April 2026

by Robin Astle.

From HISTORIC, the FBHVC magazine Issue 9

DVLA by Ian Edmunds

Policy Review

It is satisfying to be able to report that our now considerably improved relations with DVLA continue to develop and our chairman and I attended a very constructive HVUG meeting in Swansea in December last year.

Topics in this meeting included such feedback as was available from the policy changes announced last August with all concerned agreeing that, although it is early days as yet, the implementation appeared to be going well. Whilst acknowledging that it was a very small sample, I made a couple of observations based on information received from vehicle owners which DVLA noted. For their part DVLA outlined the support they have put in place for their staff as these very significant changes are introduced. DVLA also told us about a short online survey they had set up to assess the reaction of the public and the efforts they had made to publicise the survey.

This was all good, valuable and interesting stuff but it was not the eagerly awaited core purpose of that particular meeting! In calling the meeting, DVLA had stated that they would by then be in a position to share information on the next tranche of policy changes. As with the first set of revisions DVLA stressed that these were still considered to be work in progress and asked that we did not share them in detail. We are very happy to respect that confidentiality but I can tell you that the currently contentious issues of newly built replacement bodies on vehicles with a separate chassis and date of manufacture for vehicles originally supplied in CKD form, are likely to be addressed to our satisfaction. As before there will be a coordinated announcement of these policy revisions later in the year.

Vehicle Inspections

Following a question asked at the Federation AGM last October, together with various points from my correspondence, I had requested a short discussion about DVLA vehicle inspections. In summary, the points made to me over a period of time were these:

• Notification that their vehicle requires inspection can cause apprehension to the owner.
• DVLA inspections can be a source of resentment from clubs who have already inspected the vehicle.
• Somewhat adding insult to injury, the sub-contracted inspectors in general seem to have little knowledge or experience of historic vehicles and do not always seem entirely clear what they are looking at.

DVLA staff appeared surprised and concerned by these comments and have undertaken to investigate further. At the same time, they made a very important point, one which I have heard before but had somewhat slipped my mind. Beyond the normal routine issue of vehicle registration and driving licences, a significant concern for the Agency is combating fraud and indeed other wider forms of crime. Inspection of vehicles that have for some reason raised their suspicions is a key tool in this process and for that reason it is standard procedure to restrict the amount of information provided to a vehicle owner prior to an inspection. DVLA are not suggesting that historic vehicles figure significantly in criminal activities but the inspection procedure/protocol is the same for all.

Heritage by Phil Sampson

Heritage Update

Firstly, as the new boy in town, I would very much like to thank the FBHVC in general and David Whale and my fellow directors in particular for the warm welcome I have been given on joining the Federation. It's been many years since I last applied for a job (1985 from memory!) but in the last couple of months I've been appointed to two posts; as a member of FIVA's Utilitarian Commission and as Heritage Director for the Federation. I now hope my background, which is principally as an automotive communications consultant within the commercial vehicle industry, will serve me well in my new roles.

There's nothing like jumping in at the deep end and my first task with the Federation has been to make the case for the British Historic Transport Enthusiast's Movement being recognised as an example of our nation's Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH). Success here will see the Movement included within the UK's Register of Living Heritage, an important step as it is envisaged that inclusion on the Register will lead to the activities enjoyed by our enthusiasts benefiting from a degree of protection and safeguarding over the long term. And that, of course, dovetails perfectly with the Federation's own goal of keeping the vehicles of yesterday on the roads of tomorrow.

The concept of ICH can trace its roots back to 2003 when UNESCO formally adopted and announced its Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage. Since then, around 100 countries have ratified the Convention and the drive to identify suitable activities for inclusion on the UK's Living Heritage Register is being spearheaded by the Heritage Alliance on behalf of UNESCO.

Whereas tangible heritage is relatively easy to define – it's things like monuments, buildings and geological formations which can be seen and touched and are valued by society – ICH is a little more challenging. In summary it refers to the traditions, knowledge, skills and practices which are passed down through generations and are recognised as part of a community's cultural identity.

