All newsletters and articles below are produced by the FBHVC (The Federation
of British Historic Vehicle Clubs).
You can also view their website at www.fbhvc.co.uk.
The Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs exists to uphold the freedom
to use old vehicles on the road. It does this by representing the interests of
owners of such vehicles to politicians, government officials, and legislators
both in UK and (through membership of Fédération Internationale
des Véhicules Anciens) in Europe.
FBHVC is a company limited by guarantee, registered number 3842316, and was founded
in 1988.
There are nearly 500 subscriber organisations representing a total membership
of over 250,000 in addition to individual and trade supporters. Details can
be found at www.fbhvc.co.uk or sent on application to the secretary.
This is not a perfect result, for reasons explained below, but is nonetheless a victory for common sense.
The European proposal to ban decorative and vehicle refinishing products that
contain a high proportion of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) came to our attention
in 2002. At FBHVC’s instigation, and with the help of Andrew Turner at
EPPA, FIVA lobbied to ensure that the needs of those restoring historic vehicles
were not ignored. The Paint Products Directive (2004/42/CE) banning the general
sale of products with high levels of VOCs, contained the following exemption
at Article 3(3) -
For purposes of restoration and maintenance of buildings and vintage vehicles
designated by competent authorities as being of particular historical and cultural
value, Member States may grant individual licenses for the sale of and purchase
in strictly limited quantities of products which do not meet the VOC limit values
laid down in Annex II.
Some time after the main part of the Directive had been translated into UK law, DEFRA consulted on how such a licensing scheme might be implemented. The original proposal, involving local authorities in issuing licences, was complicated. FBHVC expressed concern both at the potential costs and the likelihood that there would be variation in approach between authorities. Local authorities themselves were also very much against the proposal. DEFRA paid attention to the consultation responses, and had a re-think, eventually consulting on another proposal earlier this year. The result is the scheme that is now in place.
The reason this scheme is not perfect in that there is a mismatch between it
and Article 3(3), which refers to the grant of licences on an individual-case
basis, making it arguable that without such a licence, the sale of non-compliant
product is technically an offence. DEFRA neatly skates round this by -
(1) publishing a code of practice for the benefit of paint suppliers;
(2) delegating responsibility for enforcement of the regulations to local authorities;
(3) providing those authorities with guidance that includes this statement:
The Paint Products Directive says that a licensing scheme can be established
to allow strictly limited amounts of non-compliant paint to be marketed for
painting vintage vehicles or historic buildings. Because of the administrative
complexities of setting up such a scheme and the burdens on those to whom it
would apply, it has been decided not to do so, but to rely on local authorities
taking a proportionate approach to enforcement.
(4) pointing out that the size of the market for non-compliant product is less
that 0.03% of the total paint market; and
(5) reminding local authorities of the provisions of the ‘Regulators’
Compliance Code’ and the public interest and proportionality tests to
be undertaken when considering enforcement action.
DEFRA’s guidance notes acknowledge that there is no restriction on what may be purchased to repaint motorcycles, tractors, boats, planes or railway-carriages (provided it is not labelled as being also suitable for use on four wheeled road vehicles), but it is likely that this obvious loophole will be closed by the EC when it reviews the effect of the 2004 Directive.
The saga continues. To recap: hiring a chauffeured car is generally a controlled activity and the relevant legislation is the Local Authorities (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act of 1976 (LA Act). There is an exemption for weddings and funerals. Licensing (in England and Wales) is in the hands of local authorities who have the discretion to set the terms of the licences. Similar arrangements exist in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Three levels of licence are required: operator (the person who handles the bookings); driver; and vehicle. Those hiring chauffeured historic vehicles for purposes other than weddings or funerals need all three. The first two should pose no problem, and are not generally hugely expensive. The last is a nightmare as authorities may set their own conditions to determine whether a vehicle is 'safe and suitable' and different authorities have different attitudes, some being absolutely rigid in refusing to license anything more than five years old. Conditions, once a vehicle is licensed, can be onerous, such as being required to pass an MoT twice a year.
As reported in the last issue, we asked the Local Government Association what
advice they provide to councils, but were told that the LGA does not provide
advice on a council's responsibilities under the LA Act. We were referred to
LACORS - the Local Authorities Co-ordinator of Regulatory Services. They, in
turn, referred us to the Institute of Licensing, which is a registered charity
providing advice to anyone involved in the business of licensing.
