Department for Transport

4. Mr N complains that he built a quad bike, only for the DfT to tell him that because of the weight and engine size it would class it as a passenger vehicle, rather than a motorcycle.

5. Mr N also complains the DfT never fully answered the questions he wanted it to answer about how it could justify the current regulations for how it should class his vehicle and it never fully resolved his complaint.

6. Mr N told us that by classing the vehicle as a passenger vehicle rather than a motorcycle, the DfT is restricting his rights to choose whatever mode of transport he chooses. Mr N says this has deprived him of the pleasure of enjoying his possessions and he feels he has been victimised by the DfT.

7. Mr N would like the DfT to make service improvements so its processes for regulating vehicles are fairer and not be based on unjust controls and increased restrictions.

8. Mr N spent a lot of time and money constructing a home built quad bike. When Mr N attempted to register it to use it on the road, he was told that because of its weight and engine size it would have to be able to pass the relevant vehicle testing that is used for cars.

9. Before any vehicle can be used or kept on the road it must be properly registered, taxed and insured. When a new vehicle is registered for the first time, the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA), part of the DfT, gives it a registration number.

10. Most vehicles that are used on UK roads are already registered and would usually have been registered by the vehicle dealership who sold it. Some vehicles may not have been registered and if this is the case you need to register the vehicle yourself.

11. A vehicle may not have been registered with the DVLA if it is: • imported • rebuilt or radically altered • an old or classic vehicle • home built.

12. If the vehicle you wish to use on the road is not already registered, you must apply to register the vehicle. When you apply to register it, you must provide evidence to support the registration. One of the documents you need to register a newly built vehicle is evidence of vehicle type approval. As the vehicle Mr N wanted to register was home built, he needed to complete this process before he could use it on the road.

13. Vehicle Type Approval is needed when a new or modified vehicle is tested and certified, to make sure it complies with the relevant safety, environmental and production requirements before it can be authorised for use on a road.

14. Type approval is available for different types of vehicles, with a different category assigned for each type of vehicle. Motorcycles are classed as category L and passenger vehicles are classed as category M. These categories are then divided into subcategories generally defined by the size or weight of the vehicle. In the UK, the Vehicle Certification Agency (VCA) is the designated UK Type Approval Authority.

15. If you wish to get a single vehicle type approved, you must use either the Individual Vehicle Approval (IVA) or Motorcycle Single Vehicle Approval (MSVA) scheme. The scheme you should use depends on the type of vehicle you want to register.

16. Mr N wanted to register his home-built vehicle using the MSVA scheme as he thought he had built a quad bike. An individual would use the MSVA scheme if they have made a single, two, three or smaller four wheeled vehicle. Mr N believes his vehicle should be classed as a smaller four wheeled vehicle.

17. When Mr N attempted to use the MSVA scheme, the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA is an agency run by the DfT) told him he could not use the scheme because his vehicle was too heavy and too powerful to be classed as a smaller four wheeled vehicle. The DVSA told Mr N that instead he would have to use the IVA scheme and it would test his vehicle under the M1 car category.

18. As Mr N thought his vehicle should be tested in a different category he complained, firstly to the DVSA and then to the DfT as it is responsible for that agency. In March 2020 Mr N complained to the Secretary of State for Transport that the DVSA had refused to approve his vehicle under the MSVA scheme and that it had told him his vehicle would need to be approved under the IVA scheme.

19. The DVSA replied to this complaint and told Mr N that under current regulations his vehicle must be classed as a passenger vehicle and must meet the appropriate technical requirements for that category of vehicle.

20. Mr N sent a further response to the DVSA on 29 May 2020. The department’s International Vehicle Standards (IVS) team responded and repeated that only vehicles with low weight and power qualify as quad bikes and his vehicle had been correctly classed as a passenger vehicle in the M1 category. After more correspondence, the DVSA gave Mr N more information on the process of categorising quad bikes for road use.

21. Mr N sent another email on 19 November 2020 and the DfT replied to this on 2 December. This reply was sent by the DfT head of engineering. It said the advice Mr N had been given was not biased or based on opinion but based on the applicable regulations.

22. This reply also told Mr N that the DfT would not reply to any more contact. The reply gave Mr N information about the DfT complaints procedure.

23. Mr N escalated his complaint to an Independent Complaints Assessor (ICA). On 5 April 2023 the ICA wrote to Mr N and told him the complaint was outside its remit because the DfT decision was a regulatory matter and about departmental and government policy.

24. The ICA reply told Mr N that the DfT had correctly applied the right legislation and it had found no fault in how it had handled his complaint.

