Calif registration and exaust noise...

[bonyhadi]

JB
==
You are correct, SB100 only applies to vehicles never registered before any where.

Chuck
------
Hope you did check all the posts by Meat on Cobra Forum, there is a wealth of correct information
already posted. Much more than is available on this board.

CobraBill
---------
We might not like the law, some states register the car based on what it does replicate, California
does not do so. When you break a law, there can be consequences. The folks that created so
many problems were the gray market guys, some did none of the DOT and EPA modifications
that they documented.


Californians are free to move out, we won't be missed with so many moving in for the best
lifestyle in the World.

[Ron61]

Ernie,

We have had five cars go through up here on SB-100 and all went right through without any problem. They did have to have a sniffer test but were registered by the body style which is the owners perogative. They do a sniffer test and none of them would have come close to passing but that must be for paper work as after that was done the referee put the sticker on that it weas a special construction vehicle and exempt from smog. One guy has a 504 with two fours and it would be a gross polluter by todays standards. As for out of state cars that have titlels in other states I think SB 1578 addresses that issue. I have a copy of it and the only thing I see that may hang anyone up is that those cars also count against the 500 per year allowed under SB 100. However SB 1578 also has some requirements that if you try to register after the intial 500 are used, then things could get a little hairy from the way I read it. Jamo or Bonyhadi should be able to explain this much better than I.

Ron61
Ron Widener

[bonyhadi]

SB1578, as I read it is ok, if you fall under the first 500 cars. If you are 501 you are screwed and fall under the gross polluter standard and will have to go visit DMV every year. Remember once
the car's number is in the computer you can't come back and apply for SB1578. I have no idea
if and when the state gets into the high 400's you can ascertain that and what for the next year.
I know that so far this year, there haven't been 500 cars registered under SB100. Most likely
jerks are still playing the '65 and '66 registration games that can get their cars confiscated.


Why they wanted to change the law from SB100 to SB 1578 is beyond me. I don't know Sen.
Johannensen, he is from Redding and his is a Shelby CSX owner now. He is is hot water
with the Party for breaking ranks. Seems like whatever he wanted to get done hasn't been
accomplished, other than you can now register under 1578 a car that was already registered
in another state.

[Ron61]

Bonyhadi,

The way to tell how many of the 500 cars are left for the year is go go to the DMV site at WWW.DMV.CA.GOV/VR/SPCNS.Htm I am not sure if that is what you meant by being able to accertain when they get into the high 400s. And they start over at 0 on Jan. 1, 2003 with another full 500. If you are going to be 501 better to hold off until after the first of the year. I talked to David Pegos in Johannessen's office and he told me that is the way it works. He was the expert on SB 100 and knows more about it than Johannessen. I then called our local DMV and asked them if they used the regular calendar year to start the count over and the woman said they do. But if there are any of the 500 left they are noit added onto the next years 500.

Ron61
Ron Widener

[Lew the taxman]

I just got off of the DMV web site. As of Oct 3th. There are 243 slots left open for calendar year 2002. That means that only 257 vechicles were registered in the first nine months of this year. I don't think that there would be a problem with only three months to go.

Lew

[Dirt Cowboy]

Just curious, are there any folks perusing this board who have actually had problems using T.U., or from bringing a car in from out-of-state? I've read lots of insinuations, but have yet to see a posting by an affected party. 500 slots per year, 10/02 almost 1/2 still available, hard to believe the DMV can mount much of dragnet for such a little number, and numbers are everything to the DMV. Having worked the better part of last year on a case involving licensing thru the DMV, I don't think they could hit their ass with both hands.

If your home state of XYZ titles your ride as a 65 Doorslammer D-Lux, CA. cannot determine it's correct lineage. As per Fed regs, they have to honor the original states regs. Don't get confused with SB100, which is FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, not for re-titleing. Now if one were to go to another state and pull some sort of shennanigans to get a newly constructed car licensed as an old one, well, they might catch you, but I doubt it.

Any posters or lurkers out there with first hand knowledge, or experience with the DMV nazi's kicking down your doors and/or seizing your ride?

Greg
edited, i before e, except after c, my ass.

[Ron61]

Greg,

As a matter of fact I do actually know a man here that bought a Cobra in Oregon that was titled as a 1966 Ford something I think it was and he spent a year in a mess. I think some of it if not most was his fault but he got a letter from the CAL. DMV that they were going to investigate him for fraud. I talked to him last week and he now has it titled in Calif. and everything is ok now but it was a real mess he said. As I said above I don't know all the details but he has a lot of money and I think used a good chunk to get the investigation stopped and everything straightened out. Understandably he doesn't like to talk about it. This is the only person that I know of for a fact that has had a problem and as I said above, I think part of it may have been caused by him.

Ron61
Ron Widener

[Brad Pfeifer]

A couple of things....

SB1578 was authored by the same person that authored SB100, our friend and fellow Cobra-replica owner Maurice Johannessen. What SB1578 does is modify SB100 to remove the "initial" item about registration, so you could conceivably re-register a California car that was registered via another method, or register a previously registered out of state car. The reason it took so long to get it signed was it was sitting on the Govenors desk waiting for signature - I won't say anything about him, and will leave those comments up to JimsGems!

