Revenue weight - problem at MOT time

Copy of message I have already posted on S2 club forum:

I just took a 1963 2A 109 petrol to my local MOT station. They now
have the new computerised testing system which they did not have last
time. They input the chassis number into the system and then informed
me that they could not carry out the MOT.

Reason given was that the vehicle has a revenue weight of 3499kg gross,
and must therefore undergo a class 7 MOT test (commercial vehicles 3000
- 3499kg GRW) which most MOT stations are not equipped for. I was
given a computerised printout which showed the reason for rejection as
'Vehicle details entered incorrectly at test registration - wrong class
vehicle'.

Sure enough, the V5 states revenue weight of 3499kg gross. I thought
this might be a one-off error: with a 2A weighing about 1800kg empty,
if you load it up to 3499kg the chassis will probably bend in the
middle. But then I checked the V5s for other commercial bodied Land
Rovers that I have at the moment, and found revenue weights on the V5s
as follows:

1971 2a 109: 3499kg
1964 2a 88: 2465kg
1959 S2 88: 3499kg
1980 S3 Lightweight: 3499kg
1983 S3 88: 3499kg
1958 S2 109: 2465kg
1987 90 hardtop: 3499kg

Houston, we have a problem. It looks as though DVLA have been using
3499kg as the default revenue weight on Land Rover V5s for a very long
time. Apart from the shortage of class 7 testing stations, the test
costs more than a class 4 test. I don't know if it is any tougher.

So I rang DVLA and was told that to change the revenue weight, all you
need to do is enter the new weight on the V5C, sign it and send it back
to them. I will do this today, but first:

Does anyone know what the correct revenue weight (gross laden weight)
is for the various models of Land Rover? The only ones I have found so
far (from a Series 3 handbook) are:

Series 3 88 inch (all) 2120kg
Series 3 109 inch 4 and 6 cyl (exc. 1 Ton) 2710kg

I guess these apply equally to Series 2 and 2A equivalents, but it
would be nice to have this confirmed.

Richard

MOT garages always get confused when they get anything that isnt
standard.

I was under the impression that the cut off point for class 4 MOT's
was 3500kg* - so yours at 3499 should still fall within this.

(* though motor caravans and ambulances are exempt from this limit and
can always get class 4's whatever the weight)

Also, isnt a landrover classed as a 'dual purpose vehicle' - and this
should also entitle it to a class 4.

I keep meaning to get a copy of the road vehicles construction and use
regulations (i think its that one i needed) out of the library to have
a read. Nobody understands the rules.

"Tom Woods" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> MOT garages always get confused when they get anything that isnt
> standard.
>
> I was under the impression that the cut off point for class 4 MOT's
> was 3500kg* - so yours at 3499 should still fall within this.

3000Kg??

> (* though motor caravans and ambulances are exempt from this limit and
> can always get class 4's whatever the weight)

Indeed, but due to their physical size and sometimes their weight they must
be done at a class 7 testing station even though it's a class 4 test.

> Also, isnt a landrover classed as a 'dual purpose vehicle' - and this
> should also entitle it to a class 4.

Yes, as long as it isn't a truck cab, 'cos then it falls into the commercial
sector as it hasn't been constructed or adapted to carry passengers etc etc,
I'd need to nip into the garage and read the manual to be precise though.

Badger.

On 20 Dec, in article
<[email protected]>
[email protected] "glencoyne" wrote:

> Does anyone know what the correct revenue weight (gross laden weight)
> is for the various models of Land Rover? The only ones I have found so
> far (from a Series 3 handbook) are:
>
> Series 3 88 inch (all) 2120kg
> Series 3 109 inch 4 and 6 cyl (exc. 1 Ton) 2710kg
>
> I guess these apply equally to Series 2 and 2A equivalents, but it
> would be nice to have this confirmed.

The military manual for the Series III Lightweight, and the combined
serial number and weight plate on the driver's side of the seatbox, both
give a gross laden weight of 2020 kg. (Which gives just over half a ton
for payload and driver, on roads.)

I think it definitely needs confirming for the earlier models.

Swansea's database is _not_ reliable. It led to be getting a private
parking ticket for leaving a combine harvester in a supermarket carpark,
two years after they stopped sending me tax/SORN reminders when I sold
it. It was later exported to Cyprus.

Like most government computer systems, they have a severe GIGO problem,
and seem pretty uncaring about fixing it.

--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.

