# Beware - DVLA tightening up on registering Oversize RVs



## 96509

I have recently been involved in registering an imported MH and found that it was subjected, under "new rules" to inspection and measurement. Currently ALL imported MHs are being inspected and measured by DVLA prior to registration.

According to my inside DVLA source, the nice young man who measured mine, this new practice follows discovery by a zealous inspector that an RV which he decided to measure because it looked a bit big, that the RV was over 12 meters long, in this case about 12.2 meters. The owner, who had spent a lot of money importing the RV, cited other oversize RVs he knew of which were registered in UK but to no avail. He was not allowed to register his vehicle and therefore seems to be at risk of being left holding a very expensive white elephant.

This led to realisation by someone in DVLA Swansea that they had been sloppy and were likely to have allowed a number of oversize RVs to be registered. In a fine example of the Civil Service thinking which inspired the TV series _Yes Minister_, DVLA Swansea issued instructions to local offices that _all_ motorhomes are now to be measured before registration. The local DVLA Offices pointed out that this would mean a huge amount of work but Swansea insisted, so currently all MHs are being measured. The chap who measured mine had been to HymerUK and another local dealer one day earlier this week and measured 120 MHs! He said it was a very cold day and he didn't enjoy it much. Who said civil servants cannot be expected to work productively?

The glimmer of hope on the horizon is that Swansea are relenting a little and have said that once a particular type and model of MH has been measured, the Inspector does not have to keep mesuring that same model again and again although whether this means that DVLA will organise a national database of MH measurements so that each local office Inspector does not have to accumulate this measuring experience for himself remains to be seen.

To those of you who have already imported an registered an oversize RV, take consolation that there is no proposal to review registrations retrospectively, so that if your overssize RV is registered you can apparently sleep easily, it is not at risk of being deregistered. At least not until some other Swansea DVLA Official gets a rush of blood to the brain or a politician tells him to nit pick his way through the back list in order to be "fair".

If you are unlucky enough to have imported an oversize RV and have yet to register it, the only hope would appear to be to bide your time, perhaps a couple of months, until the novelty of this new policy is wearing off and they have got fed up with measuring everything. Then apply for your registration at a local office which registers a lot of RVs in the hope that they will already have measured a 38 ft model of yours which is a tad longer and then hope they don't bother measuring your "38 ft model" either. It might help if you ask them to inspect at your location which is in some remote and inhospitable place where the Inspector would prefer not to have to go. If the man with the tape measure actually turns up, your only hope would appear to be bribery; we are European these days after all!

DVLA do not allow any excess length or width, not even 1 cm! The limits are 12 meter long and 2.55 meters wide, excluding mirrors.

Stuart Ormerod


----------



## 2point

We got caught up in this last week.

Supposed to pick up on the 1st but MH had to be measured etc first so we didn't get it until the 2nd.

Ours is a 7m Adria.


----------



## DABurleigh

Worrying for anyone planning to import an RV over 100.4 inches wide, INCLUDING awning.

Dave


----------



## 97785

Does anybody know where the DVLA measure from in terms of width and length?


----------



## 88724

Widest body point, longest body point. Mirrors dont count, Bumpers do. Never asked about awning's

Ring Marsham, get it in writing


----------



## 88927

I believe, but could be wrong, that they take any object that is fixed to the vehicle ie rear ladder or bike rack into the measurement also, so it is not just bumper to bumper but actual overall length.... Same thing would apply to width (except rear view mirrors).
As George says, best to check and get it in writing though if you are concerned.

Keith


----------



## 97785

But surely if accessories such as awnings, grab handles etc. don't come out further than the mirrors then this is ok?


----------



## 88724

Hi wbd

You are labouring under the misconception that these things should make sense, they rarely do make total sense.

They say that mirrors are not included, but most other fixtures are (if I am remembering rightly other exceptions were, exhaust and towball.

I think Mirrors are exempted for purely practical reasons, try measuring including the width including mirrors..............


----------



## MOTORHOMER

GeorgeTelford said:


> Hi wbd
> 
> You are labouring under the misconception that these things should make sense, they rarely do make total sense.
> 
> They say that mirrors are not included, but most other fixtures are (if I am remembering rightly other exceptions were, exhaust and towball.
> 
> I think Mirrors are exempted for purely practical reasons, try measuring including the width including mirrors..............


