Here is a video demonstrating the stupidity of the government's scrappage scheme:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=feadbYB55mw
I think this is a disgraceful destruction of our motoring heritage, and should never have been allowed to happen.
{mods note:- please be aware that the video contains swearing}
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 12/10/2009 at 01:34
|
|
You can't blame the government for that. The blame is purely on the shoulders of the greedy owner. He didn't have to trade it in.
|
|
spood, I disagree. The owner just wanted their £2k allowance. I am sure they would have been happy for the dealer or scrapyard to pass it onto a classic car enthusiast. However, under the terms of the scrappage scheme the government says it MUST be destroyed.
Edited by wiltshire_driver on 11/10/2009 at 22:27
|
|
Its an old car of, which there are still thousands, around not a unique old master.
|
|
|
|
You can blame the Government actually. There are a lot of serviceable cars that are worth way less than £2000, and scrapping them early in favour of a newly made car is wasteful and damaging to the environment.
The scrappage scheme is also a substantial non-means-tested handout which has been taken as a straight subsidy by many very well off people with an old car lying around. If I'd had my current Land Rover more than a year I might have put that in, and I'm not -yet - in need of a handout from taxpayers with over a trillion £ of national debt including unfunded public sector pensions and PFI obligations.
I am a bit cross.
|
I am a bit cross.
well look at it like this, without it, you would nothave a new car to buy in the future, and that means a second hand car. The makers would have been bust.
|
|
Thanks AE, I feel much better now you've explained ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
If it was mint it was presumably worth £2000 anyway?
|
Nothing to stop the car from being stripped of everything before the shell is scrapped - it's only the shell that has to be destroyed.
Sounds to me like it wasn't mint, to be honest. Lots of Minors have shocking undersides, and that video isn't really evidence if it being even half-decent.
|
If it was something super-rare I would agree with the OP. Not sure about other forum users but around my end of Wales there are a good few Moggies in regular daily use, so one being crushed is hardly a loss to our heritage.
I have heard tales of classic cars being saved from the scrappage scheme, and also "parted out" as the Americans say. We've certainly benefitted from it, as has the environment. Wifey's Punto no longer leaks oil on our drive!
|
How does any of you know it was mint? All we have is the say-so of whoever posted the video.
It could have been a catastrophic rot box. Never took long for a Minor to get that way without extremely careful maintenance.
(I speak of my dad's Morris Minors.)
HJ
Edited by Honestjohn on 11/10/2009 at 22:53
|
I agree it's sad to see classics being scrapped, but Morris Minors aren't exactly rare and even a lot of tidy ones are probably not so good under the skin. They were not as rot-proof or durable as perhaps the mythology around them might hint.
Edited by Sofa Spud on 12/10/2009 at 00:20
|
|
|
|
The EU will ban old cars eventually, best just get with the program. Atleast a Minor will have had a decent working life unlike some more modern cars.
|
|
I don't think the EU will ban old cars. What they might do is to allow them to be used under limited mileage schemes, which is how a lot of them are insured already.
|
However the Koreans are very grateful to Mr Brown for the scrapage scheme.
The car looked in very good condition, the interior was like new if you look at the second video
|
Well the EU can ban old cars if they like - it would be par for the course for them in the stupidity stakes. If they do I'll make a garden ornament out of mine and just go and look at it every day.
And if they try and confiscate it so I have to be stuck with a Korean puddle-jumper I'll be lurking in the bushes with a Kalashnikov...
|
Doesn't look as though it was in bad condition in this one:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ea5uX4jM1eI&NR=1
Scrappage is a a non-environmental, poorly thought out subsidy for the UK motor industry.
It would be criminal to scrap our 60k mile 10 year old Clio that has never been a spot of bother, has no rot and all works inc the aircon that has never even needed a recharge. However we would be daft to turn down £2k for it if we decide to get a new car.
|
As others have said a scrappage car can be stripped of all useful parts before going to the breakers... so I'd blame the scrappie rather than the owner... I think that whole cars have been saved as well... if it really was a mint Moggie it would have been worth at least £2k anyhow, so on the basis he PX'd it i assume it wasn't...
However, as i said on a previous thread, they should have made the scheme so it either wouldn't take cars over 25 years old, or any cars over 25 years old could be recovered and resold to the Classic Car trade.
And I totally agree that the scheme has done wonders for the Far East's car manufacturers... shame about ours!
|
Scrappage is a a non-environmental poorly thought out subsidy for the UK motor industry.
