If I buy a crashed Indy (write-off), with, say, a Triumph engine in it, can I just build another car with a blade engine, not using any parts from the original car and transfer the number plates to the new car and thus avoid the SVA and registration?

What do you think?

Cheers

Chris

You can only do that with Duttons.

yours, Pete.

P.S. get me a wooden spoon will you.

reality and the law are probably different things here. I think that if the car is very seriously modified, it is eligable for SVA, but then how will they know if it is modified?

the main problem will be if it is recorded as written off, as all newly repaired vehicles must be inspected to help combat ringing.

great idea though! i suspect swapping the chassis number over is a good start, and also registering the new engine into it.

What if I did it and sold it to someone else as a "turnkey" car and kept quiet?

Cheers

Chris

chris i'd worked this one out after your 1st post, you know the answer but a suttle chris like way of getting a bit of info out,

think they call it "spin" in political circles.

lol maybe set up a company called Superb Pilfered Deathtraps to vend them thru? it would have a catchy acronym then...

Was that the sound of a penny dropping Joel!!

Cheers

Chris

probably quite a few pennies, not sure how many, but enough to smashed me car and nearly have me twat leg off! Having said that i could well happen to me...

just thought pete was being his usual absurd self, banging on about wooden spoons...

The moral is

"Let's be careful out there"

Cheers

Chris

It's a common practise to "rebody" a Dutton Joel, but it does wind some people up. Read some old posts some time and you'll see what I mean.

yours, Pete.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peteff
It's a common practise to "rebody" a Dutton Joel, but it does wind some people up. Read some old posts some time and you'll see what I mean.

yours, Pete.

---

see PEET has a BEE in his bonnet about it at the mention of it

Right, reel him in.

See what I mean Joel.

yours, Pete.

Wooden spoon is the preferred utensil for sh1t stirring.

[Edited on 12/12/03 by Peteff]

I think I went about it in the wrong way, I bought a Dutton and scrapped it so I could reuse the body. Ooops!

Well, at least the one I bought one wasn't registered.

Chris - all you would be doing is replacing the chassis (same as replacing the bodyshell for a "normal" car) and subsequently replacing the engine - don't see why you couldn't do it. It happens a lot with old minis and MG's etc.

its a bit like an old rock band really, all the members leave one at a time and get replaced, and eventually none of the original dudes are left. But they still get called the same name.

quote:

---

Originally posted by andyps
Chris - all you would be doing is replacing the chassis (same as replacing the bodyshell for a "normal" car) and subsequently replacing the engine - don't see why you couldn't do it. It happens a lot with old minis and MG's etc.

---

to completely spill the beans on a good idea i had, imagine if you had a nice SVA compliant little kitcar. Stick a chassis number on it, and an engine, and get it tested. Then, once passed, chop out the bar with the chassis number on, and sell the engine, the bar and number, the V5 and the plates for a tidy sum of money. Then go back to your original car, get a new bar welded in, new chassis plates, new engine etc and put it in for SVA again.

Not sure how much you could sell the 'kit' for but surely there would be a market for such a product?

not that i would condone SVA avoidance anyway as safe cars are always a good start...

my old boss used to have 2 mg midgets
one for him and one for wife
every year he would mot one of them twice, with each others reg plates, and chassis no on a plate just pop riveted on

and the best bit was he always used the same mot station within 2 weeks for both mot's

the tester must have tunnell vision or a very bad memory

2 duttons on e bay for £49 at the mo

Can you spot the difference?

Cheers

Chris

About all I can spot is that one has different wing mirrors...

What have I missed...?

have a look at the registration plates.

Hang on then....

[sarcasm]About all I can spot is that one has different wing mirrors...

What have I missed...? [/sarcasm]

Morally (and Legally) this is wrong.

Woodster was sold the orange car as a "turnkey" by Sports Power Drive.

That in it's self is reprehensable, misrepresentation.

The fact that SPD bought the blue car and used NO parts from it to build the new car means that it's not re-chassisied.

It's a Ringer, bought for it's identity.

Woodsters car has never been SVA'd or legally registered. He has been driving the car illegally without knowing it. If he'd had an accident his insurance would have been invalid.

Add to this that the dodgy prop nearly took his foot off, the wishbones we're on upside-down and the wrong hand, the front springs were on the back and vice-versa and the hand-brake was crudely bodged.

Moreover SPD agreed to have it fixed and then refused to pay, the whole thing is a disaster for Woodster and an important lesson for everyone else.

Cheers

Chris

Alledgedly(Happy Mike?)

[Edited on 14/12/03 by chrisg]

I guess it depends upon your intentions. My earlier suggestion is one which is surely followed pretty closely by anyone who purchases a new bodyshell from Heritage for their MGB - it is quite likely they would include an exchange engine in the rebuild which would be quite legal and maintain the identity of the original car.

I think rally teams probably do this regularly - Ford Focus WRC cars are regularly "written off" bodily, but re-appear at the next event complete with the same registration, but no doubt new shell and engine and more or less everything else.

Another example is the so called first ever Mini - registered 821AOK (I think) which once had a full length sunroof but now doesn't - can't be very original in that case.

