LVV Certification

Phone John Brett Technology 0800 LOW VOLUME (0800 569865)

We have now discontinued LVV Certification

We suggest that customers whose vehicles require LVV Certification:-

Try to contact a LVV Certifier (good luck with that!), or

Advise NZTA on 0800 108 809 that you are unable to get LVV Certification.

Meanwhile, if you have a query, check out the post "Low Volume Vehicle Certification- Your Queries" on the right hand side bar. All queries posted will be answered.

Thank you,

John Brett

John Brett

John is a professional engineer with 50 years experience.

John has designed and built many cars, trucks, and vehicle assembly facilities.

John has worked on design of roads, bridges, cranes, transmission towers, and buildings, and operation, maintenance and upgrade of hydro and gas turbine power stations.

John was a LVV Certifier for 13 years. John has long been a whistle-blower, expressing the view that the LVV system is dangerously deficient. John's authority was revoked in December 2012.

John rides a 1992 Yamaha FJ1200ABS, and is a keen road cyclist.


The Low Volume Vehicle System has failed in the following:-

The LVVTA have failed to develop and maintain LVV Standards- SEE- ORS Submission2
The LVVTA are failing to maintain an acceptable standard of safety of vehicles modified. LVVTA DANGERS- THE FACTS
I understand that another Coroners report is pending, concerning a fatality resulting from the failure of an LVV Certified trike.

Certifying a Porche Spyder

Certifying a Porche Spyder

The LVVTA appears to be being operated in an illegal and questionable manner.
Here are two examples of the sort of questions that do need to be asked and answered before a way forward for the LVV System can be found:

QUESTION 1 How can the NZ Transport agency justify allowing the LVVTA to make Certification judgements?
The LVVTA have a contract for ‘Desktop Auditing’ to ensure LVV Certifiers are meeting the LVV Standards, however the LVVTA appear to be making Certification decisions under this guise.
We can see no provision in any legislation authorizing NZTA to allow this.

QUESTION 2 On what basis does the LVVTA assume that their knowledge is superior to that of the LVV Certifiers? None of the LVVTA Staff are LVV Certifiers, and do not even meet the requirements for many categories. Yet experienced LVV Certifiers have their judgement questioned, are required to accept the judgement of the LVVTA, and are reported to NZTA for ‘incorrect’ decisions. Several recent incidents have proven that the judgement of the LVVTA can be seriously wrong.

The LVV system is failing to retain the skilled Certifiers on which the system depends- (my opinion- but count them!)
The LVV system is failing to meet the needs of vehicle modifiers- the number of Certifications is falling whilst the number of vehicles and the number of mods needing LVV Certification are rising-

1…….Abandoned Certifications We receive continuous enquiries for LVV Certification, from all over New Zealand.
We give out the phone numbers of other Certifiers, we even contact them ourselves on behalf of customers.
In the end, we are left with sheaves of job-sheets, for vehicles which WILL NEVER BE LVV CERTIFIED

2……Modified cars exported- We are aware of many modified and scratch-built vehicles EXPORTED to avoid the LVV system in NZ

3……Modifiers leaving the business- We are aware of PROFESSIONAL MODIFIERS (many with export business) who have CLOSED THEIR BUSINESSES or moved out of NZ.

U Drive Mobility are one recent example of this- now building in France

4…..Avoidance of LVV System Motor-home builders IN NEW ZEALAND switching to Certification to ADR Second Stage system, to avoid the costs, delays, and irregularities of the New Zealand LVV system. Private modifiers are being forced to drive vehicles without LVV Certification

Uncertified vehicles

Police at the bottom of the cliff (Ambulances not visible in this shot)

5……Soaring costs-
The LVVTA levy, has increased, with more increases anticipated, as legal and insurance costs start to bite.
LVV Certifiers have increased their charges to cover time they now require to process Certifications.
In Auckland the total cost to the customer for LVV Certification has increased by an average of 25% in June 2014.

This means that to LVV Certify say, a set of wheel spacers, or adjustable platform suspension struts, will now cost the vehicle owner $550 to $650, which could exceed the cost of the modification.

