Jump to content

re-registering a vehicle


pies
 Share

Recommended Posts

Also regarding the statutory declaration part. That is described well here: https://www.govt.nz/browse/law-crime-and-justice/making-a-statutory-declaration/

There is a downloadable PDF you can print out here: https://www.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Law-crime-and-justice/Statutory-declaration.pdf

Someone has posted their version of that form that they used here before too.

Simon

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 574
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just an update on the next part of the process. I went to the Police Station to see about the 'NZ Police vehicle of interest report' NZTA want to accompany the CA03 form.

The lady looked at the email I had from NZTA and said that doesn't sound right, she'd have to go check the process. She tried to ring NZTA directly but gave up after quite a while waiting. She said the Police are not allowed to give out any information from their system like that now and any stations doing that were not supposed to. Maybe some still do so it's a matter of finding a 'good' one. Her suggestion was talk to one of the KDSPs (AA, VINZ, VTNZ).

So I toddled off to the AA testing station, they aren't a compliancing one so thought they might not be much help but as it was there went to see. They directed me to the AA office in the mall. They listened to the story and said yes, it sounds like a strange process and they couldn't really help unfortunately. They couldn't understand why the public facing Police stolen vehicle check wasn't enough nor why NZTA can't just check themselves.

But one lady did suggest that you can do an OIA request to the Police to find out what info they have. Interestingly I had heard of someone going through the VINing process doing that in the past and I had thought that seems a bit over the top.

But indeed you can do one and you can do it online: https://forms.police.govt.nz/oiarequest

So I am giving that a try. In the request I specified that I was trying to provide the documentation for the CA03 application, that NZTA were requesting the 'NZ Police vehicle of interest report' to show the Police have no interested in the vehicle and gave them the chassis number (there is only one number on an Austin 7) and asked for all the information they have on it. 

Of course they will probably just come back and say they don't have anything but that's all NZTA need to see from an official source.

I also spoke to the VTNZ centre I am going to use for the inspection and he can do the initial chassis number check once I get the car to them no problem. I asked when they do the certification process for someone what do they do about the Police report. He said they usually just ask the person with the vehicle to go to the Police to ask them for a letter saying they have no interest in it so he was surprised the Police told me they can't do that now. I might try again at the next Police Station I go past to see if they say the same thing.

He also said it usually takes a month once the paper work is all sent through for NZTA to come back to you. And that he is booked up doing inspections until November anyway.

Everyone I have spoken too seem to think it odd NZTA can't look up or talk to the Police directly to see if a vehicle is stolen themselves.

Slow progress but heading in the right direction.

Simon

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man im glad my car was in Carjam still, means none of this cocking about needed to be done. Definitely something to keep in mind when planning to re-rego a car.

Be interesting to know what the over all resolution is to the police part of it. Hopefully the OIA just comes back as "nah no care" and you're sweet from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another step done. Took the car to a VTNZ to get them to cite the chassis number. He gave me a form on their letterhead saying the Make, Model, Year, VIN/Chassis Number and who sighted it. I can now send that off to NZTA along with the other documents when I get them. It only took 5-10 minutes for him to do but as they were busy we had to wait over an hour (staff member down) so probably best to book first.

When I do get permission to re-VIN it that's where I will take it back to so it was good for them to at least have seen the car now.

Simon

Quick edit to add they didn't charge me anything for this bit.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another piece of information for the pile. This is of immense importance to people like be building historically accurate replicas of pre 1960 cars. So my Riley Brooklands, Bugatti Replicas and the like.

It basically makes it easier for us to get through low volume certification.

If you build a pre war car and try to follow the rules for a scratch built as set out in the LVVTA Car Constructors manual you will find you can't. You have to do so many things what you end up with is basically a Hot Rod, not a pre war replica.

It seems this issue was recognised back in 1998 and then in 2008(!) LVVTA released Information sheet 01-2008: https://www.lvvta.org.nz/documents/infosheets/LVVTA_Info_01-2008_Introduction_of_Sub-categories_for_Scratch-built_LVV.pdf

This basically introduces new sub categories with different rules for pre 1960 historic replicas. The cars need to be sighted (basically finished) by the VCC who verify the category it is in on what is called a DOMAS document.

This information sheet says they can vary the rules for certain types of historic scratch built vehicles apart from a few, non exempt safety rules. 