Mmm thats interesting. Thinking of Speed ferries here & their 2metre width rule.

Motorhomer


----------



## DABurleigh

Elizabeth,

Well the Speedferries small print doesn't relate at all to practice. It says:
http://www.speedferries.co.uk/speed_en_20.html
"Standard Car - A vehicle no longer than 5.0 m, wider than 2.0 m ....."
"All measurements indicated above include roof racks, top boxes, bicycles and any other objects mounted on or fixed to the car."

Which, formally, includes door mirrors. However, a Vauxhall Zafira, promoted as a compact car, is wider than 2.0m including mirrors.

Unfortunately it is rather adademic for me anyway, for despite being a fan of Speedferries and getting my motorhome, which is just as wide as yours, on there no problem, the reality is that they have been undercut by Norfolkline this year.

Dave


----------



## DABurleigh

"labouring under the misconception that these things should make sense"

Ah, George, a lovely phrase and a parable of our time 

I did a quick spot of delving and thought it worth logging a few links.

http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/forms/application%20for%20an%20international%20plate%20for%20a%20motor%20vehicle%20(vtg%20101).pdf
"The overall length and width to be shown are as defined in Regulation 3 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986. When measuring width disregard any projecting mirrors and lights. When measuring length disregard any projecting mirrors."

So awnings and grab handles have to be included in the 100.4" 2.55m width. Incidentally on the 12m length limit, longer is allowed on buses and coaches, but I haven't delved into the precise definition of these:
http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftopicp-104014.html#104014

The following reference is a particularly good one:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_roads/documents/page/dft_roads_506867-02.hcsp
"2.5 Motor caravans, ambulances
When considering applicable technical standards, these are classed as a special kind of passenger car; a different classification may be applied for other purposes, such as taxation."
_An interesting reference to a point of principle. One could infer things, albeit very arguably, about motorhome weights and driving licence classes. I also note that, while it is not strictly inconsistent with, it hardly supports Gillian's recent post about a motorhome being a car for tax purposes. I guess there's tax, and tax._

"The ONLY (my emphasis) pre-registration test is the annual MoT test. Motor caravans and ambulances are exempt from the Type Approval and Single Vehicle Approval described above. New imported motor caravans and hearses are subject to roadworthiness (MoT) testing three years after first UK registration and every year thereafter."

So DVLA's "new measurement test" on imported motorhomes flies in the face of that. The only hope for those sailing close to the wind is that, as suggested, its implementation may be bureaucratic and in due course cease to be flavour of the month.

"British Construction and Use and Lighting Regulations require that vehicles incorporate a number of individual components that are marked to show they have been type-approved to British or European standards unless specifically exempt. Such components include lights, windscreens, seatbelts, mirrors and tyres. The only lawful alternative to this for imported motor caravans and ambulances is possession of a Minister's Approval Certificate under the SVA scheme. You can volunteer your vehicle for SVA to gain exemption from these requirements instead of replacing the individual components."

However, note that for US imports:
"Vehicles imported from North America - Generally speaking, most USA and Canadian design and construction standards will be accepted as being equivalent to Single Vehicle Approval standards. There are, however, two important exceptions in addition to the above left-hand traffic, RASS and number plate requirements:
Many North American cars follow a different convention for the colour of their external lights. Front side lights, and all turning indicators are likely to require modification - including the addition of amber front side repeater turn indicators.
There are no standards on external projections in North America. Beware of vehicles with features such as "bull bars", non-retracting mascots, and protruding exhaust pipes."

For avoiding VAT and duty on a US RV, see: 
http://www.rvforum.net/SMF_forum/index.php?topic=860.0
And the following may give source material implicit in some of the correspondence therein:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_roads/documents/downloadable/dft_roads_506814.pdf

Who said ignorance of the law is no defence? Seems damned reasonable to me!

Dave


----------



## MicknPat

sormerod said:


> The glimmer of hope on the horizon is that Swansea are relenting a little and have said that once a particular type and model of MH has been measured, the Inspector does not have to keep mesuring that same model again and again although whether this means that DVLA will organise a national database of MH measurements so that each local office Inspector does not have to accumulate this measuring experience for himself remains to be seen.
> Stuart Ormerod


Stuart,

As we are planning to visit the USA to buy our RV this problem is very worrying, what if the American Manufacture states its RV is 100" but the man from DVLA measures your new imported RV at 101"

Also 2.55m converts to 100.39" so what if its 100.5"

If they do develop a data base of authorized RVs I will be a happy bunny in that I will be able to visit America with the confidence that the RV I buy is on the DVLA data base WILL be allowed in.

