rat]

Washers and wipers not required if windsreen opens or folds ( ie view to front without looking through the glass). Nor are lights, ( for daytime use) but if fitted you must have:
Two front position lamps /sidelights ( can be in the headlamps) a matched pair of headlamps ( do not need to dip if they are permanently deflected downwards so as not to dazzle)
Two rear position lamps, two brake lamps, rear number plate lamp. Indicators not required but if fitted must work and have either audible beeper or warning lamp bisible to the driver, plus two red rear reflectors ( which may form part of rear position lamp. Rear lights must be at least 2 sq in in area.

For details see road vehicles lighting regulations.( hours of darkness)
Daytime use is governed by the road vehicles constructin and use regulations.

[Stuart Giles]

It is some years since I recorded my Ulsteroid with the DVLA. It has a shortened Ruby chassis, but the Ruby never lost its V5. When the time came I simply reported that the car now has a Tourer body, and this is what they recorded on the new V5. I suggest a phone call to DVLA asking whether a similar approach would be acceptable before formalising the situation. My general advice is to tell them no more than they want to know, but just enough to achieve your objective.

IIRC, the DVLA 8 point system came in in 1998, and after that time, it shouldn't have been possible to just change a body type except in the way I outlined earlier. The reason being that sawing the roof off your monocoque modern to make a tourer/cabriolet would have meant that the car was "radically altered". Not the case of course with a car like an A7 with a separate chassis where the body carries no points; but the "kit conversion" process should still have been used to change the V5C entry.

None of that means that cars did not get the body type changed without all that rigmarole, because the first point of contact would have been the (now shut down) local taxation office, who may well have just nodded through all sorts of changes. A professional kitcar constructor I knew used to take all his finished cars right down to a tax office somewhere in the Bournemouth area to get them registered. None of his cars (which were built from a pile of secondhand mechanical parts) ever received a Q plate.