registration in australia and the legal option.

[just dreamin]

BMK flew a kite the other day re the possability of a number us starting some sort of "fighting fund" hmmm. No one has responded to date so I thought it might be interesting to bring to your attention a story in the Adelaide Advertiser that appeared today. The article "Long wait for wheels has mystery ending" has some interesting points.
Briefly a person wanted to import a car into Australia that did not have a compliance plate nore was it considered unique. To import, required minesterial approval, which was refused. The importer went to the federal court which sent the case back to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal with instructions it should think more broadly about how the ministers discression should be excercised. There was a suggestion that discression be exercised in favour of the importer. This matter was then resolved with the Dept of Transport etc. not commenting and refering the questions to the importer. The happy importer is pleased but will not be elaborating further. We live in interesting times! Food for thought?

[BMK]

Mmmm, yes I think some of the authorities are starting to understand that they must have legitimate reason to refuse.

Administrative Appeals Tribunals are part of all legitimate claims [approved or refused] and have wide discretionary powers.

Planning and registration agencies must comply with the law or standards set. Individual decisions that are made outside that scope are subject to appeal. Those making decisions on whim end up a major focus for criticism by Administrative Appeals members.

Civil Disputes and small Claims refer VCAT. They certainly cover a wide variety of areas.

Members of Government, Ministers and their Advisors are a good starting point for any grievance. It amazing what results a Members enquiry or contact can have on an official.

Or better strill just go the 90 day permit scheme...

[750hp]

I can't find the article online. Is it purely relating to the import approval or also registration? If it's the former and the guy just threw a car into a container and shipped it over with the expectation that he would get import approval while it was in transit, it's his own problem. The Infrastructure website makes it clear to get import approval before you load it onto a ship.

A car doesn't need to be considered unique to get import approval, but it needs to be pre-'89...

[just dreamin]

The car is post 1989 and doesnt meet the requirements for a straightforward importation, ie personal import, or other designated catagories. That is the province of the federal government. However the court appeal seems to have argued successfully that the car should be let into aust even though it dose'nt fit the rules. The problem was that he could not get import approval and dissagreed with the rulling. The Aston martin DB9 Volante convertible (car in question) has not been shipped yet but will be able to be registered because approval has been granted for its importation. The article appears on p39 in the SA Business Journal section of The Advertiser and is written by Russell Emmerson dated Tues June 14.

[suthol]

If the article is the one I'm thinking about it was a guy who purchased and then decided to import it and clearly didn't meet the PI guidelines due to age of vehicle and length of prior ownership, he had truck loads of money and figured he should be a special case so challenged it in court and much to his dismay found he wasn't.

[Dimis]

Sorry, can someone please explain this to me like I'm a 7 year old!?

How much would it cost?
What buttons do you have to push?
&
Who has to sleep with who & Where?

Many Thanks,

[400TT]

Originally Posted by just dreamin

The Aston martin DB9 Volante convertible (car in question) has not been shipped yet but will be able to be registered because approval has been granted for its importation. The article appears on p39 in the SA Business Journal section of The Advertiser and is written by Russell Emmerson dated Tues June 14.

Import approval and registration approval are two different things.

You can get approval to import, but the car will definitely need to be modified to comply with all ADR's for year of manufacture to be able to be registered here. And all the modifications may need to be performed be an approved workshop. Sounds like he will have no problem with providing the funds to do the required modifications.

[Zedn]

Originally Posted by BMK

Mmmm, yes I think some of the authorities are starting to understand that they must have legitimate reason to refuse.

Administrative Appeals Tribunals are part of all legitimate claims [approved or refused] and have wide discretionary powers.

Planning and registration agencies must comply with the law or standards set. Individual decisions that are made outside that scope are subject to appeal. Those making decisions on whim end up a major focus for criticism by Administrative Appeals members.

Civil Disputes and small Claims refer VCAT. They certainly cover a wide variety of areas.

Members of Government, Ministers and their Advisors are a good starting point for any grievance. It amazing what results a Members enquiry or contact can have on an official.

Or better strill just go the 90 day permit scheme...

I disagree with the 90 day permit system being a solution to registration.

If everyone starts going down that route it will give the authorities reason to scrap the ICV process. The intention of permit systems is to allow historic cars access to roads for travelling between club events and completing maintenance and repairs.

We should not be looking to this as a solution for kit cars. A solution should be more towards adding an ICV category to the low volume scheme. The low volume scheme is national and currently has categories for under 25 and 25-100. There should also be an additional option of 1 per year that allows cars built by individuals to obtain a VIN through the Feds that is then accepted by the states. Compliance would simply be to the national code of practice which has been written by a committee made up of all states. full stop!

