Warning to you builders…

[Oldrat]

The Dept of Transport want motorcycles standardised. This was a piece of EU planning which the DoT have continued with…

The effect will be…
No customisation.

If they can do it to motorcycles then your transporter will be next.

I’ve already written to my MP pointing out that this proposal will remove the right of an owner to do what they wish with their own property (within the law of course) and that if the intention is greater road safety, then why not actually enforce the laws we already KH have which seem to be such a low priority.

Anyway this was my text which you may wish to use as a basis for a letter to your own MP


Preventing people modifying their own property. A consultation by DoT.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...dernising-vehicle-standards-print-version.pdf


Dear Mr XXXXXXX MP.
As a lifelong motorcyclist I was astounded to come across this idea in a consultation by the Dept of Transport and would seek your support on preventing it from gaining traction.


In short the DoT want to impose standardised transport, where changes to vehicles by individuals are not allowed.

This firstly, restricts a person’s rights to do what they wish (within the law) to their own property.

It also inhibits one of this country’s greatest assets, it’s innovation and inventiveness.

Finally, it would put a death knell onto an industry in which this country is seen to be the lead, motorcycle customisation.

Businesses from all over the world look to the UK for its innovation and design in motorcycling. Triumph, Ducati, Moto Guzzi, BMW and most international motorcycle manufacturers have been woken up by hundreds of small UK businesses showing the lead.
As a result, these multi national companies now produce machines which encourage customisation, directly as a result of small UK custom builders in a huge and widespread market.

Many of these custom machines can cost in excess of £20k.

If the DoT want better control of noise, speed and road safety, then how about enforcing existing road safety laws and regulations which nowadays are largely ignored by the authorities as a low priority.

I would be grateful for your support and do what you can to put a stop to this nonsense proposal.

 

[Dellmassive]

I was reading the other day about a similar thing concerning. E-bikes and E-scooters.

To make it illegal to MOD them as a. User. (For more power, faster)

And to make them tamper proof from manufacturers.

It was to do with a EU limit of 25kph/15mph that below could be a Push bike, but above had to be classified as a motor scooters etc and needed lights and number plate and insurance etc.

Seemed reasonable....

But your post seems an un reasonable suggestion.

 

[Oldrat]

I’m in favour of controlling new technology but this below is a step too far..
For instance..How long before it’s turned into a cash cow where you have to pay to have work ‘authorised’

“We will create new offences for tampering with a system, part or component of a vehicle intended or adapted to be used on a road. This will enable us to address existing gaps in the legislation, ensuring cleaner and safer vehicles”

 

[DaveD]

I’m in favour of controlling new technology but this below is a step too far..
For instance..How long before it’s turned into a cash cow where you have to pay to have work ‘authorised’

“We will create new offences for tampering with a system, part or component of a vehicle intended or adapted to be used on a road. This will enable us to address existing gaps in the legislation, ensuring cleaner and safer vehicles”

The wording is quite vague, that wording could make it illegal to fit a front splitter, what I suspect they want to do is to make it a criminal offence to carry out a DPF delete or EGR valve delete, both of which are not currently offences.
It could be the thin end of the wedge, in future could it be argued that fitting different wheel / tyre combinations causes higher emissions?

 

[JOG]

The wording is quite vague, that wording could make it illegal to fit a front splitter, what I suspect they want to do is to make it a criminal offence to carry out a DPF delete or EGR valve delete, both of which are not currently offences.
It could be the thin end of the wedge, in future could it be argued that fitting different wheel / tyre combinations causes higher emissions?

It’s a consultation…..so engage and consult! I absolutely recognise the “cash cow” risk - it is akin to how chippies resent that “Gas Safe” registered plumbers can charge a higher rate!

 

[McFlude]

I was talking about my DIY camper conversion to a friend in Tenerife and he was amazed that we could do it. He said that he can't even remove a seat in his car.

 

[Oldrat]

Having been a part of several Govt consultations from a Local Government position, they are written by admin bods who have no clue as to the real world and seem to take no notice anyway.

 

[JOG]

Having been a part of several Govt consultations from a Local Government position, they are written by admin bods who have no clue as to the real world and seem to take no notice anyway.

Erm….try central government too!

 

[Oldrat]

Quite right, it’s often just a game.

 

[JOG]

I read the paper posted….it’s piss-poorly written. To précis: we recognise that technology, innovation and stuff we don’t understand is developing and changing at a pace that the Road Traffic Act can never keep up with; we haven’t a scooby what to do to support the impending autonomous driving; however, we want to hold the whip hand….so we are considering a clunky, catch-all piece of legislation….let us know what you think. Oh, brown envelopes in the usual place please!!!

 

[Oldrat]

Nowt new there then, as I said, often written by those not in the real world.