UK-RV who's currently in the US has bought a 102" wide RV  the models I like are also 102"...... Like one of the postings says other over sized RVs have previously been allowed in :twisted: was that as a result of a 'back hand' or DVLA member who couldn't care less?


----------



## 97785

I have been looking at dealers in the UK who are saling over sized RV's.

One I found is from Travel World:

http://www.travelworldrv.co.uk/detail.asp?idVehicle=292

Itchy Feet:

www.itchyfeet.biz

Westcroft:

www.westcroftmotorhomes.com

Dudleys:

www.dudleys-rv.com

This is after a lot of research on all the models I think maybe over sized.

Tell me what you think


----------



## DABurleigh

I know that certainly in the past, and for all I know still now, Dudleys went to great lengths to make the width UK legal. Often this entailed removing awnings, rubbing strips, etc.

Give them a ring and sound them out on the issue. You will get straightforward talking. And if you do, ask them why they never answered my enquiry about price matching a US dealer 

Dave


----------



## MicknPat

Yes no doubt a lot if not ALL UK dealers will stock RVs that exceed the DVLA size limit but as one post says in this thread you cannot use that argument at the port when you are trying to get your RV through that may be 1/2" to wide.


----------



## 97785

But is an RV classed as a conditioned vehicle?


----------



## DABurleigh

Do you mean refrigerated? :roll: 

Dave


----------



## 97785

yes


----------



## DABurleigh

OK. No. 

Or at least, I really can't see how! 

Dave


----------



## 97785

Well there is a unit (or two) on top of the RV's that cool the vehicle. Doesn't this count?


----------



## DABurleigh

No.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/sr/sr1999/19990454.htm#7

In such matters I have yet to find any significant difference between Ireland and UK.

"In this regulation "refrigerated vehicle" means any vehicle which is specially designed for the carriage of goods at low temperature and of which the thickness of each of the side walls, inclusive of insulation, is at least 45mm."

Applying that definition to a RV or motorhome with aircon is stretching incredulity.

Dave


----------



## 88724

Here are the links from a post I made last year on another forum, its about oversized RV's

http://www.selbytoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=994&ArticleID=770667

http://lawzone.thelawyer.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=109596&d=11&h=207&f=23

http://www.motorhomefacts.com/postlite729-.html

http://www.thisisyork.co.uk/york/archive/2004/04/03/york_news_local18ZM.html

This actually gives a legal precedent to say the vehicle is OK, so the DVLA would be in breach of a legal precedent if they pull a vehicle turning a blind eye as been given the legal go ahead.

Very sad for the chap concerned, his last post before the bailiffs took hid computer away was on the motorcaravaning forum, he was discussing the bailiffs being in his house....

here is a quote from the Judges ruling in Bramhill v Edwards and Edwards (Destination RV)

Giving judgment, Lord Justice Auld noted that there was "ample evidence, albeit of a secondary and circumstantial nature … that the authorities had turned a blind eye to wide-spread breaches of the regulations and that that was well-known to enthusiasts"


----------



## 88974

> In such matters I have yet to find any significant difference between Ireland and UK.


Maybe I am wrong but I do think that there is some differences in both registration systems.

One major one is that a motorhome in Ireland is not subject to an m.o.t. so the checks are not as stringent.


----------



## MicknPat

GeorgeTelford said:


> here is a quote from the Judges ruling in Bramhill v Edwards and Edwards (Destination RV)
> 
> Giving judgment, Lord Justice Auld noted that there was "ample evidence, albeit of a secondary and circumstantial nature … that the authorities had turned a blind eye to wide-spread breaches of the regulations and that that was well-known to enthusiasts"


George,

I'm sorry but I've left my wig and gown at court 

On the strength of the above would YOU try importing an RV measuring 102" into the UK?

The FULL court ruling can be found here http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/judgmentsfiles/j2455/bramhill-v-edwards.htm

I just wish I understood what it all means??


----------



## 88724

Hi Mick

2.55 meter = 100.393 700 787 inch Though 100.4" seems to be legaly acceptable 

What can I say if the body (Box) is 102 Inches and regardless of anything that sticks out, on paper its ilegal. 

