Mondeo RS Turbo....
- Thread starter Peerzy
- Start date
That's one hell of an assumption to make?
If I ever do sell my GTI, I'll drop the "On the Logbook as a 1.6" line towards the end of the ad. As far as I'm concerned it is a selling point, and I am going to be damn sure to take advantage of it.
That wouldn't be a selling point to me as I'd asume it was a dodgy conversion done by a chav. There's no reason not to fufil your legal obligation to inform the dvla of the engine change unless you're trying to cheat an insurance company.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Why do you run an illegally modified car?
Why is notifying the DVLA such a hardship for you?
I can't think of a single reason why you wouldnt tell them that doesnt involve defrauding insurers?
[TW]Fox;16163115 said:
Because the DVLA are hardly consistent when it comes to informing them of an engine change. Things can either go easily - You send your V5C off with the changes you want made and they send you an updated V5C with the change of details you requested, or they can decide they want an "Engineers Report" or even worse, a VIC check, Both of which you have to pay for and organise yourself of course. And then think about all the issues that I may face at a VIC check - Remember, I bought my car with the current engined fitted, and as such I have no official paperwork backing up the origins of my engine, all I do have is the word of the well known and respected 205 expert that fitted it and knows of its rough history. Whilst I personally believe his word, will an official inspector? I do not believe my engine is stolen (and even if it was, the only original left on it now is the block
), but proving that it is not is an experience that I'd rather do without. Even if I was defrauding insurance, my car would still come up as a 1.6 on their computers, and as far as I'm aware insurance companies do not request a copy of the V5C when starting a new policy for somebody?
As far as I'm concerned Stirring the hornets nest when you don't need to isn't the clever thing to do. I pay the same amount of tax everybody else does with a pre 2001 one with a engine bigger than 1549cc, likewise my insurance company is informed of the changes so if I plough into a playground backwards whilst on fire little Timmy is covered. I really don't see what the problem is?
[TW]Fox;16163477 said:
Yes, but why bother? I bet nobody can come up with a valid reason other than "Because the DVLA say so"
.The Tax-man gets the same amount of money and the insurers are informed of the changes (like they would need to have been regardless of the information on the V5C). No harm, no foul.
Yes, but why bother? I bet nobody can come up with a valid reason other than "Because the DVLA say so"
The Tax-man gets the same amount of money and the insurers are informed of the changes (like they would need to have been regardless of the information on the V5C). No harm, no foul.
There's also the fact that the age of the engine fitted effects the mot test. Eg a 2001 engine if fitted in to a 1990 shell still has to pass the 2001 emmisions test.
The insurance could, and probably would cry foul in the event of a large payout, as the car is incorrectly registered and as such isn't legal to be on the road.
Yes, but why bother? I bet nobody can come up with a valid reason other than "Because the DVLA say so"
The Tax-man gets the same amount of money and the insurers are informed of the changes (like they would need to have been regardless of the information on the V5C). No harm, no foul.
As Fox has said, the only reason you wouldn't is because you either want to commit, or want to facilitate insurance fraud
I bet nobody can come up with a valid reason other than "Because the DVLA say so"
Well thats kinda the law? I dont see why reason why you wouldnt do this.
As Fox has said, the only reason you wouldn't is because you either want to commit, or want to facilitate insurance fraud
No it isn't, Read my post regarding the Engineer's report or VIC.
And also How does it facilitate insurance fraud? The car will still come up on insurance companies' computers with the original engine size, no matter what the V5C says...
If either of those is required, then its required and its not for you to decide whether its done or not by not fulfilling your legal obligations. If it's a clean, decent install what have you got to hide?
This is incorrect. Most insurance companies use the dvla database so it'll show up correctly. In exactly the same way that a car that's been on a private plate for a while will.
How can you tell me something that I know for a fact is incorrect?
Enter the registration number of a car that has had an engine change declared to the DVLA and 9 times out of 10 (well, 10 times out of ten in my experience) it will show the original details for the engine.
They don't seem to update very quickly but it's exactly the same process as for a reg transfer and does usually show up after a while. This was certainly the case for the direct line systems when I worked there.
Everybody miss this bit then ?
Performance 3000 = http://wikibin.org/articles/performance-3000.html
Personally I just don't like the fairy lights or the clocks in the vents but other than that it's not so bad.
Performance 3000 = http://wikibin.org/articles/performance-3000.html
Personally I just don't like the fairy lights or the clocks in the vents but other than that it's not so bad.
Why would having 1.6 on the log book be a selling point then? Surely an engine change that has been done correctly would be a better selling point if there is no financial gain to having 1.6 on the logbook?