 

[Jonah1972]

I’ve read through the consultation and the wording is aimed at tackling those who intend to defeat or bypass systems introduced to improve environmental or safety systems.
As stated by others this seems to point towards DPF/EGR deletes, overriding software that limits speed etc. Change of use mods such as converting to motor caravan from a panel van will not be impacted, just greater scrutiny over type approval for safety compliance. i.e May end up having to use a type approved RnR bed.
Thin edge of the wedge? I don’t see it, to me it is simply additional legislation to prevent third parties making type approved vehicles non compliant.

 

[Oldrat]

Change of use mods such as converting to motor caravan from a panel van will not be impacted, just greater scrutiny over type approval for safety compliance. i.e May end up having to use a type approved RnR bed.

Firstly how can you be so certain that it will not affect other parts of vehicles, by way of unintended consequences. The final legislation will not be written by niche vehicle builders, but by administrators.

Actually you have just proved my reason for concerns.

What about all those small engineering shops who make roof racks for transports and crafters, make door ladders, or other ancillary items. Will they have to be type approved to, they have flexing them out of existence.

Further, what about the need to reroute an exhaust system to make room for water tanks/ gas etc.

As I’ve said before, enforce existing legislation which currently includes the catch all offence of using a vehicle in a dangerous condition.


Section 40A of the Road Traffic Act 1988 states:-

A person is guilty of an offence if he uses, or causes or permits another to use, a motor vehicle or trailer on a road when-

(a)the condition of the motor vehicle or trailer, or of its accessories or equipment, or

(b)the purpose for which it is used, or

(c)the number of passengers carried by it, or the way they are carried, or

(d)the weight, position or distribution of its load, or the way it is secured,

is such that the use of the motor vehicle or trailer involves a danger of injury to any person.

The offence is judged on an objective basis and you can be charged and convicted even if you did not know that there was a danger.

Here are a few examples;​

• Failing to ensure seatbelts are in a good working order;
• Carrying too many passengers;
• An open boot carrying an insecure load – e.g. gardening waste.

It is therefore very important that you, as the driver, ensure that there is no risk of harm to others as a result of the state of your vehicle.

The courts sentencing powers are to impose a mandatory 3 penalty points or discretionary disqualification and a fine of up to £2500 for a non-commercial vehicle. If you have committed a similar offence within the last 3 years you will face an obligatory disqualification.

 

[Salty Spuds]

TBH if it keeps the wannabe Lewis Hamilton’s off the local by-pass in their souped up Astras & Clios, bring it on.

 

[F2JON]

I wondered what this was when I saw the title, being a builder I thought what now!!

 

[JOG]

TBH if it keeps the wannabe Lewis Hamilton’s off the local by-pass in their souped up Astras & Clios, bring it on.

Nope, it won’t fix that at all

 

[LastBoyScout]

Probably to do with the mad rush to control emissions. VW removed the sport from the dsg and any addition at build to the California effects these too and requires VW to complete additional testing. One day we will all be driving boxes without any input. Sad!

 

[Oldrat]

TBH if it keeps the wannabe Lewis Hamilton’s off the local by-pass in their souped up Astras & Clios, bring it on.

So sod the rest then?
At the expense of others who are not wannabes eh!

There is plenty of existing legislation to deal with boy wonders, including seizing their cars.
Does it happen much? Nope because the Police, like others are overworked and understaffed and sadly officers nowadays are not so thoroughly trained or supported.

So let’s bring in a catch all for those law abiding folks, they won’t mind….will they

 

[DaveD]

If you're thinking about getting your van remapped, do it before this proposed legislation becomes law.

 

[Salty Spuds]

So sod the rest then?
At the expense of others who are not wannabes eh!

There is plenty of existing legislation to deal with boy wonders, including seizing their cars.
Does it happen much? Nope because the Police, like others are overworked and understaffed and sadly officers nowadays are not so thoroughly trained or supported.

So let’s bring in a catch all for those law abiding folks, they won’t mind….will they

As I understand it, the (proposed) legislation is aimed at “modders” who alter their vehicles in a way that materially changes the emissions. E.g. deleting EGR/DPFs, changing the power outputs of engines beyond their specifications etc etc. How is this a bad thing?
If you want more power, buy the higher output engine, it will then come with a chassis/suspension/brakes designed to take the extra power. If you want a noisy exhaust that pisses everyone else off, then boohoo. If you buy the 84ps engine & re-map it to 150, are you going to upgrade the brakes & gearbox too?
I’m no tree hugger, and if Greta crossed my path, I’d give her a bollocking & send her back to school. But all the things I’ve mentioned are there for a reason. I grew up in the 60-70’s in the industrial north, and the air that we breathed literally killed people. When smokeless zones came in, people threw up their arms claiming it was the end of the world, similarly when leaded fuel was banned. The days of the internal combustion engine are numbered, I’m 57 and I will see the end of the consumer/private Diesel engine in my lifetime (hopefully I’ll live long enough, but who knows?). This legislation might actually extend the life of the ICE by ensuring it stays cleaner & more acceptable. Times change and those who don’t/won’t or refuse to change get left behind.
Resistance is futile