818 YUX where are you?

[Ian Williams]

I have never understood why owner would be against their cars being recorded on the register. We have a ridiculous situation here where a past Chairman of the VARNZ was completely hostile to sharing information with the UK citing "privacy" as one of his reasons. The information recorded on what exists as a register in NZ is very poor as a result of this attitude, many of the entry's are wrong, which is sad because NZ has some interesting late numbered run out models and it appears some very early examples of a particular Model. For example the earliest and the latest recorded surviving RM saloons which were not on the register, my Nippy was also not on the register and turned out to be a car of interest once added, the list goes on. One problem for a registrar is the owners knowledge, and at times honesty when submitting details, we have a few EA sports on the NZ register, not one of which is a genuine car and most are simply very loosely based specials rather than authentic replicas, yet that is not recorded. Or a Type 65 with a replica body, touring engine, gearbox, back axle, saloon seats etc that is, according to its owner, in completely original condition. This is compounded in NZ with a lack of information being made available to owners, such as the Association publication about how to identify your seven coupled with no drive by the Club to bring the register up to date and record the cars correctly. I know that if that were done we would discover some very interesting facts about the cars exported here. Hopefully at some point in the not too distant future the abysmal internal politics of the VARNZ will get sorted out and the club can get back on track as a register and source of information for owners as its creator Peter Fry intended. Some may feel I am being pedantic in my comments and views, but personally I feel that a well run and accurate register is a gold mine for restorers and historians. I would also like to see in this digital age photographs of the cars kept on file as well as numbers.

[Ivor Hawkins]

I’m in full agreement with you Ian, privacy is important of course, with cloning being an issue, but the more information that is out there, surely there is less opportunity for the fakers?

Martin expresses the vital importance of retaining an old vehicle’s original registration, it often being the only way to trace its history.

In my view, anyone who cites privacy when it comes to an old car has something to hide, which is why I keep photographs of cars I’ve spotted over the past 60 years that have now miraculously become desirable sports and coachbuilt models, but my only reference is the registration number.

The old car world has lost some wonderful Alvis, Bentley and Riley saloons (and Austins, of course), because of greed, add to that the cars which have been robbed of their original registration numbers and the history is lost...and all to make few quid with no regard for automotive history.

[Martin Prior]

I can't in all honesty see why some people get so worked up about the anonymity of their cars. Yes, it's reasonable enough not to want your name and address published, but they aren't anyway. I'm baffled by people who blank out their registration plates on FB and elsewhere - If you drive the car on public roads, it's there for everyone to see and to photograph. As to the information on the Register, I cannot see how, if you have a valid V5, there can be any risk of a car's identity being stolen by using it.

[Mike Costigan]

The trouble is there are too many people out there with a vested interest in disguising their car's history. About four years ago I nearly bought a Gordon England Cup: it was being sold as a genuine 1928 GE with apparent provenance and price to match, but it only took half an hour's research the reveal that thirty years ago it was some sort of Cambridge-style special, and back in the fifties it was a 1931 RM saloon! If the registration number had been concealed on the old photographs it would have been much harder to prove the lie.

[Ian Williams]

Good points guys and more weight to my argument for having digital photographs saved on the register, 3/4 front, back and interior. No privacy issues that I can think of, and if someone were trying to restore a similar car the registrar could potentially put people who own good reference vehicles in contact, all with consent of course. Outside of the UK it becomes much harder to trace a car as registration numbers often don't stay with the cars if they are not in constant use, added to which most old paper registration records have long been destroyed when streamlining systems with the advent of computer records.

[John Mason]

I agree with all that is said about selling original numbers and the inability to then trace its history. What however is a much more heinous crime is the buying of a reasonable Ruby or similar and making it into a special when at half the cost the original Ruby could be put back on the road. At least if some money grabber sells an original registered number at least we still have the car. Yes and if anybody is questioning my Ruby AOV 401 as far as I know the number is original.

John Mason.

[Martin Prior]

Hi John.  I totally agree with you!  My 10-year-old grandson Henry is reversing the process, rebuilding a 1937 Ruby around a body shell discarded by a special builder.  Unfortunately, the chassis that we've acquired for it has no paperwork, so it'll end up with anther "age related" plate.

At age 14, my first A7 was AOV 816 - sadly long vanished.

[Dave Mann]

I've followed this thread with some interest, 3 decades ago 3 Sevens were stolen from a garage and the registration numbers for two of them are now on moderns whilst all thee Sevens are back in use. I view the DVLA practice of swapping registration numbers about as aiding and abetting the criminal fraternity, what is the provenance of your car? What it tells me is that in this computer age records do not last long.

[Ian Williams]

Yes Dave I agree to a point that pandering to egos just to make money is not exactly something we want a government department doing. However is there not precedent and good evidence that the Austin factory swapped registration numbers (OL166 for example) onto several different cars, presumably legally, maybe they had special dispensation to do so?

---

Martin that body looks on the face of it quite solid, seems a shame it was removed from its chassis. I guess this is on the increase due to disregulation, i.e removing MOT etc, and the DVLA's inability to recognise a car ( special ) built out of historic components.

[Mike Costigan]

Ian, I'm not convinced the various OL 166 appearances are different cars; there was really no reason for the Company to transfer the number to different vehicles, and they don't appear to have done it with any other registration number. More likely is that the car was retained as a development car and just reappeared at various times in different forms.