Latest news from
Brussels on the EU Roadworthiness Testing
requirements
The
Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs (FBHVC) has just released a note
on the current situation. The
FBHVC has been working with the DfT in the consultative process on the proposed
requirements along with a number of bodies concerned over the constraints the
final legislation might impose on "historic" vehicles, not least classic
cars.
See the FBHVC press release dated 17th January 2014. More
This
is not the most exciting NEWS item but it is one of real concern for classic car
enthusiasts, not least members with MGBV8 conversions or a modified MGBGTV8 and
RV8.
Posted: 140117
 |
Brussels
agrees on Roadworthiness Testing
EU proposals for new Roadworthiness
Testing requirements have been causing some concern for many historic vehicle
enthusiasts as they fear any legislation might be famed in a way which introduced
unhelpful constraints over the use of vehicles, particularly vehicles incorporating
modifications. Today the FBHVC released news that the EU institutions had reached
agreement on the final form of the Roadworthiness Testing legislation on 18th
December 2013, although the final text had not yet been published. Formal adoption
of the measures is scheduled for April and then the UK will have a total of 48
months - until April 2018 - to incorporate them into national legislation.
Despite
the absence of a full draft, two very important things have emerged.
Legislation
is in the form of a Directive not a Regulation
The good news is the legislation
will be in the form of a Directive and not, as feared, a Regulation. This means
that the UK, and of course all other EU states, will be able to incorporate the
Directive's requirements into their laws in the way which best suits their existing
legislation, institutions, procedures and processes. Officials at the FBHVC have
cautiously welcomed this development as the UK Government is known to be sympathetic
to the interests of historic vehicle owners, and have been receptive to the representations
of the FBHVC during the consultative process which has preceded this agreement.
Definition
of "a vehicle of historic interest"
The second thing we learn
from the FBHVC report is the terms of the crucial definition of a 'vehicle of
historic interest'. FBHVC understands the agreement reached in Brussels has adopted
the definition as:
> Any
vehicle which is considered to be historic by the Member State of registration
or one of its appointed authorising bodies and which fulfills all the following
conditions:
> It was manufactured or registered for the first time
at least 30 years ago;
> "its specific type, as defined in national
or EU law, is no longer in production;
> "it is historically
preserved and maintained in its original state and has not sustained substantial
changes in the technical characteristics of its main components."
It
is those vehicles deemed to fulfill these criteria that EU governments will not
have to test. It is in fact up to national Governments whether they do indeed
exempt these vehicles from testing. In discussions the Department for Transport
(DfT) has been at pains to point out that the exemption is a right they have,
not a duty with which they must comply. Indeed there is clearly a body of
opinion in DfT that there might be a need for even vehicles of historic interest
to have some sort of periodic safety test if they are to use the public highway.
It
is no secret that the FBHVC would have preferred the definition to have been simply
age related. It certainly argued the case, but lost. Some other countries had
genuine reasons why a purely age based definition would simply not have been acceptable.
The task now is to work with our national Government to ensure the most favourable
outcome to the interpretation of the legislation, an interpretation that has become
possible by the adoption of the Directive rather than the more prescriptive Regulation
format.
Why
is this definition of "a vehicle of historic interest" a concern?
The
key phrase in the definition of a vehicle of historic interest which DfT will
have to decide how they interpret is the third one: "It is historically preserved
and maintained in its original state and has not sustained substantial
changes in the technical characteristics of its main components."
A
report
issued by DfT in August 2012 highlighted the real concerns. It noted the Commission
proposes to introduce a definition for a roadworthiness test that components of
the vehicle must comply with characteristics at the time of first registration.
This may prevent most modifications to vehicles without further approval of the
vehicle. This will apply to many components and to all types of vehicle. This
replicates practice in some continental countries. It is completely opposite to
the current UK practice of testing the vehicle as presented for safety and roadworthiness.
It would require access to complete specifications of all vehicles manufactured
over the past 30 years, as first registered and as subsequently modified, to account
for manufacturers' safety recalls. We consider the UK practice to be greatly preferable.
As
an illustration of the difficulty with the proposal it adds "This is completely
impracticable, requiring complete original specifications and photographs of every
type of vehicle ever built in order to determine whether it can be classified
as historic. Some vehicles never could be classified historic - for example many
Rolls Royce armoured cars built during WWI were rebodied for civilian use in the
1920s. Under the above definition they would never become historic. Conversely,
any vehicle once established as historic would never be tested again, so could
be completely altered without coming to the notice of the relevant authority.
Any definition of historic other than simply the date of first registration creates
difficulties, and no benefits are apparent.
A similar concern is that
many classic car owners in maintaining their cars occasionally introduce safety
modifications - for example fitting a dual circuit servo braking system to replace
a single circuit system originally fitted to the car. The "maintained in
its original state and not sustaining substantial technical changes" are
not a welcome feature of the legislation at all. | |
|