Should read:
Scrappage is a non-environmental poorly thought out subsidy for the Korean motor industry.
|
|
I'd have thought it was a well thought out subsidy for the Korean motor industry....?
|
There was an article in my local paper recently indicating that there are a number of classic cars being destroyed under the scrappage scheme, in this case traded in against Suzuki cars.
"Of the orders taken, Suzuki has seen some unusual and classic vehicles that have come through the door to be traded in. These include a Fiat Coupe, Triumph TR7 and Spitfire, BMW 2002, Jaguar XJ Sport, Mercedes-Benz 380 SLC and several MGBs."
Doubtless many of these were in rough condition but it does seem a shame. However, it would appear that the scheme makes an overall profit for the Treasury. Thus it is most unlikely that a government of any political persuasion is likely to drop the scheme anytime soon.
"With VAT currently at 15pc, the Treasury is in profit whenever a scrappage customer pays more than £7,600 for a car including tax. According to the motor industry the average price of cars bought under the scheme has been £9,000."
tinyurl.com/npoogf
|
>>"With VAT currently at 15pc, the Treasury is in profit whenever a scrappage customer pays more than £7,600 for a car including tax. According to the motor industry the average price of cars bought under the scheme has been £9,000."
>>
No, that is surely assuming that none of the scrappage sales would happen if scrappage did not exist.
Nowwheels made some very good point on that in another thread.
|
No that is surely assuming that none of the scrappage sales would happen if scrappage did not exist.
That would be a very complex calculation to make as you would need to count all cars that are sold under the scheme and then subtract the number of cars that would have been sold without the scheme. On the cars that would have been sold without the scheme, the government is losing money as it is clearly having to come up with the scrappage subsidy.
Guess you could compare like for like sales between 2008 and 2009 but it would still be hard to quantify exactly. Superficially, in the short term, the scheme is appealing to government as it has a green aura about it and it appears to be stimulating the motor industry and motor trade.
|
it is most unlikely that a government of any political persuasion is likely to drop the scheme anytime soon.
Actually, there is one party who are opposed to the scrappage scheme - The Green party. They point out that a substantial proportion of the energy consumed and emissions produced during a car's lifetime will occur during it's manufacture.
The scrappage scheme should have targeted old gas guzzlers with sky-high mileages rather than smaller cars (and classics) with a low mileage.
|
Old gas-guzzlers with sky-high mileages can still be sought-after classics!
The whole thing is the usual UK government and Whitehall-inspired shambles.
I've been trying to find out how successful the French and German attempts at the same thing have been. All I read is that it has worked as far as sales are concerned - of course the French and Germans buy the cars they make themselves - but a disastrous slump in the trade is expected as soon as subsidies are withdrawn.
Anyone know any more?
|
|
The strength of the Euro and the ferocity of the German TUV (MoT) means that some UK classics are now going to Germany.
|
Anyone know any more?
There is a fair amount of info on the German scrappage scheme here:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrappage_program
|
unless that Moggy was riddled completely with tin worm underneath...the the real moron here is the seller.
A half tidy Moggy with a decent interior like that has to be worth £1500 of anyone's money...and it cannot be difficult to negotiate a £500 cash discount off any new car..so where's the advantage?
If someone has owned that Moggy for at least a year (which they must have to use the scrappage scheme), why oh why would they want to see it crushed?
|
|
A few comments here about it possibly being riddled with rot - dont forget that it would have had a current MOT, so although it could well have been rotten, it couldn't be that bad.
|
"it could well have been rotten, it couldn't be that bad"
With two days left on the MoT, and a bodge job done last year, kept outside since, it could be a basket-case.
|
|
The scrappage scheme has been a marvellous marketing scheme but in reality most of the discounts have been illusory. It is normally possible to achieve a discount approaching the amount offered under the scheme without trading in an old banger
|
>> >> Scrappage is a a non-environmental poorly thought out subsidy for the UK motor industry. Should read: Scrappage is a non-environmental poorly thought out subsidy for the Korean motor industry.
So the Koreans have the business cos they work hard and produce cars that don't leak water in or oil out. We have unions and trossers for workers who are so far up themselves and can't see the wood for the trees.
Never confuse attendance with work!
MD......Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
|
So the Koreans have the business cos they work hard and produce cars that don't leak water in or oil out. We have unions and trossers for workers who are so far up themselves and can't see the wood for the trees.
Sorry. Should have said HAD workers.
MD
|
Sorry. Should have said HAD workers.
Have you lost your edit key?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Regardless of its condition it doesn't measure up to any of today's safety standards and as such shouldn't be allowed on the road. I agree with it being destroyed.
|
Regardless of its condition it doesn't measure up to any of today's safety standards and as such shouldn't be allowed on the road. I agree with it being destroyed.
