Saddened by recent rape

[James Baxter]

I saw a modern S type Jaguar today, registration KW 292.
I was deeply saddened because the number has been raped off a genuine vintage Jowett.
I don't blame the driver because he probably has spare cash and he is sure his registration looks super cool.
But rather i blame the bandit rapist who took the number off the car, within the past 12 months, just about. He needs locking up,in my humble opinion.

Climbs down from soapbox.

Does anyone agree?

[Peter Holden]

The original KW 292 was raped over a year ago.

She was in Lichfield area with an SV tattoo over a year ago.

If you know her I would suggest you take her to the police station and report it. Good luck.

We will see the case in the High Court or you will be Sectioned!

[Jack]

Sadly it used to be that you needed an mot to transfer the number from most cars, but now we have no mot presumably any owner with an old v5 for a project they are never going to get round to might decide to cash in on a numberplate worth more than the car...

Sad, but how do we combat it? Buy up reg nos for the future? Should the club accelerate from waiting for an owner to claim a number to registering all the nos the registrars have and know the location for?

Jack

[David Kemp]

I may be out of step here but, a number plate does not maketh a car.
I still can't fathom why people pay thousands of dollars/pounds/Euros for number plates , or worry if an old cars plate is transferred.
Over the course of a cars life it may have had numerous plates, my current car though 15 years old has had 3 plate changes!
It is nice to see an original car with it's original plate, it adds to authenticity , but is no lessor vehicle for having NO number plate.

[Chris Spencer]

Does anyone agree?

James - I completely agree, much like the vendors who value the registration number well in excess of what of the vehicles value is, then there is the old dealers trick of purchasing a vehicle, removing the original registration and re-registering the vehicle before selling both of them on - Not something that I would ever support

[ian Howell]

It happened to me both ways.

I bought my first Javelin registered MKC 1 in 1965 and later found out quite a bit of its history. Even so, when in 1969, when I was about to be married, I was offered the price of the downpayment on a house for just the number. The replacement number 6469 TU was then issued to it by the DVLA and I kept the car for another 18 years.

I eventually sold it as a non-runner in 1987 ostensibly for repair but I noticed a few years ago that 6469 TU had been transferred to a Lexus.

However, during my ownership of 6469 TU I often took it to rallies where I put back the original MKC 1 plates 'just for the show'.

I suppose that, providing you don't put it on the road with them on, you could fit ANY number you like on a car (possibly not HRH 1 though!).

I currently own PG 7956 with no intention WHATEVER of transferring it, although I have a friend with those initials who could well afford it for his Bentley Continental!

[Andy Stevens]

Sadly it used to be that you needed an mot to transfer the number from most cars, but now we have no mot presumably any owner with an old v5 for a project they are never going to get round to might decide to cash in on a numberplate worth more than the car...

You still need an mot to transfer a plate even if the vehicle is pre 1960.....

[DavidMetcalfe]

I think if a car has good history,it should keep its number! A car that is made of bits or no real history, then the number can be taken off,but the car still survives, remember if you own it,it's yours to do what you want with!
As members do mud plugging in the VSCC, which I don't agree with! As good cars are wrecked in a breath! So which is more important,number plates or wrecking a good car?
People should realise that its upto the owner to do what they wish,a numberplate won't wreck a car!

[Keith Clements]

Since you need an MOT on the donor vehicle and the recipient vehicle to transfer a plate then a bag of bits will not do, unless you can get an MOT via the back door.
To get an MOT, the car will need to be registered and this should include inspection by a trusted third party. So the bag of bits might be an issue there as well.
Provenence has always been an issue in the classic car market, especially where a bag of rusty bits is concerned, but now it is presumably harder to fool the system.
Does anybody know any cases where MOTs were not required (recently)?
Incriminating details not required!

[DavidMetcalfe]

There is plenty of bags of bits cars out there! We all know of them! Wrong engines wrong gearboxes in wrong years chassis! Hence called a special! As long as a car is road worthy at the time of a MOT there is no problem! There isnt Many MOT testers about that have a clue in what there looking at anyway and if the use the ministry's book on testing there wouldn't be a old car on the road! It's down to the MOT testers discretion as the ministry don't want to get in volved! I know as I'm a MOT tester! I also disagree with no MOT as people who don't have a clue repair there own cars and think its road worthy!

[Keith Clements]

Speaking with David this evening he said that the DVLA accept cars for registration, if they contain 2/3 the original car. I was not aware of this as it seems just owning a small bit of rust or a brass plaque seems to allow some to justify provenance. I think the classic car clubs have a large part to play in establishing the provenance of cars, but some pragmatism needs to be employed and strict rules are doomed to failure. In most cases this involves being able to establish the chassis number of the car, but the DVLA often insists on a lot more than that.

That is a seperate issue though to the rape of number plates, or the ability of owners to get a period number plate , or the ability of people to have personalised number plates. The DVLA now insist the cars have MOTs which at least stops some of the buy a restorable wreck and scrap it. But does it. are cars that are now exempt from MOT not so protected?