Update on CA: SPCN Registration

Morgester · #1 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 01:05 PM

Please referrer to previous threads on the underlying issues on California SPCN registrations. This thread is only to provide updated information:

1. As of January 1st, DMV will key in the SPCN registration “date first sold.” This will reflect the year that the vehicle was first registered. BAR will be using this date for emission testing requirements. So a SPCN registered in 2008 will have to meet 2008 emission standards or have a SB100 exemption.

2. With reference to the out-of-state registration and California’s full faith and credit statute. DMV will honor all legally acquired title. Assuming you follow all of the rules in the titling state (residence, taxes, disclosures), the titling states documents will be honored. If the titling state lists the vehicle as a 1965 Ford, it will be registered in California as a 1965 Ford. A 1965 vehicle is not referred for emission testing.

I anticipate legislative action to correct the above loop hole in California’s emission rules. I also believe that there will be discussions on addressing emissions SPCN vehicles in general.

Randy Rosenberg · #2 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 01:12 PM

Hi Mr. Morgester,

Thanks for the update...

With respect to #1, will this "date first sold" have an affect on Brake & Lamp inspections?

Currently SPCN titles have 0000 for one of the dates on the title (I forget which). That is the date that the Brake & Lamp inspector uses - since no cars were made in 0000, the B&L inspector usually agrees that the car needs to meet the B&L requirements for the year the vehicle replicates.

Thanks again,
Randy...

bdeutsch · #3 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 01:16 PM

Bob, thank you for the update.

Bob

Morgester · #4 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randy Rosenberg

Hi Mr. Morgester,

Thanks for the update...

With respect to #1, will this "date first sold" have an affect on Brake & Lamp inspections?

Currently SPCN titles have 0000 for one of the dates on the title (I forget which). That is the date that the Brake & Lamp inspector uses - since no cars were made in 0000, the B&L inspector usually agrees that the car needs to meet the B&L requirements for the year the vehicle replicates.

Thanks again,
Randy...

BAR indicated that this at this time this would not be an issue. DMV is only setting “date first sold” as opposed to “date of manufacture.” As with all things in this area we will have to wait to see how it is implemented.

Randy Rosenberg · #5 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 01:23 PM

Thanks again...

RedBarchetta · #6 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morgester

2. With reference to the out-of-state registration and California’s full faith and credit statute. DMV will honor all legally acquired title. Assuming you follow all of the rules in the titling state (residence, taxes, disclosures), the titling states documents will be honored. If the titling state lists the vehicle as a 1965 Ford, it will be registered in California as a 1965 Ford. A 1965 vehicle is not referred for emission testing.

Too bad they didn't think this way 4 years ago. That would have been one more SPCN number available for someone that really needed it.

CobraEd · #7 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 01:30 PM

Not exactly sure why California hounds the relatively few car enthusiasts about specialty car registration. It is a big state don't they get enough taxes to support themselves. What is the purpose of all this self serving nonesense. Virginia just last year passed a law that allows all replica owners to legaly and officialy register their car as the year it was made to represent 65, 66, etc. These cars can then use vintage (antique) plates of that year. They then waive personal property tax, annual inspections and emissions testing on that vehicle.

It is a state that supports its people, to include car enthusiasts. What are we, . . . . .0001% of the total population. How much tax revenue could be lost??? Your state government is there to support YOU, . . the taxpayer, not THEMSELVES the tax collectors. What a disgrace!

Strong letter to follow!

.

RodKnock · #8 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 01:33 PM

Question please.

If I purchased my SPCNS car in 2007 (it was also built in 2007) and started the registration process in 2007 (I had my first visit, paid my taxes and got a TOP), but the registration process will be not be completed until 2008, hopefully, then will I have a 2008 SPCNS?

