GIVE WAY!

ACTIVE8 · Post by **ACTIVE8** » 30 Dec 2004, 17:42

Yes that's the meter maids above, as seen on the programme.
So they keep the tourists happy, in more ways than one. [:D] LOL
They ensure that the tourists return, and have good memories of their visit

Homer · Post by **Homer** » 31 Dec 2004, 01:07

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jedi

And, finally. Dear Homer, you are displaying ignorance with your incoherent and xenophobic comments. You make statements such as â€œyou will find that this is the case in the UKâ€

paranoid · Post by **paranoid** » 31 Dec 2004, 02:07

have heard of people being killed by horses, but sheep? I'll have to be really careful!
Mate of mine got seriously damaged by a pheasant once!!!!!
Well not so much the pheasant but the the dry stone wall he hit after getting said bird full in the face at 120+mph (hayabusa's more trouble than there worth)

Jedi · Post by **Jedi** » 02 Jan 2005, 01:15

Happy New Year to all. Homer, it is nice to hear from you. Thanks for your input and for clarifying the bold print regarding the cyclists.
As far as the Highway code rule 146 is concerned this would be identical to the rule in some European countries although, over there, it would also include the cyclists. We are not talking about people who cycle on the pavements but the poor souls stuck between the payment and a car that is trying to turn and run them over. What I find puzzling is why, assuming that this rule is the same, is the driving behaviour so different. As a driver, I have not seen any vehicles adhere to this rule (not once in six years). As a pedestrian, I almost got killed (many times) by cars turning at high speed with great desire to kill people, often not even indicating. The fact that a pedestrian in this situation actually does have right of way speaks volumes.
My questions are:
1. To Homer â€“ I assume, possibly wrongly, that you still may live in Yorkshire.
a) Are driving standards where you live better than driving standards in London?
b) Do people adhere to the rule 146?
c) Do you?
2. If nobody complies with this rule is it because:
a) People are not aware of it
b) The law is open to interpretation (by using words â€œyou shouldâ€

Homer · Post by **Homer** » 04 Jan 2005, 13:24

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jedi

Happy New Year to all. Homer, it is nice to hear from you. Thanks for your input and for clarifying the bold print regarding the cyclists.
As far as the Highway code rule 146 is concerned this would be identical to the rule in some European countries although, over there, it would also include the cyclists. We are not talking about people who cycle on the pavements but the poor souls stuck between the payment and a car that is trying to turn and run them over. What I find puzzling is why, assuming that this rule is the same, is the driving behaviour so different. As a driver, I have not seen any vehicles adhere to this rule (not once in six years). As a pedestrian, I almost got killed (many times) by cars turning at high speed with great desire to kill people, often not even indicating. The fact that a pedestrian in this situation actually does have right of way speaks volumes.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
In the case of a cyclist actually on the road they would have the same right as any other vehicle. One would not attempt to turn across the path of a bus.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">1. To Homer â€“ I assume, possibly wrongly, that you still may live in Yorkshire.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Yes.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">a) Are driving standards where you live better than driving standards in London? <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Yes, the further north you go the better the driving standards. The North of Scotland has the best driving standards of the whole of the UK.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">b) Do people adhere to the rule 146? <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
A majority do.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">c) Do you?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Yes.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">2. If nobody complies with this rule is it because:
a) People are not aware of it
b) The law is open to interpretation (by using words â€œyou shouldâ€

beezer · Post by **beezer** » 05 Jan 2005, 04:54

The whole 'car derived van' thing is shrouded in confusion. The C&E have promised to publish a list. A Government site says anything bigger than an Astravan is doubtful. 2 ton gross is reckoned to be the limit so if you cut windows in a Transit but still have enough loading space to allow a 1 ton payload it is subject to restrictions.
My V5 states that my Kangoo is a car derived van so that should be enough to curb an eager polis.