If NZTA loses faith in the LVV System, (Quite likely)
it is possible that:

1 … Minor Modifications: TSD agents, or WOF agents be authorized to pass a range of minor modifications

2 … Self- Certification: Professional Modification businesses (seat installers, motor-home builders etc) be accredited to Self-Certify

3 ….Hobby cars and Hot-rods- (a very small part of the LVV picture) could be left out in the cold, are unable to be driven on the road.

Not road legal

Going to the Beach Hop?

4 …. The LVVTA and LVV Certification plates become history.


How about some clear thinking about the LVV System of the future?

1 Trust the Certifiers to do the job they are appointed to do. Cut LVVTA out of the Certification process. Allow Certifiers to make their own plates, or use a Certifier appointed Plate printing contractor.

2 Introduce proper “Certifier Training”, conducted ‘on line’ and on the job, by Certifiers or Industry Professionals, (not by the LVVTA) and allow proper technical debate to occur.

3 Allow Certifiers to Certify to proven International Standards if they choose, instead of faulty LVVTA Standards.

4 Form a Certifier controlled “Standards Committee” to develop and change LVV Standards, instructing LVVTA to print and distribute.

5 Simplify Certifier Categories to say “Mechanic based Certifier” (able to do most certifications) and “Engineer Certifier” for situations where the skills of an Engineer are required. Allow “Engineer Certifiers” to consult to “Mechanic Certifiers” when required.


This vehicle was built to our specifications, provided when I was still a Certifier.

Note the folded box beams connecting the Wheel-arches to the B-pillar, to replace the structure of the C-pillar and rear cant rail. The B-Pillar has been buttressed to about 400 mm depth, to withstand the bending moment from the eccentric load from the box-beam, and transmit loads to the upper cant rail.

See our new resource page about Body Restructure

Nissan Skyline Utility

Nissan Skyline Utility


We have been threatened with Libel action by Lawyers acting for Mr Johnson of the LVVTA, and accordingly have:-removed some clauses, and changed others that were mentioned. We have also made the offer to Mr Johnson’s Lawyers to consider changing or removal of any other statements that they still consider libelous

Mr Johnson would like the entire article removed, however as the CEO of an organization charged by NZTA with ensuring Public Safety, I believe that Mr Johnson CANNOT place himself above public scrutiny and comment.

The road toll has fallen to record lows, see annualroadtollhistoricalinformation

A large part of the improvement in safety is attributed to safer vehicles. Safer Journeys See Page 24. The LVVTA Standards exhibit no understanding of modern vehicle technologies, although LVV Certifiers have to deal with the implications of modifications on modern vehicles.

The Low Volume Vehicle system in New Zealand is failing to make the contribution that it should- Modified vehicles are being LVV Certified and allowed on the road with known safety issues, (Facts shown below) and resultant avoidable deaths and injuries occur and will continue to occur.
It is argued by Mr Johnson’s Lawyers that only one death so far has been formally attributed by the Coroner to faulty LVV Certification, and that any further discussion of safety will be regarded as defamatory to Mr Johnson.

A report by a group of LVV Certifiers identified some of the shortcomings in the LVV system, in a report compiled in 2010, and published in January 2011. This was presented to the LVVTA and to NZTA.
The recommendations were ignored, and no action was taken. ORS Submission2

The Low Volume Vehicle Technical Association controls the Low Volume Vehicle Certification system in New Zealand. It is
NOT an association of Low Volume Vehicle Certifiers, but an association of mostly enthusiast groups, but does include VANZ, the association which represents the disabled community.

The LVVTA has wrongly promoted itself to be effectively the ‘Low Volume Vehicle Technical AUTHORITY’ and not only writes LVV Standards, but audits each LVV Certification and directs LVV Certifiers on what can be Certified (refer to the current LVV ORS document)
The LVVTA has set itself ABOVE the Certifiers and appointed itself the sole technical authority on all matters, forgetting that its expertise and knowledge relies on that of the LVV Certifiers and of the modification industry.

