LHD buyers guide

[neilmcl]

Does anyone know if there is a definitive guide to buying and owning a LHD MH in the UK, specifically dealing with the rules and regulations, MOT requirements etc.

 

Is there any advice you guys can give.

[Brian Kirby]

If you are proposing a personal import, then probably the quickest and simplest answer is to contact DVLA and ask for booklet P15, "How to Import a Vehicle into Great Britain", together with the importer's pack, which will contain all necessary forms and explanations, together with guidance on the modifications necessary for registration.  Briefly, the speedometer must read in MPH (but can retain a KPH scale), the headlamps must be suitable for use in left hand traffic without use of masks or benders, and the rear fog light/s must be on UK offside, or central, or one each side.

However, do be aware that there is great difficulty in obtaining insurance for a new vehicle before it is registered in UK.  This will definitely apply to that part of the journey outside the UK, and may apply to the leg from the UK port of entry to your home.  It is theoretically possible to obtain the insurance, but very few firms seem interested at present, and of those who will, it is not entirely clear that the insurances are being issued in the full knowledge of the facts.

A alternative is to turn to an import agent, such as Bundesvan, who will source your vehicle, bring it to UK on trade plates, register it, and deliver it to your house.

You will need to tell your insurer the vehicle is LHD, which may, or may not, affect the premium depending on the insurer.

If you are proposing to buy a LHD vehicle already registered in UK, then it would be wise to check whether the above modifications have been made.  If they have, well and good.  If they have not, someone, but not you, has been naughty!  What you do about it is then up to you, but so far as the MoT test is concerned, I think the only item that may result in a fail would be a rear fog light on the UK nearside, which should be fairly easy to fix.  Headlamps may be masked for the MoT, so although these are not acceptable for registration, if the beams pass muster on test, the presence of masks/benders will not result in a fail.  The speedometer is not an MoT item, though you may wish to be able to see your speed in MPH, rather than having to approximate from KPH.  A Gatso won't make any allowances!

[neilmcl]

It's a used UK based 2004 Elnagh Clipper 90 that my Dad's thinking of buying which was imported and registered in the UK and previously MOT'd. We just wanted to make sure that the previous owner has made all the necessary modifications.

[MIN663]

Hi have the speedo, headlamp rules always applied or did they come in recently. I have a 1989 LHD imported hymer and previous owners havent changed any of the above. cheers min

[Guest peter]

Mine's lhd and is great to drive as you can see the nearside of the road when in u/k. You don't notice the difference you just get in and drive. Insurance is no different to rhd.

[rupert123]

neilmcl - 2009-11-04 8:08 PM

 

It's a used UK based 2004 Elnagh Clipper 90 that my Dad's thinking of buying which was imported and registered in the UK and previously MOT'd. We just wanted to make sure that the previous owner has made all the necessary modifications.

 

It could not have been registered and passed mot if it did not meet requirements. If it was imported from Europe the only things to do are change headlights and make sure the rear fog light, if their is only one, is on the correct side. You do not have to have a speedo that reads in mph.

[rupert123]

MIN663 - 2009-11-04 8:44 PM

 

Hi have the speedo, headlamp rules always applied or did they come in recently. I have a 1989 LHD imported hymer and previous owners havent changed any of the above. cheers min

 

It is not required to have speedo in mph, if headlights are ok at mot their will be no problem.

[Brian Kirby]

rupert123 - 2009-11-04 10:11 PM It could not have been registered and passed mot if it did not meet requirements. If it was imported from Europe the only things to do are change headlights and make sure the rear fog light, if their is only one, is on the correct side. You do not have to have a speedo that reads in mph.

I'm afraid this is not quite accurate.  It can, indeed, have been registered without the lighting having been modified for left hand traffic and the speedometer reading in MPH.  I know this, because when we imported our first van no check was carried out by DVLA when it was registered (so had it not been modified, they would not have known), and because there are numerous other UK registered LHD vans that have not been modified.

However, provided they meet the requirements for the MoT test, which is primarily a safety and pollution test, they can all pass, despite not meeting the legal requirements for registration.  Batty, maybe, but that is how it is.

[Brian Kirby]

rupert123 - 2009-11-04 10:13 PM

MIN663 - 2009-11-04 8:44 PM Hi have the speedo, headlamp rules always applied or did they come in recently. I have a 1989 LHD imported hymer and previous owners havent changed any of the above. cheers min

It is not required to have speedo in mph, if headlights are ok at mot their will be no problem.