If full production and both categories of low volume are complied at a national level, why are ICVs done at state level? There is no logic. There are no secure borders between states where you have to stop and have a vehicle inspected. Cars can freely be sold and bought interstate.

All states should be doing is checking vehicles are maintained.

Has no one actually stopped and thought about this?

[Merv and Sharon]

Originally Posted by Zedn

I disagree with the 90 day permit system being a solution to registration.

If everyone starts going down that route it will give the authorities reason to scrap the ICV process. The intention of permit systems is to allow historic cars access to roads for travelling between club events and completing maintenance and repairs.

We should not be looking to this as a solution for kit cars. A solution should be more towards adding an ICV category to the low volume scheme. The low volume scheme is national and currently has categories for under 25 and 25-100. There should also be an additional option of 1 per year that allows cars built by individuals to obtain a VIN through the Feds that is then accepted by the states. Compliance would simply be to the national code of practice which has been written by a committee made up of all states. full stop!

If full production and both categories of low volume are complied at a national level, why are ICVs done at state level? There is no logic. There are no secure borders between states where you have to stop and have a vehicle inspected. Cars can freely be sold and bought interstate.

All states should be doing is checking vehicles are maintained.

Has no one actually stopped and thought about this?

The 'club' registration process has been in place for some 'classic' and 'veteran' cars for many years and serves a useful purpose. However, I tend to agree with Liam on this as the Cobra replica is generally a more regularly used, contemporary build of vehicle, and not a collectors' item. The activities of national bodies representing their members have been responsible for some categories of car being approved already. There really should be national criteria adopted and (just) checked at state levels. The 'permit' strategy would not suit me at all, given the frequency of use that I have, but it may suit others. It seems not be the first choice as a strategy, but a subsequent option, if needed.

[Outwest34au]

Originally Posted by Zedn

I disagree with the 90 day permit system being a solution to registration.

If everyone starts going down that route it will give the authorities reason to scrap the ICV process. The intention of permit systems is to allow historic cars access to roads for travelling between club events and completing maintenance and repairs.

We should not be looking to this as a solution for kit cars. A solution should be more towards adding an ICV category to the low volume scheme. The low volume scheme is national and currently has categories for under 25 and 25-100. There should also be an additional option of 1 per year that allows cars built by individuals to obtain a VIN through the Feds that is then accepted by the states. Compliance would simply be to the national code of practice which has been written by a committee made up of all states. full stop!

If full production and both categories of low volume are complied at a national level, why are ICVs done at state level? There is no logic. There are no secure borders between states where you have to stop and have a vehicle inspected. Cars can freely be sold and bought interstate.

All states should be doing is checking vehicles are maintained.

Has no one actually stopped and thought about this?

I have to agree on the permit thing. If we all bend over and accept less than what is our right then the already distorted system WILL crumble.

Why isn't 1 car low volume production?? Take my old girl for example, it isn't a 'kit car'. I have had to alter almost every item I fit to comply with current rulings that are way different to what the original manufacturer had in mind. It hasn't been built, it has been totally re engineered to comply. Like it or loathe it, it will be a one of a kind in construction except for body shape and basic chassis design. What percentage of changes is required to make a car unique/ individually constructed or a low volume production of 1 or maybe I will make another the same??

The case of different rules from sate to state, well, franky that is just total frogsh*t. If our mate in NT has a legally registered Cobra with live sidepipes he can drive it to NSW, QLD or wherever and the car is still legal. If he tries to register it in another state it is not legal. How can anyone drive a car that is unroadworthy/ illegal in another state or territory?? I am not for a moment suggesting it is his problem or he should be sidelined. The problem as we are all very well aware is the wankers that want to play God and make themselves seem more important by differentiation.
It's just like the wanker safety officers in each different coal mine here. There are generic rules but each site has some FANTASTIC idea that makes them safer than the next, so the next bloke has to come up with some stupid interpretation to make life harder for the contractors that is site specific. eg, strobe light on one site and revolving lamp on another, flag height of 2.1 metres on one site and 2.4 on another, regulatory working at heights limit different from site to site. No wonder common sense people cant work on mines, you need to leave your brain in a box at the gate and be a sheep, comply, shut up and take the money.

Maybe someone should start a one nation political party. You can't take the Australian out of Australians but you can certainly divide us on so many levels.

[*Cobber*]

This rego thing always goes round in circles, the bottom line is the market is not big enough or loud enough for the gvt to give a hoot. With greens in the mix we will only be allowed elastic band powered vehicles.

The cobra party would have more followers than the current bunch of clowns.