LVV Standards are not based on overseas standards, but appear to derive from the old ‘Hot Rod’ manual. This means that e.g. seatbelt installations engineered to meet International Standards (ADR, E, JIS, FMVSS etc ) do not comply with the LVVTA (Hotrod) standards. This also means that New Zealand Installations can be sub-standard, and fail to provide the level of protection available in vehicles in other countries.

The LVVTA Standards are so inadequate that each vehicle certification requires special consideration from the Standard writers- the LVVTA.

This is in contrast to e.g. the Building Industry, in which Standards are developed with input from all sectors, Builders, Architects, Engineers, etc. The Standards are published by SANZ, which plays no part in their implementation.

The following article has been published in major newspapers, and reprinted on this site for comment. wheelchair-user-cars-pulled-from-roads

TV3 have also picked up on this item-TV3- NZTA pulls disability vehicles off the road

Axle Failures

Axle beams made of Cast Iron have been approved by the LVVTA. Some axles have failed, and lives remain at risk.

Failed axle showing brittle failure typical of Cast Iron

Failed axle showing brittle failure typical of Cast Iron

Lucky this vehicle was going so slow

Lucky this vehicle was going so slow

Beam front axles have been made from Forged Steel, in cars since the Ford Model T, and in all railway vehicles before that.

Forged Steel has high strength, and high fatigue resistance.

Hot Rod enthusiasts have fitted heavier engines, more powerful brakes, suspension systems (such as ‘Hairpin” radius arms) which apply torsion to the axle.

Now Hot Rod enthusiasts are demanding ‘Dropped Spindle’ Axles, which apply even more loading in the critical areas.

Some suppliers are offering Drop-Spindle axles made from Steel Forging.
Other suppliers are offering axles made from Cast Iron.

A comparison of the properties of Nodular Cast iron and Forged Steel:
Fatigue Performance Evaluation of Forged Steel versus Ductile Cast Iron Crankshaft: A Comparative Study

The yield strength of the forged steel is 52% higher than that of the cast iron, and the forged steel fatigue
strength at 106 cycles is 36% higher than the ductile cast iron The forged steel has a factor of 50 longer life than the
ductile cast iron

This evaluation is based on the grade of Cast Iron known as “Nodular” or ‘Spheroidal Graphite” Iron.

Nodular Cast Iron appears to be a poor substitute for Forged Steel for Axle beams, and is likely to result in eventual fatigue failures.

Mr Johnson admitted at a LVV Certifier training session that he had no knowledge of these grades of cast iron. From this, I assume that he believed that the axles being supplied were ordinary ‘grey’ Cast Iron, which is brittle, with a tensile strength below 140 Mpa, and unsuitable for any structural application such as this.

Most of the axles supplied appear to have been ‘Nodular Iron’, however some have been ‘Grey Cast Iron’. Axle failures have resulted, fortunately without injuries or deaths, so far. The LVVTA is now carrying out Quality Control inspections of axles (since the manufacturer does not) to attempt to identify the grade of Cast Iron.

LVVTA appear to have based their decision to allow these axles on the basis that other Hot Rodders in other countries use these axles. Following this logic, there would be no need for a Low Volume Vehicle Certification system in New Zealand, so long as everyone just copied what Hot Rodders did overseas!

Professional oversight would have ensured that the right questions would have been asked at the start- e.g.
“What is this material?”
“What are the properties of this material?”
“Where is the evidence that the material meets this specification?”
“Would these components be FIT FOR PURPOSE?”.

What more evidence is required that the LVV System has outgrown its origins and originators, and in the interests of public safety needs to be replaced by a professional certification process?


Rear-facing seat, lacking strength to restrain occupants frontal impact

Rear-facing seat, lacking strength to restrain occupants in frontal impact

Rear-facing seat- view from front.  No reinforcing beam fitted

Rear-facing seat- view from front. No reinforcing beam fitted

Vehicle occupants are required to be restrained under frontal impact.
In front facing seats, the primary restraint is by seat-belts.
When seats are rearward facing, the seat becomes the primary restraint.
The loads from restraining passengers in 20 G decelleration is huge- around 1600 kg, or 16 Kilonewtons. Normal seat backs will fail at a fraction of that load.