However, you may have a problem with the rear fog light, if there is only one on the UK nearside (this seems to depend on how thorough the tester is).  The headlamps will need masking, or beam LHD benders, to pass MoT.

[rupert123]

Brian Kirby - 2009-11-04 11:11 PM

rupert123 - 2009-11-04 10:11 PM It could not have been registered and passed mot if it did not meet requirements. If it was imported from Europe the only things to do are change headlights and make sure the rear fog light, if their is only one, is on the correct side. You do not have to have a speedo that reads in mph.

I'm afraid this is not quite accurate.  It can, indeed, have been registered without the lighting having been modified for left hand traffic and the speedometer reading in MPH.  I know this, because when we imported our first van no check was carried out by DVLA when it was registered (so had it not been modified, they would not have known), and because there are numerous other UK registered LHD vans that have not been modified.

However, provided they meet the requirements for the MoT test, which is primarily a safety and pollution test, they can all pass, despite not meeting the legal requirements for registration.  Batty, maybe, but that is how it is.

Brian I thought this is what I said. Do not understand you, what legal requirements can you avoid?

[Brian Kirby]

Brian I thought this is what I said. Do not understand you, what legal requirements can you avoid?

Sorry if I was not clear.  However, you did say "It could not have been registered and passed mot if it did not meet requirements."

What I am seeking to point out, is that UK registered LHD vans can have been UK registered (including by dealerships), and passed MOT tests, while not meeting the required compliance with UK Construction and Use Regs (the legal requirement for UK registration).  Thus, whereas they may be safe enough to pass the MoT test, they may not necessarily fully comply with UK legal requirements for registration.

My point being, that it is not safe to rely on the presence of a UK registration number, and where required a UK test certificate, as evidence that a LHD vehicle is fully legally compliant.

[rupert123]

Brian Kirby - 2009-11-06 1:47 PM

Brian I thought this is what I said. Do not understand you, what legal requirements can you avoid?

Sorry if I was not clear.  However, you did say "It could not have been registered and passed mot if it did not meet requirements."

What I am seeking to point out, is that UK registered LHD vans can have been UK registered (including by dealerships), and passed MOT tests, while not meeting the required compliance with UK Construction and Use Regs (the legal requirement for UK registration).  Thus, whereas they may be safe enough to pass the MoT test, they may not necessarily fully comply with UK legal requirements for registration.

My point being, that it is not safe to rely on the presence of a UK registration number, and where required a UK test certificate, as evidence that a LHD vehicle is fully legally compliant.

OK Brian I understand, however if a vehicle has passed an mot, if required, and been issued a number by the DVLA, whose job it is to check, it becomes fully legal. Now the UK construction bit with regard to motorhomes is a very grey area. My old partner and i used to bring cars in from Japan, as you may know most vehicles from Japan if older than ten years just require an mot. If they are younger than ten years they need to go via a full SVA test which will include you producing a vehicle compliance certificate, which you can hire. Motorhomes are exempt from all this and you just need an mot, no idea why this is the case but it is. The same grey area exists in Europe, take the 'A' class van for example, these things are not crash tested, how do they get away with that? Any normal van based on a Fiat, Ford, Renault etc will be fully euro compliant on the base part, what about the rest. Now i have had no dealings with all this for about two years so things may have changed but if so am not aware of it.

[Brian Kirby]

rupert123 - 2009-11-06 5:30 PM ................however if a vehicle has passed an mot, if required, and been issued a number by the DVLA, whose job it is to check, it becomes fully legal. .............

Re the MoT, I agree.  However, re compliance with C&U, I'm not so sure that failure on the part of DVLA to spot the deficiencies confers compliance. 

Whether this might at some time matter for the owner, I know not.  However, I believe such a vehicle would have been illegally registered.  A fine point, agreed, but, as to accuracy.............?

[George Collings]

I would not wory about the lack of crash testing for A class vans.Although I seem to remember something about Hymers being tested.

 

Most A class vans are built on the same platform as other coachbuilts. The main component in the crush zone is usually the chassis leg and inner wing not the external wings and flimsy front panel.

The standard cab doors probably offer significantly better side impact protection than in an A class body.

