Carrier Data plates

[RichardT10829]

you are right in some respects...... it is not illegal in the UK to reproduce a vin plate as long as the details contained on the plate are correct for the vehicle ie if it was a car the plate would have to be correct to the stamped in vin on the chassis and other hidden VIN's which most folk dont know about (and i will not discuss any further for obvious reasons)

so say you had a mini. the visible vin is located in the gutter on the scuttle infront of the drivers seat, the vin plate is mounted on the slam pannel at the front where the bonnet meets the grille this part often corrodes and the plates either get binned or lost so you can reproduce plates to match the numbers in the chassis

NOW THEN:-

same chap has the same mini but the mini is registered as a 1964 austin mini.....he wants to make some money... and the car he has although nice is not worth that much money and this guy wants to make mega bucks so he goes onto ebay and buys an old V5 document for a 1964 austin mini cooper S.....he then goes back into his garage and welds over the numbers in the scuttle pannel and removes all the glass, then places the Cooper S Reg and plates onto the chassis.....now remember the plates came from a scrapped cooper S but the documents were retained....neither car was stolen......

dispite this you have stepped over the line and you have broken the law.

this is a very popular problem in the UK especially with Mini's and old Landrovers mainly because with mini's you get the cars value to rise from 3k to circa 19k and with landrovers its a way folk avoid paying road tax.

what you are doing is slightly different as the vehicles were not registered perse....

think of it as you building a caterham 7 car and you want to register it you can put anything you like as the chassis number....even BOLLOX1234 if you wish. i know chap that had his name and date of birth for the car something like ROB12012010.

the problem may arrise for those who dont know all their details for 100% certainty and they get a plate made.....later down the line another carrier is dragged from its rusty tomb and it has its plate in situ which contains some of the details you have used.

you cannot use plates from one carrier and put it on another.. this goes back to the mini scenario.

my advise...and it may not be liked ? is those in the situation where they do not know all their details can provide to you what they do know then for the missing details you give it any number but.....either before or after you place a mark be it a pip or a line....anything that way you can say to the powers that be this number has been given based on research however not 100% the mark identifies this number as questionable or not 100%

finally the question would be raised that these vehicles were never fully registered and those that were have long since gone...when the reg has not been used or has not flagged up in the system for a period of time, the details go back into the pot (so to speak) and the reg would be re issued for example those who have registered carriers in the UK will have numbers previously used on cars / bikes etc it is rare you will get a reg number of that period that has not been used before... my pal has an old 40's period number on his brand new audi.....cherrished transfer.

with documents especially in the UK i would need to sit down with a pint and spend a few hours explaining it i have kept it as simple as i can and have still babbled on so it gives you an idea


i know a little bit about this stuff especially for a brick layer !

Also a true vin contains a hell of alot of detail in the number sequence ie, make, model, trim type, date of manufacture, factory/country of manufacture and a unique random sequence.......

losely translated i suppose our plates are a vin but it could be argued that it was for military purposes for servicing and armament issues like a reference plate

i dont think you will have any issues to be fair George as there is no propper register for these things (i dont think)

[George McKenzie]

Thanks Richard . I agree with that you have said . Now the fact is are we making VIN plates as such . These were never used to get a license, they were for military use And if we did get a license which number would be on the license? ,I would think that if we need proof one number on the carrier would be proof of ownership .and like you say if you pick a number that is on another carrier the world won't come to an end .I have to convince the maker of this .

[RichardT10829]

i dont personally think they are vin plates... and i suppose at the reproduction of plates from his point of view would not be illegal...copied vins only become ileagal once they are used on a vehicle for the above purposes i mentioned....the manufacture is not the illeagal part...its the use.

just to throw a spanner in the works further the lists which are popping up on this thread list your 10128 carrier as a universal carrier no2 mk1* mine is 10131.... and after forensic testing of the remnants of my front armour and the numbers left therein (not complete) we arrived at the CT number being CT54508 by deduction (not fool proof) and my carrier is a No.3 Mk1* can i ask how you guys established 10128 was a no2 mk1* ? as this is throwing doubt into my mind about mine being what we beleive it to be...

its a minefield this numbering lark hahahaha.

[Ralph Volkert]

Hi Richard, I really only know and can guarante the numbers on my machine for certain. I have had to depend on the accuracy of the many differnt outside sources for the other machines listed here.

Due to a lack of reference materials, the UC 2MkI 2MkII or 3MKII or what ever, is the part I am deficient in. I recently have ordered Nigel's first 2 books in the hopes that will clarify the situation. But the list really will only be as acurate as the info given.

PLEASE! Note and Mail me ANY corrections notice or assistance. I will always correct and post copies of my list with Revision nos. to reflect any corrections and additions to the list.

Thanks to those who have already done so.

Speaking of which can anyone speak to the accuracy of Defence Contract # (CD) WSL72.2? What country is that for? That is a new one on me.

[Perry Kitson]

Just a few more numbers to throw into the mix. My carrier is missing the data plates(perhaps this is a better name than VIN plates), but here are the numbers off the MkII*(I believe).
Build date: 2 10 1944 (Feb. 10)
Serial #24344
W.D. # 266827
Lower hull # 26924
Upper hull # 26845

There seems to be quite a gap, in the other direction, between the serial number and the hull numbers compared to other carriers.
If somone is able to reproduce DATA plates, I would be interested in a set.

Perry

[RichardT10829]

Ralph / Perry. cheers for that i was not having a go, just wanted to make sure what i had was correct. Nigel Watson had done some research for me and he had come back with that contract number, it was made by ford Canada i know that much, but only he will be able to enlighten further as he had access to the full details. but here is a snippet of the info i have

The evidence on the vehicle points to it being manufactured as part of a batch of MkI Carriers made to Contract WSL72.2* between the years of 1942 and 1944.
*This evidence is from Universal Carrier wartime Production Cards held at Bovington Tank Museum, Dorset, from the wartime Standing Order Books held at The National Archives in London.


if they are made from brass i reckon if someone made the patterns i could get them made up. but with british VAT about to go crackers, it wouldnt be cheap.

[Jordan Baker]

Ralph here is another # for your list.

All that is left of this veh is part of the front armour. Myself and a buddy scraped the carrier 2 years ago and parted it out.

The top edge of the armour is stamped as follows.

CT113652 1943 1451 (5/6?) I can't tell if the last digit is a 5 or 6

Interesing as this is only a few numbers off of another one you have in your list.