If it is done purely to avoid SVA this is different, although, except in the case of the Midgets mentioned, the original would need to be re-SVA'd. You could argue that it would pass again but how many people keep their cars in a state which would re-pass the SVA?

So Andy would be happy.

Anybody else?

Cheers

Chris

I'm happy with the original scenario you raised - not sure about the two pictures though as it maybe depends upon the motive etc. I'm not happy if it is done for "passing off" purposes.

[Edited on 14/12/03 by andyps]

Folks, its my understand from reading this and other threads that legal proceedings are in the works. Can we all add lots of "allegedly" to our statements. Not sure if it really makes a difference but it could be fun!

The Caterham people got into a lot of bother when a company went bankrupt and comments where passed on blatchat. Even though they where bankrupt threats of libel writs where issued etc etc

P.S. If the aforementioned, alleged scenario was to happen allegedly to me in alleged real life, I suspect I might allegedly be very annoyed, allegedly, Once i'd got over my alleged annoyance I suspect I might be tempted to sue the alleged company involved, if it was allegedly true. Hypothetically speaking of course.....

Mike, u made me when i read that ^^^

well, allegedly u made me anyhow.

Everything I have posted I believe to be true.

If I get sued I'd like to see them get any money out of me - I'm skint.

Alledgedly

I just feel sorry for Dave(Woodster)

Cheers

Chris

I have said this before concerning the aforementioned allegations that the alleged matter is as previously purported to have been occasioned on this forum in a manner which is detrimental to the ongoing proceedings between the three affected parties and as such any further communications may be actuated in legalities appertaining to the conclusion of the judicial systems final deliberations on the eventual outcome. Any further allegations will result in the allegator being shot and made into shoes and handbags.

yours, Pete.

Nice wun Pete. I do like those "shoes"

Dick

quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisg
If I buy a crashed Indy (write-off), with, say, a Triumph engine in it, can I just build another car with a blade engine, not using any parts from the original car and transfer the number plates to the new car and thus avoid the SVA and registration?

What do you think?

Cheers

Chris

---

At least I don't have to worry about the legality of my comments, they were nothing to do with the original topic anyway!

It's always good to be obscure Peet!

Cheers

Chris

It's called legalese Chris, an obscure language used by people in suits to extract large amounts of money from an unsuspecting and far too trusting populace.

yours, Pete.

Trouble is Pete I like to call a spade a shovel......if you get my drift, alledgedly.

If something's wrong, then it's wrong.

Aledgedlly

Am I spelling that right?

Cheers

Chris

Don't the Police Traffic department deal with claims like this ? I thought they called the proven cases 'ringing' and dealt with them accordingly ?

Jason (confused)

quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisg
Woodster was sold the orange car as a "turnkey" by Sports Power Drive.

The fact that SPD bought the blue car and used NO parts from it to build the new car means that it's not re-chassisied.

It's a Ringer, bought for it's identity.

Woodsters car has never been SVA'd or legally registered. He has been driving the car illegally without knowing it. If he'd had an accident his insurance would have been invalid.
Alledgedly

[Edited on 14/12/03 by chrisg]

---

Be interesting to see if Trading Standards have anything to say on the matter.

It's breach of the sale of goods act if something's been sold under a false/misleading decription.

James

I always used to get a write off and re road it as cheap transport and it has never been a problem to put them back on the road. About five years ago the police started asking for the vehicle to be brought in for inspection but this was only an engine and chassis number check to notify you it has been a write off and only happens if the vehicle has been written off by an insurance company. If you crash it third party it doesn't get notified and you can sell it or repair it. If the process is bypassed and used to defraud someone then it is wrong, but if the buyer knew the history of the car it is a case of caveat emptor and should have been checked over by a qualified third party engineer before any agreement was made.Part of the car was obviously not fit for its intended purpose so something could be made of that but it would be easier to try to get the money for the repair than to try to prove that. Who is the aggrieved party in the case and how they pursue the matter is entirely up to them.

yours, Pete

Pete, did the guy buy it knowing it's history then ? or was it actually sold as a 'turn key ' 'New Car' ?
I don't know myself so am not making a jibe

Jason

i dont think he suspected anything, and if it does indeed turn out to be a car of shady origin, then that is an issue for the courts i guess.

personally, i only intend to build one compliant car, and use its details on many others...

So what was the outcome of all this then? Or is it still going on?

Chris

[Edited on 8/9/05 by woodster]

Legalese, Trading Standards, Police, Courts?

May I suggest "Ringing" his F***ing neck!

Alledgedly of course.

Are they denying all knowledge of the (alleged) ringing? What about the (alleged) stupid prop shaft?

Chris

allegedly the aledged company is up for sale allegedly because they're allegedly emigrating allegedly for alleged family matters, not because of alleged issues with them being alleged toerags

quote:

---

Originally posted by timf

quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisg
Woodster was sold the orange car as a "turnkey" by Sports Power Drive.

The fact that SPD bought the blue car and used NO parts from it to build the new car means that it's not re-chassisied.

It's a Ringer, bought for it's identity.

