is it just me

[Adam1958]

I love the idea of doing something in order to stop a new owner from getting into strife. But I also note that I see all manner of people doing all manner of illegal things almost daily, and I don't feel compelled to tell even my cat.

[geoff]

Fair enough one has to choose their own poisons and there is enough evil in the world for all of us to feel overwhelmed.

I generally choose to make a difference in some way indeed any way and it matters not which way.

All I know is I've been fortunate that when I started out many decades ago I had guidance to avoid pitfalls and that not everyone has had the same privelige.

[diffwhine]

I have absolutely no problem with individuals reporting a problem vehicle if there is a mechanism to do so. Equally I don't see an issue with our illustrious VRO having an occasional discrete word in somebody at DVLA's metaphorical ear. Where I am concerned is if we do this as a Club and be seen to be trying to police something which others may perceive as none of our business. We toe a delicate PR line and I would not like the club to be accused of being a bunch of "busy bodies".
There is definitely a case for highlighting and reporting a problem vehicle, but in my view that's not a club responsibility unless we are specifically asked to provide input.

[Peter Holden]

Obviously I have a contact within DVLA as I occasionally review vehicles for them and on occasion I have passed on details of "potentially dodgy" vehicles that I have come across to them as did my predecessor (who is a retired piliceman these days).  They also police the likes of Ebay and Facebook Marketplace.  However they are not experts in any particular marque and can only pickup glaring errors.

Thre are some serious crooks out there, I know of at least 2 properly restored land rovers that were stolen from very hidden places not long after their completion.   They weren't casual thefts someone must have been watching considering the logistics involved in getting into very secure buildings.  Those vehicles were either straight out of the country or were put on ready prepared identities.

I think it is incumbent on us to challenge any suspicious activity but also to make our own vehicles as secure as possible.  Added to that anyone going to buy any vehicle should try to take a knowledgeable friend with them.  It is very easy to be seduced into buying without proper checks.

Interestingly but a bit off topic I asked a seller of a camper some fairly in depth questions because things didn't seem right.  He got very stroppy and refused to answer the questions but that vehicle disappeared off sale very quickly.

Peter

[Theshed]

That Ad' read Series iii. My guess is they where upside down exclamation marks ?
Buyer beware as they say.

[Alan Drover]

There's a 101 FC in the current issue of CLR. It has a Nissan diesel fitted. DVLA records show it still has a V8 and is therefore MOT exempt whereas fitting a non Land Rover engine makes it MOT liable.

[Richard]

I was a victim of fraud with a Range Rover Classic. Apparently. I'm still not convinced any of the PO's ever had less than sincere intentions. Maybe I'm just a naive idiot. Fact of the matter remains that the registration of the RRC was revoked because of the fact that the identity of the vehicle couldn't be unequivocally established. The whole story is somewhere in the archives.

I am a member of this club, and was already a member of this club when I bought the car, and I knew perfectly well people messed around with Land Rovers, be they Series, Ninety's or OneTens, or Range Rover Classics. Tax laws, and exemptions to them, and the way these vehicles are constructed make it a 'worthwhile' endeavour to mess around with them and make money from it. I read up on the subject before the visit, during the visit I checked the chassis number and everything there was to check for a non-professional car buyer. I knew things didn't add up (1978 RRC with 3.9 l V8 and ZF-autobox), but thought it was in accordance with regulations, the one-third-two-thirds-rule: so long as not more than only one of the three component parts chassis-body-drivetrain was altered – and that alteration was registered with the RDW/DVLA, which it was – it would be a legitimate vehicle.

I was warned, by reading up on the subject, by being a member of a classic car club (classic car clubs plural in fact), by being a member of several online forums, by being critical during inspection. Could I have known? Was I too eager? If things seem too good to be true, they probably are.

I don't think classic car clubs can do more than they already do: raise awareness on the subject among its members, and the general, classic car buying public, for instance via social media, assist authorities when asked to do so, confront auctioneers with inconsistencies. This is a non-exhaustive list.

I don't think classic car clubs should do more. I'm afraid that if they would, they would be obliged to change their legal status, ensure they have or can afford legal assistance, because one of these messing-arounders will undoubtedly take legal action against a 'verdict' issued by the club, or the club will issue a guilty verdict on an innocent car... Shit happens.

Richard

[chughes5]

If it doesn't meet the criteria to be tax exempt, any individual can report it as untaxed.

I've done it via the website link before (giving location as 'the internet' and had a response from them saying they will look into it

https://contact.dvla.gov.uk/report-untaxed-vehicle