Quote

 

In past discussions, Land Transport New Zealand have specified that through Section 4 (Exclusions) of the LVV standards, LVVTA can soften the technical requirements as we deem appropriate for ‘authentic replica’ scratch-built vehicles. However, it has been agreed between LVVTA and Land Transport New Zealand that a number of critical safety items are ‘non-negotiable’. This means that in the case of all scratch-built vehicles, including ‘Historic Replicas’, the items in the following table must be complied with. From an engineering point of view, all of these items are quite achievable, even for the most authentically-built ‘Historic Replicas’. The table below shows those safety items that are non-negotiable: System Minimum requirements Glazing: must have approved laminated front windscreen (if fitted), and approved toughened or laminated side and rear window (if fitted). Lighting: must meet all LVV lighting performance requirements, but no requirement for approved standards compliance. Brakes: must meet LVV braking performance requirements. Seatbelts: must have minimum of a lap seatbelt for all seating positions. Steering Impact: must meet LVV steering system collapsibility requirements.

 

So it removes a lot of the barriers from a period correct cars. You can use period lights with out standards (providing they work well enough!), brakes can be as original (my Riley has a single cable operating all the brakes) and the steering requirement is met by the fact that the steering box is well behind the front axle and there is a longitudinal drag ling to the stub axle.

This info sheet isn't mentioned in the constructors manual (this is noted in the sheet itself) and is just one in a list of 107 of them on the LVVTA web site. So no one knows about it it seems. An older chaps (in his 70s or 80s) found it after going through all the documents on the site there. He confirmed with LVVTA that it is still valid. The VCC has never mentioned it as far as I can tell and certainly don't mention it at all on their DOMAS forms. I am not sure which certifiers will know about it as I imagine it doesn't happen very often.

I just wonder what other things are buried in the various information sheets that have come out over the years. This one is only useful to those building VCC historic replicas but there might be other useful things in the information sheets for people with other issues.

Simon

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are hundreds of things in info sheets, newsletters, standards, certifier updates, training records... as well as the CCM. It's impossible to remember them all.

I failed a car for undersize suspension arms a while back and it was the customer that found a paragraph in a newsletter that said they were actually OK in that specific front end 

 

The information evolves and changes faster than the paper versions of manuals are practical for, LVVTA has been doing updates on the CCM and standards to make it more of a 'single source' document but it takes a long time , the CCM was released in 08 and had an update in 2010 and only recently has had a few chapters updated  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember guy who certed my landcruiser telling me i had to remove airbags and replace seat belts,part of the reason was my custom front bull bar was not designed tested with airbags.

I did send him a couple paragraphs from cert manual that excluded my cruiser from frontal impact rules because mc class with gvm over 3.5t. 

And he said thats fine :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, a lot to try and keep up with all the time I imagine. I wouldn't expect anyone to know it all off the top of their heads. It would be useful if the VCC made this particular one a bit more clear in their documentation as it was specifically put in place for them. There is an amusing little dig at them in that info sheet around their lack of voice when it comes to such things. It's a pretty massive concession made by NZTA/LVVTA for us though.

The most up to date VCC restoration manual I can find is from 2001 so it's out of date a bit and of course won't have this info in it. But the forms you have to fill in to get the VCC category verified should really mention it. It had puzzled me what those VCC classifications were for outside of the VCC and this info sheet explains that. I am not sure when they came in so they might have already been there then those were adopted as part of the sub classes. I searched the club magazines for 2008 and they don't mention it. 

I know of people starting to go through that process now armed with that sheet so will be interesting to see how they get on. One slightly tricky thing is the VCC want to see the car finished to classify it but the certifier wants to see it being built/apart so they can verify everything. No dodgy paint/filler hiding things! Luckily your average pre war car doesn't really have much to it so you can see most of it easily. My approach is to finish the car, make it functional but not make it pretty until it's all OKed. You wouldn't want to spend thousands on paint or leather upholstery until you know it's going to get through I guess.

Simon

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a quick follow up on my saga. 

I took the car to VTNZ who looked at the chassis number and verified it on a form with their letterhead. And my OIA request to the Police came back saying they had no record of it in their system. I also did a new statutory declaration explaining how I bought the car and when and had that witnessed and signed. 

That was sent back to exemptions@nzta.govt.nz for them to look at again.

Hopefully this now matches what they want.

Simon

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oddly enough a friend up in the far north is going through the same process but he's been given a VIN plate BEFORE actually completing the CA03 process. He had the car inspected by a repairer. Apparently they can also do the initial part. The inspector contacted NZTA directly it seems and said they needed a VIN so they issued one. My friend had to physically take the car to a VTNZ place and they attached it. He is now sending in his documentation.

When he did the Police OIA request he specified his local district in the form and he got back a simple emailed response very quickly (a day or so). I didn't specify in mine so it took somewhat longer (2 weeks)  but mine came in the form of an official looking PDF.

So it seems the process is somewhat, errr, fluid depending on where you are and who you are dealing with.

We haven't even got to the actual inspection/LVVTA parts yet!

Simon

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...