Homer · Post by **Homer** » 05 Jan 2005, 18:39

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by beezer

The whole 'car derived van' thing is shrouded in confusion. The C&E have promised to publish a list. A Government site says anything bigger than an Astravan is doubtful. 2 ton gross is reckoned to be the limit
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
A C5 2.2HDI estate is over 2 tonnes GVW, where does that stand?
A Citroen Dispatch is basically the same vehicle as a Synergie/Evasion the van is subject to the lower limits (and they are being enforced), the MPV is not, even if you remove all the seats and fill the rear with cardboard boxes.
From the Highway Code.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Cars and motorcycles (including car derived vans up to 2 tonnes maximum laden weight)<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Seems pretty clear to me.
The subject has been discussed at some length on both the Safespeed and Pepipoo forums. The distinction all boils down to what it says on the V5.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">My V5 states that my Kangoo is a car derived van so that should be enough to curb an eager polis.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
What is it's GVW? Some of the Berlingo vans are over the 2 tonne mark.

ACTIVE8 · Post by **ACTIVE8** » 05 Jan 2005, 20:05

If you check out the V.O.S.A. web site, and contact a local L.G.V. test station, and speak to a Technical Officer then they might be able to clarify, and explain the details over the phone.
There is even the chance, that they might allow you to bring your vehicle to the L.G.V. test station, to have a brief look, and clear up the confusion.
The V.O.S.A. web site can be found at :-
http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/infocus.htm

Homer · Post by **Homer** » 05 Jan 2005, 22:35

when did we start talking about Large Goods Vehicles?

np · Post by np » 06 Jan 2005, 00:31

GVW= gross vehicle weight.The maximum design weight of the vehicle,with passengers,luggage etc....

beezer · Post by **beezer** » 06 Jan 2005, 01:21

Not so straightforward:
[2. VAT – definition of a motorcar
This Business Brief clarifies Customs’ interpretation of the definition of a motorcar as contained in the Value Added Tax (Cars) Order 1992.
Background
The UK operates a ‘block’ on the deduction of input tax on the purchase of a vehicle that is defined in VAT legislation as a motorcar. As a result of this block, most businesses that purchase motorcars are unable to recover the VAT they have incurred. In broad terms, the purpose of the block is to prevent recovery of input tax on vehicles whose physical attributes make them suitable for private motoring. It is important, therefore, for business to know the status of their vehicles under the terms of the legislation, as this will affect the deductibility of VAT on their purchase.
The clarification is necessary in the light of recent developments in the car-derived van market, which have resulted in the manufacture of vehicles that have blurred the distinction between cars and vans. This means that these vehicles are difficult to categorise in relation to the definition of motorcars in VAT legislation.
In response, Customs have issued new guidance, produced in consultation with manufacturers, which clarifies our treatment of car-derived vans and highlights the correct interpretation of the legal definition when considering combination vans. This guidance is available on request from the Customs’ National Advice Service on 0845 010 9000.
Vehicles affected and their VAT treatment
The vehicles affected are certain car-derived vans and the combination van.
Car-derived vans
Many car-derived vans pose no problem with regard to our current definition of a motor car, in that they are clearly vans or non-motor cars for VAT purposes e.g. they have no rear seats, metal side panels to the rear of the front seats, a load area which is highly unsuitable for carrying passengers etc.
However a number of models, where the vehicle starts off life as a car and is subsequently altered, cannot be so clearly defined. It is these vehicles which are the focus of this brief.
On the exterior, these vehicles look like a motorcar but their interior has been altered to give the appearance and functionality of a van. The rear seats and seat belts along with their mountings have been completely removed and the rear area of the shell is fitted with a new floor panel to create a load area. In addition, the side ‘windows’ to the rear of the driver’s seat are fitted with immovable opaque panels.
Customs will not view such a ‘car-derived’ vehicle as a motorcar for VAT purposes, if:
the technical criteria specified in Customs guidance are met by the manufacturer. The criteria relate to how any alterations to the vehicle have been effected;
the adaptations give the vehicle the functionality of a commercial vehicle. As such, the removal of a bench seat or similar from what is essentially a two-seater car would not automatically satisfy Customs’ requirements; and
the space that remains behind the front row of seats is highly unsuitable for carrying passengers.
It may be difficult for businesses to satisfy themselves fully that all of the technical criteria have been met. At present, Customs, in partnership with the manufacturers, are developing a list of car-derived vans on which VAT can be deducted, subject to the normal rules. This list will be available shortly on the Customs’ website. In the meantime, if businesses are in any doubt, they should obtain confirmation in writing from the vendor that the vehicle meets the technical criteria.
Customs consulted the manufacturers on the technical criterion in September 2003. As such, if businesses have bought such a car-derived van prior to 1 October 2003, it is unlikely that it will satisfy all of the technical criteria set out in Customs’ guidance. However, where the vehicle has the appearance of a car-derived van as defined above, in such circumstances, Customs will allow that vehicle to be treated as a non-motor car for VAT purposes, and the VAT incurred can be recovered, subject to the normal rules.
Combination vans
While these vehicles have the appearance of vans, they are designed to be fitted with or include additional seats behind the front row of seats to enable the carriage of passengers.
Such vehicles are motorcars for VAT purposes except in the case of:
larger vehicles which have a payload of more than one tonne (these vehicles are automatically excluded from becoming motor cars by the one tonne payload test contained in legislation); and
those vehicles where the dedicated load area (i.e. that load area which is completely unaffected by the additional seating) is of a sufficient size compared to the passenger area to make the carriage of goods the predominant use of the vehicle.
If businesses have previously bought a combination van, which does not fall within the exceptions above, it is a motorcar under VAT legislation. If businesses have recovered the VAT incurred on the purchase, they must make an adjustment to correct this overclaim.]