The LVV Seat Standard 185-00 (introduced in 2002) has required that rear-facing seats be suitably reinforced, usually by a transverse cross-beam of 65 x 65 x 5 mm box section bolted to the vehicle body.

This requirement was ignored by a certain commercial seat installer, who continued to install unsafe rear-facing seating.
These installations were wrongly LVV Certified for 7 years, but never challenged by the LVVTA
The installer claimed to have an engineering report to justify their seat installations.
Concerns were raised by LVV Certifiers at a Certifier Training session, and Mr Johnson stated that these seats were justified by an Engineering report from TSL, which he did not believe was correct.
Nobody in the LVVTA was prepared to challenge the engineering report.

John Brett became the LVV Certifier for this company in August 2009. John inspected the Engineering report, and found that it DID NOT justify these seat installations.
John required that future rear-facing seat installations meet the LVV Standard 185-00, and ensured that a transverse cross-beam was fitted to all subsequent Certifications

This is supported by our Certification documents for the first vehicles FAILED by us, we still have copies of the FAIL SHEETS

Mr Johnson received complaints from the Installer, and from TSL about Mr Brett failing the unsafe seating. Mr Johnson’s response was to arrange the reinstatement of a LVV Certifier , and arrange for this person to become the LVV Certifier for this company.

It is not known whether the unsafe seating continued to be installed.


This means that for 7 years (2002 to 2009) every vehicle built by this company, fitted with rear-facing seats, failed to meet the required standard.
This means that every passenger who travels in any of these hundreds of vehicles is at risk of being thrown out of the vehicle windscreen in any frontal impact, after impacting on the driver and front row passengers.


These unsafe certifications continued until I stopped them. Even then, Mr Johnson arranged for me to be replaced as the Certifier because the Modifier complained about me failing the unsafe seat installations.

The rear-facing seats in the unsafe PSV’s met the “20 times own weight” loading of the seats in this video:-

This would be similar to the outcome in a frontal impact- visualize rear-facing passengers being thrown forwards-


What more evidence is required that the LVV System has outgrown its origins and originators, and in the interests of public safety needs to be replaced by a professional certification process?


Body Re-structure is defined in the ORS as when a body structure has:-

(a) “all body modification, restructuring, and configuration changes, that retain the vehicle manufacturer’s occupant protection systems and structures forward of the A-Pillars, and complete (bolt off-on OE Body type) body substitution: and
(b) all chassis and sub-frame modifications, but not complete chassis substitution or complete chassis or rear half-chassis design and construction, or complete sub-frame changes”

Ford Falcon Stretch Limo Convertible

This vehicle was subjected to rigorous beam and torsional bending tests

U Drive Skoda Yeti converted to be wheelchair accessible

These vehicles have had a complete re-construction of the floor.

The criteria for LVV Certifiers in this category are defined in the ORS as:-

(a) have had two years experience operating as a Category ‘1B Modified Production Extended’ LVV Certifier, and
(b) have completed relevant and appropriate formal motor body structure training: and
(c) have an appropriate level of knowledge, expertise, and practical experience in the modification and adaptation of vehicle structures.

There are NO LVV Standards relating to Body Restructure, and NO guidance in the “Hobby Car Manual” for this type of work.

There is NOBODY working for the LVVTA who meets ANY of the criteria for a 1D Certifier.

Despite this, the LVVTA have set themselves up as ‘Judge and Jury’, as evidenced by the provisions of the ORS. A reasonable person could reasonably come to the opinion that the LVVTA have promoted themselves to be the “LOW VOLUME VEHICLE TECHNICAL AUTHORITY”

The Skoda Yeti vehicles have all been ordered off the road by NZTA, presumably at the behest of the LVVTA
The reason given has been that of safety.
However, no-body at the LVVTA is competent to make any judgement about the safety of such Certifications.

What has motivated the LVVTA to make such drastic decisions without proper engineering justification?
A ‘Complaint from a concerned member of the public’- or from a jealous competitor? NZTA need to come clean on this to avoid any suspicion!

