California: Is your kit car registered as a 1960 vintage vehicle?

[Morgester]

As this forum is aware, a kit car or replica vehicle can only be registered in California as a Specially Constructed Vehicle (SPCN). A kit car or replica vehicle that has been titled as the year that it replicates (i.e. 1965 Ford) is considered to be fraudulently titled and the individual submitting the title documents to DMV has committed fraud and perjury by misrepresenting the year of manufacture.

We are aware of individuals who are reselling fraudulently titled kit car or replica vehicles. This resale to an innocent third party subjects the seller to both civil and criminal liability.

If you own a fraudulently titled vehicle you must surrender your vehicle registration and re-register the vehicle correctly under California law.

Recognizing that some vehicle owners were complicit in the fraudulent registration process and may not wish to come forward due to criminal liability, I have been working on AB 619. AB 619 will grant amnesty from criminal prosecution for those that choose to re-register their vehicle legally. AB 619 has been passed out of the Assembly and has just cleared Senate Transportation. (See http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postq...use=B&site=sen)

Some folks may be of the mind set, you haven’t discovered me yet so why worry. To be candid we were not looking but we are now. We are finishing up another title fraud investigation and I anticipate DMV pulling the registrations on hundreds of vehicles. I encourage you to rely on the experience of this list that was part of the Title Unlimited investigation. Better to be in the front of the pack correcting your registration then in the back.

Additionally, a kit car or replica vehicle that is fraudulently titled is what we call “low hanging fruit.” These vehicles are easy to identify and provide an easy first step in identifying illegal registration services. Once the service is identified, every vehicle that the service processed to date has had its registration pulled.

Law enforcements goal has always been to shut down the illegal registration services. In addition to providing fraudulent registration for kit car or replica vehicles, these services wash title for lemon, salvaged, and stolen vehicles.

Even given the sometimes volatile nature of this forum, I have always tried to be open and candid regarding our investigations and prosecutions. My recommendation today is the same as it was when I first posted to this forum. You are better off correcting the registration sooner rather then later.

[xlr8or]

Robert,
This is a good first step but does not address the reason many vehicles have been registered this way.
Most of these "Replica" vehicles cannot be registered for road use with just an SPCN registration due to the smog requirements being based on the engine block if they do not have an SB100 #.
As you know there are only 500 SB100 #'s issued per year and that is not nearly enough.

I think it would be a much better solution to offer them an SB100 exemption (outside of the 500/yr limit) along with the SPCN registration if they use the application for amnesty and will not pass the current testing requirements.


I think this alone would be encouragement enough to get most of them to join in the process, thereby getting the state caught up on revenue that is due them.

Because this bill does require the car to go to a referee to determine if it is subject to smog testing requirements, they could make that determination and provide them as needed.

Glad I got my SB100# when I did.

[Igofastr]

Morgaster,

I'd have to say that I'm in agreement with Xlr8or. AB619 does seem to be a good first step, and will hopefully entice those who've side-stepped the legal process to register their cars.

I don't necessarily feel the need to "reward" the law-breakers with automatic SB100 exemption. However, this brings us to the problem, if the newly-repentant are not given the exemption, they'll all likely be in line on the first of Jan '08, adding additional competition for the already very limited SB100 #s, and effectively punishing all those who've patiently been waiting for the oportunity to register legally.

I'm open to ideas, but adding further competition for those few #s would be unfair the rest of us law abiding stooges....er, citizens

[Morgester]

AB 619 is neutral on the emissions issue. The only requirement is that the vehicle complies with existing law. Even with this neutral approach, I have seen significant “push back” from a variety of environmental groups. (See Senate report for opposition). Common theme was they did not want to see SPCN amnesty vehicles eligible for SB100. As it stands now, the bill does allow SPCN amnesty vehicles eligibility for SB100 but will require the SPCN year be set at 2008.

The SPCN year being set at 2008 on amnesty vehicles has no effect as to SB100. It may or may not have an impact regarding passing emissions outside of SB100. If current BAR procedures hold (year established by engine) it again will have no impact. If BAR procedures are found to be invalid and BAR is required to test by model year (year registered) then the SPCN year being set at 2008 means the vehicle must meet 2008 standards.

The issue of course is “what is existing law” as to emission requirements of SPCN. In conjunction with the amnesty bill we are trying to get “certainty” as to the emission rules on SPCN. The outcome of this inquiry may force interest groups on either side of this issue to pursue a legislative solution.

Bottom line, there will never be any type of emission exemption for amnesty vehicles. Best case scenario, absent a complete emission testing overhaul on SPCN, is the current rules. Worst case scenario is that SB100 will still be in play but any new vehicle or corrected registration vehicle that does not have a SB 100 pass will have to meet 2008 emission requirements. I should have a better handle on the emission consequences soon.

