Registration Process for a Replica?

[Brastic]

Since the car was registered as a 1965 SPCN in AK, the DMV took it. I am standing there with a half inch of build recites and stuff, and the DMV just took the sign AK title. I smiled, said thank you and left. Sometimes you just get lucky.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by Brastic

Since the car was registered as a 1965 SPCN in AK, the DMV took it. I am standing there with a half inch of build recites and stuff, and the DMV just took the sign AK title. I smiled, said thank you and left. Sometimes you just get lucky.

Since there was not SPCNS program in 1965, nor was your Cobra produced in 1965, you're title is incorrect. You must have gotten someone unfamiliar with the process. You're certainly taking a chance here, hoping the CA DMV will not catch up to the incorrect registration, assuming of course, you didn't go through the SB100/SB1578/SPCNS process of going to the CHP and BAR.

Good luck. I'd be nervous without that magical BAR sticker on my car.

[jhv48]

Originally Posted by Brastic

Since the car was registered as a 1965 SPCN in AK, the DMV took it. I am standing there with a half inch of build recites and stuff, and the DMV just took the sign AK title. I smiled, said thank you and left. Sometimes you just get lucky.

Tread lightly with that 1965 registration. According to the CHP, your vehicle is fraudulently registered and can be confiscated if caught. You can be prosecuted and fined in the process. Even though the dmv based the registration on how the previous state registered it, it still isn't a 1965 vehicle and if caught, you will be held responsible. The reason is simple, $$$$$. California bases their registration fees on the actual year of the vehicle. The newer the date, the higher the fees. Thus, by knowingly allowing the car to be registered as a 1965 when in reality it is a 20--, you are considered to be committing fraud.

This has been discussed many times on this forum. Not condemning you. I'm only making you aware of the possible repercussions.
There are stories of officers walking car shows and checking the registrations of all the cars. Any found to be be incorrect were towed away and the owner left to fight it out at a later date. Just the thought of having my car towed to a storage lot was enough to make me cringe.

If it were me, I would return to the DMV and inform them of their error and begin the correct sb100 registration process and pay the appropriate fees. Then drive and enjoy the peace of mind.

[Brastic]

Thank you for the replies. I have an appointment with the DMW for Friday and I will bring up date. I really want my paperwork to be clean so that there are no hassles in the future.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by jhv48

Tread lightly with that 1965 registration. According to the CHP, your vehicle is fraudulently registered and can be confiscated if caught. You can be prosecuted and fined in the process. Even though the dmv based the registration on how the previous state registered it, it still isn't a 1965 vehicle and if caught, you will be held responsible. The reason is simple, $$$$$. California bases their registration fees on the actual year of the vehicle. The newer the date, the higher the fees. Thus, by knowingly allowing the car to be registered as a 1965 when in reality it is a 20--, you are considered to be committing fraud.

This has been discussed many times on this forum. Not condemning you. I'm only making you aware of the possible repercussions.
There are stories of officers walking car shows and checking the registrations of all the cars. Any found to be be incorrect were towed away and the owner left to fight it out at a later date. Just the thought of having my car towed to a storage lot was enough to make me cringe.

If it were me, I would return to the DMV and inform them of their error and begin the correct sb100 registration process and pay the appropriate fees. Then drive and enjoy the peace of mind.

See above from an earlier post.

Just because another state has registered it as a 1965 doesn't magically change the actual manufacture date to a 1965. Replicas were never made in 1965, obviously. And I'd be nervous running around in your "1965 Ford", when in fact it was not built in 1965.

There's a process for registering these cars (SB100 for new builds and SB 1578 for used out of state Cobras) and I'd personally follow it.

[ACHiPo]

Originally Posted by RodKnock

See above from an earlier post.

Just because another state has registered it as a 1965 doesn't magically change the actual manufacture date to a 1965. Replicas were never made in 1965, obviously. And I'd be nervous running around in your "1965 Ford", when in fact it was not built in 1965.

There's a process for registering these cars (SB100 for new builds and SB 1578 for used out of state Cobras) and I'd personally follow it.

RodKnock,
Per your earlier guidance, I'd tried several searches here, on the DMV site, and Google on different variants of "new/used kit car registration in CA" that did not lead to a clear understanding of the process. This is the first I've seen a reference to SB 1578. This time I searched for "SB 1578" and sure enough found some good explanations. A heck of a lot easier when you know what to search for--kinda like a teacher saying "look it up" when you don't know what letter the word starts with.

I'm sure it's frustrating when newbies come in and ask a bunch of basic questions that were hashed through years ago. Trust me it's also frustrating to spend what little free time you have researching without getting a clear understanding of the licensing process. It seems like this topic is ripe for a "sticky" or FAQ to save the frustration?

Regards,
AC

California SB 1578

SB100 was enacted to enable folks to INITIALLY register new SPCN builds by either the year of the engine, OR, the year the body most closely resembles. Not by chassis, not to RE-REGISTER replirides. If the BAR dude can't figure out what year your car most closely resembles, the process defaults to 1960. I don't know why anybody would try to justify an engine by year, when there are about 275 million pictures of 64/67 Shelby Cobras in the public domain one could use to establish a baseline.

SB1578 was enacted to REMOVE the "INITIAL" part of the registration process on SPCN rides. If one had a replica that had been "mis-registered" initially, htru no fault of his own, one can use SB1578 to correct this oversight. Of course, one will have to pay the taxes,( NOT sales tax, it's a USE tax, which just happens to be the same rate as the local sales tax.)

The real question is "what does the DMV really need to see to register my SPCN?" Since I just went thru this, I feel pretty comfortable in answering. They want to see:
1. MSO, from the factory
2. RECIEPTS of the engine , transmission, the kit, and any other relevant major components. I took in paper on wheels and tires, engine, kit and tranny, and the DMV seemed pretty happy. Me too. The lady charged me $1800, then reduced it to $1336 when I showed her the reciepts of the "MAJOR COMPONENTS." If one had used a Mustang donor, all one would need would be the MSO and title to your donor car, very frugal. I've seen Mustangs as low as $100 around.

That's it. Some folks take in every receipt for every nut and bolt, but this practice just serves to confound the clerks at DMV. Keep It Simple Stoopid, take in the bare neccessities. It appears, after my recent foray, that the impression is that the value of most SPCN cars are all the same as an FFR kit, i.e. $25K or so, as it appears FFR's are most frequently presented. This info could be beneficial to folks who are building other types of cars. Heck fire, if one bought, oh say, a Kirkam roller for 22K, and a "donor car" for a couple of thou, the bill would be almost the same as mine. If one is adamant that he doesn't own any "cheepo" replica, then step right up to the 8% on 80/100K "use tax".

One further note, if your replica is registered as a 65, 66 or whatever, beware. It seems DMV is asking folks with cars titled as such to present the cars and paperwork to justify the exemption. Check out the Superformance thread from a couple of days ago, there have been some FFR types receiving the same letter.