TV3 have picked up on this now, see- TV3- NZTA pulls disability vehicles off the road

What more evidence is required that the LVV System has outgrown its origins and originators, and in the interests of public safety needs to be replaced by a professional certification process?

Wheelchair-user cars pulled from roads


29th August 2014

LVVTA, NZTA contradicted by Ferrari Engineer

2nd August 2014

Cars banned in NZ, but okay in France

May 20th 2014

3 news- track test exonerates suspension modifications over alleged bump-steer 19th March


TV3 News


A car modified for wheelchair users has been pulled off the road after concerns its floor could become detached because it was only glued on.

The NZ Transport Agency has revoked the warrants of fitness of eight Skoda Yetis that were modified by Auckland company U Drive Mobility after five months of trying to work through serious safety concerns.

U Drive Mobility imports the vehicles, which are disassembled and then put together again in New Zealand with modifications that allow wheelchair users to get in and out independently.

Modifications include replacing the original, reinforced steel floor with an aluminium sandwich panel that is glued into the body of the vehicle with epoxy, a car panel glue that NZTA says is not safe for use on load-bearing vehicle body parts.

NZTA spokesman Andy Knackstedt said there were serious concerns about the design and construction of the cars, specifically about the floors and the stability of their independent rear suspensions.

“The effect of these [floor] modifications was to remove a significant part of the vehicle’s structure and replace it with material not designed and constructed with materials and components that are fit for purpose.

“The structural integrity of the vehicle would likely be significantly compromised in a serious crash.”

Warrants of fitness were issued for four of the cars before the modifications were made, and four were given certification incorrectly, Mr Knackstedt said.

The cars were certified by an independent assessor, but a second set of checks by the Low-Volume Vehicle Technical Association (LVVTA) highlighted serious safety issues.

Mr Knackstedt said U Drive Mobility had not been able to satisfy NZTA or the LVVTA that the cars were safe and fit for purpose.

Eight people who bought the vehicles – some with grants from the Ministry of Health and the Lotteries Commission – have been ordered not to drive them until the issues are resolved.

NZTA has offered affected owners $5000 to cover transport needs until then, and told them to consider seeking independent legal advice and contacting the health and disability commissioner.

U Drive Mobility director Roger Phillips said the company was working through the compliance process with NZTA and LVVTA, but he did not have any concerns about the safety of the cars.

“They’ve been on the road now, the oldest one for nearly two years, and there hasn’t been a problem with the vehicles, nothing. It’s a compliance issue.”

Mr Phillips said customers had been kept informed and the company had followed the processes, and done what it had been asked to do to resolve the issues, including passing required tests.
Ad Feedback

LVVTA chief executive Tony Johnson said U Drive Mobility had been reluctant to accept the seriousness of the issue, and a recall and repair of the cars in November had failed to fix the issue.

The Vehicle Association of New Zealand, a watchdog for modifications on cars for people with disabilities, said there were already similarly designed cars on the market, and all had been through the certification process.

Chairman Robert Berger said the association stood by LVVTA’s assessment of the cars, but the system had failed.

“The system has failed the owners of the vehicles and people with disabilities, in that it should never have got to this stage of construction, it should not have happened.

“Right at the beginning, the certifiers should have looked at the job and said, this isn’t safe, and that should have been the end of it.”


We have also made comment on this matter here: lvvta-incompetence-threatens-lives/

Comments on STUFF below:

Robert2 days ago
The work should be certified only by a real engineer .That is some one who has been to University and has a degree for example Mechanical Engineer.

JohnBrett3 days ago
I have LVV Certified many similar vehicles with rear wheel-chair ramps. The reason that steel is used in any body-restructure is because it can reliably reproduce the characteristics of the structure removed, which was steel. One important consideration is the crumple performance:- steel can deform and absorb energy in a way that composites cannot. These vehicles should be re-engineered in line with normal, proven practice for this type of modification.

