eligible for vintage tax

scrap_man

Hi, I'm just after buying a 1985 Toyota carina. I know it will qualify for vintage tax next year, but my question is will it be eligible in jan 2015 or june 2015 as that iis when it was 1st registered?
Thanks

b.c

1st reg

scrap_man

ahh so a year and a half to go

Dades

Assuming there's no messing in the December Budget!

Always a nervy time of year for those with 80's machines.

Johntm

Sorry to jump in but is NCT needed on every car after 1980 now, I thought I read it somewhere but not 100% on it

MrFoxman360

Johntm wrote: »

Sorry to jump in but is NCT needed on every car after 1980 now, I thought I read it somewhere but not 100% on it

yep, every car registered from 1/1/1980 onwards

Dades

And tested every year, too!

Car99

Dades wrote: »

Assuming there's no messing in the December Budget!

Always a nervy time of year for those with 80's machines.

I wonder how likely they are to impose a vintage tax cut off date in the near future like in the uk where it's pre 74 (Thanks Corktina). I've an 86 M5 and I'm hoping to get in for vintage tax in a couple of years otherwise it'll be going up for sale unfortunately . All these ZV land rovers are not doing us any favours. Also a lot of late '80s machinery are more than capable of being good daily drivers.

corktina

it's pre 1974 now (was 73 until very recently)

macplaxton

corktina wrote: »

it's pre 1974 now (was 73 until very recently)

No Corky, It's still pre 1973. It's not April yet!

(Yes, I know they announced the 1 year move in the March 2013 UK Budget, but I also like to not count chickens before hatching (planned start date is 1st April 2014)
UK Perma-SORNS did start on the 16th December 2013 though. The plan was announced in the same budget.

corktina

it is in my head.

Dades

Are the UK using a rolling 40 year date now - or is their change just a one off?

macplaxton

One off.

PanhardPL

Rolling 30 year exemption

Europe-wide Roadworthiness Testing legislation, agreed in Brussels last month, is scheduled to come into effect in April, and the UK’s Department for Transport (DfT) will then have until April 2018 to decide how to incorporate the directive into UK legislation. Part of the legislation includes exempting ‘classics’ from MOT testing on a rolling 30-year exemption basis. If introduced this year, it could potentially be applied to all Land Rovers built before 1984.
LRO takes the view that all vehicles should be checked for road safety at regular intervals by a certified professional, and never has supported the idea of abolishing the MOT for older vehicles – which currently applies to vehicles registered before 1 Jan 1960 in the UK. Even if the new legislation goes ahead, the owner of an MOT-exempt vehicle would still be responsible for their vehicle’s road safety, and legally liable for any damage caused by mechanical failure. We think it’s too risky to rely on owners who are not vehicle technicians to assess the safety of their own vehicle.
 According to the new directive, a vehicle qualifies for exemption if:
1. 'It was manufactured or registered for the first time at least 30 years ago.’
2. 'Its specific type […] is no longer in production’.
3. 'It is historically preserved and maintained in its original state, and has not sustained substantial changes in the technical characteristics of its main components.’
For vehicles as modifiable and long-lived as Land Rovers, that leaves plenty of wiggle room. Does a 1983 One Ten count as ‘no longer in production’ when the largely similar Defender 110 is still being made? Would swapping a 2.5-litre diesel for a 200Tdi (based on the earlier 2.5) count as a ‘substantial change’? What about a Tdi engine in a Series Land Rover? And how would you classify a well-preserved 1970s-built V8 Series I trialler? Despite being heavily modified, some vehicles can still be ‘historically preserved’ and a classic in their own right.
Nothing is yet set in stone. The form of the Brussels agreement, as a directive rather than a regulation, allows the UK government some flexibility in how it interprets the legislation, and whether it wants to adopt it at all.
The Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs (FBHVC), representing 550 member clubs, is liaising with the DfT, and has said that it aims ‘to ensure that as testing becomes more modern and automated, it still remains possible to test older vehicles’. 
For more information, visit the FBHVC’s website at fbhvc.co.uk

corktina

never mind the UK, that means we could have the 30 year rolling NCT exemption back!

macplaxton

corktina wrote: »

that means we could have the 30 year rolling NCT exemption back!

