New definitions of historic vehicles etc proposed

[Mash]

I'm surprised we haven't had this yet because it affects pretty much everyone on here. Soz if I've missed it somewhere but I don't think I have

 

It was announced in Practical Cla**ics that the FBHVC is considering going along with FIVA in the new European definitions of older cars in order to protect "classics" (I hate that word ) from the forthcoming 2010 emission regs and so on. The date proposed is 1980 or 30 years but there's still some confusion over this being an actual cut-off date or a rolling one.

 

http://www.fbhvc.co.uk/news/index.htm

 

I'm very concerned about this. If this isn't a rolling date, we're going to lose an awful lot of good cars over the next few years surely? I accept the need to set some sort of date in order to protect the cars we love from over zealous legislation - all well and good. However, there still seems to me some injustice if this date does not roll and some of the articles I've seen seem to suggest an actual cut-off date.

 

I'm not too bothered about the free or reduced tax issue, that's a separate thing altogether and a bonus if we get it. My biggest fear is that I'll be forced to stop using or even scrap both of my 1980s cars which I alternate between as dailies. As time moves on so does nostalgia and like it or not there are a lot of people out there who like cars from the 1980s regardless of how good or bad anyone out there with a "proper classic" thinks they are.

 

There's always been a reluctance from a lot of quarters to accept this age of car into the fold as it were but I cannot accept the exclusion of a car simply on grounds of age. Why should a 1982 Ford Sierra be discriminated against but not a 1962 or 1972 Cortina - they're the same thing when it comes down to it - a mass produced family saloon from a volume manufacturer, simply from different decades. I like all cars from all periods from the 1930s onwards and I'm not trying to spark off the "what is a classic car" debate again, just trying to get my head round this as it's potentially very serious. I may sound biassed because at the moment the 1980s cars are flavour of the month with me and if I suddenly can't have them I'll be a bit peed off. I don't mind cutting down the mileage if necessary but I don't see it being as straightforward as that.

 

Another point is that I don't see why I should give up a perfectly reliable, well maintained car which is in excellent condition just because the emissions are slightly higher than a modern car. It probably emits pretty much the same crap in the 8000 miles or so I do in a year as someone travelling 30000 miles up and down the country in a large Beemer or whatever and it regularly returns 40 mpg which a lot of large cars today will not. Add to that all the raw materials and energy to make it were used up 25 years ago it probably ends up being carbon neutral!

 

Or am I being paranoid? Someone put my mind at rest

[Guest]

I wouldn't worry too much to be honest man!The government are concentrating on meddling with the tax of 2001 onwards cars (with the emissions-based tax), which make up something like 80% of cars on the road. Future proposals seem to revolve around dealing with people in that bracket, pushing them into lower emissions models etc. which obviously makes sense as there are loads more people in that category, pre-2001 cars will dwindle automatically as "normal" people move from used T-reg Astras to used 53-reg Astras and so on.I don't think there are any real plans to ban people from using older cars, there isn't enough of us really so it'd cause uproar for little gain. In some EU countries they had/have a lot of old motors in daily use but it's not really the case here, if I go into town I won't see a load of Fiat 500s and things whizzing round. I really think if the government were bothered about old cars on the road they'd mess around with road tax for cars on the "old tax". But if you look the increases set out until 2011 or something are pretty modest really, a fiver on cheap tax and a bit more on high tax, nothing spectacular.I think this definition of a classic thing is more to do with existing EU schemes where in some countries you can (voluntarily - never heard of a mandatory one) register your vehicle as a classic and get reduced/free tax and is probably more to do with the protection of things like that. I don't think it'll mean I suddenly become an outlaw for driving the Galant to work.In conclusion, chill out!

[58classiccars]

what twat do they pay to come up with this shit? I think its time the people of the uk stood together, just for once and told our goverment what to do with some of these bloody silly laws.

[CortinaDave]

Im actually pleased we have this credit crunch crisis going on as it is distracting the government from their usual day to day business of making life more unpleasant for the motorist.

