Buying an out-of-state car in CA

[Excaliber]

I don't consider my Oregon Cobra registered as a 1965 Cobra, nor does Oregon nor would California. Nor would anyone else with half a brain...

It is a REPLICA, as noted elsewhere on the title. Many, or most, of the states that also register a kit Cobra as a 1965 Cobra very likely have a similiar disclosure somewhere on the title. "Street Rod", "Specially Constructed Vehicle", "Replica" or some other qualifying term.

I know for a FACT that in Hawaii and Oregon if your kit Cobra does not carry that qualifying statement somewhere on the title your title is invalid. Yup, there are SOME titles without a qualifier in many states, that does not make your car legal or correct, it's just smoke, mirrors and an incompetent DMV employee.

twoshelbys title is:
A. Not showing the qualifying statement as to what it REALLY is.
B. An illegally registered vehicle waiting for the stuff to hit the fan. You better jump on that amnesty thing while you can (if you were in California that is).

Take you pick...

[jwd]

Too much Pakalolo has made you crazy AND paranoid. Just because you can't get it right, don't condemn those that do. Register yours as a 1972 Ford Country Squire for all I care. See ya.

[Excaliber]

jwd, your car is illegally titled, period. It is not a 1965 Cobra. California is under no obligation, nor is Oregon, Hawaii or any other state, to accept your title at face value. It would be a complete sham to advertise your car for sale as a 1965 Cobra without qualifying statements.

...and you aint fooling anybody here either.

[jwd]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

jwd, your car is illegally titled, period. It is not a 1965 Cobra. California is under no obligation, nor is Oregon, Hawaii or any other state, to accept your title at face value. It would be a complete sham to advertise your car for sale as a 1965 Cobra without qualifying statements.

...and you aint fooling anybody here either.

Again. Please read before you post. Nowhere did I say my car was titled as a 1965 COBRA . Where do you get this crap. It is titled as a 1965 and is completely legal. For Gods sake, put down your crack pipe and pull your head out. I'm done arguing with a f---ing idiot.

[Excaliber]

Lets review the thread question:

Buying an out-of-state car in CA

How can I register that car in California, is the fundamental question. The quick answer is: SB100

jwd's mystery 1965 "car" is an unknown variable, as he wisely chooses not to divulge exactly WHAT it is registered as. We will assume it's a "Cobra" until further notice. One thing we do know for sure is; it aint no 1965 "whatever".

The very gray and controversial answer appears to be, any kit Cobra legally titled in another state as a 1965 Cobra. The KEY to that controversial question is the "legal" status.

twoshelby's think's his car meets that criteria, a quick glance at the original California title shows clearly that is not the case. Bringing that car BACK to California and attempting to register it as before will all but certainly result in failure or fraud charges at some point in time, if not immediately.

jwd is sure his car is legally registered as a 1965 Cobra, apparently without quailification, (we assume in the state of Washington). That car will not past muster with the California DMV as a "real" 1965 Cobra. Neither will any future prospective buyer fall for it (at least let us hope not).

But let's assume it DID, or twoshelbys did, or anyone else with a 1965 Cobra title!!! What's the value of a 1965 Cobra for California tax purposes? $500,000? A million dollars? At what,,, 7% tax? You will be BEGGING them to re-do the title as a "kit" car, worth a fraction of that amount! You will be swearing up and down it's all a big horrible mistake, PLEASE don't register it as "real".

[twobjshelbys]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

Lets review the thread question:

twoshelby's think's his car meets that criteria, a quick glance at the original California title shows clearly that is not the case. Bringing that car BACK to California and attempting to register it as before will all but certainly result in failure or fraud charges at some point in time, if not immediately.

Where did I say that? I merely provided factual evidence that SOMEONE ELSE did, and for one year, got away with it - whether it's right or not I'm not offering an opinion. And that Colorado registered it as such (as evidenced by my title) and it's the norm here. Your mileage will vary.

