A very tired subject: SB100

[Black Mamba]

Well, I've had my Contemporary for sale now about a month and received some silly offers but unfortunately no cash-ola. The reason for selling is the house is in escrow, closing on the 30th and I'm supposed to be out of here by the 7th. The new place I'll be leasing doesn't have a garage and I don't want to just leave it in the driveway under a cover, even if it is "weather proof".

So one guy that came to look at it asked if it had SB100. No, I don't have that certificate but on the registration it's listed as a 1965 Ford, registration is current and I had no hassles transferring the car to my name. He said it was a big no-no and in order to operate I need that certification or my car could be impounded.

Can someone PLEASE clarify, if the car IS currently and has been registered, has current tags, a registration number, and recognized as being operable by the state of California, do I need SB100 designation?

[jhv48]

If you want a quicker sale, YES.

Unless your car was actually built in 1965, it is NOT a 1965 car, and if it is registered as a 1965, it and you are in danger of being impounded/prosecuted as a fraudulant registration.

If you are the first owner, then you registered it incorrectly. If you bought it from another Ca. owner, then HE registered it incorrectly and they haven't caught YOU yet.

Now, there was an amnesty period where any "incorrectly" registered vehicle can correct the registration without penalty. But, I'm not sure if that program has expired.

If it was transferred from another State and was legally registered according to that State's registration laws, then California will recognize that registration as legitimate (until they decide not to).

I would get the sb100 and register the car as the year it was first completed. Makes the car much more saleable too.

Lots of threads on this topic. Do a search and be prepared to read and read.

[tcrist]

And there might even be some SB100's left!!!!!

[Black Mamba]

I've read and read and my head starts spinning from all the differing opinions.

It has always been a Ca car going back to the build in 1995. So my question is HOW can it be that it was registered incorrectly? It had to have been inspected and given a number at the time, registration just doesn't happen does it? Based upon that fact, wouldn't that make it legal?

[jhv48]

In 1995, they were a lot less strict and they let lots of "incorrect" registrations slip by. I don't think the sb100 exemption was even available then, so everyone, in order to avoid smogging their engines, claimed that the year of their kits was pre 1967. Due to the budget problems, these registrations are seen as a form of additional revenue and the DMV is looking for them. You don't want to be turned into an "example".

If you have doubt, go down to DMV and do a "what if" scenerio. Pretend you are considering buying a car like yours and see what they tell you. Make sure you talk to someone that has half a brain, or you will get the wrong answer,

[eschaider]

This special registration pain has been brought to you courtesy of Jerry Brown when he was Governor if my memory serves me correctly.

You really do need to get your car registered correctly, it will not only will make it sale-able (in CA) but you will also be able to keep it if you don't sell it. An extra side benefit is that you will not be persecuted and possibly prosecuted by the Kalifornia Gestapo.

Ed

[Black Mamba]

Originally Posted by eschaider

This special registration pain has been brought to you courtesy of Jerry Brown when he was Governor if my memory serves me correctly.

You really do need to get your car registered correctly, it will not only will make it sale-able (in CA) but you will also be able to keep it if you don't sell it. An extra side benefit is that you will not be persecuted and possibly prosecuted by the Kalifornia Gestapo.

Ed

Brought to you by a different set of knotheads:

Sacramento: Senate Bill 100, authored by Senator Maurice Johannessen (R-Redding), passed the Senate unanimously 40-0 and now awaits Governor Gray Davis' signature to become law. This bill clears the air regarding emission control inspections of specially-constructed vehicles (i.e., kit cars, Cobra replicas and street rod reproductions).

[Jamo]

Originally Posted by Black Mamba

Brought to you by a different set of knotheads:

Sacramento: Senate Bill 100, authored by Senator Maurice Johannessen (R-Redding), passed the Senate unanimously 40-0 and now awaits Governor Gray Davis' signature to become law. This bill clears the air regarding emission control inspections of specially-constructed vehicles (i.e., kit cars, Cobra replicas and street rod reproductions).

Sorry if I step on your toes, but I have big feet...you evidently don't comprehend what you read very well. I'm being direct because situations like yours are exactly why we've had the SB100 program at risk at times. Just search "Titles Unlimited" or "House of Cobras"...hell, you could probably google them.

Now read Paul F's post again...if it is actually listed as having been built in 65, it's not valid. No fair trying to blame moronic DMV employees. If your engine isn't from the early 60s (ahem...you have a Windsor), then it needs smog gear consistent with the year of the engine.

This site has had dozens of articles over the past several years on this subject, and NOWHERE has it ever been explained that having a 60s registration for a replica in California is legal. Why do you think they called it an "amnesty" program when they set it up for cobras registered using fraudulent 60s dates (and likely VINs) for registration under SB100 without incurring any legal woes for the past.

Hell, we even had a deputy attorney general weigh in on it on these pages...more than a few times.

Just because you got it transferred when you bought it and haven't been bothered by the DMV thus far does not answer the question. It usually catches up with you, and in this case, it's catching up now that you want to sell it. The prospective buyer was correct in walking away...hell, he should've run given the number of Cobras for sale with SB100 numbers.

And as for your commentary about Johannessen being a knothead, again, you obviously don't understand the first thing about the history and motivation behind SB100.

