Proposed Victorian club permit changes

[DoubleChevron]

Hi Guys,

break out your pens and get writing. We currently have a brilliantly fantastic club permit scheme in Victoria. Not happy with this, they are trying to enforce photographic requirements (a MASSIVE impost on large clubs) and FULL ROADWORTHIES.... To get a modern vehicle through a modern victorian Roadworthy is hard enough.... But to get a bloody 40+ year old car thorugh would be near bloody impossible.

Victorian Club Permit Scheme changes

I have posted the proposed changes here. Let in-inundate Vicroads with Objections. We DO NOT want enforced Roadworthy certificates on vintage and classic vehicle. A lot leaked and weeped when new, how can they expect to be perfectly leak free (with photographic evidence) 50+ year later

The "M" modification plates ? Brilliant idea, it removes the grey area currently plaguing the scheme

seeya,
Shane L.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Unlike other states, in NSW Roadworthies have been mandatory on all registered vehicles every year and my SIII Land Rover on HCRS gets an inspection station roadworthy every year too.

Having unsafe cars on the road is not what any club/historic/or special interest scheme is about.

[Scouse]

Hi Guys,

break out your pens and get writing. We currently have a brilliantly fantastic club permit scheme in Victoria. Not happy with this, they are trying to enforce photographic requirements (a MASSIVE impost on large clubs) and FULL ROADWORTHIES.... To get a modern vehicle through a modern victorian Roadworthy is hard enough.... But to get a bloody 40+ year old car thorugh would be near bloody impossible.

Victorian Club Permit Scheme changes

I have posted the proposed changes here. Let in-inundate Vicroads with Objections. We DO NOT want enforced Roadworthy certificates on vintage and classic vehicle. A lot leaked and weeped when new, how can they expect to be perfectly leak free (with photographic evidence) 50+ year later

The "M" modification plates ? Brilliant idea, it removes the grey area currently plaguing the scheme

seeya,
Shane L.

I think you'll find that the photographic evidence is required to verify that the car was suitable for the Club Permit scheme to start with.
That way, when the car is found to have a V8 or flares/massive wheels down the track, the authorities will have evidence that this work was done after the permit was issued.

[Bigbjorn]

Unlike other states, in NSW Roadworthies have been mandatory on all registered vehicles every year and my SIII Land Rover on HCRS gets an inspection station roadworthy every year too.

Having unsafe cars on the road is not what any club/historic/or special interest scheme is about.

I wholeheartedly agree. And the certificate should be provided by a licensed inspector not by a club mate rubber stamping a declaration.

[DoubleChevron]

Unlike other states, in NSW Roadworthies have been mandatory on all registered vehicles every year and my SIII Land Rover on HCRS gets an inspection station roadworthy every year too.

Having unsafe cars on the road is not what any club/historic/or special interest scheme is about.

I've seen the absolutely laughablely "roadworthy" cars from NSW in the past.

It's nothing at all to do with allowing "unroadworthy" vehicles on the roads. One of my cars has been owned since 1996 (that's 18years without a roadworthy .... WHY HAVEN"T I HAD THOUSANDS OF ACCIDENTS MAIMING PEOPLE IN THIS CAR ..... It had "one" roadworthy back then. How is this more or less dangerous than someone putting there pride and joy onto a club permit.'

The reality is the "roadworthyness" of a vehicle has absolutely no statistical impact on it being in an accident that causes death or injury ( otherwise south australia would have horendous accident statistics. They have NO roadworthy ... ever ... there, even when vehicles changes hands).

this is how stringent they are:
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/~/me..._1212_web.ashx

The tester also needs to keep photographic evidence of all testing. including for leaks. The photos must be stored in multiple offsite archives and all sorts of bull****.

Last time I got a roadworthy was on a 2year old Citroen C4 that had only done 30,000kms from new. It failed as the windscreen washer didn't work. I took it back (after changing the blown fuse).... The guy took the keys, parked the car on the street, took a photo of it infront of his business, took photos of it's VIN numbers, started the car and took photos of the wipers running and the windscreen washers working This is a requirement of the RWC in Victoria

Imagine getting a 35 year old Range Rover that weeped everywhere when new .... let alone 30years later through this ... unless you coudl find someone that was willing to "massage" the piccies and requirements and bit to ensure a pass.

It's a load of bull**** designed to push older cars off the road (older as in 5+years) as they become un-economic to tyr and keep on the roads. The car industry loves this as it'll mean more sales of new cars.

My father fathers 1950 Traction Avant will be ready for a club permit soon. Can you imagine trying to get a 1950 model car with no syncho's on the lower gears, drum brakes, "pump" windscreen washer, single speed wipers, no demister fan, no indicators or factory lighting through a roadworthy. No seatbelts (they can be fitted, but are very ineffective due to the car being designed in the 1930s' so there being nowhere substantial enough to bolt the belt too). Lets no mention grease points, ball joints and driveshafts without rubber boots. etc....

There's not a snowmans chance in hell this could pass a modern roadworthy ... let alone the brake tests etc...

We used to have a local guy that lived and breathed old cars ... everyone took there oldies to him for Roadworthies. As soon as these modern roadworthy requirements came in ... he shutup shop. It wasn't worth all the bull**** involved.

seeya,
Shane L.