Ross M5 days ago
Lotus has been using glue for their aluminium-extrusion-framed sports cars for a long time now…

Gazglor6 days ago
I don’t believe that the LVVTA have the ability to approve this type of work. After all, they still will not approve an A frame connection onto a motor home for towing vehicles and nor will the Insurance Industry confirm in writing that they will pay out on any future accident. How can a restraint system work satisfactorily in the situation you describe? Why don’t you check with your insurance company. Until or unless we mass produce motor vehicles in. NZ and we probably never will because we are too small then we need to approach the world market for a solution and if there isn’t one then why try and invent the wheel? Sorry about that.


Wheel Less7 days ago
As one of the affected owners yes we do feel extremely let down by the system.
Our vehicle was issued a certificate by the independent certifier which was followed by a plate from the LVVTA. The warrant was issued following the cert. We did not make our final payment until this point and placed complete reliance on these. This certifier is still listed on the LVVTA site.
We do not fell qualified to comment on the technical issues and of course safety is paramount but we understood the inspection would have covered these issues.

Disabled road users deserve better. It is a huge financial commitment to purchase one of these vehicles and there is not a lot of choice especially if you do not want a big van. These vehicles make a huge difference to our and our family’s lives and our independence.

These vehicles have actually been off the road for 4 months now and this is taking its toll on all the users.

We certainly need to lobby for better systems.

CharleyL7 days ago
It is probably best to consider what you are about to say carefully before you burst into print – I would have bought one of these cars had we not lost the family member.
Aluminum (and particularly the “honeycomb” composite) is a far superior and stronger material compared to steel when used in constructing a vehicle, that is why Jaguar, Lotus and other top quality manufacturers use it for structural components in preference to steel – the Wurth Glue used in construction is the very same one used by the original manufacturer Skoda, it is an approved product for this purpose.
There is a great deal of test data relating to these vehicles, all carried out by U Drive to ensure that all safety aspects were addressed and ironically the modified vehicle appears stronger than the original.
These cars are built by highly skilled individuals in a proper facility (I inspected it) and with the price in mind I think there is little reward for the owners of the company.
There is no new vehicle available in New Zealand that provides a disabled person the same level of comfort, versatility and freedom as these, there have only been to date some poor quality used imported cars and awful vans – I had to buy one before these were available. If you are in any doubt, ask one of the owners of the vehicles in question.
Lastly, ask what test data the LVVTA has that justifies their actions and substantiates their assessment ? Remember that the (genuinely highly qualified) LVVTA certifiers initially checked and put their name against the certification for these vehicles – not something done lightly by anyone.
Remember – it’s your (taxpayer) $40 000.00 given away by the LVVTA and 8 disabled peopled that have had their freedom limited from the start of the festive season.
You need to ask if the LVVTA has concrete data that proves these cars are unsafe and what test proved that they had to be taken off the road immediately and did they provide this information to the owners?
Some serious questions need to be asked and properly answered by the LVVTA, frankly the media need to do this and it needs to be done for all to see.


ArthurOrd-Hulme7 days ago
Epoxy glues are used to hold most modern aircraft together, and are as strong as electric arc welding, as any suitably qualified engineer will know. I have had deal with the LVVTA in the area of Wheelchair Vehicles, and it is a pretty safe bet that their ‘engineer’ , who will only understand older welding/bolts methods of assembly, saw “glue” and panicked and reached for the “Dangerous/Ban It” rubber stamp. And in my experience will not be answering the phone or emails to justify their actions.

Niggly7 days ago
clearly Stuff didnt care for my earlier comments, that there are literally thousands of Skoda Yetis on the road in Europe being used as “Motability” vehicles. Why is the situation so different in NZ. Surely Euro specs are safe?

Backstreets7 days ago
That would mean that all Holdens would have to be taken off the roads as well

JoeAstorNZ7 days ago
Of course Roger Phillips doesn’t have any safety concerns about his modified vehicles…that would affect his bottom dollar.

Jonman7 days ago
Epoxy glue hold the new Airbus380 together.

