CA: New criminal cases filed - Page 7

SL · #**121** (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 12:21 AM

I read with interest the tangled web that has happened, as my friend is caught in it. He bought his Backdraft from Armand at Cali Cobra in San Diego. Armand took his money for the roller and later registered it for him. The problem he has, is Armand provided a counterfeit 67 Ford Mustang VIN / title to DMV. The next problem is, Armand filled out the DMV paperwork and stated the value of the car as being under a $1000, (also signing my friends name to the DMV forms). Armand turned around and charged my friend the true sales tax and licensing fees, well over $4000, yet gave DMV less than $70. Crooks like Armand and California Cobra are the real vilians here. My friend is now stuck having to pay DMV again and try and get his title squared away....

imagine2frolic · #**122** (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 10:44 AM

SL, and what is your friend doing about Armand? Sounds like charges need to be brought. Not even including the grief of dealing with the state!

brobehr · #**123** (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 12:33 PM

So,
It looks like an out of state purchase ( for use in Ca. ) is a possibility, granting the out of state ( non Ca ) car /owner has all legitmate records and registrations on the up and up. However as earlier posted camping out for an SB100 cert would not be a bad idea. Is this sound thinking?

Excaliber · #**124** (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 01:59 PM

Yeah I think an out of state purchase would work, following your guidelines of history of the car, etc. I also think that 'loop hole' may be closed in the future. I would guess a 1965 titled car would still have to be 'smogged' once a year? Which shouldn't be a problem as the requirements are pretty lax for 1965.

PS My car is no longer for sale.

A guy offered me a fair price AFTER I pulled my Ad, and when it hit me I could really actually loose the car, it scared the crap out of me. No sale!

Randy Rosenberg · #**125** (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 02:54 PM

There are many "1965" recently built SPCNs in CA, which were legal out-of-state purchases, where the 1965 title was simply transfered and registered, based upon pink slip and bill of sale (pretty standard practice). Some of the owners of these vehicles are changing the titles to a "year of build" SPCN, and applying for SB100 Smog Exemption, but not all.

At some point in time the CA DMV will need to decide how to handle these vehicles with respect to model year. If the CA DMV chooses not to accept the model year for Smog Requirements purposes, then it may take someone with deep pockets to initiate legal action to argue (and win) differently.

Given that any/all decisions are going to made in Sacramento, where is SEMA to help ensure that Hot Rod and Custom Car Hobbiests are being represented fairly, like they have done in other states?

Cobrabill · #**126** (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Excaliber

Yeah I think an out of state purchase would work, following your guidelines of history of the car, etc. I also think that 'loop hole' may be closed in the future. I would guess a 1965 titled car would still have to be 'smogged' once a year? Which shouldn't be a problem as the requirements are pretty lax for 1965.

Ex-there were no standards in '65.Therefor there couldn't(shouldn't?)be any requirements.It would be interesting to see them come up with arbitrary numbers,though.After-all, it is Kalifornia.

Excaliber · #**127** (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 07:41 PM

Well thats good news. I would think they at least would check for a PCV though, surely THAT would be required?

Cobrabill · #**128** (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 08:12 PM

O.K.-ya got me.I was referring to numbers out the pipe,but yes,PVCs were standar.But that brings up an interesting point.Who would look to verify?Since a 65 isn't going to be tested(sniffer),they won't want to see you at the smog stations.

SkipB · #**129** (**permalink**) 11-27-2007, 04:56 PM

SL,

Are you sure you have your facts straight about California Cobra and Armond? (Correct spelling btw) I doubt if he issued the VIN number. I believe someone else with DMV connections did this. I also heard that the certain someone may have kept the proper tax payment less the DMV fees, not Armond. I am not sure I have my facts straight either. Just what I had heard!

In any case, I am sorry your friend had to be put through all this, when all he was trying to do is own a great car.

Skip B

Rick Parker · #**130** (**permalink**) 02-04-2008, 11:27 AM

Would it be anticipated that a SPF with a 460 would ask for and receive a "1960" model year designation under the SB100 process?

