Government response to petition 'Classic-Cars'

But still modification, what if someone squeezed the MGB 1800 lump into a A40, mounted a MBG rear axle and up-rated the brakes - all things that BLMC could have done, is that just up-rating an A40 or re-deisgning the car?

Then buy a car that already has that spec' if that is the more important requirement, this is the crux of the matter, are people just running cheap (VED free) cars but want as close to 'modern' spec' or are they *preserving* motor heritage, a Minor is still quite capable of coping with modern town traffic, can still stretch it's legs when required and can still get a speeding ticket on many roads if miss used.

Hmm, has the Highways agency closed all the A, B and C roads over-night then, I've not seen it reported on the BBC!

There has been a surge in people running such cars whilst wanting to modify them because they really want more modern braking or performance though...

Hmm, if one were rational VED is a stupid tax. It would be better to put the tax on fuel so that it has a direct relationship to fuel consumption. Oh hang we already do that as well.

Those are rather more fundamental changes than bolting in a later - but externally similar engine. The B series is larger and heavier. The MGB axle has a different track.

Perhaps you should pay a TV licence proportional to the amount you watch too. It's a very similar cost. Then there's council tax.

Every tax ever invented is considered unfair and unjust by some.

Yes dave, I'm well aware of your theory that everyone should pay lots of tax and be happy to do so.

By everyone other than the brainwashed.

%steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) realised it was Sat, 26 Apr 2008

Why do you lower yourself to personal attacks? Are you out of arguments?

Please feel free to point out the personal attack.

I'm certainly well aware many want to pay less tax and pass the burden on to others. I take it you fall into this category?

Perhaps you fit into that too. The VED is a tiny part of the overall costs of running a car.

No, I'm in the group that wants government to stop stealing money. You seem to be in the group that wants to burden other people with taxes they can't afford. You know, like the poor buggers recently hit by Gordon "tax the poor" Brown.

I simply want a level playing field. Preferably one in which the government taxes are zero. Since that's unlikely, as close to zero as possible.

VED is a pointless tax. It achieves nothing, is expensive to administer and had a high avoidance rate. The only purpose for VED is to employ some useless drones in Swansea as an alternative to the dole.

You're in the group who needs to read a dictionary.

So classic car owners are all poor?

I hope you're willing to forgo all the services too. Somehow I doubt it. Seems many want to come and live in the UK and by default are happy to pay for that privilege. But not some of the residents.

It achieves an income and registers cars once a year. Same as in most other countries. Perhaps you'd like it removed and that part of the taxation replaced by the poor paying it?

Technically I could be using two as my wife is a named driver... it doesn't happen often, but she does drive my Elf on occasion.

For the most part I'd agree, but some vehicles not only lend themselves to it, they have a time-honoured tradition of it - the Mini for example.

Unfortunately the reverse problem also occurs - people passing off late-model cars as tax exempt by switching the number plates and chassis plate with a scrapper. Easy enough to spot if you know anything about the cars.

One of my Minis is going to get a K series in the near future. Nothing to do with its taxation class; I happen to have the car, it needs a new lump, and I want a reasonably straighforward auto conversion in it (the A-series auto is dire).

My 67 Elf is a daily driver. Tax is irrelevant; I just enjoy driving it more than most of my other cars.

The MOT test could be used to achieve the same thing, and remove a level of burocracy.

Although I think VED should be free on every car, or near as dammit, I happen to agree with this.

This doesn't worry me, if something gets free tax and you can drop a nice engine in it then I don't see why not. Especially as it keeps a classic on the road.

What I don't agree with is people buying or restoring a shabby 1972 car instead of a half tidy 1974 one just because of the VED. Anyone who buys a pre-73 car /just/ to save £180 a year shouldn't be allowed any car, IMO.

There seems to be a roaring trade in "using a later shell" on Mini 'recreations'. Basically putting a '72 logbook on a '95 Mini, screwing early bumpers and the like on, using the '95 engine, box, wiring etc and claiming it to be a '72.

People who do this should be jailed for at least 12 months, IMO. It's blatant fraud and can cause later owners large problems. People who buy them in order to save £

You can play hte moral high horse as often as you like. But the fact is you supoort taxing the poor, and I don't.

It depends on the car. My Standard 10 could lock all 4 wheels if you trod on the brake pedal hard enough - on drum brakes with no servo. So could my mother's A40. On the other hand, the P4 Rover had weak brakes, even with a hefty servo, and an understeer like a canal barge when driven on wet roads.

The trick was to drive within the capabilities of the vehicle. If you know it won't stop in a hurry, you don't tailgate. Something most drivers of modern cars cannot even imagine!

Jim

The date being 26 Apr 2008, "Dave Plowman (News)" decided to write:

That might not be a bad thing. People do buy them for the wrong reasons e.g. destruction derbys.