To begin with, before there was an SB100, folks fraudulently registered their cobras under 60s registrations, usually "borrowing" VINs from Fords found in a junkyard (again, via Titles Unlimited and other registration agents who "helped" customers along), or they legally registered under the special construction rules (SPCN) and had to get smogged every couple of years. Folks that did it the sometimes difficult and annoying SPCN way were laughed at by the Titles Unlimited customers. Not only did the Titles Unlimited folks avoid smog issues, they also failed to pay appropriate taxes and fees because they were registering old cars of little value as far as the DMV computers were concerned.

Maurice realized how asinine this was, and recognized that folks fraudulently registering their cars were putting themselves at risk. A cobra-owning peace officer up north even got snared in this and lost his job and pension. So Maurice, who BTW took delivery on a modern CSX, got SB100 passed to allow a legal method of obtaining a registration with a smog exemption. Informed folks know to thank him for that move. Yes, it would be nice to have a 1,000 exemptions each year, or even no limit, but at least we got something. In the early years, the numbers were grabbed in a matter of hours...now they languish unused for months due to the downturn in the economy and because folks with bad registrations have been converting over to SB100 exemptions for the past several years under the amnesty program, which has been well publicized and the subject of many articles here, and the demand has softened.

Now, having said all that, yes, it's too bad this is hitting you at a bad time given the need to sell your Cobra. You can try, but you really have no one to blame at this juncture...you can blame the previous owner if that makes you feel better. Hell, go ahead and blame me for getting in your face about this...I'd rather that than watch you go through hell by doing nothing.

Go get the damn SB100 registration...there are numbers left...and store the car until you do if you don't want to lose your ass on it or get embroiled in more problems if some dumbass does buy it from you and tries to roll the fraudulent registration over to his name...you will end up being responsible.

That's it...you can whine and b!tch about it til hell freezes over, but it isn't going to change the facts.

Sorry about the toes, but they'll heal faster than the administrative and legal (and financial) hurt you'll go through if you don't take the same action the majority of us have taken since SB100 came along.

...or sell it to someone out of state who doesn't have need of an SB100 number.

[Black Mamba]

Jamo, I didn't mean to disrespect Johannessen, that was unkind, I apologize, and I was really trying to point out that this action didn't happen under Jerry Brown, it occurred under Gray Davis. This was a reply to "This special registration pain has been brought to you courtesy of Jerry Brown when he was Governor if my memory serves me correctly." I think you've commented before on my not having facts correct and I was correcting someone else, it was just worded in a vicious, uncalled for manner. And this is not me endorsing JB.

I am not blaming you, me, or anyone else. I want to get this straightened out and have it registered properly. I don't intend to "whine" if that's the way you're perceiving it, again, I'm just looking for proper clarity. Some people are good at wrestling their way through legal forms and lawyer speak, I am not one of those people - I prefer literal layman's terms. Thanks to you and others for weighing in on this.

Now I have a fair amount more clarity on this issue. I have read many, many posts here, some going one direction, some going another and this has finally opened the window shades and shed light on the subject - thanks all for the input and now I'll download the forms and get in line as many have done before me. I would just assume keep the Cobra, continue to have fun with it, and spread the appreciation for a car whose dominance on the track as well as the street was so overwhelming.

[Black Mamba]

Is there a book "SB100 For Dummies"?

[Got the Bug]

Originally Posted by Black Mamba

Is there a book "SB100 For Dummies"?

Here's the best "how to" thread regarding SB100. Look at post #6.

SB100 Conference at the MUSTANG RANCH

[Paul F]

Let's be specific. What does your title say under each heading:

Vehicle number - Don't give the actual number, but does it say CAxxxxxx?
Year Model -
Make -
Body Type -
Yr 1st Sold -

If year model is 1965 and Make is Ford and Yr 1st Sold is 1995, it might be legitimate. Only Morgester would know for sure.

But if it was registered in 1995 as a 1995 year car, if it has a 1965 motor in it (or did at the time), then it definitely was legal with regard to smog.
I don't know that there is a licensing issue here. It may be fraud to call it a 1965 Ford rather than an SPCNS. This stuff is so fuzzy, you'll get endless opinions. Call Mr. Morgester (Morgester on this forum) to get the states view.
If Yr 1st sold is 1965, it's definitely fraud.

[Got the Bug]

Don,

I'm not sure where you read that. If a car is correctly/legally registered in another State, you can bring it in to California and go through the SB100 process. Special construction vehicles that are currently registered in California incorrectly can also be registered under the SB100 program.

[PANAVIA]

Glad to see my old post still helps people.

Steve

[Sledge]

Paul F:

My car was already registered in CA and I still needed to do all the paperwork plus get the CHP VIN et al. So any given individual's experiences may vary. By the way, I consulted the Morgester, a DMV enforcement officer, a BAR referee, and others. The process worked it just took a while. And I met some very nice people along the way.

Cheers

[Paul F]

Bill,

It would be helpful if you shared what forms you had to fill out and why and also tell us about why the VIN was changed so that others can anticipate what their experience might be.

In my case, the car was registered in 1995 under 1969 (year of the block) smog rules with a CAxxxxxx VIN (meaning the CHP had already assigned a California State VIN).