Board logo

Is this car street legal (I don't think so)?
mr henderson - 29/12/08 at 10:02 AM

http://www.flatmobile.co.uk/index.htm

This highly modified Hillman Imp is reckoned to be under 19" high. Seeing as the minimum height BELOW the headlights is 19.7 inches, and seeing as the car obviously requires an SVA test, I say that it is NOT street legal, despite the builder's claims to the contrary.

It's featured on the current front page of
http://www.totalkitcar.com/home.php
One would rather have thought that they would know better?

Any comments?

John

cd.thomson - 29/12/08 at 10:05 AM

legal or not its very ugly. He's spent a lot of time creating something that looks flattened?

*How do I do something original in a postmodern world? Hmm..I like cars..I like flat things....

AHA!*

Mr Whippy - 29/12/08 at 10:11 AM

Years ago there was an imp that was cut and shut till it was a little higher than that but had a full roof. It was bright glow in the dark pink and done so it looked like it had been run over by a steamroller. It was street legal somehow and I think that batmobile is a descendant of it.

seeing that it is just a cut and shut job I'm not sure if it needs a SVA or not, depends if he bothers telling the DVLA I suppose. If it doesn’t have a separate chassis like a beetle for example then I don’t think this kind of thing is strictly allowed.


[Edited on 29/12/08 by Mr Whippy]

dinosaurjuice - 29/12/08 at 10:12 AM

i cant understand why anyone would spend so much time and resources making that. surely better things to do...

back on topic john, according to my sva manual min headlight height is 500mm. so unless he wasted even more of his life making them pop up, then its a fail.

wil

Mr Whippy - 29/12/08 at 10:22 AM

well looks like he's found a helpful MOT guy (there are some out there who are happy to turn a blind eye) and I can see the tax disk so I think it is on the road, right or wrong. Stupid looking it may be but if he likes it then it’s not really a waste of time, lights are definitely way to low though to be legal.

Stott - 29/12/08 at 10:27 AM

Maybe he taped them up for the test and has a daytime mot?

cd.thomson - 29/12/08 at 10:33 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Stott
Maybe he taped them up for the test and has a daytime mot?


But he wouldn't have passed SVA.

Miks15 - 29/12/08 at 10:45 AM

I just watched the documentary video on it and he says that its totally street legal only during the daytime and good weather.

He claims that it meets all regualtions Except headlight height


link

David Jenkins - 29/12/08 at 10:45 AM

You all seem to be missing the point - it was built for FUN, probably as a publicity thing. He is a mate of Ed China, famous for his road-legal settee with matching standard lamp and coffee table, so it comes into the same category.

Stott - 29/12/08 at 10:47 AM

Maybe, just maybe, it never got submitted for SVA......................

No, what am I saying, of course it did, he'd have had no trouble passing interior / exterior projections with it looking like that, I wonder if he managed to get that 1st battery cut switch counted in the steering wheel exempt zone..

somehow I don't think his sticking point for SVA would have been the height of the headlights

mark chandler - 29/12/08 at 10:49 AM

Original chassis and bodywork, albeit cropped, no need to take it for an SVA.

dinosaurjuice - 29/12/08 at 10:51 AM

im all up for driveable 4 poster beds and cars disguised as shrubbery. but this thing seems outright dangerous. i would quite like a recumbrent bicycle, but for the same reasons i wouldnt want to share the roads with trucks etc

whatever floats your boat i suppose

Triton - 29/12/08 at 10:55 AM

Mad but hats off to the fella for being different..marmite car for sure

iank - 29/12/08 at 11:00 AM

quote:
Originally posted by mark chandler
Original chassis and bodywork, albeit cropped, no need to take it for an SVA.


Do you not think that a chop of that magnitude doesn't count as radically modified?

PPC have a feature this month (page 90) where the DVLA are quite clear that any major chop to a monocoque is significant to them and requires an SVA.

Light height is construction and use so it's still not road legal anyway with or without an SVA.

mr henderson - 29/12/08 at 11:07 AM

quote:
Originally posted by David Jenkins
You all seem to be missing the point -


I don't think so. The whole point of the car iws that it is supposed to be street legal, and it isn't

Mr Whippy - 29/12/08 at 11:13 AM

Happens all the time though, seen simply masses of shortened, chopped and butchered cars, really I don’t think many people care about the DVLA and they’re opinions, good luck trying to convince them otherwise along with the apparently millions who can’t be bothered even insuring their cars. That full size movie batmoble that apparently was also road legal had tons of SVA and MOT fail points when you looked at it. Looks a fun car for sure, bet you could really push it round corners, but if it was mine I’d fit the bubble canopies and rear rocket launchers as there were trademarks of the car, oh and the flashing red light

I'd love a replica of the original car, soooooo

[Edited on 29/12/08 by Mr Whippy]

Humbug - 29/12/08 at 11:52 AM

quote:
Originally posted by mark chandler
Original chassis and bodywork, albeit cropped, no need to take it for an SVA.


but not an "original, unmodified chassis" as required by the rules

Mr Whippy - 29/12/08 at 12:20 PM

This same subject seems to crop up very regularly tbh, we all know people don’t follow the ‘rule book’, they’d be something very wrong with the world if they did. The DVLA aren’t some all knowing superpower and have better things to do with their time than chase up every chancer that wants to see what he can get away with, really their more interested in fining you if you forget to tax your car. But he’s got his tax disk, he’s on the road, so what, let him have his fun.

hehe look he's built a road going Dalek! superb




[Edited on 29/12/08 by Mr Whippy]

Richard Quinn - 29/12/08 at 12:46 PM

With respect, who are we to decide whether this vehicle is road legal or not. Are we not also publicly discussing safety issues etc associated with a particular vehicle without raising them with the builder / manufacturer first?

