1983 Mercedes 280 SE Unregistered.

[MBManInKen]

The 1964 'B' registration on my 1957 car , previously registered abroad , is an example of exactly that - makes the car 'appear' seven years newer than it actually is

Yes, but that is for a vehicle manufactured before 1 January 1973, for which there seems to be a different regime. This car in question is post that date and I can't find any provisions to allow vehicles post 1/1/73 to feature a plate that makes it look newer.

 

[Will]

Yes, but that is for a vehicle manufactured before 1 January 1973, for which there seems to be a different regime. This car in question is post that date and I can't find any provisions to allow vehicles post 1/1/73 to feature a plate that makes it look newer.

I'm pretty certain you can register an old vehicle that hasn't been used or registered before with a current plate - they're not plates to determine how old a car is, they're registration marks, and as such indicate the approximate date of when the vehicle was registered.

I don't believe that there's any set rule of how long this must be (date of build to date of registration). Otherwise, surely new cars would have a 'sell buy' date?

There's plenty of old cars which haven't been registered before that are given current plates - I've seen quite a few (eg, the W201 190E EVO-II that I mentioned would've been manufactured around 1990, and that carried a '96/97 'P' plate)

Maybe there's some form of declaration that states that the vehicle must be new and not previously registered/used overseas?

Will

 

[MBManInKen]

I'm pretty certain you can register an old vehicle that hasn't been used or registered before with a current plate - they're not plates to determine how old a car is, they're registration marks, and as such indicate the approximate date of when the vehicle was registered.

That's a reasonable comment - the "age" of the registration is that of first registration, not manufacture. But the registration system does to some extend give away information about a vehicle's age in Britain. And the DVLA says:

registration marks cannot be transferred onto any vehicle if it may appear to make the vehicle look younger.

You're quite right that in the end it's up to the secretary of state (i.e. the DfT) to set the specific rules, so there must be some kind of principle they use for old vehicles not previously registered. Importing a vehicle is one thing, but would there be a special regime for vehicles that have effectively been in Britain since a given date and only much later are being registered? It seems logical they get a registration mark on the basis of the date of entry, or a Q plate if no evidence either way exists?

 

[jaymanek]

Funny thing...
we had a camper van... we had custom built this from a Talbot Solara Front End in 1995... The donor was on an old 1980 W reg... This stayed with the camper when we converted it...

We sold the van around 2000.. the new owner managed to get the DVLA to change it to a 95 M reg as thats when it was built!
No idea how he proved that but he got it... and then he put his private plate on..

 

[sidmon]

my car wa sowned by a famous ex aston villa player and he only used it to got home games and so it did about 2,000 in 5 years

thats why its a 1994 with 103k on it

Being a Villa fan I'm intrigued who this player is, I remember Andy Townsend used to have one I used to notice it as I live not far from the Training Ground!

 

[ukcodger]

it'll get an age related plate if its year of manufacture can be proved, which is easy to do with the chassis number.

the log book will look interesting though as it list the year its first registered not manufactured.

No sorry, not trying to score points, our 2nd car is a 1985 Mazda RX7 that was warehoused new and unregistered for nearly 8 years. DVLA gave it a 'K' registration for 1992/93 when it was 1st registered, not a 'C' plate which would have been it's correct age plate. The 1st MOT was not until a further 3 years had passed by.

One thing I'm wary of with this Merc is the Catalytic Converter legislation. One of the reasons the selling dealer of our Mazda registered the car was the Cat laws which were coming in in 1993 and it spooked him. I'd want to know how this would be dealt with on this Merc.. Things on our car like no rear seat belts, no emissions test at the MOT are all accepted by DVLA for a car registered out of time so maybe the cat law would be applied the same.
Strangely the price is the same as we paid for the RX7 in 1993. Looks good though.