"I am Number Two," said Penfold. "You are Number Six."

In message <[email protected]>
[email protected] ("David G. Bell") wrote:

> On 20 Dec, in article
> <[email protected]>
> [email protected] "glencoyne" wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know what the correct revenue weight (gross laden weight)
> > is for the various models of Land Rover? The only ones I have found so
> > far (from a Series 3 handbook) are:
> >
> > Series 3 88 inch (all) 2120kg
> > Series 3 109 inch 4 and 6 cyl (exc. 1 Ton) 2710kg
> >
> > I guess these apply equally to Series 2 and 2A equivalents, but it
> > would be nice to have this confirmed.
>
> The military manual for the Series III Lightweight, and the combined
> serial number and weight plate on the driver's side of the seatbox, both
> give a gross laden weight of 2020 kg. (Which gives just over half a ton
> for payload and driver, on roads.)
>
> I think it definitely needs confirming for the earlier models.
>
> Swansea's database is _not_ reliable. It led to be getting a private
> parking ticket for leaving a combine harvester in a supermarket carpark,
> two years after they stopped sending me tax/SORN reminders when I sold
> it. It was later exported to Cyprus.
>
> Like most government computer systems, they have a severe GIGO problem,
> and seem pretty uncaring about fixing it.
>

<rant mode>[1]

It's Targets. Targets are all that matter. Meet your Targets and you'll
Be A Good Manager. Causing havoc and ruining peoples lives does not matter,
it's not a Target. Failing to keep customers happy does not matter, it's
not a Target. Helping people to put things right does not matter either,
guess what - it's not a Target. Indeed, waste your time actually sorting
things out and you will miss your Target, thereby becomming a Bad Manager.

But the really galling thing is that these mamagers who are getting
paid a fortune to force the poor sods that work for them to meet
their Targets haven't got the spine to turn round and say it's wrong.
And they are almost certainly the first on the phone to Jeremy Vine when
they get treated the same way.

Personaly, I don't know how they sleep at night.

</rant mode>

Richard

[1] Still seething, 6 years later, about getting a phone bill demand
from a company who had bought a non-existant debt from BT.
Calls BT call-centre.....
BT: "We couldn't find your address".
Me: "You haven't got a phone book then?"
BT: "But you might not have been the right person".
Me: "You managed to change our Direct Debit over to this number and
address".
BT: "Oh dear, that seems to be Option 11 out of 10 on my screen, I'll
have to put the phone down on you".

Bye-bye BT, hello NTL!

--

glencoyne wrote:

> Series 3 88 inch (all) 2120kg
> Series 3 109 inch 4 and 6 cyl (exc. 1 Ton) 2710kg
>
> I guess these apply equally to Series 2 and 2A equivalents, but it
> would be nice to have this confirmed.

My SIIa SWB has a GVM of 2000kg according to it's NZ registration
documents - which I trust on vehicles that were registered before 1985
when the system fell apart. The S3 SWB that's lurking on my lawn has a
GVM of 2020kg according to it's VIN plate (as do the plates for sale on
ebay).


--
EMB

Tom Woods wrote:
> MOT garages always get confused when they get anything that isnt
> standard.
>
> I was under the impression that the cut off point for class 4 MOT's
> was 3500kg* - so yours at 3499 should still fall within this.
>

Cut-off point for Class 4 is 2999kg. 3000-3499kg are class 7 unless
'dual purpose' which basically means 4 wheel drive with seats in the
back. So a plain commercial Land Rover should not be 'dual purpose' -
although I suspect a lot of MOT testers have been using the dual
purpose exemption to get round this problem, which may be why I have
not read anything about it before now. I suspect the safest course of
action is to get the revenue weight changed well before the next MoT is
due.

Richard

i have just been on the landrover.com website .

maximum gross vehicle weight for a defender 90 hardtop is 2400kg
[2500kg maximum axle ]

for a 110 hardtop its 3050kg [3500 maximum axle] .

looks like i have to change my log book listed weight as mine shows
3500kg and i have a 90 defender .

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 13:18:48 +0000 (UTC), "Badger"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>Yes, as long as it isn't a truck cab, 'cos then it falls into the commercial
>sector as it hasn't been constructed or adapted to carry passengers etc etc,

The fact that it is 4wd means it does not have to comply with the
other things a no 4wd dual purpose does. I still have the DVLA letter
stating my 110 is dual purpose somewhere.