That is like saying all buildings of a certain age should be demolished because they don't meet todays safety standards, e.g. historic castles with narrow staircases.
|
|
|
And every other old car too, presumably?
Oh come on, Mr Snail.
There's a lot of NCAP 5 motors being driven by uncaring morons out there too.
|
|
Put cars like that in a museum by all means, but please don't allow them to be driven on public roads.
Edited by L'escargot on 12/10/2009 at 18:11
|
Put cars like that in a museum by all means, but please don't allow them to be driven on public roads
Les, methinks you do protest too much. Drivers of Moggies are aware that their vehicles are less 'capable' than modern counterparts and drive accordingly - partly because by your own definition, they know they will come off worse in any collisions.
|
|
|
|
I wonder if the accident stats support your case?
|
|
|
Put cars like that in a museum by all means but please don't allow them to be driven on public roads.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH hark at you Monsieur Perfecto.
|
>> Put cars like that in a museum by all means but please don't allow them >> to be driven on public roads. >> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH hark at you Monsieur Perfecto.
When anyone says "They don't make cars like they used to." I always reply "Thank goodness for that.". I may be old but I'm not a sentimental fuddy-duddy.
{tags onto the post you're actually replying to!}
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 13/10/2009 at 11:19
|
Showing them to others who may be too young to know them and as a nostalga trip for those of us who are old enough to know them is no bad thing though... and its much nicer to see something running than stuck in a museum... Though I agree that it shows how things have moved on, the Maxi may still be a very practical car (the wheelchair fits in the boot for a start, which is more than it will do in many similar sized modern cars), but its nowhere near as easy to drive as a modern car...
A large percentage of the population love "nostalga", MrSnail, and there is a fair chunk of the Tourist Trade built around it as well (and we in this country are not alone in that!!)...
Edited by b308 on 13/10/2009 at 10:37
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Look at it this way. The remaining Moggies are now slightly rarer and possibly more valuable as a consequence. This will continue until they are so valuable that no one will dream of scrapping one. Perhaps. Just think of all of the cars that once existed of which no example is extant.
JH
|
I do find it amusing that Morris Minors are now cosily called Moggies and thought of as trundling, slow old rusbuckets. When the Minor 1000 first came out it was favoured by rich young men for its relatively good handling and turn of speed (a good one could exceed 80).
I was hitch-hiking on a sinuous stretch of the A420 in the late fifties when a new Morris Minor 1000 appeared over the horizon slightly sideways, passed and vanished absolutely flat out, displaying as it did so some different slip angles. I recognised the driver, who I knew slightly, but he was working so hard he couldn't possibly have recognised me let alone slowed down. I confess to a pang of envy at that moment.
|
|
|
I love all these "Scrappage-classics-destroyed its the governments fault" threads, perhaps the OP could explain why? Did they MAKE the owner of the Moggie trade it in and if so how? Was it silent phone calls, anonymous letters containing threats of violence or kidnaped family members? Did the MIB pay him a visit late at night with some sort of blunt instrument??......Of course not. The government might have given him an option but the owner made the decision HIMSELF.
Unless you fully understand or are in exactly the same situation and circumstances as the owner I consider it comical that you could even consider making a comment such as this. You may consider the car a classic or have a soft spot for them but the plain fact is it is the property of the owner, as such he has every right to do with it what he wishes, nor should the government be "blamed" for anything he chooses to do with it.
|
Unless you fully understand or are in exactly the same situation and circumstances as the owner I consider it comical that you could even consider making a comment such as this. You may consider the car a classic or have a soft spot for them but the plain fact is it is the property of the owner as such he has every right to do with it what he wishes nor should the government be "blamed" for anything he chooses to do with it.
Ted Crilly for PM.
|
|
|
I love all these "Scrappage-classics-destroyed its the governments fault" threads perhaps the OP could explain why? Did they MAKE the owner of the Moggie trade it in and if so how?
By means of a £2,000 "incentive"
The government might have given him an option but the owner made the decision HIMSELF.
I agree. It is hard to turn down a £2,000 incentive
Unless you fully understand or are in exactly the same situation and circumstances as the owner I consider it comical that you could even consider making a comment such as this. You may consider the car a classic or have a soft spot for them but the plain fact is it is the property of the owner as such he has every right to do with it what he wishes nor should the government be "blamed" for anything he chooses to do with it.
The owner was taking advantage of an incentive, and I don't blame them for that. I admit that I would be tempted to do the same if I were in similar circumstances.