But by legal precedent of the apeal court Judge who said that a blind eye is being turned thus implying that its legal now by precedent and that he could have quite happily driven this supposedly ilegal vehicle.

At some point that precedent could be overturned (as it does fly in the face of the law as written) In which case many vehicles in UK would have to be exported to get anything ( £$ )back on them.

In 45 years its been OK never a real court case, but its your call as Harry Callahan once said 

"you've got to ask yourself a question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"

Fun quote no offence intended


----------



## DABurleigh

I can't think of a film where I could quote a bigger chunk of dialogue word perfect 

Before I was waylaid earlier this evening I was going to query the implication you seemed to be making, George, but others have done the same.

In practice, what happens when the DVLA say "Sorry, it's too wide"?. Whip out a printout of the ruling and tell them they've been wasting their time upholding an unambiguous Statutory Instrument of law? I don't think it would go very far. And if it did I wouldn't want to stake potentially throwing good money after bad as did that poor couple who tried to sue the dealer.

The most frustrating thing is I can't see how this issue will pan out. But probably most significant thing is that I can't see a zero risk solution, or even anything less than a massive risk, frankly, unless you KNOW the imported RV can be honed down to 100.4 inches if necessary, and if only temporarily!

Dave


----------



## MicknPat

DABurleigh said:


> I can't think of a film where I could quote a bigger chunk of dialogue word perfect
> 
> In practice, what happens when the DVLA say "Sorry, it's too wide"?. Whip out a printout of the ruling and tell them they've been wasting their time upholding an unambiguous Statutory Instrument of law? I don't think it would go very far. And if it did I wouldn't want to stake potentially throwing good money after bad as did that poor couple who tried to sue the dealer.
> 
> The most frustrating thing is I can't see how this issue will pan out. But probably most significant thing is that I can't see a zero risk solution, or even anything less than a massive risk, frankly, unless you KNOW the imported RV can be honed down to 100.4 inches if necessary, and if only temporarily!
> 
> Dave


George or should that be Dirty George? 

Thanks for that,

I would like to take the risk but as I've previously mentioned the RV we will be bringing back to the UK will be our new home so the last thing we would want is a hitch which causes it to be held up on the dock side.

Knowing my luck we would be one of the 'unlucky ones' dealt with by 'Captain Jobs' worth.

So it looks as if I've got to find one under 100.39"


----------



## 88724

Hi Dave

This question admits no answer, legally a precedent as been set by the court, but it totally disagree's with the written law, a precedent usually only interprets out the fuzziness/grey area, in this case the precedent totally ignores the law as written.

What are the possibilties.

1. they carry on ignoring it, after all they have for 45 years (I am not totally convinced by this latest story that the DVLA are measuring vehicles, I would not put it beyond dealerships to latch on and use it as an excuse for delay, I have had no joy trying to find anything out about it though)

2. They crack down and only bar new imports, leaving the old imports as prized big vehicles

3. they crack down completely in which case big RV's will be worthless in this country and will need exporting (some of the old ones will be scrap value only then, not worth the export costs)

4. they alter the law to allow the larger motorhomes

All down to how much *you want to risk*, the court case makes one thing clear (unless it gets overturned) that the courts will not protect you from buying an oversized motorhome.

The Harry quote fits perfectly, because you got to ask your self do I feel lucky?

I cannot answer that one for you


----------



## DABurleigh

Well, Alison's away for the weekend, and so while waiting for the papers to arrive I read the full 9000 words of the appeal case that Mick posted earlier in this thread. Sad or what?

I tried to maintain a reasonable, balanced and just view throughout, but found myself becoming increasingly incredulous and feeling the need to write reams. In the end, however, my personal conclusions became admirably simple:

1) Too-wide RVs remain illegal for use in the UK. (The case talks about 100 inches but it is ~100.4, the imperial equivalent of 2.55m, excluding mirrors and lights, as I pointed out earlier)

2) It is not illegal to sell in the UK RVs that are too-wide for UK use, but it is illegal for a buyer to use one. (This was the aspect that really wound me up and stuck in my craw).

3) If ever there were soul-mates, "Caveat Emptor" and RVs make pretty good candidates.