[just dreamin]

Well as allways we seem to have got onto another issue. The point of the article was to illustrate that there are options available to challenge rulings and descisions that we assume are cast in stone. This guy challenged the system because he thought it unfair or unreasonable. Its obvious the Admin Apeals Tribunal rejected his apeal so he took it to the next level. The Federal Court thought he had a case and made a few suggestions. Low and behold his car was suddenly allowed in. The moral of the story is, You can sit back and complain all you like and no matter what, not much will change. Or you can do something about it which would require some time, commitment and money.

[*Cobber*]

At least it got this far without the holden ford fight.

I agree with you completely, there's a rule for one and a rule for another it just depends on how much money you have as to which rules you follow.

Now where did I park my Aston Martin.

[Zedn]

Originally Posted by just dreamin

Well as allways we seem to have got onto another issue. The point of the article was to illustrate that there are options available to challenge rulings and descisions that we assume are cast in stone. This guy challenged the system because he thought it unfair or unreasonable. Its obvious the Admin Apeals Tribunal rejected his apeal so he took it to the next level. The Federal Court thought he had a case and made a few suggestions. Low and behold his car was suddenly allowed in. The moral of the story is, You can sit back and complain all you like and no matter what, not much will change. Or you can do something about it which would require some time, commitment and money.

This is not a legal battle. In most cases the government departments are following the legislation. There is a national piece of legislation that allows state legislation. I can only comment on NSW, but we have the Road and Transport (vehicle Registration) regulation that we must comply with. This legislation authorises the authority to grant exemptions to a particular vehicle to comply with the ADRs. The authority is authorised to grant exemption straight out or exemption subject to conditions. This legislation allows them to grant exemption but doesnt say they have to. If the authority wants to they can turn around and say 'no exemptions' and then all ICVs have to comply with full testing. If this happens you can appeal to the ombudsman and contact the minister, but you are arguing that it is unreasonable to request the requirements, not that a law has been breached.

[just dreamin]

I agree especially if those same departments are granting aditional exemptions to street rod builders, trike builders and car modifyers that pre date certain years. The gripe is that ICV builders do not get the same considerations.

[*Cobber*]

I have two exemptions on my cobra.

If you don't ask you don't get.

[BMK]

The 90 day or 45 registration scheme should be an option.

Firstly, it is not a permit scheme but full registration with an option of a 45 day use or 90 day use. It is a lot more cost effective.

You can drive the car when and where you want. That is to events, workshops or just cruise. There is absolutely no requirement to drive or being driven to a sanctioned event.

Jump in and take a mate for a cruise and a coffee for a few hours..

You pay to use your car for either length of time - 90 or 45 days. You have a log book. It is simple you fill it out and away you go...

There is no requirement to fill it out to move it from yard to yard - under 100 metres on the road. But once you decide to use the car beyond 100 metres you fill in the relevant details.

Now 90 day registration/log book allows an enthusiast car owner to use the car nearly every weekend. If you want to use the car for a daily driver you can until the 90 days are used up in a year. This is recorded in the log book - similiar to an interstate driver log book but a lot less detail for stops.

I think it a great option. Far better than trying to fight a battle...

SR plates on street rods do not appear to have altered the value of individual street rods. I have seen a car on full registration canceled by new owners and plated on SR plates. Not sure if this was a cost factor or just..

S/Aust. has multiples of 90 day registration for the family cars. You can register for a period and leave it for 3 or 6 months and just pay the next 3 months. Your choice. Great for a laid up family car or someone who is overseas holiday etc.

Guess at the end of the day it is your/our choice.

[OZCOBRA]

Originally Posted by BMK

The 90 day or 45 registration scheme should be an option.

Firstly, it is not a permit scheme but full registration with an option of a 45 day use or 90 day use.

Totally AGREE!!!!..

[jcraigau]

I'm a little confused, if it's a full registration doesn't the car need to be registered? If a 90 day (not permit) gets around being registered then I'm just going to weld up some steam pipe and go for it!

[OZCOBRA]

Originally Posted by jcraigau

I'm a little confused, if it's a full registration doesn't the car need to be registered? If a 90 day (not permit) gets around being registered then I'm just going to weld up some steam pipe and go for it!

I'm a little confused......
Lets me see if we can shed some light???.....

.....If the permit is full rego then the car is registered is it not!!!!...so it doesn't need to be registered again because you've just given yourself 45/90 days FULL REGISTRATION..F@RK.....so if your 90 day rego gets you registered then your not getting around being registered because you already are registered albeit for 90 or 45 days...... Hey but that's how it is in Victoria.

So weld up some pipe get an UNREGISTERED vehicle PERMIT present the car in a to be seen as roadworthy state and hope to god the Club Secretary will sign off for you...and then your REGISTERED FULLY but remember only for 45/90 days..