Triton - 29/12/08 at 12:52 PM

It's no different to folk changing their cars after SVA..and nearly everyone does that!!!!!

Mr Whippy - 29/12/08 at 01:01 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Triton
It's no different to folk changing their cars after SVA..and nearly everyone does that!!!!!


shocked!!

Triton - 29/12/08 at 01:11 PM

Nobody owning up to that one then...

mr henderson - 29/12/08 at 01:40 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Quinn
With respect, who are we to decide whether this vehicle is road legal or not.



Well, we're not really deciding, we're discussing.

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Quinn

Are we not also publicly discussing safety issues etc associated with a particular vehicle without raising them with the builder / manufacturer first?


Can't see any reason why we should raise it with the manufacturer, I'm sure he is well aware that his car is not legal in the sense in which we understand it.

My point in starting this thread was that he is touting the car as being street legal, when it isn't. It's just the same as if he was claiming that it was the fastest car in the world, or any other claim that is evidently untrue.

I was also drawing attention to the fact that it is being featured by an on-line kit car magazine that should know better

John

Richard Quinn - 29/12/08 at 04:25 PM

quote:
Originally posted by mr henderson
Well, we're not really deciding, we're discussing.

touting the car as being street legal, when it isn't.
Sounds like you've already decided!

wilkingj - 29/12/08 at 05:14 PM

If you have NO (legal) lights at all, it can still be street legal.

However, you cant drive it after lighting up hours. (ie dusk to dawn).

There are hundreds of Trials bike on the road with no lights. You just cant ride them at night or you get done for no lights.

Simple.

Triton - 29/12/08 at 05:37 PM

Sva is a good idea don't get me wrong but as you can change things afterward and still be legal in the eyes of mot bods and the plod it does make you wonder why

mr henderson - 29/12/08 at 05:46 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Quinn
quote:
Originally posted by mr henderson
Well, we're not really deciding, we're discussing.

touting the car as being street legal, when it isn't.
Sounds like you've already decided!


Indeed I have, and have explained my reasons. The discussion continues with you saying what you think. What do you think? Legal or not?

John

Simon - 29/12/08 at 06:05 PM

Don't know what the prob is - he also built a Mini (http://www.flatmobile.co.uk/lowlife/pages/frmset1.htm), which Guiness confirmed as the lowest legal car.

So that proves it's ok then

Kinda reminds me of the stuff Andy Saunders used to turn out donkey's years ago.

ATB

Simon

[Edited on 29/12/08 by Simon]

mr henderson - 29/12/08 at 06:44 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Simon
Don't know what the prob is - he also built a Mini (http://www.flatmobile.co.uk/lowlife/pages/frmset1.htm), which Guiness confirmed as the lowest legal car.

So that proves it's ok then


Absolutely, in fact I understand that the Guinness Book of Records has now taken over the functions of the DVLA, and will be administering the SVA and IVA tests from now on!

FEZ1025 - 30/12/08 at 04:55 PM

quote:
Originally posted by wilkingj
There are hundreds of Trials bike on the road with no lights.


Not true they have to have a working brake light operated from both brakes to be legal

Alan...

rusty nuts - 30/12/08 at 05:43 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Triton
It's no different to folk changing their cars after SVA..and nearly everyone does that!!!!!



As if I would do that?

flak monkey - 30/12/08 at 05:54 PM

Dont see what the fuss is about.

The 'chassis' is unmodified - he hasnt removed anything from the floorpan - all he has chopped is the bodywork, as can be seen in the build photos. This is no different to building a Dakar (land rover with the body chopped off and GRP body plonked on top) or any other of a whole host of cars where the original body is chopped off or removed/modified to create the new car.

All you need is an MOT and you are sorted.

With the amount of publicity the flatmobile cars have had, I doubt they would have slipped through the SVA and VOSA's all seeing eye.

David

mr henderson - 30/12/08 at 06:16 PM

quote:
Originally posted by flak monkey


With the amount of publicity the flatmobile cars have had, I doubt they would have slipped through the SVA and VOSA's all seeing eye.


Can't see the fact that the VOSA haven't, as far as we know, done anything about this car proves that the car is legal.

Perhaps (if we are at all interested) we should ask ourselves two questions-

1) should this car have been submitted for an SVA test?

2) Would it have passed such a test? I realise that it could be claimed that the headlights are not needed if the vehicle is only used during the day, but what about the heights of the indicators and brake lights?


John

iiyama - 1/1/09 at 09:59 AM

Would it have passed SVA? With out a shadow of doubt it wouldnt. Why ask a question that you know the answer to?

Should it have been submitted for an SVA? Nope, under the current rules it dosent need one.

Is it a waste of time? Maybe of yours, but you havent built it! Im sure he loved every minute of it and thats what counts. Im building a Dax Rush, maybe he thinks that its a waste of time but what do I care? I dont because basically its non of his business as its my time.

mr henderson - 1/1/09 at 01:31 PM

quote:
Originally posted by iiyama


Should it have been submitted for an SVA? Nope, under the current rules it dosent need one.



Well I guess that's the question! I've looked into this and can't find any written rules that would seem to apply. There is some anecdotal evidence that cars with modified bodyshells need to be submitted for an SVA test, and if that's true, then I would say it applies to the car in question because that is a modified bodyshell.

If anyone has a link to some official guidance on this subject I would be interested to see it.

John

iiyama - 1/1/09 at 04:28 PM

Well to paraphrase:-
Where would we be with not enough rules? France. Where would we be with too many rules? Germany!