Bye Bye landie

The short answer is that most cars on the road do not have a clear distinction between chassis and bodywork and, while some body panels may be replacable, chassis replacement involves the whole bodyshell.

The DVLA rules on vehicle identity do allow for chassis replacement -- a new chassis to the manufacturer's original specification. Otherwise there is a points system, involving chassis, axles, suspension, transmission, and engine. Stay within the points limit and it's the same vehicle.

It may be that an insurance assessor may not be familiar with these options, as they may be applied to a Land Rover, and the cost of a chassis replacement may be more than the insured value, when mechanics' wages are considered.

My reading of the rules is that "suspension" is only invoked if there is a fairly fundamental change -- leaf-spring to coils, for instance -- rather than replacing damaged parts.

There is an Insurance Ombudsman. The insurance value of and old vehicle may also be low enough to be within the limit for Small Claims procedures, although I've no idea whether or not it may be excluded for other reasons.

My own feeling is that the original poster may have been foolhardy, and may have to take some extra steps to stay legal. An engineer's report may be necessary to assure the insurance company that the repair is sound. Similarly, the DVLA may want to check the vehicle.

(Is it still called the DVLA?).

Whatever the OP does, he should document the process. And, other than that advice, he should be wary of what he it told on Usenet.

Never mind the question of complete chassis replacement, how much of a chassis can you replace and still call that original.

When I bought the landie, it had a new rear crossmember welded in, and Now I suppose the worst situation would be a new front crossmember as that is the part most likely to be twisted if the damage has gone beyond the dumb irons, which might have needed replacing before the next MOT anyway, judging from the rust that fell off with the bumper. From that point of view if I don't go through the insurance company all I am doing is what might become necessary in the course of restoration anyway, and providing it is done well enough to satisfy an MOT whats the problem.

The way I see it at the moment is even if the police catch the guy who ran into it, the car was stolen so he had no insurance, and a private prosecution would not get far unless he has money to pay up but the type who nicks cars regularly is not the type it is easy to enforce a payment against anyway. And again if he is ever brought to prosecution, that is when I courts could order compensation, so long as I keep a record of what it costs.