ERRRMMMM

mountai

f4fay wrote: »

Errrrrm you forgot to mention...:eek:

1979 JBA falcon ????........JBA Falcons Manufactured from 82 to present day...It just doesn't add up.

Cortina Doner ????

No I'm Not a Member of IKCC !!!

Very Simple Go back through your own treads !!!!

Congratulations . you have just published the Reg No of a car I sold nearly
two years ago. FYI that car was properly registered in this country and if you go to the IKCC Forum , you will see the battle I had with the Revenue (which I won!!!) to get them to accept the Age Related details that were on the English V5. You are correct in your assumption that the donor car was a Cortina. Get your facts right before you try to discredit me .

f4fay

mountai wrote: »

Congratulations . you have just published the Reg No of a car I sold nearly
two years ago. FYI that car was properly registered in this country and if you go to the IKCC Forum , you will see the battle I had with the Revenue (which I won!!!) to get them to accept the Age Related details that were on the English V5. You are correct in your assumption that the donor car was a Cortina. Get your facts right before you try to discredit me .

First of all i did not post any reg number and secondly that car as you say was a 1979 car but was manufactured in 1982 or later... . and further more i did not try to discredit you !!!! Facts are Facts !!!!

mountai

f4fay wrote: »

First of all i did not post any reg number and secondly that car as you say was a 1979 car but was manufactured in 1982 or later... . and further more i did not try to discredit you !!!! Facts are Facts !!!!

I apolagise You didnt give the Reg no. I suggest you aquaint yourself with the AGE RELATED registration regulations that the Britian has in allowing Kit cars to be registered . Then it will be YOUR turn to say sorry to me.!!!Insofar as me starting this thread --- Kettle -- Pot etc . Dont read it if it offends you .

f4fay

I am Fully aquainted with age related numbers in the uk...... and its simple JBA falcons were not manufactured until 1982 and we are in "Ireland" not the uk so i hate being as childish as some of the people on this foum but an 82 car with 79 reg....well yes as you said it Pot Kettle Black ! but you...by starting this tread are creating hassle for the classic car community in ireland and i think this is unfair because you have some sort of gripe with the kit car club !!!

mountai

f4fay wrote: »

I am Fully aquainted with age related numbers in the uk...... and its simple JBA falcons were not manufactured until 1982 and we are in "Ireland" not the uk so i hate being as childish as some of the people on this foum but an 82 car with 79 reg....well yes as you said it Pot Kettle Black ! but you...by starting this tread are creating hassle for the classic car community in ireland and i think this is unfair because you have some sort of gripe with the kit car club !!!

Lets set the record straight. I imported a JBA Falcon that had an age related plate (1979) on it. I Paid my import tax at the correct rate. I subsequently applie for and got a ZV Reg on it as was my entitlement. I have no gripe with the average member of the IKCC , who either did as I did and paid their dues on importation and are upright citizens. My gripe is with that section of Cheats and Swindlers who bring cars into this country, and use Classic Plates illegally to avoid VRT and road tax. My biggest concern is that , by giving false information to the Insurance Cos the Insurance will be Null and Void in the event of an accident. I prefer to take a stance against wrongdoing and make no apolagies for doing so.
" Evil will only prosper , when good men do nothing"
Now do we understand each other???

f4fay

So what you are saying is you are worried about these people that you think are not insured because they gave false information.....so how did you get to be totally legal insurance wise with a 1979 car manufactured in 82 or later...if i worked in an insurance company and you had an accident in an 82 or later car with a 79 reg there would be a serious investigation ...do we undersand each other ???;)

mountai

f4fay wrote: »

So what you are saying is you are worried about these people that you think are not insured because they gave false information.....so how did you get to be totally legal insurance wise with a 1979 car manufactured in 82 or later...if i worked in an insurance company and you had an accident in an 82 or later car with a 79 reg there would be a serious investigation ...do we undersand each other ???;)

JESUS ---- YOU ARE ONE THICK MAN

ALLMGS

As I posted earlier the car from our club, escort mk2, is what you call a cloned car because the chassis origional identity is from eastern europe. The owner wanted to be sure he was covered and gave a full declaration to the insurance company and they fully insured it on these details. They are in insurance for business ( risk of claim) and they would pay out on this policy. Therefore the car is covered. This, IMHO, is the most important issue. Phew, this is harder than walking but don't tell my wife or shows are over for me!