4) A buyer of an RV from a UK dealer should, as a minimum, before the sale write a recorded delivery letter to the dealer stating that the sale is conditional on the vehicle being legal for use on UK roads.

5) A self-importer buying a vehicle from the US shoud ensure that the RV can be reduced, albeit temporarily, to 100.4 inches wide exclusive of mirrors and lights.

The legal argument on insurance of a too-wide RV I thought bizarre.

Much was made in the case of the Nelson defence, that the authorities turned a blind eye to this legal technicality. I was less than convinced on this point. Turning a blind eye is a conscious action. But you see earlier on in this thread that I showed that the authorities have not required such checks on an imported motorhome - the first formal check of any sort is the MOT at the 3 year point. However, as this thread originated, they now seem to have introduced such a check for DVLA registration.

They are personal conclusions and I don't really offer them for debate. If legal costs of £180,000 or whatever can be incurred, clearly there is scope for debate but I'm done on this subject!

Dave


----------



## MicknPat

DABurleigh said:


> 5) A self-importer buying a vehicle from the US shoud ensure that the RV can be reduced, albeit temporarily, to 100.4 inches wide exclusive of mirrors and lights.
> 
> Dave


Dave,

I understand from an MHF member and RV owner that one British RV importer removes some guttering to get the imported RV through then presumably replaces the guttering.

Surely an owner of one of those RVs would be in the same boat as the couple mentioned in that case.

The DVLA may turn a 'blind eye' to an illegal RV and an insurance company may well accept over £1,000 to insure your RV, that is UNTIL YOU MAKE A CLAIM.

I have decided that it is NOT worth the risk and shall only buy an RV 100.4" wide or less.


----------



## 88724

Hi Mick

They never have refused a claim based on size or licence, but I think you decision to avoid is probably for the best.


----------



## Scotjimland

Mick_P said:


> I have decided that it is NOT worth the risk and shall only buy an RV 100.4" wide or less.


Hi Mick

I think that is a prudent decision...here is an extract from an American site on 'wide bodied' RVs

Quote 
What is a wide body?

Not so long ago in simpler days, the maximum width for all vehicles on all roads in the USA was 8 feet (96 inches.) If a truck was hauling a load wider than that, it required a special permit, and sometimes an escort vehicle. Then a few years ago the federal government passed a law mandating the maximum width for all vehicles on Interstate highways at 8.5 feet (102 inches.) Gradually, states began to "designate" certain other roads as legal for 102-inch vehicles, until today nearly all states permit them on at least some of their four-lane and even two-lane roads. The trucking industry saw this as an opportunity to haul bigger loads in wider trucks. According to Utility, a major truck trailer manufacturer, orders for new 102-inch wide truck trailers now account for over 90% of their business. Buses, even local transit buses and school buses, are now being built on the 102-inch platform.

Read the complete article here: >>Two Lane.com


----------



## DABurleigh

Mick,

My use of the word "temporarily" for a self-importer was simply in order to avoid major heartache and not to lose tens of thousands of pounds if at any point the authorities bounce it. Clearly putting stuff back on makes it illegal again.

I'm not aware of a dealer taking stuff off in order to pass any new registration test then putting it back on before sale. However, as that case showed, should a dealer do this he avoids any responsibility under the Sale of Goods Act where the buyer is aware of width issues. BY CONTRAST THE DEALER WAS NOT EXPECTED TO WITHHOLD SALE BECAUSE HE WOULD ALSO HAVE BEEN AWARE!!!!

I think it fair to say that reputable dealers who have sold a reduced-and-legal-width RV are content to replace awnings etc. at the request of the buyer. I'm sure some dealers and MHF members might baulk at that but I have no problem with it - the buyer knows unambiguously who holds the risk and presumably is content with that. But the dealer would have behaved honourably in the RV sale.

Let me say as an aside regarding the buyers of the RV in this case, while I have considerable sympathy for their plight, I think their motives were questionable and they were foolish, and not just with the benefit of hindsight.

Regarding insurance, I did say it was bizarre. The original judge ruled:
"He held that neither non-compliance with the Regulations as to maximum width or the fact that the width of the motor-home was wider than normal vehicles on United Kingdom roads was material to risk, and that, therefore, there was no obligation on Mr and Mrs Bramhill, or on anyone to whom they might want to sell it, to volunteer to potential insurers breach of the Regulations in this respect." The appeal judges, while acknowledging the limited evidence to make this ruling, were content that the original Mercantile Court judge had considerable relevant personal experience of such matters. That's allright, then.