The Institute of Licensing agree the legislation is a mess, and there is little
uniformity of approach. They were pleased to hear from FBHVC as they are in
the process of preparing a consultation amongst interested parties with a view
to proposing that the Department for Transport should consolidate the existing
minefield of legislation and regulation into a unified system that will result
in a balanced set of regulations that can be applied evenly throughout the country.
FBHVC will be included in the consultation.
There are two new consultations both from VOSA: on 'Delivering Better Services
and Fairer Fees' and 'Proposed Changes to the Standards of Testing Heavy Goods
Vehicles and Public Service Vehicles and the Implementation of Electronic Aim
Measurement' which is concerned with the testing of headlamps. We will be responding
to both of these. We have to report no further progress on the following ongoing
topics: measures to enforce insurance 'from the record'; improving access to
public transport for the disabled; private hire vehicles; and the regulations
for the sale of non-compliant paint.
In response to a question about oils which do not contain zinc dialkyldithiophosphate
Castrol Technical Centre very kindly submitted the following article. Club editors
are very welcome to reproduce it in their own newsletters but to preserve technical
accuracy Castrol request that it should only be reproduced in whole.
Established in 1899, originally as C.C. Wakefield, Castrol launched their first
lubricant for cars in 1906 and have been at the leading edge of lubrication
technology ever since. With the introduction of low viscosity engine oils and
changes to anti-wear additives in modern oils in recent years, owners of veteran,
vintage and classics are asking whether modern oils are suitable for their cars.
Choosing the correct lubricant for your veteran, vintage or classic vehicle
is essential to ensure peak running and maximum wear protection. The technology
of older vehicle engines is very different from today's modern cars, so to assist
owners, Castrol reintroduced their older brands with their 'Classic Range' in
the early 1990s. These Classic oils are produced to original viscosities and
importantly have retained the necessary levels of additives including anti-wear
additive ZDDP (zinc dialkyldithiophosphate) appropriate for the technology of
the engines they are designed for and to provide overall protection. The ZDDP
levels are appropriate for engines that are in use or running-in, including
those fitted with new or reconditioned components, where care should always
be taken to follow the manufacturers' recommendations when breaking in new components
such as camshafts.
ZDDP additive provides a high level of anti-wear protection, but its phosphorus
content is harmful to catalytic converters and other emission equipment fitted
to many modern vehicles. It has therefore been reduced in the latest specification
oils, designed for engines using the latest surface hardening technology and
meeting the latest emission requirements for modern vehicles. These requirements
also necessitate the use of other new emission equipment friendly additives
not designed for use in veteran, vintage and classic car engines.
Oil formulations required for today's modern vehicles are very different from
formulations needed for older vehicles, having thinner viscosity and alternative
additive technology as stated earlier, making them generally unsuitable for
use in older engines. This has been done in conjunction with new vehicle manufacturers
who have increased the surface hardening of engine components to receive maximum
protection from the new additives. Oils for modern engines comply with the latest
API ratings and are designed for modern engine technology with tight tolerances
and compatibility with catalytic converters.
A car engine of old design has very different characteristics, with cork, graphite
or rope seals, low pressure cog driven oil pumps, wider oil-ways with greater
dependence on 'splash' and 'cling' lubrication, lower revving with lesser machine
tolerances. Such widely different specifications demand totally different lubricants
of thicker viscosity with appropriate additives specially included for the work
they have to do.
Oils even of the same viscosity, supplied by different oil companies can have
radically different formulations and thus have significantly different performance
characteristics. Oil classifications are designated 'S' (for spark ignition
petrol engines) and 'C' (for compression ignition diesel engines). Oil classifications
for older petrol vehicles range from SA for vehicles from the turn of the last
century to SH, to the late 1980s and early '90s.
• Inadequate anti-wear additive (ZDDP) and the oil film between moving
parts breaks down prematurely, resulting in metal to metal contact and damage
to reground or new engine components particularly on run-in.
• Inadequate detergent will result in gum and lacquer clinging to the
hotter engine components.