[Bigbjorn]

Shane, your 1950 Citroen only has to comply with the regulations in force then. You don't have to fit seat belts (in Qld.) if the car predates the requirement and has never had belts fitted. The gearbox is not part of a safety inspection. Drum brakes, the wipers, lighting only need to work as well as their design permits. The pump washer is a rarity on a car of that vintage and I don't think anyone would notice if you removed it prior to inspection. Vic Roads requirements are not excessive (I read that link) and only what is to be expected, and are similar to those requirements legislated in other states. Qld. Transport are savage on oil leaks following representations from the motor cycling groups about the amount of oil at intersections.

[DoubleChevron]

Shane, your 1950 Citroen only has to comply with the regulations in force then. You don't have to fit seat belts (in Qld.) if the car predates the requirement and has never had belts fitted. The gearbox is not part of a safety inspection. Drum brakes, the wipers, lighting only need to work as well as their design permits. The pump washer is a rarity on a car of that vintage and I don't think anyone would notice if you removed it prior to inspection. Vic Roads requirements are not excessive (I read that link) and only what is to be expected, and are similar to those requirements legislated in other states. Qld. Transport are savage on oil leaks following representations from the motor cycling groups about the amount of oil at intersections.

It'll have seatbelts fitted... In theory everything you say is true. THe reality is, you'll have a bugger of a time trying to find someone that'll book in a vintage car... and then your reliant on them understanding and applying common sense. Have you ever tried to get a modern (as in 1985 Citroen CX) through a roadworthy.

FAILED:
--indicators don't self cancel
--slop in the steering
--handbrake won't apply in 3clicks
--brake pedal is hard
--has air horns
--etc,etc.etc...

Then your into fighting with the bloody tester "the indicator never self canceled" ... "I want them to self cancel" .... "Shove your roadworhty fee where the sun don't shine then I'm not paying" ... and on and on we go. "Mate, start the car, there should be slop in the steering with it off".... "the brake pedal should be hard, it's just a valve" .... **** me, the handbrake self adjusts to upto 15clicks automatically on this car" ... "AGAIN, I'M NOT REMOVING the god damn air horns, I've shown you the factory two stage button on the dash, they only work if you press really hard on the button to over-ride the town horn" ... and on and on we go....

Find someone with half a brain "A Citroen, this'll be interesting" ... "No worries mate, yeah weird, not self cancelling indicators, no worries'.... "nice car mate, good to see something different, here's your roadworthy" ... Or your list of valid things that need repairing.

it will all be fun no doubt. All I know is getting a roadworthy now in victoria is far from easy. Infact can be downright bloody difficult. The ludicrous bit is after all the bull**** ... the car will never be checked again ... ever .. .if I own it for another 20years... How does it being classed as "roadworthy" at 3:30pm on the 15 Novemeber in 2014 impact the safety of the car over the next 20years

There is no doubt I'll still own my cars in another 20years too.

seeya,
Shane L.

[B92 8NW]

It is hard to get a roadworthy in Vic, I'll agree, but it's also ridiculously easy to get a dodgy one
The current system doesn't work. It's not about safety, it's just an earner. If it was about safety, they'd go the way of NSW.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

I've seen the absolutely laughablely "roadworthy" cars from NSW in the past.

And I have seen Victorian vehicles with external rust you could have put your hand through.

It's nothing at all to do with allowing "unroadworthy" vehicles on the roads. One of my cars has been owned since 1996 (that's 18years without a roadworthy .... WHY HAVEN"T I HAD THOUSANDS OF ACCIDENTS MAIMING PEOPLE IN THIS CAR ..... It had "one" roadworthy back then. How is this more or less dangerous than someone putting there pride and joy onto a club permit.'

And both you and I would make sure that we have vehicles in good, roadworthy condition. I can't say that about a lot of people with "old" cars.

The reality is the "roadworthyness" of a vehicle has absolutely no statistical impact on it being in an accident that causes death or injury ( otherwise south australia would have horendous accident statistics. They have NO roadworthy ... ever ... there, even when vehicles changes hands).

I would like to see your evidence for that claim?

this is how stringent they are:
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/~/me..._1212_web.ashx

The tester also needs to keep photographic evidence of all testing. including for leaks. The photos must be stored in multiple offsite archives and all sorts of bull****.

Last time I got a roadworthy was on a 2year old Citroen C4 that had only done 30,000kms from new. It failed as the windscreen washer ...

Very annoying, I have to agree!

Imagine getting a 35 year old Range Rover that weeped everywhere when new .... let alone 30years later through this ... unless you could find someone that was willing to "massage" the piccies and requirements and bit to ensure a pass.

I have a 30 year old Range Rover I've owned since new and it only started it's first leak after about 15 years. because I kept it serviced by professionals.

It's a load of bull**** designed to push older cars off the road (older as in 5+years) as they become un-economic to tyr and keep on the roads. The car industry loves this as it'll mean more sales of new cars.

You may be correct, however with classic car enthusiasts like ourselves, we will jump through whatever hoops they put in front of us because of our love of cars and all the wrecks that owners who only want cheap rego will send their heaps of junk to the recyclers. Thats a good thing.

[Bigbjorn]

I would like to add this comment for any Victorians who are getting the hump about proposed changes to their very generous part-time registration scheme. Don't antagonise the bureaucrats. You could end up with a much worse scheme. Qld. and NSW do not have discounted part-time registration scheme. They have a permit to use an unregistered vehicle under certain laid down conditions. I know from conferring with Qld. Transport on behalf of the combined clubs that the bureaucrats regard the schemes as un-necessary and serving no useful purpose, are something extra to administer, only provide a benefit to a relatively small number of people, and the big kicker, cost the government money. Get the wrong powerful peoples backs up and you could end up with no scheme at all.