The way the DfT categorised Mr N’s quad bike

28. When we consider a complaint, we look at whether there are signs the organisation has got something wrong. We do this by comparing what should have happened with what did happen. We have done this and have not seen any signs that something has gone wrong.

29. Mr N told us, ‘I spent years building a very special Quad bike only to be informed by the DVSA that because of its weight and engine size it would be tested in the car category M1 of the IVA because weight and power limits had been introduced for Quads, but I cannot find out why. They have referred me to some German regulations that were designed for small cars which the Germans refer to as Quads, they are not Quad bikes as we know them, they are cars. These EU regulations were adopted by the DfT with no consideration given to the rights of the British people, British law, or the democratic process which has to be complied with before any law can be adopted in Britain.’

30. Mr N also told us, ‘These regulations are a denial of our rights and against the rule of law making in Britain. [My MP] has confirmed I do indeed have the right to build a machine of my choice and the right to establish its suitability for registration and safe use on the roads of Britain.’

31. In its complaint response the DfT told Mr N, ‘You explained that the DVSA had refused to approve your vehicle under the MSVA Scheme and that they had advised that it must be approved under the IVA scheme. The DVSA replied to you explaining that, under current regulations, the vehicle is an M1 passenger vehicle and must therefore meet the appropriate technical requirements.’

32. The DfT also told Mr N, ‘Personally built vehicles must be inspected and approved before they can be registered for use on the road, either using the MSVA or IVA schemes. The eligibility criteria for each scheme are set out in law and, since the vehicle exceeds both the maximum unladen weight and power limits for quadricycles, it cannot be approved through the MSVA route’.

33. The Road Vehicles (Approval) Regulations 2009 say that a manufacturer (in this case Mr N) needs type approval for any relevant vehicle and must apply to the relevant authority, in writing and accompanied by the right documentation for type approval. This legislation gives the DfT the legal power to only allow vehicles on the roads that keep to certain safety standards and that have been through the type approval process.

34. In the UK, the VCA is the designated UK Type Approval Authority. Its guidance on vehicle approval is published in the MSVA Inspection Manual. This manual says, ‘The purpose of this manual is to set out the testing procedures and standards for those DVSA examiners that carry out the inspection on vehicles submitted for motorcycle single vehicle approval. Owners should also find the manual useful as it details the inspection to which vehicles are subjected and the reasons why a certificate may be refused.’

35. Section two of the Manual explains which vehicles the scheme applies. The section on four wheeled vehicles (heavy quadricycle) gives the criteria a vehicle must fit to use the MSVA scheme. The vehicle must: • have a maximum design speed of 28 miles per hour • have a maximum net engine power of not more than 15kw • have a weight of not more than 400kg • if designed to carry goods, a payload (weight a vehicle can carry) of not more than 1000kg.

36. From the information we have seen Mr N does not disagree that the vehicle he built exceeds both the maximum power and weight restrictions. He believes that these restrictions do not give him the freedom to use the vehicle he has built.

37. It is very clear from the DfT responses to Mr N that because the vehicle he built does not meet the standards needed to use the MSVA scheme, it would not consider granting him type approval under this class of vehicle. Instead, the DfT has told Mr N that his vehicle must be tested using the IVA scheme. We can see from the MSVA manual that it clearly gives the maximum weight and power limits to be able to use this scheme and the vehicle Mr N built does not meet these standards.

38. We understand Mr N does not agree with this decision and he told us he does not think it would be safe to add seat belts to his vehicle (which he would need to do to meet the standards as the DfT is classing the vehicle as a car). We understand Mr N’s safety issue concern, but the legislation is clear: the vehicle he has built does not meet the weight and power restrictions to class it as a motorcycle.

39. We can see the DfT kept to the relevant legislation and guidance when it told Mr N he cannot use the MSVA scheme to have his home-built vehicle approved for use on the road. There are no signs of a failing in how the DfT classed Mr N’s vehicle.

40. Mr N has mentioned that he thinks the DfT is violating his human rights by not giving him the freedom to use his vehicle. From the evidence available to us, we do not think the DfT is stopping Mr N from using the vehicle. The DfT has told Mr N that if he does wish to use his vehicle, he can but he needs to have it approved using the correct categorisation.

41. Mr N tells us he thinks that how the DfT has restricted his freedom of choice is against the Human Rights Act 1998 (the HRA). We can see the DfT has followed relevant legislation, policy and guidelines. It is not our role to look at human rights issues and we cannot make a decision on the DfT policy and how it interprets the HRA.

42. If Mr N wants to challenge the legal part of the DfT’s policy and whether it is against the HRA, he will need to take this to a court. We would advise him to get independent legal advice before taking any legal action.