• Too much detergent can cause a build-up of metallic ash in the combustion
chambers of older engines. In older engines with traditionally high oil consumption,
this will cause detonation and pinking. In older engines where the carbon has
built up over a number of years the detergents can also have a scouring effect
causing the carbon to flake off, blocking up oil galleries and spray jets. High
levels of detergent will ‘wash’ traces of carbon from seals and
gaskets, revealing oil leaks.
• Inadequate anti-oxidant and the oil will permanently thicken during
high temperature motoring, with large amounts of gum and varnish clogging filters
and piston rings.
• Inadequate corrosion inhibitors and engine internals become pitted with
corrosion and rust from acids and water formed during combustion.
• Inadequate dispersing results in soot, wear metals and the by-products
of combustion settling out in the sump to form a thick sludge that will block
filters and oil ways.
• Inadequate pour point depressant and the oil ceases to flow at low temperatures,
with excessive strain on the oil pump or in certain cases, oil starvation on
start-up causing complete failure of the lubrication system.
For older vehicles; veteran, vintage and classic, use an oil of the correct
viscosity as recommended by the vehicle manufacturer and shown in your vehicle's
handbook. Where your vehicle requires a specific viscosity such as 30, 40, 50
and 20w-50, avoid using inappropriate low viscosity engine lubricants designed
for modern vehicles such as 0w, 5w, 10w, 15w. Castrol's vehicle lubrication
records date back beyond the turn of the last century, detailing lubricant specifications
for engine oils, gear oils and greases right through to today's classics, so
to find out which Castrol grade is right for a vehicle, owners can simply refer
to their vehicle handbook and select that grade from Castrol's Classic range.
Castrol's Classic engine oils XL30, XXL40, GP50 and XL20w-50 are formulated
to the original viscosities and contain the necessary levels of ZDDP anti-wear
additive to provide appropriate protection for veteran, vintage and classic
engines. The range is available throughout the UK via leading car specialists.
For further information either telephone the Castrol Classic helpdesk on 01954
231668 or visit www.castrol.com/uk/classics.
FBHVC – Newsletter No. 4, 2009 - Extracts
Paint
At last. After over six years, we now know where we are. In June, the Department
of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) published guidance for the
enforcement of the various paint regulations together with a code of practice
for those selling non-compliant products. The result is that if you can find
a supplier who has signed up to that code of practice, have a vehicle over 30
years old and complete a straightforward one-page application form, you may
purchase cellulose and other non-compliant paint.
This is not a perfect result, for reasons explained below, but is nonetheless a victory for common sense.
The European proposal to ban decorative and vehicle refinishing products that
contain a high proportion of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) came to our attention
in 2002. At FBHVC’s instigation, and with the help of Andrew Turner at
EPPA, FIVA lobbied to ensure that the needs of those restoring historic vehicles
were not ignored. The Paint Products Directive (2004/42/CE) banning the general
sale of products with high levels of VOCs, contained the following exemption
at Article 3(3) -
For purposes of restoration and maintenance of buildings and vintage vehicles
designated by competent authorities as being of particular historical and cultural
value, Member States may grant individual licenses for the sale of and purchase
in strictly limited quantities of products which do not meet the VOC limit values
laid down in Annex II.
Some time after the main part of the Directive had been translated into UK law, DEFRA consulted on how such a licensing scheme might be implemented. The original proposal, involving local authorities in issuing licences, was complicated. FBHVC expressed concern both at the potential costs and the likelihood that there would be variation in approach between authorities. Local authorities themselves were also very much against the proposal. DEFRA paid attention to the consultation responses, and had a re-think, eventually consulting on another proposal earlier this year. The result is the scheme that is now in place.
The reason this scheme is not perfect in that there is a mismatch between it
and Article 3(3), which refers to the grant of licences on an individual-case
basis, making it arguable that without such a licence, the sale of non-compliant
product is technically an offence. DEFRA neatly skates round this by -
(1) publishing a code of practice for the benefit of paint suppliers;
(2) delegating responsibility for enforcement of the regulations to local authorities;
(3) providing those authorities with guidance that includes this statement:
The Paint Products Directive says that a licensing scheme can be established
to allow strictly limited amounts of non-compliant paint to be marketed for
painting vintage vehicles or historic buildings. Because of the administrative
complexities of setting up such a scheme and the burdens on those to whom it
would apply, it has been decided not to do so, but to rely on local authorities
taking a proportionate approach to enforcement.