The practical reality you or I might face is rather different. Imagine the scenario. You are making a claim due to costly damage down the length of your coach, or at the rear quarter because of outswing, due to manoeuvres in city streets, whether or not you were to blame or any other driver. The insurance company refuses your claim because the the vehicle is too wide for UK roads. And you lamely hold up this case where a judge said the fact that is was too wide was NOT material to risk?!

As to your own decision, Mick, I think that is very prudent. Should I be in your situation now, as opposed to what I aspire to in 10 years' time, nevertheless I'd be tempted by a Monaco, something like the Cayman in 34ft. Pity there is nothing much shorter. What's a mm each side ....? (I'm sure THAT can be shaved) ;-)

http://www.monacocoaches.com/models/monacoindex.aspx?model=cayman&year=2006

Dave


----------



## 88724

Hi Dave

How do you reconcile these two views?, both of which you have expressed recently

From above

*I'm sure some dealers and MHF members might baulk at that but I have no problem with it*

And below is from a recent thread about getting away with a relatively minor dodge when compared to the one above.

*I can't see anything wrong with being pleased about the upholding of fair play.*


----------



## DABurleigh

George,

In the same way I have no difficulty with car manufacturers or dealers selling cars that go way over the national speed limit. The difference is there is no attempted deceit there. 

On the other hand, I think there is deceit when a UK dealer sells an illegal vehicle without explicitly warning a buyer to this effect. The dealer should not presume the buyer knows it is illegal. 

Whereas a car dealer can presume the buyer knows of the 70mph limit.

Dave


----------



## 88724

Hi Dave

Implicitly the dealer who changes a vehicle just to get past a test and then puts it back into an ilegal condition, both parties are complicit and flouting the law, not maybe breaking the law at a later date, they are breaking the law there and then, which you say you have no problem with.

Yet you uphold fairness and honesty in the other post

I can't see anything wrong with being pleased about the upholding of fair play.

Edit to correct spelling of Breaking


----------



## DABurleigh

I see no inconsistency or hypocrisy between simultaneously holding the views of:

a) I can't see anything wrong with being pleased about the upholding of fair play.

and

b) the freedom of an informed individual to choose to break the law and risk the consequences.

But I'd be grateful if you did not further dilute this thread. If you wish to continue to question my integrity feel free to do so by PM, unless there is a clamour for it to be public.

The end.

Dave


----------



## MicknPat

GeorgeTelford said:


> Hi Mick
> 
> They never have refused a claim based on size or licence, but I think you decision to avoid is probably for the best.


George,

I think you may find that the cost of any claim could influence that decision,I'm sure that if the claim was for a new RV plus other vehicle,plus personal say loss of life claims (god for bid) they would take up the gauntlet.


----------



## 88724

Hi Mick

I think that in 45 Years, there must have been a few doozies by now.

Hi Dave

This is about your views on the subject in hand, not really of the topic.

I Think I can see your reasoning now, both views can be simultainiously held

You are happy for them to break the law, by temporarily altering the vehicle to comply, but equally you are happy for them to be caught at a later date in a clampdown when the rules are upheld.


----------



## 97785

After phoning the DVLA personally they told me the following:-

That the maximum width is from the widest part of the body which in most cases is the wheel arches.

At this moment in time they will be measure the length on all RV's imported to the UK (bumper to bumper)

Hope this clears up some of the questions.

Craig


----------



## DABurleigh

I thought that's what was said in the first few posts of this thread.

Edit - "Happy" was your word, not mine, George, but yes, you get the gist.


----------



## 97785

I was just clarifying what I personally was told by the DVLA.


----------



## MicknPat

GeorgeTelford said:


> Widest body point, longest body point. Mirrors dont count, Bumpers do. Never asked about awning's
> 
> Ring Marsham, get it in writing


George, Can you help me with a few more details for 'Marsham' that you refer to above please?

Thank You.


----------



## 88724

Hi Mick

Marsham is the Construction and Use dept, this dept is specifically mentioned in the legisaltion as the Arbitors of vehicle Classification.