ACTIVE8 · Post by **ACTIVE8** » 06 Jan 2005, 20:07

The V.O.S.A. are the Vehicle Operating and Services Agency.
They are an executive agency of the D.O.T. Department Of Transport.
So, the fact is they could be of assistance, on this issue of car derived vans.
Yes they do test L.G.V.'s Large Goods Vehicles, but they also test any other class of vehicle including, motorcycles, cars, and the smaller commercial vehicles. They also carry out S.V.A. tests.
Single Vehicle Approval tests.
As they test a wide range of vehicles, and are the agency that licence appropriate garages in the U.K. to carry out the V.O.S.A. test. Then they will have extensive experience of vehicle related subjects/problems. They also have weighbridges at the test stations, the police attend their sites for various reasons, and I have also been there when Customs and Excise have been in attendance.
This thread actually started as a topic about Give Way, and now has opened up in different ways, which is good as I like a healthy debate. The reason why I posted information about the V.O.S.A. web site is because all information is useful, when you are trying to find out about something.
Clearly there has been information provided by other posters from Customs and Excise.
If a vehicle needs downrating for example it has to be presented at a government V.O.S.A. L.G.V. testing station after it is downrated.
Downrating is done by an operator to enable them to pay a lower tax on their commercial vehicle if they are carrying light goods, and just need the volume of a larger bodied vehicle. So the quality of the work would be inspected at the test station, and if it is now O.K. to be reclassified at a different G.V.W. Gross Vehicle Weight.
The information therefore is passed on to the other relevant government agencies by them, e.g. Customs and Excise, D.V.L.A. Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency e.t.c. The vehicle operator will now pay a different rate of excise duty for their vehicle, and a different V.O.S.A. and manufacturers chassis plate stating the revised detail will be on display in the cab.
The V.O.S.A. staff are civil servants like the Customs and Excise, and should be able to help. They would be able to determine the weight carrying capacity of a vehicle, and where an owner has changed their vehicle around to suit their needs, possibly taking it into a grey area.
 We did not digress to talk about L.G.V.'s at all !
This was merely another source for more information, to investigate the grey area of car derived vans. 
This is a friendly useful forum, so I am like others trying to be (H)elpful to (O)ther (M)embers with useful (E)xtra (R)esearch [:D] M8 [;)]
So, please understand it does not mean I want to be like you, of course not, it's just a pun. [:D]
Note, to a certain member, read between the lines , look at the details properly, and think about what people are posting. Check out the web sites, the devil is in the detail. Not your cynicism, or sarcasm, and we can all be direct, as I will if you reply to this, as I expect you will. [;)]