AJH

Well my limo was plated for sommat ridiculos like 3.7 tonnes, and I always
got it MOT's at the Council depot, because they had ramps long enough.
However I always had it MoT''d as a private car not a commercial.


--
þT

L'autisme c'est moi

"Space folds, and folded space bends, and bent folded space contracts and
expands unevenly in every way unconcievable except to someone who does not
believe in the laws of mathematics"




"Tom Woods" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> MOT garages always get confused when they get anything that isnt
> standard.
>
> I was under the impression that the cut off point for class 4 MOT's
> was 3500kg* - so yours at 3499 should still fall within this.
>
> (* though motor caravans and ambulances are exempt from this limit and
> can always get class 4's whatever the weight)
>
> Also, isnt a landrover classed as a 'dual purpose vehicle' - and this
> should also entitle it to a class 4.
>
> I keep meaning to get a copy of the road vehicles construction and use
> regulations (i think its that one i needed) out of the library to have
> a read. Nobody understands the rules.
>

Just looked at my new style V5C

It has a lot of blanks on it, including Maximum permissible mass and mass in
service which are not recorded

It is merely a PLG with the body type Estate

Does not even state the number of seats.

In other words I suspect there database has rather little information
recorded on it at all


--
Larry
Series 3 rust and holes



"glencoyne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Copy of message I have already posted on S2 club forum:
>
> I just took a 1963 2A 109 petrol to my local MOT station. They now
> have the new computerised testing system which they did not have last
> time. They input the chassis number into the system and then informed
> me that they could not carry out the MOT.
>
> Reason given was that the vehicle has a revenue weight of 3499kg gross,
> and must therefore undergo a class 7 MOT test (commercial vehicles 3000
> - 3499kg GRW) which most MOT stations are not equipped for. I was
> given a computerised printout which showed the reason for rejection as
> 'Vehicle details entered incorrectly at test registration - wrong class
> vehicle'.
>
> Sure enough, the V5 states revenue weight of 3499kg gross. I thought
> this might be a one-off error: with a 2A weighing about 1800kg empty,
> if you load it up to 3499kg the chassis will probably bend in the
> middle. But then I checked the V5s for other commercial bodied Land
> Rovers that I have at the moment, and found revenue weights on the V5s
> as follows:
>
> 1971 2a 109: 3499kg
> 1964 2a 88: 2465kg
> 1959 S2 88: 3499kg
> 1980 S3 Lightweight: 3499kg
> 1983 S3 88: 3499kg
> 1958 S2 109: 2465kg
> 1987 90 hardtop: 3499kg
>
> Houston, we have a problem. It looks as though DVLA have been using
> 3499kg as the default revenue weight on Land Rover V5s for a very long
> time. Apart from the shortage of class 7 testing stations, the test
> costs more than a class 4 test. I don't know if it is any tougher.
>
> So I rang DVLA and was told that to change the revenue weight, all you
> need to do is enter the new weight on the V5C, sign it and send it back
> to them. I will do this today, but first:
>
> Does anyone know what the correct revenue weight (gross laden weight)
> is for the various models of Land Rover? The only ones I have found so
> far (from a Series 3 handbook) are:
>
> Series 3 88 inch (all) 2120kg
> Series 3 109 inch 4 and 6 cyl (exc. 1 Ton) 2710kg
>
> I guess these apply equally to Series 2 and 2A equivalents, but it
> would be nice to have this confirmed.
>
> Richard
>

"AJH" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 13:18:48 +0000 (UTC), "Badger"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>Yes, as long as it isn't a truck cab, 'cos then it falls into the
>>commercial
>>sector as it hasn't been constructed or adapted to carry passengers etc
>>etc,
>
> The fact that it is 4wd means it does not have to comply with the
> other things a no 4wd dual purpose does. I still have the DVLA letter
> stating my 110 is dual purpose somewhere.
>
> AJH

But there is mention in the description of a "dual purpose vehicle" in the
testers manual that states something to do with "constructed or adapted"
that infers that it must carry passengers other than in the front only,
which effectively rules out a truck-cab, making a 109/110 truck-cab
commercial and therefore class 7. I'll have a re-read next time I do a test
to confirm this.
Badger.

I now have (I think) a definitive answer from VOSA. If a vehicle has
four wheel drive, an unladen weight of 2040kg or less, and is able to
carry passengers, it is classed as a dual purpose vehicle for MOT
purposes and subject to class 4. 'Carrying passengers' includes the
front seats, so you do not need to have seats in the back for the
vehicle to be dual purpose. Nor do you need a hard top, side windows
etc.