DVLA always state at the bottom of the page on licencing large vehicles

_*Categories of vehicles and their descriptions can be found here. DVLA cannot give legal advice on how vehicles are classified but, generally speaking it depends on the weight of the vehicle or the number of passengers it can carry.
Any queries should be directed to 0870 240 0009 and lines are open Mon - Fri 8am - 8.30pm and Sat 9am - 5.30pm

This information is not intended to be a definitive statement of law.
.*_

Do not believe the above bull you will get if you ring tha above number, they cannot substantiate it with a reference to the legislation, there legal dept could not even after 3 months of discussions could not show the legislation (now they say we cannot offer legal advice, strange as part of their remit they must explain licencing law to the public

They used to direct you to the construction and use dept in Marsham complete with phone number, unfortunately I have been such a thorn in their side pointing out that the LAW and Marsham disagree with them that they have now removed Marsham address and phone number and instead have a link to "their twisted and unsubstantiated" views and another DVLA "helpline" and a seperate weblink

Here is_* one*_ of the original's

HOW ARE VEHICLES CLASSIFIED?

DVLA cannot give legal advice on how vehicles are classified for driving licence purposes. We can only give general guidance. The Vehicle Standards and Engineering Division, Great Minster House, 76 Marsham St, London, SW1P 4DR,(0207 944 2064), may be able to help classify a vehicle that falls under - Works Trucks, Agricultural Motor Vehicles, Industrial Tractors and Engineering Plant but only for the purposes of its Construction and Use.

This information is not intended to be a definitive statement of law.

The Vehicle Standards and Engineering Division, this is the new name for the Construction and use dept.

BTW while you are on ask what the weight limit for motorhomes is and also are they classed as goods vehicles.


----------



## MicknPat

A few days ago I e-mailed the Monaco Coach Co asking at which points they got their 100.5" width from here is their reply.


> We are happy to know that you are interested in the diplomat. Here is the answer to your question, I do hope that it will help you make a decision!
> 
> The 100.5 is sidewall to sidewall and does not include the awnings. If you have any other question please do not hesitate to call 800-650-7337 ext 7823
> 
> Olivia Richardson


*Good news?*


----------



## 88724

Hi Mick

Good news?

Not really 100.5 is oversized anyway 100.39 is the max.

If the law is ever applied, you would probably need to export to get anything back

Do you feel lucky? well do ya?


----------



## DABurleigh

Mick,

I don't see how. I presume they mean bodywork sidewall to sidewall and not tyres (the latter being even worse).

That means there is no scope for trimming the width further, and even worse is that any wheel arches, awnings, grab handles and trim strips have to be added on to the 101.5. All of these things need to be INCLUDED in the UK legal width (only lights and mirrors are EXcluded).

Dave


----------



## MicknPat

Chap's,

In that case then I do not believe there are any A Class diesel pusher RVs that are under 100.39" in width.

Fleetwood list ALL their fleet at 102" obviously OVER.
Damon 101" OVER.
Winnebago 101.5" OVER
Safari 100.5" OVER.

So the $64,000 question is HOW DO THE DEALERS DO IT? :evil:


----------



## 88724

Hi 

Because they are not taking the risk, the buyer is.


----------



## MicknPat

Here is a nice picture of a Monaco Diplomat 38PST an RV I would very much like to visit America and buy for about £95,160.










Monaco claim the width of this RV sidewall to side wall is 100.5".

As you can see it has plenty of sticky out bits on its side including 3 slide-outs so looking at that picture how many inches would you add on to it's 100.5" width?

If I pop around to my nearby Monaco dealer he will sell me that identical RV for £189,702.

For that RV to be in the dealers show room it must have gone through the DVLA checking system......correct? HOW?

Yes, I agree George once a dealer has imported the oversized RV and is displaying it for sale in his showroom the risk then falls on the poor sod who drives it on the road.

If I could guarantee getting this RV through customs and the DVLA I would be quite happy to risk driving it on both the British & European roads.

The chances of being stopped by a Police Officer who has the knowledge of vehicles max widths is zillions to one.

That figure will continue to increase by the day with the continual replacement of the Police by Community Support Officers. :wink:


----------



## 88724

Hi Mick

Supposedly it will have if this thread start is correct, BUT that will do YOU no good if the dealer slimmed for inspection and then reinstated the extra width YOU will still be ilegal NOT the dealer According to the Hammill case its Caveat emptor


----------



## MicknPat

George,

DABurleigh in one of his earlier postings in this thread suggested that,


> I know that certainly in the past, and for all I know still now, Dudleys went to great lengths to make the width UK legal. Often this entailed removing awnings, rubbing strips, etc.