So, a good example, one we used at the recent Club Expo event, is Stonehenge. Here, the collection of stones and rocks which make up the monument form the tangible part of the equation, while the rites and rituals associated with it as practised by Druids, Pagans and other spiritual groups is the intangible part. Like body and soul, these two elements are inter-dependent and work together to form the whole – without one, the other would not exist.

Bringing that back to our world, the Federation's recent National Historic Vehicle Survey determined that 4.3 million people attend events supported by FBHVC member clubs every year. Without that extraordinary level of engagement, many club events would simply wither on the vine – and that's why we are so keen to see the interests of our enthusiasts protected. Inclusion on the Register does not automatically guarantee anything, but the Heritage Alliance tells us the ambition is that the inventory will provide government with a focus to start the conversation about further safeguarding actions.

From the Federation's point-of-view, our submission is now an active work-in-progress. We have successfully cleared the first hurdle – our Expression of Interest has been accepted as legitimate and we have been given the green light to go ahead with a full submission. That needs to be completed by the end of March, after which there will be a review by a panel of living heritage stakeholders. We expect to have a decision by the autumn, and I look forward to reporting in due course on what we all very much hope will be a successful outcome.

Legislation by Lindsay Irvine

Road Safety Strategy

After much fanfare, the Government has launched its Road Safety Strategy. Our Secretary promptly and effectively set out the details of the plan on the Federation website https://www.fbhvc.co.uk/news/article/road-safety-strategy-kicks-starts-consultations-on-proposed-law-changes and to save space, I will only summarise the bare points below with some brief comments where appropriate, and provide the links to the individual consultations should you wish to respond personally by 31 March 2026.

As I have noted not so long ago (Issue 6, June 2025), the UK has had a fairly impressive record in relation to road safety for many years, outperforming most European nations. Indeed, as one caustic commentator has noted, although there were 1,579 fatalities on Britain’s roads in 2024, 25 years ago there were 3,400 fatalities with half the number of vehicles on the road. So, they comment, “road deaths have halved while the number of cars has hugely increased.”

That said, we have dropped behind a couple of European nations recently in the fatality stakes. In the international airline world, aircraft and flights have increased exponentially in number over recent decades but passenger flying has just got safer and safer, largely technology-led but with changes in crew training and behaviours contributing. To a degree the same is intended in terms of the UK Road Safety Strategy.

Its stated aim is to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on UK roads. With an average of 4 lives lost daily in 2024, it seeks to reduce this by 2035. To quote:

“It commits to review policy areas such as the safety of young and novice drivers, older drivers and motorcyclists, to shape smarter, evidence-led interventions.”

To progress the strategy, it proposes action in 5 principle areas on which it has launched separate consultations. These are:

1. Action on motoring offences – in summary, tightening and increasing penalties for offences such as drink and drug driving, not using a seatbelt, failure to stop and report, driving unlicensed, no MOT or insurance, and use of illegal number plates, including ‘ghost’ number plates. The headline issue in relation to the first proposal on this list is the reduction in the drink driving limit. https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/proposed-changes-to-penalties-for-motoring-offences.
2. Introducing a minimum learning period for learner drivers (category B driving licence) - https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/introducing-a-minimum-learning-period-for-learner-drivers
3. Introducing mandatory eyesight testing for older drivers – given previous (slightly inaccurate) media rhetoric on the UK lagging behind other countries on medical fitness to drive, I predicted that this option was the most likely one that the government would pursue. https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/introducing-mandatory-eyesight-testing-for-older-drivers.
4. Improving moped and motorcycle training, testing and licensing (categories AM, A1, A2 and A driving licence) - https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/improving-moped-and-motorcycle-training-testing-and-licensing - the fatal accident statistic for our two-wheel operators are not good, as you will read, and therefore this initiative is unsurprising.
5. Mandating vehicle safety technologies in GB type approval -https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/mandating-vehicle-safety-technologies-in-gb-type-approval. Those devices (anti-collision, lane keeping, etc.) which are becoming increasingly prevalent on new vehicles will be mandated for GB type approval.

As I write, the Review and consultations are with Legislation Committee members to discuss at our February meeting. Save for monitoring any risk of retrospective application and anything that might affect our freedoms disproportionately, the Federation is generally supportive of well-conceived safety initiatives. See https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/road-safety-strategy.