[QUOTE] ..but, but they're easy to do.[/QUOTE] Salmon ought to stop it.
[Snipped Text] I haven't read a manual for a while, but IIRC it did say that you shouldn't start a test if the vehicle cannot be identified.
Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, Champ No, silly. The bolts are behind curtains. -- Wicked Uncle Nigel - Manufacturer of the "Champion-105" range of rearsets and Ducati Race Engineer. WS* GHPOTHUF#24 APOSTLE#14 DLC#1 COFF#20 BOTAFOT#150 HYPO#0(KoTL) IbW#41 SBS#39 Enfield 500 Curry House Racer "The Basmati Rice Burner", Honda GL1000K2 (On its hols) Kawasaki ZN1300 Voyager "Oh, Oh, It's so big" Suzuki TS250 "The Africa Single" Yamaha GTS1000
I've done them now: tip bike on its side undo a couple of nets No Comment!!! -- Robbo Trophy 1200 1998 BotaFOF #19. E.O.S.M 2001/2002/2003/2004/2005 B.O.S.M 2003, 2004, 2005 FURSWB#1 KotL..YTC449 PM#7 ..
Yet, the testing station I took my shite Fiat to was able to use the computerised system to produce a new MOT certificate without a V5 document, whether old or new. How so? You know the numbers that are printed under the bonnet on a car? They are really important if you want to find out which parts you need, particularly if you have a car that has a model change in that year (which always seems to be the case for me). So, the information that is contained on the vehicle itself should be enough for them, should it not? And, of course, the /date of first registration/ will not necessarily relate to the production date of the vehicle, and therefore relate to the components needed when replacement is required, so why is the date of first reg. so important all of a sudden? I could understand if you wanted to ensure that the first MOT of a vehicle was being done on the correct date (or in the correct time period), but not on a car that had had multiple MOT's, and for which a reminder letter had been sent out to the owner that the MOT was now due.. After all, if I needed new brakes (more than pads, *brakes*), on my old Datsun 120A fII Coupe, I had to provide them with the number embellished under the bonnet of the vehicle in order for them to provide me with the correct brakes, or else they may have purchased brakes for a slightly different model in error. But, why? When all the information is already on the vehicle under the bonnet anyway? And since when did knowing the exact reg. date of the vehicle become important in respect to providing an MOT? And, lets face it, if you have a dodgy vehicle that doesn't have that info on it then you are hardly likely to be taking it to be MOT'd for tax porpoises anyway. This is true. -- Lesley CBR600FW SBS#11 (with oak-leaf cluster) BOTAFOT#101A UKRMHRC#12 BONY#54P BOB#18 Real burds don't take hormones, they rage naturally
As an MOT tester I'd just like to say, no it isn't. It may make life easier for the tester to have the V5 present but it's not now, and I don't see it being so in the future, a requirement to present the V5 at the MOT test. John
So, what you are saying is that the owner of the vehicle has to dig out their V5 (or V5C) so that the tester has an easier job to do? Blimey, I have enough trouble just finding the MOT cert when the 6 months tax runs out on the car. You know how it is, you come home with 'the stuff' together, you put it down, determined to 'put it back in it's safe place later'. Then, when you need to re-tax the vehicle you realise you never got around to doing just that.. -- Lesley CBR600FW SBS#11 (with oak-leaf cluster) BOTAFOT#101A UKRMHRC#12 BONY#54P BOB#18 Real burds don't take hormones, they rage naturally
I think Pip's point is that they want to identify the _vehicle_, not the model! Cross-checking VIN with DoFR helps this. -- Ivan Reid, Electronic & Computer Engineering, ___ CMS Collaboration, Brunel University. Ivan.Reid@[brunel.ac.uk|cern.ch] Room 40-1-B12, CERN GSX600F, RG250WD, DT175MX-MIA "You Porsche. Me pass!" DoD #484 JKLO#003, 005 WP7# 3000 LC Unit #2368 (tinlc) UKMC#00009 BOTAFOT#16 UKRMMA#7 (Hon) KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".
[Snipped Text] We're still waiting for ours to be installed - it's been on order since I started there 18 months ago!
Which is done with the two sets of numbers available under the bonnet, the same as two sets of numbers (usually, but not always with imported bikes) on a bike. So, why? If the implication is that they have computer system set up that cannot readily identify a vehicle without the date of registration being input, then that's just tosh, shirley? -- Lesley CBR600FW SBS#11 (with oak-leaf cluster) BOTAFOT#101A UKRMHRC#12 BONY#54P BOB#18 Real burds don't take hormones, they rage naturally
<NNNGGGHHHH> No, I got a nice, shiny, large new MOT cert without submitting my V5. -- Lesley CBR600FW SBS#11 (with oak-leaf cluster) BOTAFOT#101A UKRMHRC#12 BONY#54P BOB#18 Real burds don't take hormones, they rage naturally
Hmm. I'll have your V5 please, so I can input the data on their onto the system without getting a pen and pad out to write the info down? There seems to be a difference of opinion wrt this ) You've been kept *pure*? *boggle* -- Lesley CBR600FW SBS#11 (with oak-leaf cluster) BOTAFOT#101A UKRMHRC#12 BONY#54P BOB#18 Real burds don't take hormones, they rage naturally
Yes, dear. I am also well aware of how often the wrong parts are supplied even when quoting the chassis/VIN plate details, engine/gearbox designations and ID numbers, etc etc ... No, it isn't. I'm beginning to suspect that you are deliberately missing the point here. That is what parts bods use, for sure - but this whole question revolves around the newly-computerised DVLA, innit. The VIN is printed on the V5, as is the vehicle index mark - the date of first registration is being used (so I was informed by my MOT tester) by DVLA as a confirmation of vehicle identity. I got a bit perturbed, see, when I was asked for the V5 for the MZ - mainly because I didn't have it. So I asked and the answer I was given is reiterated above. The whole system is changing: the new format V5C, all MOT testing stations going online, insurance companies opening their databases to the Police and DVLA: all ostensibly to rid our streets of untaxed uninsured vehicles lacking an MOT certificate. I don't doubt Mr Greystrong's input, but this is all on a rollout basis aiui and I have no idea of timescale or how premises are selected for updating. Parallel to the demand for sight of the V5 when obtaining a VED these days from a Post Office (if you can find one), I'm not surprised to come across another demand for sight of the V5 for a related process. You may also note that when applying online to SORN a vehicle, not only is the registration mark required - but the Document Reference Number from the V5: an otherwise completely irrelevant line of figures. I assume that being able to provide the DRN from the V5C assures DVLA that the registered keeper is in possession of the document - again, a cross-check: this time with a reference which has nothing to do with the vehicle at all, but is purely bureaucratic. How many more times? It is used as a cross-check, especially in the case of older and more obscure vehicles, to obviate problems originating from a misplaced digit - it seems that people can more easily transcribe date info than 30-odd digit numbers. You should be well aware of how many "computer errors" are in reality "data input errors". Never mind though, eh? I shan't bother again.