(4) pointing out that the size of the market for non-compliant product is less
that 0.03% of the total paint market; and
(5) reminding local authorities of the provisions of the ‘Regulators’
Compliance Code’ and the public interest and proportionality tests to
be undertaken when considering enforcement action.
DEFRA’s guidance notes acknowledge that there is no restriction on what may be purchased to repaint motorcycles, tractors, boats, planes or railway-carriages (provided it is not labelled as being also suitable for use on four wheeled road vehicles), but it is likely that this obvious loophole will be closed by the EC when it reviews the effect of the 2004 Directive.
Registration Enquiries
The DVLA liaison person for one of the larger one-model clubs commented that,
during a particularly busy week, he had eight registration enquiries and there
was usually a problem with every single one. The list included: no chassis number
given; incorrect postage on letter; no cheque enclosed; a non-member and no
fee enclosed; registration sold some years ago and now applicant wants it back;
the chassis number did not relate to the model of the car; missing forms. One
application had three of the above.
A regular problem is persuading an owner that just a set of rusted-on number plates is not sufficient evidence. One individual was sent the signed paperwork for an age-related plate, and then just altered the form to attempt to claim the original number. Applicants have left phone messages, like ‘I spoke to you last week. Can you give me a ring back’ but without leaving a name or a phone number.
As a DVLA liaison person both for the Federation, and for a commercial vehicle club, I can recognise many of those problems. I would add to the omissions list - no clear photograph or ‘brass rubbing’ of chassis plate.
I have a standard letter/email to send to new applicants which is designed to catch most of those problems before they occur. The case of the chassis number not relating to that particular car is not something that an owner would necessarily be aware of, but of course is something that the specialist car clubs should be able to detect.
FBHVC Newsletter No. 3, 2009 - Extracts of Interest
LEGISLATION
David Hurley
Delivering Better Services and Fairer Fees
The proposed consolidation of the operator’s license fee of £40
with the HGV test for privately owned preserved commercial vehicles is to go
ahead. Our suggestion for an age exemption has been rejected on the ground that
cost will still be incurred for ‘enforcement’. We are not going
to let the matter rest and are currently researching just how many pre-1970
vehicles have been subject to enforcement activity in the past.
Local Transport Act - consultation on impounding of illegally operated
PSVs and HGVs
Since this measure would also apply to privately owned and preserved vehicles
of this type, our response accepted the thrust of the proposed legislation and
apart from certain details agreed with the detailed procedures which incorporate
well tried VOSA principles and involvement of Traffic Commissioners. We did
however feel that there were compelling reasons for some minor changes to avoid
the destruction of offending historic vehicles and also made recommendations
that historic vehicles should not be subject to roadside clamping for reasons
of security.
Minor modifications to MoT test content and fee maxima
The Federation comments about exemptions for older vehicle number plates appear
to have been noted and we have been assured that the VOSA MoT guidelines do
make provision for historic vehicles.
Continuous Enforcement of Motor Insurance
Our response supported measures to combat the use of uninsured vehicles, but
requested that our concerns about the impact of these proposals on the owners
of historic vehicles should be addressed. We raised questions about the accuracy
of the MID and also about the extra administrative burden the expected increase
in the number of SORN applications would create, as well as the possibility
that people could be liable to unfair penalties under the continuous enforcement
legislation as well as SORN penalties just for neglecting to renew SORN. We
do intend to carry out some further research into the implications of this proposed
legislation with the Association of British Insurers.
EU agrees new EU tyre noise proposal
The EU institutions have reached agreement on the new standards for tyres designed
to reduce carbon emissions and noise pollution from vehicles. The exemption,
which applies to tyres designed only to be fitted to vehicles registered for
the first time before 1 October 1990, was achieved by FIVA and remains in the
final text.
EU to waive asbestos ban in second-hand products
The European Commission and member states have agreed that the re-sale of asbestos-containing
products that had been in use before the 2005 EU ban on the cancer-causing substance
can continue indefinitely in order to allow the sale of older "articles"
containing asbestos, such as houses and aircraft. The EP has 6 months in which
to oppose the Decision – if it does not, the Decision will be enacted.