The LVVTA Strikes Again!

You make a very fair point there mate, particularly with your last statement.
My concern is that what started in 92 as a stop gap measure from a collection of Hot Rod and car clubs after 23 years has evolved into a non transparent private agenda driven group that wield draconian powers and are responsible to no one.
The nation wide shortage of certifiers and the number of well known people from the industry who are opting out distancing themselves from the LVVTA speaks volumes.

Sadly whqqsh might be on to it when he describes it as an "old mates whiskey club".

I blame the baseball cap on backwards, remove the springs, drop the seat, fit a bean can exhaust and wide tyres, fit a super loud stereo brigade.

Usual sledgehammer to crack a walnut approach and it reminds me of my interview in the UK for the well known manufacturing company who brought me out, for my experience and qualifications, 32 years ago.

"We are over administrated and under managed." Whilst he was referring to the company, it is apparent that it also applied to the country - and it is getting worse.

The other side of the coin is that without LVVTA, ALL modifications could well have been banned by NZTA - so no rally cars, no road-race cars, no engine swaps, no swapping ancient 4 speed gearboxes for 5 speed boxes, no recreations of Lotus Cortina, Mini Cooper S, Capri Perana, TR7 V8, MGB V8 - just to name a few Brit cars and no Hot Rods.

The lesser of two evils - though that doesn't make it right. They could easily opt out of responsibility by getting the owner to sign a declaration and it would probably be down to insurance companies to demand an LVVTA approval, and WoF inspectors to decide whether or not a vehicle is deemed safe, which still happens, regardless of a LVVTA plate.

Surely the simple obvious solution would be that any "hot rod" type stuff you know the 12 ltr V12 Mini is where the LVVTZ is involved.

Significant coach building structural integrity stuff should be the problem of Certified Motor Engineers or whatever they may be called. In otherwords designed by competent qualified persons, peer revived etc and then passed for go. Like Civil Engineering and similar fields. Only problem there of course is look at the ChCh mess where they had engineers who really weren't competent to engineer a paper bag let alone a building.

Im not sure what the answer is but the LVVTA IMHO is not the answer. If my limited experience of the recompliance process on a 60 yr old unmodified car is anything to go by those that complain about the LVV process, and by implication some of the certifiers, have every right to moan very loudly.

I'm almost at the point of suggesting we scrap the LVVTA, make 3rd party insurance compulsory and leave it in the hands of the private sector to make the call.
I'm sure most of the boutique classic car insures (that may of us already use) would be more than happy with a simple design/construction report from a suitably qualified/experienced engineer.

I had re-compliance issues with my 60 year old car, as there was no welding/repair certificate for bodywork already done over it's 60 year history.

Got there after a year or so, but only because we (eventually) found a certifier who was very much on our side and who just needed the whole middle and outer sill structure bringing up to the required standards, whereas the first person contacted effectively rubbished the whole car because it wasn't built to modern BMW standards - and who even wanted the (new) paint taking off the rear wings to check the welded repairs underneath - and loads more besides!

Agree with sr2, there has to be a simpler way forward.