corktina

ALLMGS wrote: »

As I posted earlier the car from our club, escort mk2, is what you call a cloned car because the chassis origional identity is from eastern europe. The owner wanted to be sure he was covered and gave a full declaration to the insurance company and they fully insured it on these details. They are in insurance for business ( risk of claim) and they would pay out on this policy. Therefore the car is covered. This, IMHO, is the most important issue. Phew, this is harder than walking but don't tell my wife or shows are over for me!

its a cloned car if the shell used was secondhand. You can only use the origanl ID from Poland or wherever, NOT the ID off a long-scrapped Irish car. The Insurance is on that long-scrapped car NOT on the Eastern Europe car .

f4fay

mountai wrote: »

JESUS ---- YOU ARE ONE THICK MAN

I don't think so !!!! Clever maybe but not Thick......And you speak about discredit......What can i say !!!!! :rolleyes:

carchaeologist

Just a few questions on this..

ALLMGS wrote: »

I was directed to the boards.ie site by a worried fellow classic car owner re the new European legistation on old car modifications, but found this thread more worrying.
Why the worry, if nothing untoward is done, nothing to worry about?
As a member of a large vintage and classic club based in the South of Ireland with a broad base of vehicles (steam, farm, classic, etc). Lots of our owners have spent a lot of time and money keeping old cars etc on the road for their and the publics interest and pleasure. Some of these cars are of an age that would attract a annual road tax of €2000.00 and like many other clubs owners around the country cannot be afforded.
We all spend time and money on our cars in this hobby.
If road tax cant be afforded faking a cars identity is not the answer. If you cant afford the road tax then either wait until the car is over 30 years old or buy a smaller engined car.

We all attend shows in as many parts of the country as possible ( the wife thinks it's good for my health to walk around lines of parked cars, who am I to argue!!) and see cars with mabye not so true regs.
Theres no maybe about it. Ringing is rife in this country with classic cars, agreed most of it is not done to avoid tax, just purely for the asthetic look of the car, but there are those who are avoiding large road tax bills but aging their car older than it is.
Highlighting this issue too much as f4fay says will cause every club in the country hassle and reduce shows etc.
The only hassle will be for the guys up ti no good avoiding road tax/VRT or whatever.
Do we need it in the current climate when owning and showing a classic car is all many of us can aspire to.


Ps. I do agree that all vehicles should be insured fully before taking them on the road or on trailers to shows and if this is the case with grey area cars Eg. a 4 door mk2 escort in our own club (owners permission given to post this), old clare reg, with a replaced body from eastern europe. This car is fully insured with details given to insurer. This car would not be on the road if he did not do this and that would be a shame.
So this car is a 4 door escort, originally RHD, now on a LHD shell from eastern europe? Has the shell been converted to RHD? Does that count as a modification? Does the insurer know of this? Where does one draw the the line?
You say 'The car would not be on the road if he did not do this' Which car, the original one thats long gone, or the eastern european one? A set of plates would not stop the imported car being roadworthy, would it?
If an axe has threee handles and two heads is it the same axe?

Was it explained to the insurance company that the registratioin was not actually from that car, because you will get insurancve on anything as its down to what you tell them, but if something happens and the **** hits the fan is that car actually covered?

Basil Fawlty

As someone who owns a few cars under the old Irish UK reg system. I feel that accusing every second car as being dodgy brings more harm to the scene than actually doing it.

I do not agree with the practice but the way its portrayed on this site you have made it out that most vintage cars are not on their correct plate. We all know thats not true but to an outsider looking in its casting a very hard to tell.

People need to calm down about being the reg police. While some people have been correct in their assumptions others have not. Innocent until proven guilty.

I used to like this forum for "today i saw an abandoned classic" etc so can it please get back on track.

f4fay

carchaeologist wrote: »

Just a few questions on this..

Don't forget to tell the insurance company every time you pump up your tyres....Just in case

mountai

ciarancapri wrote: »

As someone who owns a few cars under the old Irish UK reg system. I feel that accusing every second car as being dodgy brings more harm to the scene than actually doing it.

I do not agree with the practice but the way its portrayed on this site you have made it out that most vintage cars are not on their correct plate. We all know thats not true but to an outsider looking in its casting a very hard to tell.

People need to calm down about being the reg police. While some people have been correct in their assumptions others have not. Innocent until proven guilty.

I used to like this forum for "today i saw an abandoned classic" etc so can it please get back on track.

