Buying an out-of-state car in CA

[Rick Parker]

JWD If you are in California and your car is registered as a 1965 and was not manufactured in 1965 regardless of what it is parading around as, I suggest you introduce yourself with the Amnesty bill that is aimed at violators such as yourself. When the DMV and BAR refocus on this issue after much procrastination, there will be no second chances. Authorities will be knocking on your door to do inspections and revoke your plates on the spot, this is what is set to happen. I've seen it happen on a small scale. Currently it's just a money hunt, they have been, and are still refering to it as it an Amnesty Period. .....If you are in California and any of this applies to you I'd call it a Wake Up Period. THEN you can show everyone your 1965 (whatever) as it sits in the garage,or point to it through a fence at an impound yard. Because if it is registered as a 1965 and is not, or better yet if it is using the VIN of a legitimate 1965 IE: Mustang, Falcon etc whether it is a Cobra or not.........you'll be minus a 1965 (whatever).

[jwd]

Originally Posted by Rick Parker

JWD If you are in California and your car is registered as a 1965 and was not manufactured in 1965 regardless of what it is parading around as, I suggest you introduce yourself with the Amnesty bill that is aimed at violators such as yourself. When the DMV and BAR refocus on this issue after much procrastination, there will be no second chances. Authorities will be knocking on your door to do inspections and revoke your plates on the spot, this is what is set to happen. I've seen it happen on a small scale. Currently it's just a money hunt, they have been, and are still refering to it as it an Amnesty Period. .....If you are in California and any of this applies to you I'd call it a Wake Up Period. THEN you can show everyone your 1965 (whatever) as it sits in the garage,or point to it through a fence at an impound yard. Because if it is registered as a 1965 and is not, or better yet if it is using the VIN of a legitimate 1965 IE: Mustang, Falcon etc whether it is a Cobra or not.........you'll be minus a 1965 (whatever).

Rich, I'll try to explain it to you since Ernie refuses to understand.

1. I do not live in California
2. My car is legally titled as a 1965
3. My car IS NOT titled as a 1965 COBRA (never said it was)
4. That's how it's done (or used to be) in my state. I handed them the MSO, wrote them a check and they handed me my title/registration/plates. Simple as that.

There are many states that do it exactly the same way. Ca. doesn't happen to be one of them.

This all started when Ernie posted about people who "claim" (inferring that they are lying) that their car is legally titled as a 1965. It would have been easy for him to say "That only applies to people in Ca." but he chose to include everyone, in all states.

Sorry that Ca. is soooo screwed up and make a big deal out of what most other states don't give a second thought. It's sad that they have to spend all those tax dollars to create a special division to deal with this non-existent problem. I can see why the state is bankrupt.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by jwd

Sorry that Ca. is soooo screwed up and make a big deal out of what most other states don't give a second thought. It's sad that they have to spend all those tax dollars to create a special division to deal with this non-existent problem. I can see why the state is bankrupt.

This is the part where the wheels come off for me.

1. I like my state. I can't think of another state in the union where I would live. Every state has issues, at least in my view. No state is perfect.

2. There are A LOT of states with money troubles. CA is not alone.

3. I like clean air and regulating smog and emissions is OK with me. Our cars are not built in 1965 and should not be labled as such. In any state. In my view CA does it correctly. Not perfectly, but pretty close. There should be some sort of limit on how many of our smog monsters are allowed on the road. Pollution is problem everywhere. It's NOT a "non-existent problem."

JMHO.

[jwd]

Originally Posted by RodKnock

3. I like clean air and regulating smog and emissions is OK with me. Our cars are not built in 1965 and should not be labled as such. In any state. In my view CA does it correctly. Not perfectly, but pretty close. There should be some sort of limit on how many of our smog monsters are allowed on the road. Pollution is problem everywhere. It's NOT a "non-existent problem."

JMHO.

The process in Ca. has absolutely nothing to do with emissions/smog or they wouldn't hand out SB 100's (which I'm sure the vast majority of Cobra replica's in Ca. have). It's about generating revenue. Period.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by jwd

The process in Ca. has absolutely nothing to do with emissions/smog or they wouldn't hand out SB 100's (which I'm sure the vast majority of Cobra replica's in Ca. have). It's about generating revenue. Period.

You're kidding right? Generating revenue? I disagree.

1. 500 cars per year can get SB100 exemptions, which is a limitation. CA just tried to increase the # to 750 exemptions, but did not get out of committee.

2. The fees and taxes on 500 replicas/cars per year is miniscule, not even a rounding error, in terms of the CA budget. The CA budget that was just passed is $87 Billion or $87,000,000,000. If you assume that about 10% is collected on every new replica at about $50,000 value per replica, then we're talking about $2.5 Million of revenue or $2,500,000. So, that SB100 revenue represents about 0.0029% of the budget. That's 29/10,000ths of one percent.