What are the circumstances in which a car that was made and first registered
in 1960 would have to take a new 1963 A-suffix registration number when it
was first sold in the 1980s?

I've seen a programme on classic cars and the present owner was bemoaning
the fact that when he bought the car in the 80s, it didn't have the original
plate because the previous owner, who had owned the car from new until then,
had been forced to re-register it with a 1963 plate when he sold it to the
garage from which the second owner then bought it.

I've heard of compulsory re-registration of classic cars, and I wondered in
what circumstances it happened and why it only applies to some cars - you
still occasionally see cars with pre-1963 plates (think of Inspector Morse's
car 248 RPA) so it evidently doesn't apply to *all* cars.

"Martin Underwood" wrote

This isn't true- at some stage the original owner (or the garage) has
voluntarily sold the registration number and the car would then have been
issued with an A-reg suffix. Nobody is forced to re-register a pre-1963 car
when they sell it.

On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 17:31:42 +0000, Knight Of The Road wrote
(in message bt.com>):

Just to expand on that, anyone can sell the registration number off their
vehicle (with a few provisos), and some types of registration are well sought
after. In many cases (particularly if it's a VERY early plate with few
numbers/digits), the number can be worth much more than the vehicle it's
attached to.

The result is that many old cars end up being sold without a number.

"Simon Hobson" thehobsons.codotuk> wrote in message
news:0001HW.C1E291CC00903F6DF0284500@usenet.plus.net...

"Martin Underwood" wrote

I presume there must be a stock of early letter registration numbers which

Presumably- a lot of these re-registered cars have a number plate beginning
with the letter "X" which I do not think was issued at the time.

For some reason, a lot of Austin A35s seem to sport an A-reg number plate
even though production finished in 1959. Presumably because it was a
bottom-end car, it became common for the number plate to become more
valuable than the car.

I once scrapped a car with the registration 59 HPT which would probably
today be worth a few bob.

"Martin Underwood" wrote in message
news:45bce57b$0$8712$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net...

[..]
I've heard it said

Makes perfectly sound business sense. A brand new coach can cost 200 000
pounds plus. That's a heck of a lot of money to have someone turning their
nose up at it 12 months later saying they won't hire it because it's last
year's model.

If the age is hidden, the coach has a longer front-line life.

"ian henden" henden.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4A6vh.81468$n36.80461@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net...

"Simon Hobson" thehobsons.codotuk> wrote

Funnily enough, one of those provisos is that it must be the original
registration. My car started out as a P-reg, but was subsequently given a
"cherished" number. Later on, the owner transferred the number to a
different vehicle and so my car was given another P-registration.

On my logbook, beneath the current registration number it states "This
number is not transferable".

I agree with the OPs sentiments about the whole number-plate industry
though. To anyone thinking of getting a personalised registration number, my
advice would be to save some money, and place in your rear window a
cardboard sign reading "I am vain, shallow and self-important" instead.

"ian henden" henden.co.uk> wrote

Yea, because when I see a Bedford Bella Vega coming round the corner with
the registration number FIL 5660 I think "Blimey, that coach is brand-new"
;-)

On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 19:46:46 -0000, "Knight Of The Road"
hotmail.com> wrote:

Or, more simply put:

"IMO I have a big cock"

DG