Visit your local shopping center carpark at about 9pm on a Friday/Saturday and you're guaranteed to run into one.
Petition to the government to not implement offences for modifying vehicles
- Thread starter Mysterae_
- Start date
Visit your local shopping center carpark at about 9pm on a Friday/Saturday and you're guaranteed to run into one.
Soldato
It's blown out of proportion lol. I go to car meets regularly with modified cars and the pops and bags are not even that common. Everyone in the "scene" hates it too so it's usually left to teenagers who enjoy that kinda thing. And teens have been rocking stupid loud cars for years and years. That's part of growing up and having fun. Don't worry they'll get old and grumpy soon.
Soldato
No it isn’t.
It’s a legitimate way of pricing ‘bangers’ off the road.
Sorry sir your Z4 has failed it’s MOT.
Why? Because it doesn’t have run flats and genuine BMW brakes.
It’s a nightmare scenario
Soldato
I would just like to add, it’s ANY non standard modification, such as fitting different wing mirrors or saddle to a motorcycle.
Or non OEM brakes to a car.
It’s just another way of removing vehicles from the road.
Or non OEM brakes to a car.
It’s just another way of removing vehicles from the road.
Do you actually have any evidence to back that up?
As has been posted multiple times:
Tackling tampering
We will create new offences for tampering with a system, part or component of a vehicle intended or adapted to be used on a road. This will enable us to address existing gaps in the legislation, ensuring cleaner and safer vehicles. We will also create new offences for tampering with non-road mobile machinery (NRMM) and for advertising ‘tampering’ services or products.
This will strengthen our ability to enforce compliance in this area.
We are aware that the Law Commissions in both their first and third consultations on automated vehicles have considered tampering. We await their final recommendations and would welcome views on our proposals, as follows.
Specifically, we would look to create:
We do not intend our proposals to:
We will create new offences for tampering with a system, part or component of a vehicle intended or adapted to be used on a road. This will enable us to address existing gaps in the legislation, ensuring cleaner and safer vehicles. We will also create new offences for tampering with non-road mobile machinery (NRMM) and for advertising ‘tampering’ services or products.
This will strengthen our ability to enforce compliance in this area.
We are aware that the Law Commissions in both their first and third consultations on automated vehicles have considered tampering. We await their final recommendations and would welcome views on our proposals, as follows.
Specifically, we would look to create:
- a specific offence for supplying, installing and/or advertising, a ‘tampering product’ for a vehicle or NRMM – this would apply where a principal effect of the product is to bypass, defeat, reduce the effectiveness of or render inoperative a system, part or component (the product may be a physical part or component, hardware and/or software)
- a specific offence for removing, reducing the effectiveness of, or rendering inoperative a system, part or component for a vehicle/NRMM and advertising such services
- a specific offence for allowing for use or providing a vehicle or NRMM that has had the operations described in the previous 2 points performed on it
- a new power to require economic operators to provide information, where a service/product they have supplied amounts to or enables ‘tampering’ with a vehicle or NRMM – this would apply in any of the above senses and include requirements to provide relevant information on the quantities of products sold or modified
We do not intend our proposals to:
- prevent legitimate motorsport activities
- prevent restoration, repairs or legitimate improvements to vehicles, such as classic cars or motorbikes
- negatively impact businesses involved in these activities
How does that cover updates brakes, saddles, or changing to a different mirror design on a bike?
If you defeated the ABS system then yes, that would be covered by the legislation (not for motorsport use though). But it’s clearly not any modification.
Soldato
@kindai
It looks like the petition has worked then.
(Just read the reply)
The original statement was ambiguous and ‘any part’ was mentioned.
If this is to prevent modifications to safety systems and emissions I’ve no problem with it.
I’ve been following it on a YouTube channel.
It looks like the petition has worked then.
(Just read the reply)
The original statement was ambiguous and ‘any part’ was mentioned.
If this is to prevent modifications to safety systems and emissions I’ve no problem with it.
I’ve been following it on a YouTube channel.
Soldato
Video I watched here:
Soldato
Tackling tampering
We will create new offences for tampering with a system, part or component of a vehicle intended or adapted to be used on a road.
Source
Future of transport regulatory review: modernising vehicle standards - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
We will create new offences for tampering with a system, part or component of a vehicle intended or adapted to be used on a road.
