Early Registration Madness???

[quicksilver]

WTF is going on here then?

Nothing unusual about a G-reg Maestro, except this is a Ledbury car assembled and registered in 2001 from a kit made around 1996, yet for some reason declared manufactured in 1990. An old post on the Maestro forum says some of the last Ledburys were G-reg but doesn't explain why, and 1990 seems to have no relevance as the Maestro was still in normal production at Cowley then and the Bulgarian fiasco was a few years in the future.

Adding to the intrigue, it was apparently on eBay last year with just 369 miles recorded and has still only done a bit over 1000 now. It's also RHD but with LHD wipers, which isn't normal for Ledburys. There must be a story here.

[High Jetter]

Intriguing. Monty one side and another Maestro the other, some show?

[quicksilver]

2 minutes ago, High Jetter said:

Intriguing. Monty one side and another Maestro the other, some show?

The annual BL Autumn Rally at Milton Keynes Museum. The brown Maestro is an early A-reg one bizarrely with an LPG conversion.

[High Jetter]

58 minutes ago, quicksilver said:

The annual BL Autumn Rally at Milton Keynes Museum. The brown Maestro is an early A-reg one bizarrely with an LPG conversion.

Interesting, I've only heard of that on the vans.

[LightBulbFun]

12 hours ago, quicksilver said:

WTF is going on here then?

Nothing unusual about a G-reg Maestro, except this is a Ledbury car assembled and registered in 2001 from a kit made around 1996, yet for some reason declared manufactured in 1990. An old post on the Maestro forum says some of the last Ledburys were G-reg but doesn't explain why, and 1990 seems to have no relevance as the Maestro was still in normal production at Cowley then and the Bulgarian fiasco was a few years in the future.

Adding to the intrigue, it was apparently on eBay last year with just 369 miles recorded and has still only done a bit over 1000 now. It's also RHD but with LHD wipers, which isn't normal for Ledburys. There must be a story here.

Fascinating! doing a bit of DVLA bashing theres a whole bunch of these like this, there seems to a block of them from G279LWP to G299LWP, so 21 cars? some are "TET ROVER MAESTRO" others are "ROVER MAESTRO 1.3"

a few of which did not last very long at all G294LWP was only taxed for a couple months! which makes me wonder, where these test cars or something? G282LWP, does not have a  used-before-date-of-first-registration marker against it either (tho I would still want to have an oggle at the special notes section of its V5)

is it known how the VIN/Chassis numbers on these kit built vehicles worked? where they issued a VIN when they kit itself was made by ARG and was that VIN then used when the cars where put together, or was a new VIN issued when the kit was actually put together into a car? or was it combination of both where a VIN was issued by ARG, but then another one was issued when the car was put together?

G282LWP's VIN is only 16 digits long curiously

[quicksilver]

10 hours ago, LightBulbFun said:

Fascinating! doing a bit of DVLA bashing theres a whole bunch of these like this, there seems to a block of them from G279LWP to G299LWP, so 21 cars? some are "TET ROVER MAESTRO" others are "
ROVER MAESTRO 1.3"

a few of which did not last very long at all G294LWP was only taxed for a couple months! which makes me wonder, where these test cars or something? G282LWP, does not have a  used-before-date-of-first-registration marker against it either (tho I would still want to have an oggle at the special notes section of its V5)

is it known how the VIN/Chassis numbers on these kit built vehicles worked? where they issued a VIN when they kit itself was made by ARG and was that VIN then used when the cars where put together, or was a new VIN issued when the kit was actually put together into a car? or was it combination of both where a VIN was issued by ARG, but then another one was issued when the car was put together?

G282LWP's VIN is only 16 digits long curiously

AFAIK the kits had no ID at all. The ones assembled in Bulgaria and brought back by Apple have normal Rover VINs, but these have TET's own VINs hand-stamped at Ledbury in a totally different format from the Rover ones and are classed as kit cars. I've found a few photos of other G-reg (and one H-reg), all LHD as the supply of RHD parts had run out, and suggestions that the G-reg was a fiddle so these last cars could avoid new emissions laws. How they convinced the DVLA they were made in 1990 is a mystery - did they just change the 6 on the paperwork to a 0?!

On the day I just thought it was a normal Cowley-built Maestro Clubman and didn't realise quite how interesting it was, or I would have sought out the owner and asked about it.

[LightBulbFun]

26 minutes ago, quicksilver said:

AFAIK the kits had no ID at all. The ones assembled in Bulgaria and brought back by Apple have normal Rover VINs, but these have TET's own VINs hand-stamped at Ledbury in a totally different format from the Rover ones and are classed as kit cars. I've found a few photos of other G-reg (and one H-reg), all LHD as the supply of RHD parts had run out, and suggestions that the G-reg was a fiddle so these last cars could avoid new emissions laws. How they convinced the DVLA they were made in 1990 is a mystery - did they just change the 6 on the paperwork to a 0?!

On the day I just thought it was a normal Cowley-built Maestro Clubman and didn't realise quite how interesting it was, or I would have sought out the owner and asked about it.

it would be a very interesting one to V888 and see what its original registering documents looked like, ie the ones used to setup its vehicle record on the DVLA computer, interesting thoughts on being a Emissions workaround, tho, the MOT rules for that are for when the vehicle is first used, not when the vehicle was made, so in theory, these should still have to comply with 2001 emissions rules because thats when they where first used, *but* I imagine most MOT'ers would just look at the "1990" date of manufacture on the vehicle record and just assume oh its been in use since 1990...

 

[Austin-Rover]

6 hours ago, quicksilver said:

I've found a few photos of other G-reg (and one H-reg), all LHD as the supply of RHD parts had run out, and suggestions that the G-reg was a fiddle so these last cars could avoid new emissions laws. 

This is as close to the truth of the matter. Parts were getting harder to find for the conversions, and also making them 'older' than they really were to make life easier. 

AFAIK, Apple 2000 cars all came with 'proper' Rover VIN. The Ledbury car I had, the VIN started 'B10S', and was hand-scribed onto the suspension turret and the VIN plate. 

[Missy Charm]

On 19/09/2025 at 21:55, caffeine said:

60 plate MK3 Focus, anyone?

Spotted on AutoTrader - can’t be too many about, although I did once spot one ‘in the wild’ and it struck me as unusual, seems this example was registered in February 2011, a month ahead of the ‘official’ UK launch and plate changeover. I think the one I spotted in person was also “Titanium” trim - I think it may have been the ‘posher’ models that were released as press demonstrators and the like.

These seem to have continued Ford’s fairly well established tradition of model ‘overlaps’  with 11 - 61 plate mk2 Focuses being pretty common, I’m sure I’ve even seen the odd 12 plate.

 

I was working for Essex Police in 2011 and remember the high-ups being rather upset by the introduction of the Mk3 Focus.  They had developed a real attachment to the Mk2 - deeming the estate version the ideal area car - and felt the replacement was inferior.  Particularly chagrining was the retirement of the old 1.8 turbo-diesel engine - the one that followed was smaller and less powerful or something .  

Anyway, they bought a load of run-out Mk2s to compensate.  Perhaps there might have been the odd '12' plate amongst them.  

Mind you, Essex Police were great ones for being sentimental about old cars.  There were still Mk1 Focuses in service back then!