So if I had a fraudulently titled car what would I do? Go to DMV immediately, say mea culpa, pay the fees and register it as a SPCN. My understanding is that they will give you at least the year it was first in the system. So that 1998 Cobra was registered as a 65 Ford will be registered as a 1998 SPCN. Next step is to pass smog under current BAR guidelines or get that SB100 chit. This places you in the best possible position in these uncertain times.

[Chaplin]

Morgester-
Fraud is one thing, but what about kit cars that were legally titled in other states as 1960s model years in accordance with those states applicable laws? Is CA not going to give full faith and credit to the determination of its sister states that a car should be titled as X year? Certainly CA cannot prosecute the owners of such cars without running afoul of the full credit clause.

And putting aside that issue for a moment, XLR8OR is correct- amnesty is no good without a viable and legal alternative way of registering your car.

[Morgester]

Forgive my “here we go again.” This has been a repeating thread for the last four years. Regardless of what the vehicle was tilted as in another jurisdiction, California requires it to be registered a SPCN.

Would you ever be prosecuted for this, extremely doubtful. Will your registration be pulled, guaranteed. If it is a kit car or replica vehicle it has to be registered as a SPCN in California.

[Chaplin]

If you say that be the rules, then that be the rules. It would be interesting to see if that position would carry the day if challenged in court, because CA is essentially voiding the valid and legally binding actions of other states, but so be it I guess.

[RedBarchetta]

Originally Posted by Morgester

The issue of course is “what is existing law” as to emission requirements of SPCN.....The outcome of this inquiry may force interest groups on either side of this issue to pursue a legislative solution.

As predicted, art imitating life is about to become life imitating art for some (not me, I'm thankfully SB100 compliant)

"My uncle has a country place that no one knows about...he says it used to be a farm before the motor law. And on Sundays I allude the eyes and hop the turbine freight...to far outside the wire where my white-haired uncle waits."

Neil Peart could see the future in 1981. Amazing.

-Dean

[xlr8or]

Chappy it hasn't been a problem in the past that I have seen when an out of state car is brought to CA if the buyer takes the paperwork to DMV and says I need to register this as SPCN.
I realize its difficult for AB619 to address the smog issue because proper registration and smog compliance are two separate things.

The problem is that amnesty does not resolve the issue it only removes the fear of prosecution for the vehicle owner and captures revenue owed to the state.
As I said, a good first step.

[mrmustang]

Originally Posted by Morgester

Forgive my “here we go again.” This has been a repeating thread for the last four years. Regardless of what the vehicle was tilted as in another jurisdiction, California requires it to be registered a SPCN.

Mr Morgester,

While an eloquent response to "Chaplin"s post above, you did not answer his questions and concerns. Please do so in a straight forward manner so that we can finally put these issues to bed. If you do not have an answer to a question on legality, then it is up to you and your dept to find out what the answer is within your government and then post it here. Just as if you were in a court of law, it is up to you as the person making and upholding the laws to be able to back up what you are posting with facts, not a "well maybe", which again in a court of law would have the judge citing you for contempt.

Bill S.

PS: Just so you know, I'm be sending off a copy of this thread link to Barbara Boxer (you know my connection there from previous email correspondense), so once again, please make sure to answer the questions posed in response to your continued questionable posts here with 100% accurate answers, as there will be others in the California government watching your responses with a keen eye.

[xlr8or]

Originally Posted by Morgester

AB 619 is neutral on the emissions issue. The only requirement is that the vehicle complies with existing law. Even with this neutral approach, I have seen significant “push back” from a variety of environmental groups. (See Senate report for opposition). Common theme was they did not want to see SPCN amnesty vehicles eligible for SB100. As it stands now, the bill does allow SPCN amnesty vehicles eligibility for SB100 but will require the SPCN year be set at 2008.
.

It's a shame those groups don't understand what a minuscule issue it is with these cars.

According to our local utility if I was to update to the latest efficient A/C system for the house it would be the "Green Equivelant" of removing 200,000 cars from the roads. Seems like they could be more effective going after those type things. The car/carbon story just makes better press.

Going after 10-15 thousand hot rods out of the millions of cars in the state is like stopping me from throwing a needle down the hall way.

[Chaplin]

Originally Posted by xlr8or

Chappy it hasn't been a problem in the past that I have seen when an out of state car is brought to CA if the buyer takes the paperwork to DMV and says I need to register this as SPCN.
I realize its difficult for AB619 to address the smog issue because proper registration and smog compliance are two separate things.

The problem is that amnesty does not resolve the issue it only removes the fear of prosecution for the vehicle owner and captures revenue owed to the state.
As I said, a good first step.

Ok, maybe I'm confused. Maybe you or Morgester can answer this question and clear it up-

If I have a kit car that is legally titled as a 1965 in another state, and I move to CA, can I transfer the title to CA and keep the car titled as a 1965 so long as I register it as a SPCN?

[Morgester]

Originally Posted by Chaplin

Ok, maybe I'm confused. Maybe you or Morgester can answer this question and clear it up-

If I have a kit car that is legally titled as a 1965 in another state, and I move to CA, can I transfer the title to CA and keep the car titled as a 1965 so long as I register it as a SPCN?