 

I wonder how many motorcaravans have been invilved in heavy enough impacts to deploy airbags. Its all a matter of risk assesment. Compare travelling in a van with on a bike especially if it has a motor.

 

 

 

 

[rupert123]

George Collings - 2009-11-06 11:12 PM

 

I would not wory about the lack of crash testing for A class vans.Although I seem to remember something about Hymers being tested.

 

Most A class vans are built on the same platform as other coachbuilts. The main component in the crush zone is usually the chassis leg and inner wing not the external wings and flimsy front panel.

The standard cab doors probably offer significantly better side impact protection than in an A class body.

 

I wonder how many motorcaravans have been invilved in heavy enough impacts to deploy airbags. Its all a matter of risk assesment. Compare travelling in a van with on a bike especially if it has a motor.

 

 

 

 

Not worried about it George because I would never risk buying one. I would point out crash testing these days does not just involve frontal impact and no 'A' class to my knowledge has been properly tested, doubt the makers of them could afford to. Just wondered how they get away with it and pointing out the grey area's where M/H's are concerned. It would however be interesting to know just how much of the impact zones they retain including steering column, impact zones around A pillars etc.

[Brian Kirby]

rupert123 - 2009-11-06 11:29 PM

George Collings - 2009-11-06 11:12 PM I would not worry about the lack of crash testing for A class vans.Although I seem to remember something about Hymers being tested. Most A class vans are built on the same platform as other coachbuilts. The main component in the crush zone is usually the chassis leg and inner wing not the external wings and flimsy front panel. The standard cab doors probably offer significantly better side impact protection than in an A class body. I wonder how many motorcaravans have been involved in heavy enough impacts to deploy airbags. Its all a matter of risk assessment. Compare travelling in a van with on a bike especially if it has a motor.

Not worried about it George because I would never risk buying one. I would point out crash testing these days does not just involve frontal impact and no 'A' class to my knowledge has been properly tested, doubt the makers of them could afford to. Just wondered how they get away with it and pointing out the grey area's where M/H's are concerned. It would however be interesting to know just how much of the impact zones they retain including steering column, impact zones around A pillars etc.

Like George, I have heard of Hymers being crash tested.  Which models, when, and how, was not stated.

In a sense, there is no question of "getting away with it", because the need for full crash testing is governed by volume of production, and no motorhomes are produced in sufficient volume to qualify.

Whether the endless annual changes are made to ensure no one model is produced in sufficient volume to trigger the test need I don't know.  :-)

The bare chassis retains, as George has said, most of the forward chassis extension, the inner wings, the whole of the scuttle below the windscreen, and the entire dashboard and instrument panel.  Frontals should be fairly resisted, but, again like George, I do wonder about sides.  The main saving grace here should be the much greater distance between the cab side bodywork and driver and passenger - provided any built in low level lockers are suitably crushable.

[rupert123]

Good point about production volumns Brian, did not think of that. However the 'A' class type vans still do not convince me safety wise. They may retain the frontal impact area and dash but what about other sections. You have mentioned door area and one of the criteria is that doors should still open, to achieve this you would need all the strenghting around the a & b pillars plus the roof. Now most 'A' class I have seen only have one door and that is a pretty flimsy affair, which would fly to pieces in any impact offering no protection to the occupants.

[Brian Kirby]

In response to that, Henry, in respect of the single door, I think this is wholly unacceptable on general convenience and safety grounds - leave alone post accident exit!  At the prices charged, a driver's door plus a habitation door should be standard.

In terms of general bodyshell strength, with only limited "snooping around" experience, they seem to me a bit of a mixed bag.  I think the Hymer (so presumably the Hymer clones) shell must be fairly strong, mainly based on one we saw three years ago, that had vaulted a concrete road side barrier and landed on its side in an orchard.  The shaky "mature" French lady passenger appeared uninjured but, due to his/her absence, I rather suspect the driver was not.  However, since the road was slow, narrow, and very twisting, and the van had ploughed off on the left of a right hand bend (Italy) for no apparent reason, I suspect stroke or heart attack may have had more to do with his absence than the crash itself.  Bit sobering, that!

Nevertheless, I was surprised to see that the van looked virtually unscathed, although that cannot truly have been the case.  It was visibly the right general shape and apparently free from major distortion.  Even the front end, which had won a fight with a medium sized apple tree on the way in, appeared undistorted, notwithstanding that the windscreen must have been stoved in.