As Lew notes, with 2 months left to the calendar year, and almost half of the alloted slots left, I don't think there is going to be too much trouble for anyone to register or re-register their cars.

Bony - I know your stand on registering cars out of state, but think you are a bit paranoid. Cobra owners are merely a speck in the total number of owners of hot rod and classic cars that are out there. As I have said before, there are exponentially more 32, 33, 34 roadsters out there than Cobra's that are registered as 32, 33, 34 Fords - and no one is going after them. How do you think they registered their cars (even before SB100)? Your point though is well taken though - with SB100/1578 folks in California should not be registering their cars through out-of-state services.

There has been a lot of rumour about the CA DMV sending out fraud letters. I can only verify one, and the reasons for it were due to something other than DMV looking for people. Even in this case, the individual involved is still driving his Cobra here in California.

Brad

[Brad Pfeifer]

Here is the press release in plain english:

http://republican.sen.ca.gov/news/4/...elease1815.asp


Brad

[Cobra Chuck]

Well it's done!!!!! I went to DMV and began the S.B. 100 title and registration process. I presented all of my reciepts, MSO, a stack of S.B. 100 and CVC 580 reference material, $1462 dollars, spent about 35 minutes answering questions, 10 minutes filling out two forms and I was done. I have clear directions on what is left to do: CHP for a new VIN, BAR referee shop for a sniff test and discussions about what years requirements will apply to my snake. Then a quick stop at a Lamp and Brake inspection shop and I am done completely. I left DMV with a 90 day temporary registeration. Based on some discussion the fees were high but are based on the cost of the kit which was purchased out of state and sales tax was collected. The fees amounted to the sales tax owed on the kit. The DMV person had never done a S.B. 100 registration but knew how to get the answers quick, she was polite, efficient and pleasant. I sure hope BAR is that way. Thanks to all for the help and advice. It paid off big today!!!

[bonyhadi]

CobraChuck
===========
Glad your 90% through the process.

Brad - Dirt Cowboy
=================
With the new laws in place there is no reason to register a Cobra other than through the current
regulations. Yes, I am aware of several Cobra owners that are in hot water with California DMV
for alledged fraud. In fact Cobra owners all over the country are having the same problems
after using T.U. Contact DV for his views. It boils down to, why risk it, only if you have nothing
to loose or so much money that you don't care about a criminal charge.

Brad
====
There are quite a few negatives that have been explored in debt at CobraForum. Surf over
there and run a search and see if you agree.

Ron
===
Thanks for the information on the web site. I was unaware of it. Don't you think it is
strange that so few special construction vehicles are made each year in California?

[Brad Pfeifer]

Cobra Chuck,

Good to hear that there is going to be a Cobra loose on the streets of Vacaville! There has been a defecit lately with me selling my car and Turk, err, parting his out.

Bony - Of all the people I have spoken with, I have only heard of one Cobra owner who got into trouble with DMV. Even at that the trouble he got into had more to do with his public position than it did his process of registering his Cobra. He is still driving his Cobra. I think you are right though, with SB100/1578 there really is no other reason to register a car any other way. However - SB 1578 does not become effective until January 1, 2003, so those who need to re-register their cars can, but they have to wait until then.

I honestly do not think that DMV is launching any big campaign to snare Cobra owners who have licensed their cars through TU or any other format.

Brad

[JB from Campbel]

Sniff test? Brake lamp inspection? I did none of those. In fact they did not even come up (and I didn't bring it up either).
johnbgood

[bonyhadi]

Brad
=====
Don't want to beat a dead horse to death. In a past post I gave the name and e-mail
address of one of the DMV criminal investigators who is working these cases. I am
sure you agree only a small percentage of the Cobra world in California is on the internet
boards. Most people don't post their problems, this is a very serious issue for some people.
My only comment is, even if you are one step away from your bankruptcy filing how do
you rationalize a criminal charge? How does the guy who is using the id number from his
donor, or running a late model engine in a recently built kit justify it to an administrative
law judge or better yet a jury. Do you think that person's insurance will stand behind them
during a major claim when the find out the car insured is not a mustang or '65 2 door Ford?
Like everything else, just my view point, and like a$$holes, everyone has got one.
Everyone should do what is best for them and their dependents.
God Bless America,
daniel


p.s. One of the reasons I was happy to sell my Contemporary was because of gray areas in
how it was registered. I was the 5th or 6th owner and my lawyer was on file at the DMV
with a letter asking how to straighten out the registration. They never replied.

[LETSRCE]

Cobra Chuck, who said you had to go to get a brake and light inspection. When did my sb100 I got a brake and light inspection but was told by DMV it was not needed and she didn't even include it in the paper work. I would double check and maybe save $75.00.