Fat chance. Being a directive, it's down to member states how they apply it. Given that the Irish government has managed to miss the odd EU deadline or two in passing some laws, I wouldn't bank on them amending the 2009 NCT regs to re-instate such a concession.

On top of that, I don't think Applus+ would be that happy losing some business.

hi5

corktina wrote: »

never mind the UK, that means we could have the 30 year rolling NCT exemption back!

It also means any modifications to a vehicle over 30 years old will be illegal.
They're not too happy in the UK.
As on this thread...
http://www.rodsnsods.co.uk/forum/topic/eu-reaches-decision-road-worthiness-testing-167913

corktina

they wont be illegal, they will just have to be MoTd as they wont count as vintage

macplaxton

Full FBHVC press release:

http://www.fbhvc.co.uk/about-us/news/_article/39/brussels-agrees-on-roadwothiness-testing/

The top and bottom is there is 4 years to implement the Directive into national law. It allows members states to exempt vehicles of historic interest (as defined) from testing, but does not compel them to do so. It doesn't necessarily mean mods are illegal.

Just keep an eye open for when/how they do it here and badger the relevant authorities not to gold-plate the directive.

corktina

4 years..that s OK..my camper is an 87 ...here's hoping!

Boskowski

Is it correct btw that the vintage tax applies only if that vintage car is not your only car?

corktina

no

Dades

Boskowski - you're thinking of classic insurance.

You won't get a classic insurance policy unless you have a second "daily driver".

Cleveland Hot Pocket

corktina wrote: »

never mind the UK, that means we could have the 30 year rolling NCT exemption back!

Never understood why people object to a impartial health check for their car for the paltry sum of €55 tbh

Dades

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

Never understood why people object to a impartial health check for their car for the paltry sum of €55 tbh

I agree on principle, but some of the crap I've had to deal with to get a car through has really put me off. Slightly frayed seat belts or insufficient power on the windscreen washers on on a 29 year old car suggests the test is not conducive to keeping old cars on the road. It seems discretion is in too short supply. In such circumstances you can't blame classic owners for having a gripe.

corktina

Seat belts I can understand, but "indicators not orange enough" would rock me back on my heels.

macplaxton

Dades wrote: »

Slightly frayed seat belts or insufficient power on the windscreen washers on on a 29 year old car suggests the test is not conducive to keeping old cars on the road.

Slightly frayed seatbelts? If it's the edges, then just run a lighter up and down them. Insufficient power on the washers? Obviously not up to the job of clearing the screen.

29 years old or not, it wouldn't of come from the dealer like that when it was new (or if it did, the grease monkey doing the PDI would want shooting)

The test is to check the prescribed items on the list. It's not that hard to pass if everything works as it should. Granted, there are some Stevie Wonders testing and some picky bastards (who should be brought to book)

unkel

macplaxton wrote: »

On top of that, I don't think Applus+ would be that happy losing some business.

I wonder what percentage of cars tested were first registered after 1/1/80 but over 30 years old? Surely it would be less than 1%?

swarlb

Dades wrote: »

I agree on principle, but some of the crap I've had to deal with to get a car through has really put me off. Slightly frayed seat belts or insufficient power on the windscreen washers on on a 29 year old car suggests the test is not conducive to keeping old cars on the road. It seems discretion is in too short supply. In such circumstances you can't blame classic owners for having a gripe.

Is a frayed seat belt on a 5 year old car any less safe than one on a 30 year old car. I would suggest that the test is rather to apply a set of rules for any car that is to be tested, rather than be 'discreet' just because the car is 'old'.

Dades

swarlb wrote: »

Is a frayed seat belt on a 5 year old car any less safe than one on a 30 year old car. I would suggest that the test is rather to apply a set of rules for any car that is to be tested, rather than be 'discreet' just because the car is 'old'.

You might have a point if the system was applying those tests to all cars.

As it is, a "weekend" car first registered on 1/1/1980 can be kept off the road with a weak washer jet, and a daily driver registered the day before can roll around with dodgy brakes and held together with filler and duct tape. The whole system could use a bit of a rethink.

They tried to fail me once because of my number plate font, showing me a book with the "correct" font. I had to point out that the cars in their staff car park had at least three different fonts on display.