Not that there's a big difference between 2007 and 2008, but I would want to represent my SPCNS vehicle accurately to the DMV. Thank you.

thudmaster · #9 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 01:42 PM

Thank you for the update.........

mrmustang · #10 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 01:43 PM

Robert,

Appreciate the updates and clarifications.

Bill S.

Morgester · #11 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 01:45 PM

You will never get into trouble with full disclosure - then what ever DMV does you are covered. Frankly I do not think it makes much difference if you are placed in either year. Absent running a 2007 or 2008 emission compliant engine you are looking at the SB100 process to get your vehicle past the emission requirement.

CobraEd · #12 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 01:47 PM

So Sad.

.

vanoochka · #13 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 01:56 PM

YES!!!

Thanks for the update, Mr. Morgester.

Excaliber · #14 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 02:08 PM

CobraEd, as Mr. Morgester has mentioned in previous posts on other threads the amount of money at stake (tax money) is very substantial. In that regard I don't blame Calif for trying to get a handle on it, thats just business.

With so many new plans/laws it doesn't always go smoothly figuring out how to implement the paperwork, theres a LOT of agencies involved with their own interpretations of 'law'. Mr. M is just doing his job as one of the many agencies involved, and doing a darn good job at that. At least HE is talking to us, when was the last post you saw from "BAR" around here?

Now if he files for the SAAC trademark name, the gloves come off and he's an instant villain...

CobraEd · #15 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 02:19 PM

I see no fault with Mr. "M". It is the process that stinks. It is a beaurocratic (sp) quagmire. If they spent half as much time facilitating a process that made sense instead of force feeding this moronic process, they would be way ahead of the game.

So if they need the bucks (sad in itself), then develop a process where the replica owners would pay tax based upon the fair market value of the car, BUT LEAVE EVERYONE ALONE ABOUT THE STUPID EMISSIONS so thet they can enjoy their cars with the retro performance engines that they should have. This way everyone could register and drive their cars quickly and easily, and poor Kalifornia would still get their money. Then it is a win-win.

I should run for office!!!

Sooooooo Sad!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

.

RodKnock · #16 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 02:30 PM

Thank you kindly Mr. Morgester.

When the DMV clerk asks me what year is your SPCNS, does it matter if I say "2007" or "2008"? Since my initial visit was in 2007, I told them "2007." I just don't want to tell the DMV clerk the wrong year for my SPCNS, since I'm hoping my registration will be completed in 2008. Again, thank you very much for all your posts.

Randy Rosenberg · #17 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 02:42 PM

CobraEd, it is all about the money - the money that the Feds give CA for hiway/road maintenance is all based upon CA meeting clean air standards. With CA leading the charge for more strict emissions for new cars, I can't see anyone standing up in front of the legislature promoting smog exemptions - they will be laughed at. For these reasons, I am not surprised that no one is trying to create CA legislation based upon the SEMA model (disappointed, but not surprised) - http://www.semasan.com/images/CustomRods.pdf - BTW, this is the model that was used for VA.

CNGreen · #18 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morgester

...I also believe that there will be discussions on addressing emissions SPCN vehicles in general.

Mr. Morgester, can you expand on this statement? SB100 vehicles already registered are exempt from emissions testing for life, correct? Are there plans to talk about expanding the # of cars?

Morgester · #19 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CNGreen

Mr. Morgester, can you expand on this statement? SB100 vehicles already registered are exempt from emissions testing for life, correct? Are there plans to talk about expanding the # of cars?

The question you ask for calls for me to speculate. I know that the current system is inherently flawed. I know that parties on both sides of the issue would like to see changes made. What the final changes will be is a question for the legislature.

vanoochka · #20 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 05:29 PM

Mr. Morgester,

As happy as I am to be able to sleep in on the 2nd, I would rather get up and go through the SB100 process now rather than later. Do you have an idea of how likely it is that out of state cars that have been properly registered in California will be grandfathered after you plug loophole, or would the correction be retroactive?

Thanks in advance for the reply.

Chuck