[VWPowered]

yep sure france will go the same way, CT law comes in meaning a car has to have one once every five years, which isnt a bad thing really

[Mr Lobster]

Im actually pleased we have this credit crunch crisis going on as it is distracting the government from their usual day to day business of making life more unpleasant for the motorist.

I'd wholeheartedly agree with that! It has pushed all the envirobollocks some way down the agendaI don't think its all that much to worry about tbh. I read that is more about getting a common definition across the EU rather than introducing restrictions on movement and useage. There are only a relatively small number of pre 1990 cars in daily use now so governments will / are going after the post 2001 stuff increasing tax in order to incentivise them to trade down to a smaller car. Putting RFL up by even £100 a year won't encourage someone running a twenty odd year old whatever to go out and buy a new Prius will it.

[Dukestar25]

On the subject of; I recieved my 'road tax' renewal notices today and the DVLA refer to it as Vehicle Tax on the bumff that comes with them. Is this just a new name for it or is it just Gormless Clown taxing us for the priveledge of owning a car ??

[Mr_Bo11ox]

They'll have done that because of folk saying 'This road tax costs a fuggin fortune and none of it seems to go back into the road network, what a rip-off' so now they have dropped all pretence of it being there to fund transport-related matters. Its juat a tax you pay to use your car, thats it.

[Volksy]

On the subject of; I recieved my 'road tax' renewal notices today and the DVLA refer to it as Vehicle Tax on the bumff that comes with them. Is this just a new name for it or is it just Gormless Clown taxing us for the priveledge of owning a car ??

It changed from Road Fund Licence a few years back, due to the fact that the government should have been spending all of it on maintaining and developing the roads..

 

It was obvious to everyone that they wern't so changed the name to suit. As it is now a 'TAX' they can spend it on what they like.. Sure there is some spin somewhere that it was changed so they could spend it on 'Public Transport Initiatives' blah blah blah

[Dukestar25]

On the subject of; I recieved my 'road tax' renewal notices today and the DVLA refer to it as Vehicle Tax on the bumff that comes with them. Is this just a new name for it or is it just Gormless Clown taxing us for the priveledge of owning a car ??

It changed from Road Fund Licence a few years back, due to the fact that the government should have been spending all of it on maintaining and developing the roads..

 

It was obvious to everyone that they wern't so changed the name to suit. As it is now a 'TAX' they can spend it on what they like.. Sure there is some spin somewhere that it was changed so they could spend it on 'Public Transport Initiatives' blah blah blah

And here's me thinkin that the 'Congestion Charge' in London (and very nearly Manchester) was set up to pay for Public Transport Initiatives . How is it the Govt is able to just change the nature of a 'tax' just by ammending a few words in the draught and no-one does anything to stop them? Highly frustrating

[Adrian_pt]

FIVA uses the 30 year cutoff date on a rolling scheme, but the countries can choose whether to be even stricter or not, for example Romania uses 1) 30 years from the last model produced and 2) original condition as determined by a 10-strong committee to get your car registered as a historic vehicle. In practice you'll still be able to drive aroundas per usual, but not class it as "historic" for tax purposes. TBH in the UK I think the issues are completely different, nobody's going to get too het up about people smoking around in 70s and 80s shitters because we're a tiny minority and generally choose to do so rather than not being able to afford to own or maintain anything else. The flipside is that owning an old car regardless of age/value is seen as some sort of a statement, and if you do so, you're even less PC than the average motorist, and therefore a target/source of taxation as far as the socialists are concerned. I think the sotiation will stay roughly the same: you're not going to have to stop driving anything, just don't expect brownie points for it. Of course we all know the arguments that our cars are more environmentally friendly, less wasteful, and cheaper to own and run than a bland autobox, but I doubt that will ever get officially recognised. Being honest that's probably part of the fun - I certainly like being able to have a far nicer, faster and more stylish (though older) car than my student peers, but it's as much about being different as it is abut getting value for money.