'Dual purpose' has different meanings for different purposes -
tachograph rules, SVA tests, Customs & Excise etc all have their own
definitions. Very confusing.

I still wonder about Forward Controls though - are they less than
2040kg unladen? I have seen the unladen weight of a IIB FC quoted at
4505lbs, which is 2047kg. I don't think there is any other model over
2040kg apart from the 127/130 crew cab. And presumably for any Land
Rover, a really bloody-minded tester can demand proof of the unladen
weight.

Anyway, hopefully all this will be helpful to anyone who finds their
Landie being refused an MOT on grounds of revenue weight.

Richard

"glencoyne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Copy of message I have already posted on S2 club forum:
>
> I just took a 1963 2A 109 petrol to my local MOT station. They now
> have the new computerised testing system which they did not have last
> time. They input the chassis number into the system and then informed
> me that they could not carry out the MOT.
>
> Reason given was that the vehicle has a revenue weight of 3499kg gross,
> and must therefore undergo a class 7 MOT test (commercial vehicles 3000
> - 3499kg GRW) which most MOT stations are not equipped for. I was
> given a computerised printout which showed the reason for rejection as
> 'Vehicle details entered incorrectly at test registration - wrong class
> vehicle'.
>
> Sure enough, the V5 states revenue weight of 3499kg gross. I thought
> this might be a one-off error: with a 2A weighing about 1800kg empty,
> if you load it up to 3499kg the chassis will probably bend in the
> middle. But then I checked the V5s for other commercial bodied Land
> Rovers that I have at the moment, and found revenue weights on the V5s
> as follows:
>
> 1971 2a 109: 3499kg
> 1964 2a 88: 2465kg
> 1959 S2 88: 3499kg
> 1980 S3 Lightweight: 3499kg
> 1983 S3 88: 3499kg
> 1958 S2 109: 2465kg
> 1987 90 hardtop: 3499kg
>
> Houston, we have a problem. It looks as though DVLA have been using
> 3499kg as the default revenue weight on Land Rover V5s for a very long
> time. Apart from the shortage of class 7 testing stations, the test
> costs more than a class 4 test. I don't know if it is any tougher.
>
> So I rang DVLA and was told that to change the revenue weight, all you
> need to do is enter the new weight on the V5C, sign it and send it back
> to them. I will do this today, but first:
>
> Does anyone know what the correct revenue weight (gross laden weight)
> is for the various models of Land Rover? The only ones I have found so
> far (from a Series 3 handbook) are:
>
> Series 3 88 inch (all) 2120kg
> Series 3 109 inch 4 and 6 cyl (exc. 1 Ton) 2710kg
>
> I guess these apply equally to Series 2 and 2A equivalents, but it
> would be nice to have this confirmed.
>
> Richard
>

Does the term revenue weight mean that this onlty applies to commercials or
does it apply to PLG as well. Mine is a Defender CSW with 12 seats and I had
a nightmare problem when I first got it new in 1998. No one could tell me
when the MoT was due as it had 12 seats it was treated as amini bus and
neede one after 12 months not 3 years.
I checked my V5 and the revenue weight section is blank ??

John H

glencoyne wrote:
> I now have (I think) a definitive answer from VOSA. If a vehicle has
> four wheel drive, an unladen weight of 2040kg or less, and is able to
> carry passengers, it is classed as a dual purpose vehicle for MOT
> purposes and subject to class 4. 'Carrying passengers' includes the
> front seats, so you do not need to have seats in the back for the
> vehicle to be dual purpose. Nor do you need a hard top, side windows
> etc.
>
This is the definition given in the testers guide

"Dual-purpose vehicle means a vehicle constructed or adapted for the carriage both of passengers
and of goods or burden of any description, where the unladen weight does not exceed 2,040 kilograms,
and which satisfies the following conditions as to construction:
a-the vehicle must be permanently fitted with a rigid roof, with or without a sliding panel;
b-the area to the rear of the driver's seat must -
(i) -be permanently fitted with at least one row of transverse seats (fixed or folding) for 2 or
more
passengers and those seats must be properly sprung or cushioned and provided with upholstered
back-rests; attached either to the seats or to a side or the floor of the vehicle; and
(ii) -be lit on each side and at the rear by a window or windows of glass or other transparent
material having an area or aggregate area of not less than 1,850 square centimeters on each
side and not less than 770, square centimeters at the rear; and
c-the distance between the rearmost part of the steering wheel and the back-rests of the row of transverse
seats satisfying the requirements specified in sub-paragraph b(i) above or, if there is more than one such
row of seats, the distance between the rearmost part of the steering wheel and the back-rests of the
rearmost such row must, when the seats are ready for use, be not less than one-third of the distance
between the rear most part of the steering wheel and the rear most part of the floor of the vehicle."