Source
Future of transport regulatory review: modernising vehicle standards - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
Last edited:
Man of Honour
I can't see your quote in the link - what are we looking for here? Looks like a pretty straightforward clarifying response.
Soldato
Sorry, using an iphone.
Try that.
Future of transport regulatory review: modernising vehicle standards - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
The original issue being, it said ANY part.
We need to sign this.
Soldato
Now i'm not a lawyer by any means, but:
We will create new offences for tampering with a system, part or component of a vehicle intended or adapted to be used on a road. This will enable us to address existing gaps in the legislation, ensuring cleaner and safer vehicles. We will also create new offences for tampering with non-road mobile machinery (NRMM) and for advertising ‘tampering’ services or products.
That could be applied to absolutely any part of a vehicle.
We will create new offences for tampering with a system, part or component of a vehicle intended or adapted to be used on a road. This will enable us to address existing gaps in the legislation, ensuring cleaner and safer vehicles. We will also create new offences for tampering with non-road mobile machinery (NRMM) and for advertising ‘tampering’ services or products.
That could be applied to absolutely any part of a vehicle.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Where does it say that?
Soldato
See above.
It opens the door to ‘fail’ a car for any non standard part.
That’s me extrapolating a worse case scenario.
These proposed anti tamper laws are not limited to safety and emission systems in the wording.
It’s any part.
The wording must be amended before this is passed.
You are still picking one sentence and taking it out of context.
It has to be read in the context of the rest of the section of the consultation which clearly limits it’s scope of what is considered to be tampering, there are specific references to safety and emission control systems.
Yes, it is not specific to any particular system or component but why should it be?
A principles based approach is generally considered the better than an exhaustive list and keeps things relevant as time passes. This is particularly key as cars transition to alternative fuels and new, better technology, safety standards etc. are implemented.
It’s highly unlikely the legislation will be worded in the same way as the consultation. Consultations are normally written for a very broad audience using plain English, legislation rarely uses plain English for good reason.
It has to be read in the context of the rest of the section of the consultation which clearly limits it’s scope of what is considered to be tampering, there are specific references to safety and emission control systems.
Yes, it is not specific to any particular system or component but why should it be?
A principles based approach is generally considered the better than an exhaustive list and keeps things relevant as time passes. This is particularly key as cars transition to alternative fuels and new, better technology, safety standards etc. are implemented.
It’s highly unlikely the legislation will be worded in the same way as the consultation. Consultations are normally written for a very broad audience using plain English, legislation rarely uses plain English for good reason.
Soldato
@b0rn2sk8
Do you actually trust anyone in power?
I don’t.
No I haven’t taken it out of context it’s vague the way it’s written on purpose.
That would not stand as a legal document.
They can apply that law to any part of the car or vehicle and I am pretty sure this is what will start to happen to help to remove older ICE vehicles.
Do you actually trust anyone in power?
I don’t.
No I haven’t taken it out of context it’s vague the way it’s written on purpose.
That would not stand as a legal document.
They can apply that law to any part of the car or vehicle and I am pretty sure this is what will start to happen to help to remove older ICE vehicles.
This. They need to leave some clunge for the rest of us. Must be getting so much driving a Fiesta ST with a 3" backbox and pop/backfire map.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 9,150
I know you're just picking random examples, but I'm not sure every garage would know a z4 should have run flats, as the M versions typically don't and not sure they check brake callipers in that much detail anyway.
Even if they just decide to ban everything it's still impossible to enforce, there are already a lot of aftermarket parts for sale which aren't really road legal. If they paint them black and OEM-looking no one is going to know. In the Ad they just put "not for road use", or sell it as a racing part and they are covered.
They made it super strict in Belgium, even saying which tyres you can use. Which means there are loads of people driving around un-insured and risking it as they can't get OEM parts or specific spec tyres anymore. Not great for anyone.
They made it super strict in Belgium, even saying which tyres you can use. Which means there are loads of people driving around un-insured and risking it as they can't get OEM parts or specific spec tyres anymore. Not great for anyone.
Last edited:
Soldato
Just sign the petition please folks.
We are loosing our freedoms by the day sadly.
We are loosing our freedoms by the day sadly.