Ross.7 days ago
I feel sorry for those that have bought one but I agree with CharlieC. It’s more about the damage and injuries caused by the stresses and strains even in a minor accident. Then the finger would be pointed at the LWTA.

JohnBrett7 days ago
The LVVTA approved these Certifications, with their ‘desk top audit’ process. The LVV Certifier involved was a member of the LVVTA’s Technical Advisory Committee.
Plenty of similar vehicles have been correctly Certified with steel floor-pans Mig-spot welded to the existing structure.
The big danger is the incompetence of the LVVTA.

daddio527 days ago
May have been on the road for 2 years Roger but hasn’t been tested by a crash as yet so your point is a moot one.

ibbillib7 days ago
The people who are stuck with the lemons should sue the Govt Body which certified the vehicles. Any Certification done for modification is expected to attain all levels in respect to safety and structural integrity. In this case that failed and they should be held accountable to the full extent of the Law.
1 reply

Otay10007 days ago
LVVTA is not a government body! NZTA is the government body causing the problem here. Obviously the particular shaping of the material in the floor- which is more important than the material used- is poorly designed. Most cars are made of light sheet steel which only achieves its strength after being shaped into ribs and curves etc. maybe the design does need to be revisited. As Charlie C and daddio say – they need to be crash tested to be proven safe.

CharlieC8 days ago
Roger Phillips isn’t listening, is he. So what if they’ve been on the road for years? The concern isn’t for the day to day driveability or suitability of the vehicles, it’s what will happen to them in the event of a serious crash.
Aluminium and steel expand, contract and stretch differently, so replacing the manufacturer’s designed and tested load-bearing steel floor pan with a different metal is absurd, and being a different metal is the reason they are gluing it. Sure it’s going to be more expensive to form a new steel plate and weld it but it’s baffling that they even seriously considered aluminium.

Comments from Dominion Post:


JohnBrett1 hour ago
SpeakSoftly speaks wisdom. I am a LVV Certifier who has certified many body re-structures, and many disability vehicles such as these. The issue with Aluminium honeycomb, and adhesives is not the materials themselves. The issue is that you are re-structuring a steel structure with designed crumple performance. The only way to reliably reproduce the performance of the material removed is to replace with similar, i.e. folded sheet steel fixed with MIG spot welds and fillet welds. The LVV System has outgrown its origins and originators, and needs to become more professional.

SpeakSoftly3 hours ago
I think the real question is – Why does the NZTA continue to delegate the certification process to an organisation set up 20 years ago by a bunch of hot-rodders to certify hot-rods, and still staffed by a large number of ageing hot-rodders? The comments below about ” not everything is welded or bolted together” are right on the mark, who are the LVVTA to decide either way whether glueing aluminium honeycomb to steel is OK, or to police the certification process when a certifier takes it upon himself to decide? Every issue that crops up is a whole new area for them to learn about, or to just let go until something happens.
Maybe the NZTA should reconsider their original proposal from 20 odd years ago?

Edward Jones8 days ago
The time has come when the Government should give consideration to separating disability vehicle modification requirements from general vehicle compliancing requirements. The demanding areas encountered in modifying vehicles for the disabled are the realm of experienced specialists and should be treated as such – but that is only my opinion. As a wheelchair bound driver with paraplegia, I can assure you that the vehicle choices available to the disabled consumer are extremely limited world wide and anybody accepting the challenge of entering this field on a global scale should be encouraged. However the Skoda Yeti concept is not new and there is a conservative choice of such products available in other countries. The problem, from the consumer’s point of view, is that all vehicles are simply modified versions of existing vehicles and thus very few are truly suitable even when extensively and expensively modified. Wheelchair bound drivers, world wide, await a manufacturer to market an inexpensive lightweight vehicle, built from the ground up, just for them. If only !

ChrisM112 days ago
I understood epoxy glue was permitted to be used on commercial aircraft. Somewhat surprised that it is considered unsuitable for cars, although this may be an over-simplistic view. Perhaps someone could enlighten me on this.
1 reply

ChrisM112 days ago
Following on from this, I have since read a posting by CharlieC on Stuff article relating to this same matter. It was pointed out that steel and aluminum expand and contract at different rates with changes in temperature, therefore gluing is not appropriate. This appears to vindicate the decision of LVVTA. Interested to hear further information.

