What happens in 2010???

Slime101 · 22 Apr 2006 at 21:37

What happens to our current number plate system when 2010 comes??

Surely it was a little short sited to only introduce a system which lasted 9 years before it became useless??

So what cunning plan are the government going to impose on us now?

Luke · 22 Apr 2006 at 21:38

Will it not be XX10 XXX and XX60 XXX ?

Serj · 22 Apr 2006 at 21:42

Slime101 said:
Surely it was a little short sited to only introduce a system which lasted 9 years before it became useless?

Yes, yes it would have been stupid. Thankfully our government aren't that stupid. The 0 which represents Feb - Sep will become a 1, and the 5 which represents Sep - Feb will become a 6. I think that's right.

GlasgowTitan · 22 Apr 2006 at 21:45

I heard that in USofA they can have different plates at the front/back. Like the front plate can have whatever you want on it, and the back must be the registered official one, is that right? Seems strange, I think I'm being wound up tbh.

Vix · 22 Apr 2006 at 21:47

GlasgowTitan said:
I heard that in USofA they can have different plates at the front/back. Like the front plate can have whatever you want on it, and the back must be the registered official one, is that right? Seems strange, I think I'm being wound up tbh.

I've heard that too. Think Phil (bf) told me so it must be true

Thats why they have all sorts of odd license plates on the front of their cars.

Luke · 22 Apr 2006 at 21:47

That's pretty much right. They can have symbols on the front plate too.

Slime101 · 22 Apr 2006 at 21:53

Serj said:
Yes, yes it would have been stupid. Thankfully our government aren't that stupid. The 0 which represents Feb - Sep will become a 1, and the 5 which represents Sep - Feb will become a 6. I think that's right.

so 2010 becomes....er, 01?? or do they add a digit and get 010??

The system as you describe it doesnt seem to work as far as i can tell, least not for some years.

It would have been better had they just changed the plate system in 2000/2001 to 01, 02, 03, 04 for years and had them roll over on 1st jan - that way an 01 would be 2001, not 2001/2002 and it would be valid for the next 98 years without problems or changes needed....however that would have required foresight and planning!

Luke · 22 Apr 2006 at 21:56

Slime101 said:
so 2010 becomes....er, 01?? or do they add a digit and get 010??

No, it becomes 10. (my logical guess anyway)

=Mac= · 22 Apr 2006 at 21:57

it will be:

xx 10 xxx
xx 60 xxx
xx 11 xxx
xx 61 xxx
xx 12 xxx
xx 62 xxx

and so on

Mackass · 22 Apr 2006 at 22:03

Pretty straight forward to be honest.

Fr0dders · 22 Apr 2006 at 22:10

as posted above reg plate will be

GF 10 STI for a march '10 plate

and

GF 60 STI for a sept '10 plate

so we got another 43 years on the current system yet

Matt · 22 Apr 2006 at 22:11

I don't know why they didn't just use this pattern thought: 01, 02, 03, 04
Surely that would have made more sense than the current way? But then again, i'm sure they put a lot of thought into it and there's a proper reason for it.

Serj · 22 Apr 2006 at 22:12

Slime101 said:
so 2010 becomes....er, 01?? or do they add a digit and get 010??

The system as you describe it doesnt seem to work as far as i can tell, least not for some years.

It would have been better had they just changed the plate system in 2000/2001 to 01, 02, 03, 04 for years and had them roll over on 1st jan - that way an 01 would be 2001, not 2001/2002 and it would be valid for the next 98 years without problems or changes needed....however that would have required foresight and planning!

Then dealers would suffer as they did when there was a yearly plate instead of a bi-annual plate change.

The plate system will work. Do you seriously have so little faith in our government that you don't think they could implement a new registration system without seeing more than 9 years ahead?

To explain again:

You bought a car in March 2003. The plate would be XX03 XXX.

You bought a car in March 2013. The plate would be XX13 XXX.

Serj · 22 Apr 2006 at 22:13

Matt said:
I don't know why they didn't just use this pattern thought: 01, 02, 03, 04
Surely that would have made more sense than the current way? But then again, i'm sure they put a lot of thought into it and there's a proper reason for it.

I think it's to do with people wanting the newest plate on a car. So if the plates changed in January, dealers might not sell so many cars in Oct/Nov/Dec. To combat this, the government implemented a bi-annual change in plates at around the R-reg stage of the last system. I *think*. lol.

Luke · 22 Apr 2006 at 22:14

Serj said:
Do you seriously have so little faith in our government that you don't think they could implement a new registration system without seeing more than 9 years ahead?

Er... yes? But the system does make sense to me. By the time the 01/51 reg wraps around there will be a totally different system in place (or dead through global warming etc, depending on who you listen to!)

Kappa · 22 Apr 2006 at 22:15

Slime101 said:
Surely it was a little short sited to only introduce a system which lasted 9 years before it became useless??

very...

http://www.ukcar.com/features/reg_year_2.htm

Mickey_D · 22 Apr 2006 at 23:20

GlasgowTitan said:
I heard that in USofA they can have different plates at the front/back. Like the front plate can have whatever you want on it, and the back must be the registered official one, is that right? Seems strange, I think I'm being wound up tbh.

You are indeed being wound up. Most states (with the exception of California) have the ABC 123 or 123 ABC setup. And both the front plate (when the car is capable of having a front plate mounted) and the rear plate MUST be the same. Some states do not require a front plate, but if you have one, it MUST be the same as the rear.

California is an oddball (along with a couple other states) due to them already having gone through all the possible letter and number combinations. They now have 1ABC234 setup.

See, the US does things a little different. We don't have tax discs. We have them on the plates themselves. They are little tamper-proof stickers that go in the upper left and upper right corners of the plates.

Our plates have absolutely nothing to do with the year of our car. For some reason we don't find the necessity to have the manufacturer's year on our number plates. Personally, I don't see the need for it either. Why do you have to advertise what year your car is?

Anyways......

Agent_Smith357 · 22 Apr 2006 at 23:24

Mickey_D said:
Personally, I don't see the need for it either. Why do you have to advertise what year your car is?

Its so your neighbours can see that you live in poverty owning a 1998 Ford Focus, shaming you to buy a base spec 2006 model.

Luke · 22 Apr 2006 at 23:28

I swear I've seen cars in the US with worded plates on the front, but normal sequences on the rear. And I know I've seen a car with a heart in amongst the digits on a front plate. To be fair, I've only been to Colorado, Arizona, Utah, California, and Vermont. Would any of those states have different rules, or was I seeing things? (it's happened before!)

Mickey_D · 22 Apr 2006 at 23:36

As I said, some states do not require you to have a front number plate, but if you have an OFFICIAL plate on the front, it must match the rear.

A plate that you made up that is OBVIOUSLY not a real one, somehow escapes these laws.

Most of the time what you saw was illegal, they just haven't been pulled by an observant cop yet.

Oh, and one exception to all of the above laws of course are vanity plates. You know, the ones where you make up a saying like 10SNE1, or OU812, or 65VETTE, etc? But the front and rear plates have to be the same. You can't have ABC 123 on the front and CBA 321 on the rear.......