Woodsters car has never been SVA'd or legally registered. He has been driving the car illegally without knowing it. If he'd had an accident his insurance would have been invalid.
Alledgedly

[Edited on 14/12/03 by chrisg]

---

surely the v5 listed a previous owner
therfore should not be listed as a turnkey car in its self

---

though im all for political correctness (im not really, but that wouldnt be PC....) it is irrelevant what he intended. the alleged fact is that one was bought as a write off, and the other allegedly sold not just as that car but as made by the original manufacturer.

anyway, the guy's a tosser....

allegedly

[Edited on 8/9/05 by woodster]

woodster,

didn't the v5 you got through the post show the number of previous owners? surely that could have been suspicious for a 'new' or ex demo car?

Ned.

It was only when things went wrong with the car Ned i sat down and read it ......... 2 previous owners .... then i read the MOT no vin number on it

What i am trying to get across is, is there any proof he never used any parts from the blue car, is there any other defects with the build quality or did he just make a badly designed prop for the bike engine which caused the damage.
On a completely different matter does anyone know anything about this rs200 he's been building is that allegedly badly built as well.

the RS200 with *no* triangulation in the cockpit, making it and the people inside the only crumple zone in an accident?

that will be the one. Has anyone seen it in the flesh? if so whats it like?

on ebay recently:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2459230377&category=29750

[Edited on 8/9/05 by woodster]

that chassis is absolutely terrible, there can be little rigidity or strength in the event of an accident, what about side impact! there's less in the way than on a locost (the doors are only fibreglass on the spd200 aren't they?

Ned.

if the whole shell is fibreglass i would assume the doors are to. they look alot shorter than standard sierra doors and i cant see them cutting and welding to shorten them.

what was used is irrelevent.

unless the car has the same chassis (which is what the reg no relates to) then it would be a ringer.

not allegedly but true.


I think whats being inferred is that the reg has now appeared on a MK chassis...... which wouldnt be right.

atb

steve

quote:

---

Originally posted by me
What i am trying to get across is, is there any proof he never used any parts from the blue car, is there any other defects with the build quality or did he just make a badly designed prop for the bike engine which caused the damage.
On a completely different matter does anyone know anything about this rs200 he's been building is that allegedly badly built as well.

---

Wooster if you have doubts, or unhappy. I would get the car identiy checked by the DVLA and then legally challange "SPD" or who ever you bought it from. If it was sold as Ex demo then it should be ex demo.

Don't Turnkey Suppliers have tighter regs to comply to than a home builder?

I'm sure Office of fair trading might be interested in this............

[Edited on 8/9/05 by woodster]

cheers syd ....

Syd

personal liability for directors and officers of a company are still in existance.

Indeed any company should have insurance for any such claim.

[Edited on 13/5/04 by SparkyPups]

sportspowerdrive aren't a limited company ...... just a sole trader !!!

Nothing to do with any of the above sad and lurid tale but food for thought for home built chassis fabricators --- I seem to remember someone telling me that under current regulations the original manufacturer can replace the body and or chassis with one of the same reusing the samw vib/chassis number without requiring re-inspection. I think the loop hole was intended for major manufacturers prototypes.

[Edited on 14/5/04 by britishtrident]

[Edited on 14/5/04 by britishtrident]

Yep trident is right,i have a friend who rebuilds old land rovers and on some the complete chassis is renewed along with most of the bolt on body parts.

I've never known them to have any problems with V5's,but then again i doubt if they have ever told swansea

As said though i think this is only done where possible in mass manufactured vehicles.

We regularly reshell damaged cars, no inspection, very little paperwork, not even a destruction certificate for the old shell - we sell them to the local rally fraternity. I personally stamp the VIN on chassis, and sign to say that I have done it.

I've reroaded a couple myself with secondhand shells, no problem. Police inspected the last one under the new system. They came to the house and asked me if I knew it had been written off and I told them I had bought the write off. They looked at the numbers and went away happy.

[Edited on 8/9/05 by woodster]

a little behind the times but looking at the pictures of the orange car, and seeing the blue car before, during and after crash they dont even have the same make of engine in

P.S.hope you nail the b***ards

whose there?

ben

ben who?

bend over, i've got a large shoe to insert...

steve you have u2u

cheers woodster

****just thought i'd mark this sorry day***** now owned the car 12 MONTHS

got my inspection date for next week

good luck with that mate

How did the inspection go woodster ?

We hold our breath in pregnant anticipation, alledgedly.

Howdya gert orn woodster?????




Enjoy

I think the whole forum is following this one

[Edited on 8/9/05 by woodster]

I'm still sat at work because of your post car identities and I've been here since 7.30 AM I would really really like to know what ended up hapening.

And regardless of wether you could force him to give you a refund by law, you could prosecute him personally for breaking the law and if found guilty then also sue for endangering your life!

I'm sure this issue is resolved now but the thread never ended and I need to know I need closure!!!!!

remember to put the 'allegedly' in, not cos i give a toss about him sueing you or me, but cos lawsuits have fallen through for less than this in the past. He (the allegedly accused!) also has undoubtedly read this thread since he is online and know of this site.

keep us updated if you can, woodster!