Sir, – I refer to Conor Mooney’s letter (“Car registrations – what’s another year?”, Letters, September 1st). Clearly, he has a bee in his bonnet; perhaps I can clarify the background for him and your other interested readers.

In 1986, I was deputy president of the Society of the Irish Motor Industry; the president was the late Matt Fagan. A group of us, including Matt and myself, were invited to a meeting in the Department of Environment to discuss the impending problem surrounding registration numbers because, at that time, the format was a maximum of three letters and three numbers, and the department could see that the system would run out of options before the end of 1987.

The society’s proposal was to increase the sequence of letters to four, which would increase the possibilities to a level that could never be achieved.

The department came back to us and said they were opting for a year signifier, as An Garda Síochána requested it so that vehicle identification would be easier for them.

Our concerns with this move were the long-term effect on used vehicle values, which affected the individual but would have a huge effect on the motor industry. Can you imagine any other capital-hungry business having to deal with a big stock depreciation on December 31st every year?

We also pointed out the impending issue when the new millennium arrived.

The effect on used car values was immediate; however, what was unexpected was the effect on consumer purchasing patterns. It is true to say that purchases were front-loaded to the early months, with the second half of the year very poor, causing very serious cash flow problems for the motor industry in general.

Cars and people that look good for their age

The industry eventually succeeded in getting the DOE to split the year in 2013 to what we have now. It was a survival strategy that somewhat smoothed out the sales pattern to manageable proportions and provided consumers a more acceptable depreciation cycle.

I am no longer active in the retail motor business but would suggest that if there were a return to reasonably anonymous registration numbers, the motor industry and consumers would welcome it.

Mooney’s inference that the motor industry was behind the change in 1987 and that the government kowtowed to “vested interests” clearly illustrates that he never went to bat with a group of well-versed civil servants. – Yours, etc,

BRIAN MURPHY,

Templeogue.