MTPLM upgrade

Part 4 of the regulation refers to Categories M2, M3, N2, N3 and Category O vehicles (trailers) and Item 18 is entitled “Plates (statutory)”..

Sorry, I still do not see anything about what must be displayed on the specified plates, apart from that the vehicle identification number must be on all of them.  Nothing about the mass permitted.

The bit that tells us this section applies to type O vehicles must be pages away.

I did find it amusing that a hierarchy is set of "motorcaravan, ambulance and hearse", which sums it all up for us.

The only plate in the front locker of my Xplore 422 refers to the VIN, no weights or technical details. It also has a QR code, perhaps this contains more information. I had the caravan upgraded to 1200kg on purchase a supplied with a new plate giving the upgraded details.

Immediately under the heading of Part 4 there is reference to Category O vehicles. Item 18 then states that the statutory plate, and that is the only one that is referred to in legislation, must comply with 76/114/EEC and that, in turn, states the following:

2. MANUFACTURER'S PLATE

2.1. A manufacturer's plate, modelled on that shown in the appendix hereto, must be firmly attached in a conspicuous and readily accessible position on a part not subject to replacement in use. It must show clearly and indelibly the following information in the order listed:

2.1.1. Name of the manufacturer.

2.1.2. EEC type-approval number [1].

This number is composed of a small letter "e" followed, in the order given, by the distinguishing number or letters of the country which granted the EEC type-approval (1 for Germany, 2 for France, 3 for Italy, 4 for the Netherlands, 6 for Belgium, 11 for the United Kingdom, 12 for Luxembourg, DK for Denmark, IRL for Ireland) and by the type-approval number corresponding to the number on the type-approval certificate for the type of vehicle. An asterisk shall be placed between the letter "e" and the distinguishing number or letters of the country which granted the EEC type-approval, and between the distinguishing number or letters and the type-approval number.

2.1.3. Vehicle identification number.

2.1.4. Maximum permitted laden weight of the vehicle.

2.1.5. Maximum permitted laden weight for the combination, where the vehicle is used for towing.

2.1.6. Maximum permitted road weight for each axle, listed in order from front to rear.

2.1.7. In the case of a semi-trailer, the maximum permitted weight on the fifth wheel king pin.

2.1.8. The requirements of 2.1.4 to 2.1.7 shall not enter into force until 12 months have elapsed from the date of adoption of the Council Directive on weights and dimensions of motor vehicles and their trailers. In the meantime, however, a Member State may require that the maximum permitted weights prescribed in its national legislation be shown on the plate of any vehicle which has entered into service in its territory.

If the technically permissible weight is higher than the maximum permitted weight, the Member State in question may request that the technically permissible weight also be stated. The weight would be set out in two columns: the maximum permitted weight on the left and the technically permissible weight on the right.

2.2 The manufacturer may give additional information below or to the side of the prescribed inscriptions, outside a clearly marked rectangle which shall enclose only the information prescribed in 2.1.1 to 2.1.8 (see the Appendix to this Annex).

Many thanks Lutz for posting the extract from Regulations; it’s starting to make sense now.  I’ve picked out the relevant parts below, with some emphasis of my own:

=======================

2. MANUFACTURER'S PLATE

2.1. A manufacturer's plate, modelled on that shown in the appendix hereto, must be firmly attached in a conspicuous and readily accessible position on a part not subject to replacement in use. It must show clearly and indelibly the following information in the order listed:

2.1.1. Name of the manufacturer.

2.1.2. EEC type-approval number [1].

2.1.3. Vehicle identification number.

2.1.4. Maximum permitted laden weight of the vehicle.

2.1.5. (N/A).

2.1.6. Maximum permitted road weight for each axle, listed in order from front to rear.

2.1.7. (N/A).

2.1.8. (N/A).

If the technically permissible weight is higher than the maximum permitted weight, the Member State in question may request that the technically permissible weight also be stated. The weight would be set out in two columns: the maximum permitted weight on the left and the technically permissible weight on the right.

=======================

So, in trying to interpret the meaning of the two plates on the caravan I’m about to buy, it looks to me that the plate beside the door is the MANUFACTURER'S PLATE referred to above, stating the ‘maximum permitted weight’ 2.1.4.  And the plate inside the front locker shows the (higher) ‘technically permissible weight’. 

If my interpretation is correct, then I am obliged to observe the maximum permitted weight figure on the plate by the door.  If I wish to increase my payload allowance, then I need to request a new Manufacturer’s Plate with the maximum permitted weight increased to the technically permissible weight as per the front locker plate.

Thanks, Lutz, for quoting the other legislation that actually describes the ideal plate, and the relevance of the weights to each other.

If the maximum permitted weight (2.1.4.) is less than the technically permissible weight then both must be displayed on the same plate. Legislation doesn’t provide for two plates.

Besides, the label by the door specifically refers to the MTPLM (Maximum Technically Permitted Laden Mass), which it definitely isn’t. If anything it would be an MPLM (as per paragraph 2.1.4.).

When we purchased our 2019 Coachman 675 laser i paid £30 to upgrade the weight by 100kg i think its ridiculous because no physical changes are made you just get a new sticker to replace the old one.

Well, having "lower" and "upper" MTPLM figures for a caravan is misleading for consumers.  The real MTPLM is the upper one, the lower one being for marketing purposes but also - as I interpret it - the one you would be tested against if stopped at a weighbridge.  

The figure I always look at first is the MIRO, which is much more meaningful.  If only manufacturers and the NCC could allow a more sensible user payload figure of 180 - 200kg, there would be no need for two MTPLM figures.

There can’t be two MTPLMs. If there were, legislation would have to specify which applies under what conditions.