What I find so immoral is that cars which are in good condition (whether they be classics or even low-mileage cars from the late 90's) HAVE to be destroyed when the dealer/scrappie could have been allowed to sell them to people with a limited budget and/or enthusiasts who find them particularly desirable. It just shows how out-of-touch this government has become to working-class people on a limited income/budget.
|
The owner was taking advantage of an incentive, and I don't blame them for that. I admit that I would be tempted to do the same if I were in similar circumstances.
So its a case of "Pot kettle Black" then?
|
The owner was taking advantage of an incentive and I don't blame them for that. I admit that I would be tempted to do the same if I were in similar circumstances. So its a case of "Pot kettle Black" then?
Not really, it is the government who brought in the scheme with it's draconian "the car must be destroyed" rules.
|
|
The choice between the car being destroyed or not is up to the owner, not the government........thought we had covered this?
|
The choice between the car being destroyed or not is up to the owner not the government
No.
When someone takes part in the scrappage scheme, they don't have the choice as to whether the car gets destroyed or not. The government says all cars traded in under the scheme MUST be destroyed.
|
But the owners DO have a choice........ Either take part in the scrappage scheme knowing the car will be crushed or not take part the scrappage scheme knowing the car will live on.................or have I missed something??
OR......do you expect the Government to give the owner £2K JUST....for chopping in a a 10yr old+ car and letting it pass on into the trade for someone else to take £2K off them in another 12 months, then someone else in another 12 months etc etc etc......WOW what a world that would be eh?? Talk about a money-go-round....or is that you just havent thought this through and considered the "what happens next aspect" of all this??
Edited by TedCrilly on 13/10/2009 at 00:06
|
|
|
When someone takes part in the scrappage scheme they don't have the choice as to whether the car gets destroyed or not. The government says all cars traded in under the scheme MUST be destroyed. Therefore TedCrilly is correct. The owner puts the car in knowing that it will be destroyed, and it is the owner's choice to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
Cars in good condition HAVE to be destroyed when the dealer/scrappie could have been allowed to sell them to people with a limited budget and/or enthusiasts ...
I agree absolutely, as I have said above (keeping a 20-y-o running). But the fact that many of them can only be sold for peanuts suggests that the demand for them is small. Maybe the immoral bit is the frantic building of new cars - which has to be done on a large scale to be viable - when almost everyone needing a car already has a good serviceable one? Not much more than fashion really ...
|
Maybe the immoral bit is the frantic building of new cars - which has to be done on a large scale to be viable - when almost everyone needing a car already has a good serviceable one?
Don't forget that new/updated models incorporate new technology and safety measures. These features are important to some people.
|
New/updated models incorporate new technology and safety measures. These features are important to some people.
Perhaps. But I suggest that many, if not most, are put there mainly to make the model appear more desirable than the one it replaces. Other threads on here have dwelt on the notion that several of those gizmos are totally expendable; or on the suggestion that modern engine management systems are over-elaborate and unfixable or undiagnosable when they misbehave.
Maybe 'new car technology' has been developed to the point of diminishing returns. But the public will probably keep buying novelty for that reason alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Strange that this thread has gone to 50 posts.
Surely if the Minor had been worth saving its value would have been more than £2,000, so the owner wouldn't have found it worthwhile to use the scrappage scheme.
Presumably it must have been 'pudding' underneath.
End of story - or am I missing something?
Edited by Avant on 13/10/2009 at 00:07
|
|
I think the problem lies in the somewhat misguided belief that ALL Minors are worth £2K upwards.
|
I think the problem lies in the somewhat misguided belief that ALL Minors are worth £2K upwards.
A very good point Ted.
|
>>>> Presumably it must have been 'pudding' underneath.End of story - or am I missing something?
And from Craggy Island... I think this thread is coming to an end. Anyone for some tea?
|
|
|
slight tangent, since getting rid of the ford i hadnt needed to use the local scrapyard for a year or two, i went down last sunday just out of curiosity and to my amasement they have all gone
I dont know if its due to the scrappage scheme or an enviromental issue but they had been there since the 1960,s and very popular too, it looks like a military compound now, the whole area screened off with 8 foot boarding and painted grey..the authorities obviously dont want people looking in....goodness knows where il go for spares now?
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 13/10/2009 at 01:05
|
It's a combination of things.
My father had a chat with his local scrappy a couple of years ago. He said that firstly there just wasn't the demand any more. People just aren't interested in turning up to look for secondhand bits.
