Pick-up speed limits

[openspaceman]

 

No - not true when you consider the commercial side of Dual Purpose e.g. pick-ups, crew vans mess vans etc. If a commercial vehicle meets the requirements of DPV then it is a class 4 NOT 7. This would lead to a potential issue that the vehicle has an incorrect class MOT test in place and could be a point to argue its not valid.

 

What's not true?

 

I'm just saying it seems to be illogical that a DPV up to 3500kg MAM should continue to only require a class 4 test when all other commercial vehicles over 3000kg require a class 7. I can see it being an issue if your local MOT station can only do class 4.

 

I take your point about currently this would lead to a DPV having the wrong class of MOT but as the Class 7 MOT tests all the items a class 4 does and some more I cannot see an offence being committed by having a class 7 MOT.

 

It no longer affects me but my LR110 had a class 7 test for a number of years despite being a DPV.

[Stoatally]

Its illogical as it was introduced many years ago to deal with (I think) a Landrover issue, and was never removed.

 

It was put into legislation and therefore became illogical. There was no appetite to actually remove it 7 years ago (when that special notice was issued) but it was debated a lot.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

That last little run of debate illustrates quite nicely the dreadful consequence of over regulation!

 

I'm unclear, the dealer seems unclear (or unwilling) to clarify, the regs are a mess, it could be class 4 or 7 for MoT test and there's a chance of getting a speeding ticket but we're not quite sure....

 

Lovely!! 👍🏻

[Richard 1234]

That last little run of debate illustrates quite nicely the dreadful consequence of over regulation!

 

I'm unclear, the dealer seems unclear (or unwilling) to clarify, the regs are a mess, it could be class 4 or 7 for MoT test and there's a chance of getting a speeding ticket but we're not quite sure....

 

Lovely!! 👍🏻

 

 

I've just had a thought. I go through a set of average speed cameras once a month on a 60 speed limit at 60(indicated with cruise control on) in my navara and not had a ticket yet.

These are digital so they should pick it up if I was supposed to be doing 50 shouldn't they?

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

What road class Richard? If dual carriageway you could do 60 in a non DPV light commercial anyway? I think??

[Treewolf]

We seem to have come full circle and arrived back where we started.

 

There are in essence three broad types of vehicle recognised in UK law, these being "motor cars", "goods vehicles", and "dual purpose vehicles". These categories are defined by the Road Vehicles (Construction & Use) Regulations 1986 (as amended). [Within some of these categories there are sub-categories, such as "heavy motor car" etc. Anything not in one of these categories can only be driven on the road by virtue of Special Types regulations.]

 

If you drive a Landrover Defender, then irrespective of what it is used for, who owns it, how it is taxed, you are NOT driving a light goods vehicle, you are driving a Dual Purpose Vehicle. It may be taxed in a VED category called "N1 Light Goods" but it is not a light goods vehicle.

 

Any vehicle which is a Dual Purpose Vehicle as defined in C&U(86) must be MOT tested as Class 4 and is subject to normal car-type speed limits. That is the law, to do anything else is illegal.

 

It is true that a Class 7 MOT tests the same things but to a more rigourous standard tha Class 4, but if you lose income because your vehicle has failed a incorrectly-administered Class 7 test when it should have passed a Class 4 test, I imagine you could now sue the test station. Similarly if you have presented the vehicle for test and the test station has carried out and charged you for a Class 7 test when it should have been Class 4, they have overcharged you (or mis-sold you the test).

 

You can argue the absurdity of the situation, but you cannot argue the facts of the situation.

 

 

 

Note, and this is very important, that this proposed change to the MOT regulations does not remove the DPV vehicle type definition,

 

That was, IIRC, the intention at the time. The message given out to the trade was that we would be changing to the Euro style M1/N1 passenger / goods classification and DPV would be completely removed making it 'easier' to determine goods vehicle as based clearly on GVW/DGW.

 

Unfortunately your selective quoting of my post is exactly the sort of thing which is propogating the myths on this subject, since it suggests that there was an intention to remove the DPV vehicle type definition from the C&U(86) regs. This has NEVER been the stated case, and DVSA and/or the DfT cannot do this - only an Act of Parliament or Statutory Instrument can alter the C&U Regs. What DVSA proposed was a change to the MoT Test Regulations, which would have removed the provision that states that DPVs are tested as a seperate defined category. It would only have affected MOTs, it would not have affected speed limits, tachographs, drivers' hours, weight limits, type approval, or any of the other areas where DPVs are/were/may be treated differently and specifically.

[Richard 1234]

What road class Richard? If dual carriageway you could do 60 in a non DPV light commercial anyway? I think??

 

 

Just single carriageway

[aspenarb]

Can we chuck this in the mix?

 

Do you need a tachograph? If you tow for your business you do - Fleet News

 

Bob

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Can we chuck this in the mix?

 

Do you need a tachograph? If you tow for your business you do - Fleet News

 

Bob

 

For the love of God, please, no more.....:bang head:

 

Does it not hinge upon the "hire & reward" point?

 

If delivering goods for payment = yes.

 

If carrying your own tools (plant for example) for your own use on site =no?

 

I know, I'll ask the main dealer...... Oh, that didn't work quite so well so far.....

[openspaceman]

F

Does it not hinge upon the "hire & reward" point?

 

If delivering goods for payment = yes.

 

If carrying your own tools (plant for example) for your own use on site =no?

 

 

It only applies to vehicles over 3500kg so:

 

If carrying your own tools (plant for example) for your own use on site, and driving is not the main activity, within a radius of 100km of base and the vehicle plus any trailer exceeds 3500kg and has MAM less than 7500kg =no