I for one will only make permanent residence in California if someone decides to plant my pine box there. That state is goofy.

[Excaliber]

Welcome, Homegense, fasten your seat belt.

Ah, point taken twoshelbys, the pine box is noted also!

This entire California registration problem exists because to many "some one's" did in fact register their kit's (Duece Coupe's, Porsche, Cobra, etc.) illegally. In some cases without knowing better, in some cases it was outright fraud and they KNEW exactly what they were doing.

Shelby, tried it, darn near went to jail. SPF owners and dealers tried it, the subsequent investigation was serious. Some SPF cars were black listed (like Shelby completition series cars are) and they can never be registered again in California. Some SPF owners and/or dealers narrowly escaped jail. Some custom car makers were investigated and arrested! Business' were closed, cars were confiscated, very serious charges threatened and/or made. People DID go to jail.

The issue is to serious to ignore. All prospective buyers need to be advised of the issues they may face in any given state and in particular California; When considering the purchase of a MODERN kit car currently titled as a 1965 "whatever".

I COULD advertise MY ERA replica as a 1965 Cobra and state that IS what is says on the title. I could, and it does say that, while the statement is "accurate", it's not "true". I would be lieing if I said my car is a 1965 Cobra, period. Your ethics on that issue may vary.

[Don]

As of 10-1-2009, CT passed a Model Year registration bill which allows for the Model Year on the registration to be the year the " vehicle most closely resembles ". Applies to any/all kit cars or replicas. However, the Make name on the registration remains as " Composite ", term CT has always used for kit cars and replicas. CT DMV assigns a unique state issued VIN to all Composites, CTXXXXX.

CT does not issue a Title for any vehicle that has a Model year older than 1981

[tcrist]

Don,

So does that mean that if someone has an origional 1964 mustang, they cant register or drive it there?

If so, what is the reason, smog?

[Rick Parker]

JWD If you are in California and your car is registered as a 1965 and was not manufactured in 1965 regardless of what it is parading around as, I suggest you introduce yourself with the Amnesty bill that is aimed at violators such as yourself. When the DMV and BAR refocus on this issue after much procrastination, there will be no second chances. Authorities will be knocking on your door to do inspections and revoke your plates on the spot, this is what is set to happen. I've seen it happen on a small scale. Currently it's just a money hunt, they have been, and are still refering to it as it an Amnesty Period. .....If you are in California and any of this applies to you I'd call it a Wake Up Period. THEN you can show everyone your 1965 (whatever) as it sits in the garage,or point to it through a fence at an impound yard. Because if it is registered as a 1965 and is not, or better yet if it is using the VIN of a legitimate 1965 IE: Mustang, Falcon etc whether it is a Cobra or not.........you'll be minus a 1965 (whatever).

[bingo2]

There is a little known division within the DMV in California, the Involuntary Transfer Division. Guess what they do. They review all suspicious registrations and title transfers occurring in the State of California. About sixty days after the registration has taken place they receive the microfilm records (old technology) from the field offices and a report from their database containing the “flagged” records. Among those flagged records is anything relating to the transfer or registration, including the reported purchase price, of a Cobra like vehicle or kit car. There is an internal DMV memo that specifically addresses the Cobra registration and transfer process. As often happens in large companies and State agencies, not all field office employees are up to speed on the policies and procedures and you may get lucky and get your transfer and registration past the field office employee but, there is a very good chance the ITD will, at some point in the future, come knocking on your door with the bad news: your registration is invalid and your title will be recalled.

Will you get caught, maybe, maybe not? I didn’t want to be the one that tests the “good faith and credit” or the “bone fide purchaser” positions in court, although I still think they have merit.

The SB 100 process is relatively painless and as Got The Bug (Doug) suggested, why not do it.

[JTD]

New security features designed to help prevent fraud and counterfeiting of California driver licenses have caused a backlog of renewals, according to the California DMV.