Randy Rosenberg · #**131** (**permalink**) 02-04-2008, 11:49 AM

1965 is the most common year used when picking a year for "Smog per Body Design", when using SB100.

Excaliber · #**132** (**permalink**) 02-04-2008, 11:53 AM

The 385 series engines (429-460) are late 60's and wouldn't qualify for 1965 model year.

Rick Parker · #**133** (**permalink**) 02-04-2008, 12:01 PM

ERNIE!

I think that is where the model year resemblence portion of the Bill takes precidence.

xlr8or · #**134** (**permalink**) 02-04-2008, 12:03 PM

Rick,
Under SB100 you get to decide which one you want the smog referee to use. Go with the 1965 that the body represents and you are fine.

Ron61 · #**135** (**permalink**) 02-06-2008, 03:59 AM

Rick,

xlr8or is correct. The owner of the car gets to pick whether he wants to register by body year or by engine year. Everyone that I know has used the body year. If the referee doesn't agree that it looks enough like that years body, he can only change it to a 1960 year.

Ron

mtml427 · #**136** (**permalink**) 02-15-2008, 05:02 PM

I have read the comments regarding bringing a car in from another state. I am trying to close a deal on a car in Texas. The car is an aluminum car with a 65 engine and 65 transmission. I do not know what criteria Texas uses in establishing the year of the car but does anyone know if the car could be re-registered as a 65 given the engine and trans. and brought into California without having to go through the SB-100 process. My lender wants to make sure the car is able to be registered in California and so does the insurance company. I would like to be able to insure, finance and operate the car upon bringing it into the state. Once January 2009 rolls around, I would have no issue in obtaining the proper and honest SB-100 certification. Any suggestions and/or ideas would be appreciated.

dlang14 · #**137** (**permalink**) 02-15-2008, 05:45 PM

mtml,

It depends a little on how the car is registered now. If its registered in Texas as a 2004 or whatever year it was build, and you bring it to CA and try to register it as a '65 that's considered fraud and you're really playing with fire. Clearly you wouldnt be the first to do so, but many have gotten burned.

If the car is registered in Texas as a '65 already there may be some loop hole that the state honors the registration. There is a long thread with mr morgester adding his feedback here in the registration section. I didnt read it carefully since I was only worried about a new vehicle. This also is a little sketchy but is not clear cut fraud.

That's my understanding. Now that said many insurance companies will insure the car before registration is complete, or even before the car is complete. I had mine insured before the drive train was installed, just in case......

Hope this helps a little.

Daryl

Rick Parker · #**138** (**permalink**) 02-15-2008, 05:51 PM

I believe effective Jan 1, 2008 the vehicle would have to conform with 2008 emmision standards without an SB100 certification. It is my understanding that this applies to any newly registered (SPCN) vehicle (new to California). Previously it could be smogged to the year of the engine if SB100 was unavailable or not applied for. The BAR only sets the standard for emissions, not how it's registered.

vanoochka · #**139** (**permalink**) 02-15-2008, 07:16 PM

If the car is titled in Texas as a 1965, you will receive a California title also designating it as model year 1965, period. No muss, no fuss.

Morgester pointed out in this very thread that is the way CA DMV is moving forward on this issue - giving full faith and credit to the former state's model year designation. I have an Arizona car, previously titled there as 1965 and now titled in California as the same.

Coincidentally, I was at the DMV today to pick up my vanity plates and re-confirmed all this with the supervisor there.

If your car is titled in Texas as a specially constructed vehicle, or a model year that requires smog testing in CA, you will need to go through the SB100 process.

rokndad · #**140** (**permalink**) 02-15-2008, 07:25 PM

I'm going through all of this with a Texas car right now. It was registered in TX as a 2004 SPCN. The others are correct about an out of state car being previously registered as a 1965, but watch out for any fraudulent activity on titling the car. If it indeed was legally registered as a 1965 without any of those title services companies involved, you shouldn't have any problem in California. I had to go the SB 100 route. BAR appointment on the 29th!! CHP done. Best wishes on your purchase.