But how and where could a dealer remove that great big awning, the awnings above the slide-outs,door handles and trim strips without the DVLA inspector smelling a rat,surely it would have to be done on the dock side?


----------



## DABurleigh

Mick,

I suggest you give Dudleys a bell and ask how they ensure a Winnebago Journey is a UK legal width.

It's such a shame Paul UK_RV seems unwilling to answer questions about how he's doing it, because he worried away at the VAT and duty aspects like a dog with a bone.

Dave


----------



## MicknPat

Dave,

Will do but if the other sentence of the posting I quoted you on is anything to go by I don't hold out much hope 



> Give them a ring and sound them out on the issue. You will get straightforward talking. And if you do, ask them why they never answered my enquiry about price matching a US dealer


----------



## DABurleigh

Just to make Father's Day complete for aspiring UK-based RV importers, my posting earlier in this thread said that mirrors should not be included in the width:
http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftopicp-107123.html#107123

Well, that may still be the case, but, due to the wonders of EU law infiltrating ever further into our lives, said RV mirrors are themselves subject to further constraints in that they mustn't project more than 20cm ......

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2005/uksi_20053165_en.pdf
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2005/20053165.htm

Dave


----------



## merctoby

*pooor old u.s. length another bite, the dust .*

have you read the latest post,s 
because we are brit,s we drive big motorhomes , sorry buses sorry , oh1 bother . the fact is the law is going to be rewritten by law . 
because we allow immigration we will have a lot of foriegn drivers who are british ? . on our roads . 
so the rules are going to change , HGV, i know you said no way does not apply because of the goods act, or the bus , sorry motorhome r.v. well get used to it, it is not going to be allowed being driven by some one who has no experiance of long heavy vehicles . because this is what they are . so all the people who want to drive these class,s of vehicle. are going to have to get used to the fact . their is to be a new classification on licence class.

check it out , but ask at government level .


----------



## asprn

*Re: pooor old u.s. length another bite, the dust .*

Could you possibly try that again in English? 8O

Dougie.


----------



## merctoby

*asprn , rv. ect,*

too much english to write about this subject ,

dougie , in english . the law is going to be changed . the reason being . people who drive big vehicles , motorhomes R.V. buses , because their is now a weight issue and length issue . people lobbying the government about the H.G.V. class we drive a lorry up to 7500kg on a car licence . germany it is 3500kg. on a car licence , they complain . that we travel to their country and the accidents that happen .are our fault . and point out to our government that we allow drivers to drive vehicles that exceed the weight issue and the length issue . and we should pass a vehicle test . to allow a person to drive a vehicle of it,s class . 
and they are pushing hard to get it part of european law , they think it is ridiculous of the brutish , to use P.S.V. for a bus paying passengers , and H.G.V. heavy goods loads weight ect, ect, . these vehicles that we are allowed to drive are to be reclassed for all drivers of vehicles that exceed 5000kg, motorhomes should carry a class , and any thing over a certain length 7m also carry a class . because we travel to different part,s of the globe , this is a very deep issue and will go for a while yet , but they will get their wish in the end . more cash . tax . does this help dougie . 
all the very best , and keep on trekking . denton.


----------



## asprn

*Re: asprn , rv. ect,*



merctoby said:


> the law is going to be changed


I keep a close eye on proposed new or amended legislation, and at the moment, there are no proposals to make the changes you suggest. I'm quite sure there is much talk about the various disparities between European member states such as you mention, but your conclusions are certainly not foregone.

Dougie.


----------



## 107925

It works both ways; in the UK, we complain about the poor driving standards of too many foreign lorry drivers. In some of their home countries, on-the-spot fines would apply, but we don't have the same rules here. Also, there have been accidents where they pull out in their LHD lorry and can't see the overtaking car due to the blind spot and no compensating mirror. So, the different driving behaviour/rules between countries, plus differing legal requirements as to vehicle standards, mean that we put up with a lot of crap from abroad, too. 

Beaurocrats have their work cut out trying to harmonise that little lot but, meanwhile, proposed changes are often no more than the loud voice of lobbyists.

Shaun


----------