Key is that it is registered as a SPCN. DMV may do any of the following (I dont work for DMV)
- SPCN 1965
- SPCN (year of build)
- SPCN 2007 (year registered in California)

Under the current system, you now need to get your SPCN smoged. SB100 allows you to pick the model year for emmission testing (1965). No SB100, then you go to BAR and they ignore the SPCN year designation and look at the engine. So under the current rules the SPCN year means nothing.

[RedBarchetta]

Originally Posted by Morgester

So under the current rules the SPCN year means nothing.

There lies the problem and time bomb (well, one of them). I have '65 smog exemption but 2004 SPCN. Someday some wacko "green" bureaucrat looking for votes is going to toy with that and I'm going to be pissed.

[G.R.]

CA law sucks when it comes to registering a legally registered auto from out of state...The powers that be seem to flaunt registration and laws from the rest of the nation...

What Ca is "better"? Glad I only visit there on occasion...pretty sson they'll fine you if you fart in public............................................ ..............

[RedCSX1]

Like others here on this forum that live in California, when I went through the SB100 process I had no problem paying the taxes the state figured I owed on the cost of my Cobra. I stood in line and had to deal with the inefficient process that the state has. As others have already pointed out some things need to change to improve this process.

1. Train DMV employee's so they clearly understand the requirements of this law. I can not tell you the frustration I and others had dealing with the DMV employees who knew less about the law than we did.

2. Improve the way the numbers are obtained. Every DMV location has to call in to one number and get a busy signal instead of getting a number for the person waiting at the counter after he or she has already waited hours in line! Why not develop a computer program that assigns the number after the required information is entered?

3. Increase the number of from 500 to 3000 or higher. Keep in mind that Cobra and Cobra replica's are not the only vehicles now required to be registered under SB100. The positives would be greater compliance and more tax dollars for California that needs the funding because liberals have been allowed to waist the money on pork for years.

4. As stated already the amount of emissions that these cars put out is insignificant. Since my car was registered in 2005 I have put less than 2500 miles on it. Most mileage occurs on the weekends when traffic is less heavy compared to weekdays. I am certain that other owners in the state use there Cobra's in a similar manner.

5. There needs to be more smog certification sites. When I went thought the process there was only one in the Fresno area that was certified by the State for vehicles going through the SB100 process. As far as I know this has not changed.

[Tinker51]

Originally Posted by Chaplin

Morgester-
Fraud is one thing, but what about kit cars that were legally titled in other states as 1960s model years in accordance with those states applicable laws? Is CA not going to give full faith and credit to the determination of its sister states that a car should be titled as X year? Certainly CA cannot prosecute the owners of such cars without running afoul of the full credit clause.

What it boils down to is that the kit/replica vehicle is not a vintage car so it doesn't matter what another state says it is.

[Jamo]

Robert, a passing reference in one of your above posts concerns me...the "push back" you're getting from environmentalists (as expected).

If a move is made to provide folks who seek to correct their registration with additional SB100 numbers (over and above the 500 allocated each year), is there a chance we may awaken them to the idea of doing away with SB100?

I say this as an owner of a 1976 Bronco who waited 10 years to do a ground up rebuild, only to have the "person" from LA push a bill through (and signed) stopping the 30 year rule at 1975. Who would've ever thought that would get changed?

I'm hopeful that folks who seek to correct their bad registrations think before they stand in line in January. Many have Mustang II running gear, complete with computer hardware, who may have little problem with meeting the smog standards for the year of their engine. Others are using older blocks who might also have little to really fear from the smog standards set for their engines. And, as has been discussed previously, some smog refs might very well continue to give a pass of sorts to motors which "appear" to be based upon older blocks despite being new "replacement" blocks.

I just hope folks look before they leap and take SB100 spots they don't need...both folks correcting bad registrations and folks with new builds. Many folks simply don't realize that SB100 is not a registration provision, but merely an exemption for smog requirements when there is no way to comply.

[jdog]

Originally Posted by RedCSX1

2. Improve the way the numbers are obtained. Every DMV location has to call in to one number and get a busy signal instead of getting a number for the person waiting at the counter after he or she has already waited hours in line! Why not develop a computer program that assigns the number after the required information is entered?

Take a look at how the state deals with some of the big game hunting tags that are in high demand. You must re-apply every year, however for every year you don't get drawn you get 'preference points' that move you to the head of the line next year. So you can be sure you will be successful eventually. Not like now, where every Jan is like an Oklahoma land race!

I had an huge amount of money invested in my car and did not know 'for sure' if I could/would ever get it registered in Cali! That's NOT a very good feeling.

Don't get me wrong It felt GREAT, after I got an SB100 number.

At least the way CDF&G does it you know you will get a tag, eventually!

jdog

[Rwillia4]

Registration sucks!