PVC registration charges.

[Brian Kirby]

lennyhb - 2017-12-07 12:28 PM................................As the DVLA state if it has a Co2 figure on the IAC you will get charged no way would I risk sending your V55 in until you get the IAC sorted.

 

Another point on UK supplied vans they have an on the road figure included in the price list the Hymer one has not changed I'm sure it would have the dealer had to pay another £450 to register a van.

You could try phoning some Hymer dealers saying you are interested in a new Hymer and ask if the new VED applies to there Motorhomes.

I think there are two things here. There is what DVLA "say" if phoned, and what they put in writing if e-mailed. It isn't the most user friendly system of communication but, once you've navigated the website to get to the correct part to lodge a query, you seem to get a better informed reply to which you can (if you follow the next paragraph :-)) refer in future.

 

One thing you do need to do, though, is to write into your query a request that they include the text of your query with their reply. The default is that you get no confirmation of your actual query: only an acknowledgement with a reference number. So, when you get the reply, you have the reference number, but are left with no evidence as to what the question was. Totally useless as a means of communication where a quasi legal question has been submitted as, without their written acknowledgement of the question (whatever record you may take of it for yourself), you can't prove what question their answer is responding to. Claimed reason is data protection, as the replies are sent over an insecure network. Hmmmmm!

 

Don't know where the extra £450 came from Lenny, but is isn't a figure I've seen. I have however done exactly as you suggest and phoned a several dealers and asked. The answer is that they are all taxed as PLG or PHGV. But, if you ask if they can explain why a £50,000 motorhome doesn't attract graduated VED, you get magic fairy dust, and none of them could give the correct answer.

[lennyhb]

Brian Kirby - 2017-12-07 1:09 PM

 

Don't know where the extra £450 came from Lenny, but is isn't a figure I've seen. I have .

Should have said £800.

 

As I have said a couple of times the DVLA won't do anything as they clearly state if the Co2 figure is on IAC they will charge you the graduated VED so it is essential Tom gets a new IAC.

[Brian Kirby]

lennyhb - 2017-12-07 2:39 PM..................As I have said a couple of times the DVLA won't do anything as they clearly state if the Co2 figure is on IAC they will charge you the graduated VED so it is essential Tom gets a new IAC.

Can you say where DVLA have said that Lenny? It's just that it completely contradicts what the August 2013 letter signed by Gary Baker says, plus the written assurance I have that their joint statement with the NCC remains their policy. There have been some past mistakes on the part of various DVLA personnel on the status of the IAC in respect of VED allocation, but the letter is categorical, to the point of emboldening the relevant parts for emphasis.

 

On the strength of that letter, I'd say that anyone whose motorhome (whether PVC, coachbuilt or A class), has a final stage CoC that has no values for CO2 emissions, has a good case for appealing if it had been allocated to graduated VED. DVLA won't be happy, and will doubtless resist, because they'll have to explain why they're handing back money, but if they're wrong, they're wrong. If the letter has since been withdrawn or changed the NCC are unaware of its withdrawal or change, and the whole industry if working on the basis that it reflects current policy. That would be quite a change to have made, and then ignored on so wide a scale. It would also be quite a letter for Gary Baker to have signed if he hadn't had authority to do so at the highest levels! :-)

[lennyhb]

I quoted DVLA words from their site earlier in the thread.

[Derek Uzzell]

The DVLA wording Lenny refrs to is here

 

https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables

 

and says:

 

"1. Cars and some motorhomes registered on or after 1 April 2017

 

You’ll pay a rate based on a vehicle’s CO2 emissions the first time it’s registered. This applies to:

 

- cars

 

- some motorhomes

 

Your motorhome’s included if both the following apply:

 

- it’s in the M1SP category - check with your dealer if you’re not sure

 

- its CO2 emissions are included on the ‘type approval certificate’ (this might be called a ‘certificate of conformity’ or ‘individual vehicle approval’)

 

If you have a different kind of motorhome, you pay tax in a different way.”

 

This is just summarised advice and it does not state categorically that a motorhome will always be registered in a graduated-emissions VED class if a related IVA carries a CO2 emissions value, nor does it identify which Certificate of Conformity ‘counts’ when (as is usually the case) a Type-Approved motorhome has more than one CofC, nor does it say that the IVA overrides the CofC (or vice versa for that matter).

 

The trouble begins when the VCA gets involved with producing paperwork relating to an imported LHD motorhome and - so it would seem - insists on entering a CO2 value on the IVA irrespective of where the CO2 value is obtained from. The VCA believes that this action is correct and there’s no point attempting to contradict that view.

 

But the real problem comes when a DVLA staff-member who is processing the LHD motorhome’s UK-registration considers that the vehicle’s CofCs and IVA are all ‘type approval certificates’ and that the IVA (being the most recent document and produced by a UK agency) is ‘the final CofC’ and, as such, can be used to comply with the DVLA’s policy that was defined in the 2013 DVLA/NCC letter Brian copied into his posting of 5 December 2017 5:02 PM above, and that Brian’s DVLA contact has said still applies.

 

Whatever the DVLA does regarding UK registration of LHD not-exceeding-3500kg-MTPLM motorhomes, it ought to be consistent. If this involved obtaining a CO2 value from any of the vehicle’s CofCs or the IVA (or even from the vehicle’s handbook) and then sticking all such motorhomes into a graduated-emissions VED class then so be it. But if some motorhomes are going in and some are not, then the DVLA should be addressing this anomaly. If the DVLA policy is still as stated clearly in the 2013 DVLA/NCC letter, then some motorhomes have been wrongly registered by DVLA staff and those mistakes should be corrected.

 

 

 

 

[Brian Kirby]

Derek Uzzell - 2017-12-08 9:08 AM...................................

The trouble begins when the VCA gets involved with producing paperwork relating to an imported LHD motorhome and - so it would seem - insists on entering a CO2 value on the IVA irrespective of where the CO2 value is obtained from. The VCA believes that this action is correct and there’s no point attempting to contradict that view.

 

But the real problem comes when a DVLA staff-member who is processing the LHD motorhome’s UK-registration considers that the vehicle’s CofCs and IVA are all ‘type approval certificates’ and that the IVA (being the most recent document and produced by a UK agency) is ‘the final CofC’ and, as such, can be used to comply with the DVLA’s policy that was defined in the 2013 DVLA/NCC letter Brian copied into his posting of 5 December 2017 5:02 PM above, and that Brian’s DVLA contact has said still applies.

...........................................................

I think the above is an excellent summary. A further complication is caused by DVLA's reference to IVA. There are multiple routes to gain IVA (which is a process, whereas the Individual Approval Certificate - IAC - is the legal evidence of having completed the process), and multiple reasons for seeking IVA, and the vehicles we are concerned with are but one sub-set of those routes/reasons, for which there are specific rules as to allocation to graduated VED.

 

The reference to "IVA" on DVLA's website is, in that context, "loose wording", and should be tightened. The end result is a bit of a lottery, where all parties can remain convinced that they have followed the correct interpretation, but remain in disagreement over the outcome. I assume it was to resolve such conflicts that the joint DVLA/NCC statement was issued. It is of regret that it seems to have got somewhat lost in the DVLA undergrowth (otherwise, I suspect, known as staff turnover).