While many drivers applied through the mail or online hoping to save time, some have faced delays of more than two months.

Marjorie Barakian, a certified nursing assistant and home health aide, says she's been waiting nearly two months for her new license.

Barakian says she wrote a check on Nov. 8 and the DMV cashed it on Nov. 22. As of Jan. 6, she still hasn't received her renewal.


"Do I have to move to another state to get a driver's license?" said Barakian.

Barakian is not alone. Several viewers wrote NBCLA, saying they've experienced similar delays.

"It was a little more than three months from the date I paid it before I got it," said viewer Robert McDonnell. "The operator at the DMV said the solution is to go to the DMV and wait in one of their endless lines to get a driver's license extension."

[jwd]

Originally Posted by Rick Parker

JWD If you are in California and your car is registered as a 1965 and was not manufactured in 1965 regardless of what it is parading around as, I suggest you introduce yourself with the Amnesty bill that is aimed at violators such as yourself. When the DMV and BAR refocus on this issue after much procrastination, there will be no second chances. Authorities will be knocking on your door to do inspections and revoke your plates on the spot, this is what is set to happen. I've seen it happen on a small scale. Currently it's just a money hunt, they have been, and are still refering to it as it an Amnesty Period. .....If you are in California and any of this applies to you I'd call it a Wake Up Period. THEN you can show everyone your 1965 (whatever) as it sits in the garage,or point to it through a fence at an impound yard. Because if it is registered as a 1965 and is not, or better yet if it is using the VIN of a legitimate 1965 IE: Mustang, Falcon etc whether it is a Cobra or not.........you'll be minus a 1965 (whatever).

Rich, I'll try to explain it to you since Ernie refuses to understand.

1. I do not live in California
2. My car is legally titled as a 1965
3. My car IS NOT titled as a 1965 COBRA (never said it was)
4. That's how it's done (or used to be) in my state. I handed them the MSO, wrote them a check and they handed me my title/registration/plates. Simple as that.

There are many states that do it exactly the same way. Ca. doesn't happen to be one of them.

This all started when Ernie posted about people who "claim" (inferring that they are lying) that their car is legally titled as a 1965. It would have been easy for him to say "That only applies to people in Ca." but he chose to include everyone, in all states.

Sorry that Ca. is soooo screwed up and make a big deal out of what most other states don't give a second thought. It's sad that they have to spend all those tax dollars to create a special division to deal with this non-existent problem. I can see why the state is bankrupt.

[Don]

Terry:

RE: CT Title

" So does that mean that if someone has an origional 1964 mustang, they cant register or drive it there? "

If I understand the question correctly, no impact on registration, driving, selling, purchasing, etc., etc,.For vehicles with a Model Year prior to 1981, registered as any other vehicle, but the state will not issue an official Title. For selling purposes, the state recommends using the current owner's registration certificate in addition to the Bill of Sale.

The Model year registration for kit cars was not retroactive prior to 10-1-2009, only new/pre-owned purchases after that date. Previously, the year of registration would also become the Model year.

[Excaliber]

There are many states that do it exactly the same way.

Really? How many is "many" and can you, or someone actually name any of these States?

States that will title your "kit" car as a 1965 "whatever you want to call it" with no addtitional qualifications to identify it as a replica, specially built, composite, street rod, etc. etc.

Any States? Anybody?

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by jwd

Sorry that Ca. is soooo screwed up and make a big deal out of what most other states don't give a second thought. It's sad that they have to spend all those tax dollars to create a special division to deal with this non-existent problem. I can see why the state is bankrupt.

This is the part where the wheels come off for me.

1. I like my state. I can't think of another state in the union where I would live. Every state has issues, at least in my view. No state is perfect.