[Ron61]

Bonyhadi,

The website for the special vehicles isn't even known by some of the Calif. DMV offices. I had to give it to the Redding DMV. They didn't know how to find out if the 500 was already used so were just going to send in the paperwork and then see what came back. Not so good the way I read the attachment bill as if they are over the 500 number then you are going to be nailed for the 2002 or 2003 registration and all applicable smog junk. Better to wait a month or so until the year starts over and they have a new 500 available. I was a little surprised at the fact there aren't more cars being registered than has shown up but by adding the used ones to it now that may eat up the 500 allotment.

[dexter]

Originally posted by LETSRCE
When did my sb100 I got a brake and light inspection but was told by DMV it was not needed and she didn't even include it in the paper work. I would double check and maybe save $75.00.

Hi Joe - I think they've amended their checklists since you did yours earlier. When I was in the Sonoma county DMV office in July doing my SB100 registration, it was very clear that they were checking off the brake light and headlight certificates in preparing the package to be sent off to the files in Sacto.

Rob

[bonyhadi]

Brad
====
Read Ron61's post to Greg above. Let it be clear the DMV is not looking for Cobras, they are
hunting for all violators. Let it be clear, I am not suggesting that any one specific tittle
washing company has done anything wrong, the DMV is specifically look for stolen cars.
You have to admit that the laws in Alabama permit one to register anything anyway you
want and that opens the doors to many things.

[Brad Pfeifer]

Daniel,

I read your post and Ron's above, but I am now confused as to what the point is. Help me understand your point - so lets look at what we know (may help clarify it for other readers too)

1. SB100 allows the initial registration of a Specially Constructed Vehicle as either the year it represents, or the year of the engine. There are 500 slots allocated per calendar year for this.

2. As one of the posts above (or somewhere on this site mentioned) there are 270+ of the 500 slots OPEN for 2002. So NEW (read as no prior registration) cars can be registered today, as there are slots available.

3. SB1578 removes the 'initial' wording from the SB100 law, to allow registration or re-registration under SB100. However, SB1578 is not law until January 1, 2003 (when a new allocation of 500 slots will be released) So for those that want to re-register their cars, they need to wait until January 2003 to do it.

Do you agree with that?

From what I am gathering from Ron's post, he is saying not only is DMV unaware of the legislation that controls them, but they are offering erroneous information to their customers. That may not be what he meant, but I have certainly heard it enough times on this site to believe it.

You asked about the legal implications - I counter with the culpable liability that DMV has to correctly advise you on how to register your vehicle. If they don't know what the hell they are doing, how can they tell you what you should be doing? How can you be held liable when you either can't get the facts from DMV, or no one has said it is illegal to do it a certain way. Is there anything, in writing, at DMV that says you cannot get a title from out of state? (If it isn't written down, it doesn't exist). Violators of what?

I agree that there are probably a number of DMV investigators who are working fraud cases, but lets be honest, they aren't too worried about a small numbers of Cobra's being registered through a very gray process. They are after the big fish and are worried about stolen vehicles, lost revenue, and the portal of stolen cars that go through California to Asia or Mexico.

Most people don't post their registration problems here because the area is so gray, there is so much mis-information, and there is no lucid place to turn for the facts. If the paperwork and statistics that come across my desk are correct, I would disagree with you that only a small percentage of the CA Cobra world is on the internet. I would say that a strong majority is on the Internet. Fewer of that number that frequent any kind of a Cobra-related site, fewer still that actively post or discuss things in this forum. We know there are many lurkers out there.

In regards to your statement on insurance, I also have to disagree. As an example: we have two frequent-posting members here, both from California, who both lost their Cobras. In both cases, their insurance companies fully reimbursed them for their losses. Again, the insurance company takes on the liability to insure the car for the agreed upon amount so the onus is on them to understand what they are insuring.

OK, your turn! :-)

Brad

[bonyhadi]

Hi Brad:

I agree with 99% of what you are saying.

What I was referring to from Ron is:
" As a matter of fact I do actually know a man here that bought a Cobra in Oregon that was titled as a 1966 Ford something I think it was and he spent a year in a mess. I think some of it if not most was his fault but he got a letter from the CAL. DMV that they were going to investigate him for fraud. I talked to him last week and he now has it titled in Calif. and everything
is ok now but it was a real mess he said. As I said above I don't know all the details but he has a lot of money and I think used a good chunk to get the investigation stopped and everything straightened out. Understandably he doesn't like to talk about it. This is the only person that I know of for a fact that has had a problem and as I said above, I think part of it may have been caused by him." end quote.

Don't under estimate the DMV, if you are anyone else used a tittle washing company, in January reregister under the new law.

If anyone has correctly insured their car they will be covered by their insurance company.
That means the insurance company is aware they are covering a cobra replica and you sent
them pictures. Trust me, follow some of these threads and it's clear that many owners think
they have their butts covered because they got away with insuring the car as a mustang
or 66 2 door ford... we all have COBRA-REPLICAS-KIT CARS. That is why Randy and the others
who did things right were protected as well they should have been. I am saying be honest
with your insurance company because they will send out an investigator like Steve-Klayfish
who is nobody's fool.

Like I said I agree with you. I'll buy the first Raki!!
God Bless America,
daniel