Elderlybloke12 days ago
There are very good Glues /Adhesives available.
Commercial Aircraft use Adhesives to secure parts together and Aviation has a very high regard for Safety.
Our Authorities are still decades behind the rest of the World.
1 reply

BarnacleBill12 days ago
You, and others with similar comments, are making the assumption that the adhesive used was in fact a structural one. There are glues that are used for non-load bearing panels (door skins etc) and glues that are used for structural stuff. The panel stuff is not suitable for structural areas. The article says it is “car panel glue” which would seem to indicate it is the former.

DonG12 days ago
The system was designed to serve the people. We empower the system to empower ourselves for the benefit of us all. Let us not lose sight of what is really important… Joy and learning.

To be wealthy we must allow others to be wealthy by allowing others to profit too…

We must give as we would like to be given to if we are to receive as we would like to receive.

ArthurOrd-Hulme12 days ago
If you are worried about the structural safety of epoxy glue whatever you do, do not get in an aircraft. Most planes are now built making extensive structural use of epoxy glues, and we are talking 777s etc. I have dealt with the Low Volume Vehicle Technical Association in the area of Wheelchair Vehicles. Based on that experience, I am guessing that one of their ‘engineers’ has seen “glue” and panicked, not understanding that nowadays not everything is welded or bolted together. And automatically reached for his/her “Dangerous, Ban It” rubber stamp. He/she will now be hiding under their desk, frightened of the consequences of their actions.

Niggly12 days ago
similar cars are in use in their thousands in Europe. Why the problem here?
1 reply

Terry Harris12 days ago

pecee12 days ago
good god,what next,
1 reply

DonG12 days ago
Exactly. Someone in the system has got out of hand. This is what mps are there to fix.

I watched the on tv last year.

Why would anyone pay tax?

Low Volume Vehicle Certification- Your Queries

We have been answering queries about LVV Certification ever since this website was started. The queries and the replies are spread around a number of posts.

So just to make things easier to find- here are some of the pages which might already have the answer you are looking for, or where you can post [...]

Who said old guys can’t handle fast cars?

0-30 km/h (s): 5.8s

0-40 km/h (s): 8.4

0-50 km/h (s): 13.3

0-60 km/h (s): 21.5

0-70 km/h (s): NA

Ferrari 412 turned into builder’s ute


Ferrari Ute 1

A Ferrari sports car has been turned into a pick-up truck for the sake of television ratings.

The Italian collectable has been reworked into the “the world’s most exclusive pick-up” as part of the Ultimate Wheels TV show on the History Channel in the UK.

The show is [...]


Would you buy an EV if it would carry you 250 miles between two-minute recharges? It’s no longer a pipe dream, writes John Cadogan

An emerging battery technology could be poised to make electric cars practical for the driving masses – finally. Based on a little-known (but common) material called germanium, and using fledgling nano-technology, [...]

Unit Seats

Detailed Drawings and Stress calculations for UNIT SEATS were prepared in 2003

The Unit system built from standardized components, either in Steel or Aluminium alloy. The Unit System provides three point dual sensitive lap/diagonal seat-belts for each occupant, within the seating system. (NO Seatbelt anchorages required on the vehicle floor, or sidewalls) The Unit [...]


In the District Court Held at Manukau

CIV 2013-055-093

In the matter of Section 106 of the Transport Act 1998


In the matter of an appeal against a decision of the New Zealand Transport Agency to, inter alia, revoke a deed of appointment as a low volume vehicle inspector/inspecting organization

Between John Bernard Brett, [...]

“Fair Go” programme taken on by LVV Certifier

NEWS- NZ Patent granted- see

Fair Go have been getting it all wrong, attacking a NZ business “The Battery Clinic” which reconditions battery packs for Hybrid cars, and which had developed the revolutionary “Power Jockey” which both extends the life of the battery packs, increases the cars performance, and makes big improvements to [...]