2. There are A LOT of states with money troubles. CA is not alone.

3. I like clean air and regulating smog and emissions is OK with me. Our cars are not built in 1965 and should not be labled as such. In any state. In my view CA does it correctly. Not perfectly, but pretty close. There should be some sort of limit on how many of our smog monsters are allowed on the road. Pollution is problem everywhere. It's NOT a "non-existent problem."

JMHO.

[tcrist]

Originally Posted by Don

Terry:

RE: CT Title

" So does that mean that if someone has an origional 1964 mustang, they cant register or drive it there? "

If I understand the question correctly, no impact on registration, driving, selling, purchasing, etc., etc,.For vehicles with a Model Year prior to 1981, registered as any other vehicle, but the state will not issue an official Title. For selling purposes, the state recommends using the current owner's registration certificate in addition to the Bill of Sale.

The Model year registration for kit cars was not retroactive prior to 10-1-2009, only new/pre-owned purchases after that date. Previously, the year of registration would also become the Model year.

Don,

What happens in your state if you were to buy a 1964 (whatever) from a private party? What do they give you when you go to the Motor Vehicle Dept., just the registration that you keep in the auto, license plates (if you do not already have them) and your current year tags?

In Ca when you buy a used auto. You transfer it into your name and at that time you receive license plates (if the auto does not already have them, there are a lot of variables to this which I am not going to get into), a receipt from the DMV (which acts as a temp registration until you get the permanent one in the mail) and your yearly tags. Then in the mail you will get an ownership cert and a permanent copy of the registration cert.

I am sure that all states are different in one way or another.


Too all, I am sur that in your perspective state your cars are registered leagal. The OP question was about buying a out of state Cobra replica that is registered as a 1965 and bringimg it into Ca. In Ca they will not/might not accepte it. If they do, great for you, until they come back and tell you it was incorrect. The best bet is to go through the SB100 process and register it correctly (in Ca.).

[jwd]

Originally Posted by RodKnock

3. I like clean air and regulating smog and emissions is OK with me. Our cars are not built in 1965 and should not be labled as such. In any state. In my view CA does it correctly. Not perfectly, but pretty close. There should be some sort of limit on how many of our smog monsters are allowed on the road. Pollution is problem everywhere. It's NOT a "non-existent problem."

JMHO.

The process in Ca. has absolutely nothing to do with emissions/smog or they wouldn't hand out SB 100's (which I'm sure the vast majority of Cobra replica's in Ca. have). It's about generating revenue. Period.

[Excaliber]

Hmmmm, thats a head scratcher, if it was only about generating revenue, why limit the number of vehicles? Which it turn limits revenue. There could be safty issues as well as emission issues that come into play. Certainly revenue has been mentioned, by the State, as a leading factor, but I think it's more than that.

Hawaii also limits the number of Kit vehicle registrations per year, based on safty issues, not emissions or revenue. During public hearings on the "new law" concerns were expressed that allowing to many potentially high horse power vehicles (Cobras were mentioned) or potentially unsafe vehicles (Dune buggies were mentioned) per year might be unsafe for the public well being. You could all but hear them whisper, "What about the children!" The island of Oahu is therefore limited to 100 per year, with no limits on the other islands.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by jwd

The process in Ca. has absolutely nothing to do with emissions/smog or they wouldn't hand out SB 100's (which I'm sure the vast majority of Cobra replica's in Ca. have). It's about generating revenue. Period.

You're kidding right? Generating revenue? I disagree.

1. 500 cars per year can get SB100 exemptions, which is a limitation. CA just tried to increase the # to 750 exemptions, but did not get out of committee.

2. The fees and taxes on 500 replicas/cars per year is miniscule, not even a rounding error, in terms of the CA budget. The CA budget that was just passed is $87 Billion or $87,000,000,000. If you assume that about 10% is collected on every new replica at about $50,000 value per replica, then we're talking about $2.5 Million of revenue or $2,500,000. So, that SB100 revenue represents about 0.0029% of the budget. That's 29/10,000ths of one percent.