so it needs a roof it needs seats in the back and it needs windows

--
Andy

SWB Series 2a ( dressed as a 3) "Bruce"
It's big, it's mean it's really, really green

VOSA really don't have a clue, do they? I give up.

"Andy.Smalley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> glencoyne wrote:
>> I now have (I think) a definitive answer from VOSA. If a vehicle has
>> four wheel drive, an unladen weight of 2040kg or less, and is able to
>> carry passengers, it is classed as a dual purpose vehicle for MOT
>> purposes and subject to class 4. 'Carrying passengers' includes the
>> front seats, so you do not need to have seats in the back for the
>> vehicle to be dual purpose. Nor do you need a hard top, side windows
>> etc.
>>
> This is the definition given in the testers guide
>
> "Dual-purpose vehicle means a vehicle constructed or adapted for the
> carriage both of passengers
> and of goods or burden of any description, where the unladen weight does
> not exceed 2,040 kilograms,
> and which satisfies the following conditions as to construction:
> a-the vehicle must be permanently fitted with a rigid roof, with or
> without a sliding panel;
> b-the area to the rear of the driver's seat must -
> (i) -be permanently fitted with at least one row of transverse
> seats (fixed or folding) for 2 or more
> passengers and those seats must be properly sprung or
> cushioned and provided with upholstered
> back-rests; attached either to the seats or to a side or the
> floor of the vehicle; and
> (ii) -be lit on each side and at the rear by a window or
> windows of glass or other transparent
> material having an area or aggregate area of not less than
> 1,850 square centimeters on each
> side and not less than 770, square centimeters at the rear;
> and
> c-the distance between the rearmost part of the steering wheel and the
> back-rests of the row of transverse
> seats satisfying the requirements specified in sub-paragraph b(i) above
> or, if there is more than one such
> row of seats, the distance between the rearmost part of the steering
> wheel and the back-rests of the
> rearmost such row must, when the seats are ready for use, be not less
> than one-third of the distance
> between the rear most part of the steering wheel and the rear most part
> of the floor of the vehicle."
>
> so it needs a roof it needs seats in the back and it needs windows
>
> --
> Andy
>
> SWB Series 2a ( dressed as a 3) "Bruce"
> It's big, it's mean it's really, really green

In other words, if it's a LWB truck cab then it's a class 7 test, which is
what I thought I'd read.
Badger.

Specifically, if it's a 110 truck cab (GLW 3050kg) it is class 7. A
series 3 109 truck cab (GLW 2710kg) should be class 4, provided the
revenue weight on the V5C is correct, which it probably won't be.

Thanks very much to everyone who has provided useful information. I
have summarised the position as I understand it at:

http://www.glencoyne.co.uk/motclass.htm

Richard

On or around Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:15:12 +0000 (UTC), "Badger"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>
>In other words, if it's a LWB truck cab then it's a class 7 test, which is
>what I thought I'd read.
>Badger.
>

and hardtop (van) ones as well, but only if it's above the specified weight,
presumably. I didn't think ordinary ones were. The payload in a normal 109
van is not all that much, hence the high-capacity one being called "one
ton", the normal ones aren't meant to carry a ton. doesn't mean they won't,
of course - I've had about a ton in a SWB before now

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in Mankind; and
therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee"
John Donne (1571? - 1631) Devotions, XVII

On or around 21 Dec 2005 02:44:39 -0800, "glencoyne"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>Specifically, if it's a 110 truck cab (GLW 3050kg) it is class 7. A
>series 3 109 truck cab (GLW 2710kg) should be class 4, provided the
>revenue weight on the V5C is correct, which it probably won't be.


I assume revenue weight and GLW which you describe are also the same as GVW
(Gross vehicle Weight) which is now MAM (Maximum Authorised Mass)?

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in Mankind; and
therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee"
John Donne (1571? - 1631) Devotions, XVII