43. As we have seen no signs of a failing with this part of the complaint, we will take no further action.

The DfT’s complaint handling

44. Mr N told us: ‘The DfT has failed to provide any lawful reason to justify the banning of these quads or the weight limit of 1000kg applied to Trikes. Mr […..] has repeatedly failed to answer my questions on the subject of the law and our rights as British subjects... The DfT some time ago sent me what they called evidence which was used as justification of the ludicrous restrictions on heavy quads. This was in the form of a YouTube video of the Euro NCAP crash tests on heavy quadricycles. In the UK there are no crash tests ever carried out on any form or design of motorcycle, because in the event of a collision riders are better off being thrown from the bike resulting in less injuries. To the extent that trike and quad riders are not required to wear crash helmets.’

45. In its complaint replies the DfT told Mr N: ‘I apologise that we have only recently provided you with relevant information regarding the reasons behind the power and weight limitations for quadricycles. While the original requirements were negotiated over 20 years ago, as explained we have now searched our historical records and provided you with the information we hold regarding the negotiation and reasoning behind the limits that currently apply’.

46. The DfT complaint replies also told Mr N: ‘I understand your frustration at not being able to obtain approval for your vehicle and that you consider the regulations to be unjust, but in my review, I can find no evidence that the Department and its officials have concealed any information from you or treated you unfairly in any way. All correspondence has set out clearly the regulations and how they apply. This has been done objectively and with impartiality… I understand your frustration at not being able to obtain approval for your vehicle and that you consider the regulations to be unjust, but in my review, I can find no evidence that the Department and its officials have concealed any information from you or treated you unfairly in any way. All correspondence has set out clearly the regulations and how they apply. This has been done objectively and with impartiality’.

47. We can see that when the DfT told Mr N that he could not use the MSVA scheme, there was a large amount of correspondence between them from around May 2019 onwards. Mr N originally went to the DVSA as the agency responsible for vehicle testing. When Mr N could not resolve his complaint, he then complained to the DfT and also to the Secretary of State for the DfT.

48. Mr N also went to his MP, who wrote to the DfT on his behalf. The DfT replied to both Mr N and his MP. Due to the large amount of correspondence and the DfT deciding it had given as much information as it could, in the 2 December 2020 letter it told Mr N it may no longer reply to his requests. This letter told Mr N how to complain if he did not think the DfT had addressed all his issues and it gave a link to its complaints procedure.

49. Mr N was not happy with the responses and he has told us he does not think the DfT answered all the questions he wanted it to. Mr N followed the complaints procedure and the DfT dealt with his complaint. The DfT then contacted Mr N and his MP. On 18 November 2022 the DfT sent its full complaint reply. This reply fully set out the correspondence it had with Mr N before.

50. In line with the DfT complaints procedure, as none of this correspondence had resolved Mr N’s complaint, it escalated his complaint to the ICA as the next stage of the complaints process.

51. The DfT complaints procedure says if you are not happy with the outcome, you can ask it to escalate the complaint to the head of division. We can see the head of engineering replied to Mr N’s complaint on 2 December 2020, so this was in line with its complaint procedure.

52. The complaints procedure also says if you feel your complaint is still unresolved after going through the complaints procedure and your complaint is about the quality of the service provided, you can ask the DfT to refer your complaint to the ICA. We can see the DfT did this.

53. Having an effective complaints system that makes sure organisations take a thorough, fair and balanced look into the issues raised is also in line with our UK Central Government Complaints Standards. By having a published and readily accessible complaints procedure and making Mr N aware of it, the DfT acted in line with our standards.

54. We understand Mr N does not think the DfT fully answered every question he asked. We can see the DfT sent a large amount of correspondence at first to try to resolve his complaint. When this did not resolve the issues, the DfT followed its complaints procedure and told Mr N how to escalate his complaint to the ICA and then us.

55. We can see the DfT has followed its published complaints procedure and made extensive efforts to resolve Mr N’s complaint. We have seen no signs of failings in how the DfT dealt with Mr N’s complaint so we will take no further action.

56. We know that Mr N feels very strongly about these matters and that this complaint is personal and important to him. We hope we have clearly explained how we have considered what he told us and how we reached this decision.

1. We have carefully considered Mr N’s complaint about the Department for Transport (the DfT). We understand Mr N is unhappy with how the DfT dealt with his complaint and how it classed the vehicle he built. We understand he feels it decision is restricting his freedom to use his preferred mode of transport and enjoy his vehicle.

2. Having reviewed the evidence available to us, we have seen no sign that anything went wrong with how the DfT dealt with the issues Mr N is complaining about. This is because we can see the DfT has acted in line with the relevant legislation and guidelines when it considered the classification of Mr N’s vehicle.

3. We are not taking any further action and we have explained our decision in more detail below.