Who said every second car is was dodgy??
Who said most vintage car was not on the correct plate?
The whole point of this thread was to highlite the illegal practice that seems to be endemic among the Kit Car fraternity. It is THEM that are endangering the Classic car scene. It is those who abuse the system and risk spoiling it for the Genuine Classic fraternity. What should we do, sit back and say nothing.If you dont like this topic being discussed in an open and honest manner then why participate??. If you believe there is a problem , whats wrong with bringing it into the open? Should we go back to the days when everything in this Country was swept under the carpet?

unfit2006

Ciarancapri,

I also like the "abandoned classic" thread but I also feel threads like this is necessary.
Some years ago, after a hard fought battle, the government allowed a concession of a reduced rate of motor tax for vintage/classic cars.
I along with many other genuine classic car owners appreciate the value of such a concession and do not like to see it abused by individuals who openly ring cars.
It disturbs me to see the vintage tax on Range Rovers, Rolls Royces, BMWs and other high end vehicles that are clearly not entitled to same.
yes there have been one or two incidents quoted over the years where subsequently it transpired that the car in question may have been over 30 years old. However, in the vast vast majority of cases our suspicions about ringers are unfortunately borne out.

If the owners/builders of kit cars encounter difficulties with registering their completed projects or declaring their imported kitcars then let them deal with that as an issue within their own group and with the relevant authorities. I do not agree that they should seek to sidestep around the problem by cloning or ringing them as "classics" on old tax books from Triumphs or Escorts or the likes.

As a classic car owner, I can see that practices such as those above will eventually undermine and threaten the hard won achievements of classic car enthusiasts over the past number of years.

macplaxton

corktina wrote: »

kit cars are not Classic cars...simples..

I'll go further...kit Cars are often bastardised Classic Cars

further still....they should not be in a position to obtain the benefits that genuine Classic Cars attract.They have no Historic merit

Now you're talking cod there Corky.

There are kit cars and there are classic kit cars. Amateur built vehicles didn't suddenly happen yesterday and kit cars of a certain age do have historic merit.

They aren't my bag, but they do have their place. I don't agree with underhand methods that some may use in registering them here, but the lack of a simple and proper mechanism for dealing with them doesn't help either.

mountai

macplaxton wrote: »

Now you're talking cod there Corky.

There are kit cars and there are classic kit cars. Amateur built vehicles didn't suddenly happen yesterday and kit cars of a certain age do have historic merit.

They aren't my bag, but they do have their place. I don't agree with underhand methods that some may use in registering them here, but the lack of a simple and proper mechanism for dealing with them doesn't help either.

macplaxton, I couldn"t agree more with you.But please let me point out the error of your last sentence. There IS a simple and proper mechanism in place.

If you want to register an imported Kit Car, then all you have to do is go through the exact same steps as anyone else who imports a car into this country.The only difference with Kit Cars is ---- The Revenue view,
is that the AGE of the car is based on the date of when the Chassis was first put on the road, in arriving at the VRT value.Thats a rule that I personally dont agree with but Hey Ho its there.

There are some fine examples in this country of Self Build cars.The people who build these cars can, and do, go through hell to get them registered.These are the people whose efforts are diluted by the Cheats. The system could do with reform, but its up to the Kit Car people to lobby for reform.
When I started this thread, it was to bring to peoples notice, the fact that SO MANY Classics are being "bastardised" in the process of Cheating the system. I had no idea that the numbers had grown to such proportions.I have been a member of the IKCC for years (though not fully paid up in recent times) and have admired the efforts that SOME Officers of the Club put in , in the development of their hobby.By their recent actions, the Club have shown that they approve the practice of Cloning (by doctoring the Photos). Obviously, I will have nothing further to do with such a discredited organization.

ianobrien

ALLMGS wrote: »

.
Eg. a 4 door mk2 escort in our own club (owners permission given to post this), old clare reg, with a replaced body from eastern europe. This car is fully insured with details given to insurer. This car would not be on the road if he did not do this and that would be a shame.

Given that the Escort never had a separate chassis and that the shell is all one, how did the owner go about getting the chassis number updated on the Clare reg to reflect the new chassis number? If he didn't, I know what some people will think.....

There is a difference between having the insurnance documents and the car's documents up to date and all correct.

Edit - You have said that without doing this, that car would not be on the road. I think you mean to ssay that that car's identity would not be on the road.......