Secondly and more importantly, the 'elf n savedee nazis have had their dead hand on the process. He was about to "close doors" anyway as he was no longer allowed to let people wander around the stacks taking bits off themselves. Apparently it's way too dangerous and anyone doing this runs a high risk of being horrifically injured or killed. I guess that in the light of this I must know quite a few very lucky people, including myself. Anyhow, if he wanted to sell parts, he was going to have to dismantle the vehicles himself and keep the parts as stock. Not worth it.
The one bit of recycling that we used to be really good at in Britain and the wingnuts have made it impossible.
|
to let people wander around the stacks taking bits off themselves. Apparently it's way too dangerous and anyone doing this runs a high risk of being horrifically injured or killed. I guess that in the light of this I must know quite a few very lucky people including myself.
Indeed. Scrap yards have always been the most dangerous einvironment around. ask anyone of an "age" and they will recount stories of getting parts from the yard under extreme teetering and tottering cirumstances.
Pity - such exciting days
|
stories of getting parts from the yard under extreme teetering and tottering cirumstances.
Indeed. My favourite yard, in Sussex, had an evil white gander that used to sneak up and try to peck you as you grovelled in the sludge under the tottering heap of metal. Only two or three - one wasn't enough - smart taps on the beak with a smallish spanner would deter the creature.
Health and safety is only the pretext for closing breakers' yards, although it's quite a convincing one as pretexts go. The real reason is to force motorists into the hands of main dealers and the aftermarket industry. I believe it may not be unconnected with the apparent spread of shameless thieving by some garages and replacement consumables chains.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Surely if the Minor had been worth saving its value would have been more than £2 000 so the owner wouldn't have found it worthwhile to use the scrappage scheme.
As has been posted, it's should have been considered to be worth no more than £1,000 to get that much from the government. Between the dealer/manufacturer the rest of the discount may have been forthcoming anyway.
The £2k is relevant if a very cheap car is bought and a normal £1k discount not offered by the dealer, perhaps someone elderly buying something new as he/she has reached a stage where something needing regular tinkering becomes a chore.
I realise normal discounts come from the dealer while the scrappage £1k comes from the manufacturer, but I'm surprised some dealers haven't caught on to the value of some trade-ins and bypassed scrappage. Maybe keeping all the returns for themselves if need be.
E.g customer trades in classic genuinely worth £1.5-£2k. Dealer says he'll give £2k off 'from scrappage' but 'forgets' to do the admin. Dealer sells car on for £1.5k.
-Customer gets same deal as if scrappage.
-Dealer/manufacturer only contributes £500 discount instead of £1k, still gets the sale.
-Government gets its VAT but saves itself £1k discount.
-Classic car saved
Looks win-win for all parties, the only one losing is the scrap dealer with one less car to profit from.
Plus, as some might feel is another loser-out, the one who actually then buys the classic for £2k that someone else thinks is just a £200 lump of metal.
|
|
It's only a Morris Minor. The metal will be recycled and used to make a decent car.
|
|
Motorists have a sense of history. Car users - classic consumers of mass-produced goods - don't have a sense of history. They just consume, bulimically.
|
Slightly different angle from Minor? - have read most of the posts above and hope I am not repeating something already said.
Wife's Xantia HDi Exclusive is 10 years old early next year. She wants a new car. It's done 110k miles, engine never needed anything except cambelt and regular oil changes. However, it has needed about £300 - £400 spending per year for last few years - new exhaust/cat, new window winding gear, new electro-valve(?), climate control new valves and recharge etc. I point out that that amount of money is not much to spend on a car and that if she buys a new car with all the stuff on the Xantia (climate, sun-roof, leather, electric seats, electric this that and the other, cd- changer etc, etc) that the depreciation will be much more than £400 and that the scrappage scheme means the Xantia will be crushed when there MUST be someone out there who would make good use of a basically good car. Problem is, I can't see any similar Xantias advertised out there for much more than £1000 and many are £600 - £800.
So what do you do - claim scrappage of £2000 or sell for hopefully (let's say) £750? Seems a great waste of existing resources to scrap it
Phil
|
Looks like the environment v. your wallet Phil. I think I'd let it go for scrap and hope that the metal would be recycled.
And if SWMBO wants a new car she may not be swayed by environmental arguments....
|
|
|
It has needed about £300 - £400 spending per year for last few years
If that amount bothers you (or your wife) then consider that any new car will immediately depreciate about 3 times faster. You know the foibles of your (t)rusty vehicle because you have looked after it. If it suits your needs, keep it. Forget scrappage - it's too good to throw away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
