ULEZ compliant?

[susanandmartin]

Planning a trip to London in a modern tin box, we checked to see if the car is ULEZ compliant (no real surprise that it is)…. Just being curious I entered the Quantum registration number to find it was also compliant! This is a huge surprise, as it is a 1987 donor with a CVH engine and E-prefix registration number (albeit V5 says ‘first registered 2009’ when it was SVA’d). It would be interesting to find if other Quantums get the same result 😊

 

Check your vehicle (tfl.gov.uk)

Martin Scott

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

[bobbycraigis]

Mine is an F plate and doesn't meet the criteria for Glasgow

Bob Craig

Sent from my Galaxy

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Quantum Owners Group" group.
To post to this group, send email to quantu...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to quantumowner...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/quantumowners?hl=en
 
IMPORTANT NOTE: All information presented herewith is provided on an "As Is" basis, without warranty or the implication thereof. Neither the Quantum Owners Club nor the individuals associated with the Quantum Owners Club or in the preparation of the above information shall have any liability to any person or entity with respect to liability, loss, or damage caused or alleged to be caused directly or indirectly by the instructions contained within this or related message(s).
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Quantum Owners Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to quantumowner...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/quantumowners/64522e11.2e0a0220.c8781.4938SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING%40gmr-mx.google.com.

[Darren Siepka]

No luck with my saloon , it's on a B plate (reg85 ?) I wonder if it's due to it being pre sva/iva?

My 2+2 won't check as it says it's sorned, but that would be free as it is over 40 and tax exempt.

Darren 

--

[Paul S Quantum]

Just checked mine and the saloon registered Dec 1987, according to DVLA, built on a 1987 E plate donor, currently on a dateless vanity plate, is not compliant for any of the ULEZ/LEZ.

My other classic, registered June 1976, which is registered as historic & MOT exempt is also showing as none exempt from the TFL ULEZ charge.

Not likely to ever go anywhere near London but a concern as the amount of zones spread.

 

Paul

 

 

Sent from Mail for Windows

 

From: susanandmartin
Sent: 03 May 2023 10:49
To: quantu...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [Quantum Owners] ULEZ compliant?

 

Planning a trip to London in a modern tin box, we checked to see if the car is ULEZ compliant (no real surprise that it is)…. Just being curious I entered the Quantum registration number to find it was also compliant! This is a huge surprise, as it is a 1987 donor with a CVH engine and E-prefix registration number (albeit V5 says ‘first registered 2009’ when it was SVA’d). It would be interesting to find if other Quantums get the same result 😊

--

[susanandmartin]

I believe it’s not automatic if over 40, and only free if you ‘register’ it as such. My Rickman (free tax registered) doesn’t comply, but I guess I could be it if I wanted to.

Martin

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/quantumowners/CABxHo%2ByNNGQFtf8t5ZbHfzBFxzDe%2BCJLo33Yb5fX4gJMVm_CFA%40mail.gmail.com.

 

[mga...@yahoo.com]

My 2+2 was registered as brand new on a P plate, so I have to wait a very long time to get the historic vehicle exemption. And, boo, it says I have to pay the ULEZ charge too.

 

Matthew

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/quantumowners/64523e4c.050a0220.f28f8.2ccaSMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING%40gmr-mx.google.com.

[Ken Needham]

I am currently going through a DVLA issue that sort of relates to the point you are raising. I recently took my 1969 Lotus for an MOT  but the garage that has been MoTing the car for over 30 years now tells me that it failed on emissions. Due to a "Chassis" change in '78 the DVLA insisted it be re registered so it now has a T plate. The V5 does state "first registered as 1978 but also contains a note saying it was "first used in 1969"

The document that the MoT Tester is presented with simply states "First Registered date"
as 1978 so he tested it as a "78 car.

I see that the MoT Manual tabulates the emissions requirements as to when the vehicle was "first used" but pointing this out to the tester did not change his mind.

I have complained to the DVLA and await full outcome.

The vehicle VIN plate seems to be the item to settle any argument but the administration path is arduous and requires a certificate from the manufacturer showing when the vehicle was made based on the VIN.

Another gotchya is the need for an Mot  for vehicles over 40 years old. Kit cars threw a spanner in this aspect resulting in the DVLA coming out with a points scheme. To be listed as an Historic vehicle the vehicle must be made up of mainly original components. Any variation alters the points status and may subsequently require the vehicle to be MoTed. This is a very messy area and can result in very complex arguments 

Quantum 2+2 saloon  Q plate!

[susanandmartin]

My understanding is that as long as the vehicle hasn’t been altered in the last 30 years, that it qualifies for MOT exemption. There is also (IIRC) a special case for classics having a new monocoque  or chassis as a manufacturer’s part replacement for the original. Lots of different sections in the ‘rules’ which, as always, seem to be applied in different ways by DVLA.

Martin Scott

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

--

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Quantum Owners Group" group.
To post to this group, send email to quantu...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to quantumowner...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/quantumowners?hl=en
 
IMPORTANT NOTE: All information presented herewith is provided on an "As Is" basis, without warranty or the implication thereof. Neither the Quantum Owners Club nor the individuals associated with the Quantum Owners Club or in the preparation of the above information shall have any liability to any person or entity with respect to liability, loss, or damage caused or alleged to be caused directly or indirectly by the instructions contained within this or related message(s).
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Quantum Owners Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to quantumowner...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/quantumowners/cf3fd175-6344-4b22-b4bd-43e250ab05e5n%40googlegroups.com.

 

[mga...@yahoo.com]

My Q2+2 was registered as brand-new in 1997, by Old Quantum in Stourbridge, and used as the factory demonstrator vehicle until I bought it from them.

So I was hopeful that it might squeak through as ULEZ compliant because it’s considered by the DVLA to be so much younger than most of its brethren. But, sadly, that site says I’d have to pay the daily fee. So I lose every which way: I have to wait longer for the tax/mot exemption, and don’t get the younger-car ULEZ benefits either. Bah.

 

Best

 

Matthew

 

From: quantu...@googlegroups.com <quantu...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of Ken Needham
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2023 4:10 PM
To: Quantum Owners Group <quantu...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [Quantum Owners] Re: ULEZ compliant?

 

I am currently going through a DVLA issue that sort of relates to the point you are raising. I recently took my 1969 Lotus for an MOT  but the garage that has been MoTing the car for over 30 years now tells me that it failed on emissions. Due to a "Chassis" change in '78 the DVLA insisted it be re registered so it now has a T plate. The V5 does state "first registered as 1978 but also contains a note saying it was "first used in 1969"

--