reply

I just purchased a Backdraft and am running into issues that seem to have started in CT, so it was funny to see this post. 1st, the car is titled in the year it was built (2006) but that seems normal based on this thread. The other thing is, the VIN they use, even though there is a Backdraft rivited VIN plate... they have theirs and that is the 7 digit number on the title. It's a little confusing for Florida title processors.. so working on that!

Your whole argument is moot. Most of the states you are complaining about have paid more in federal taxes for years over what they received, including the state where I live. NY paid $22 billion more in 2018 than they received. Now they are asking for some money, and are getting called out. How about Kentucky that gets $148 billion more in taxes than they pay and they have their hand out wanting more?

If you are going to post political crap, at least make sure it is correct.

We are of a different opinion and while you are entitled to your opinion you are not entitled to your own facts and that does not change the fact I do not agree with your confused (if I am polite) view. For the record you are conflating a State's internal entitlement largesse and it's associated costs with federal taxes paid by the residents. Federal tax and State spending are not even remotely related.

The election to grant all manner of entitlement programs is an election made by voters in individual states. To attempt to get voters in other states to pay for your spending largesse is reprehensible. If you choose to spend like a drunken sailor that is your right. When it comes time to pay the piper, do not look at other states to underwrite that largesse. You bought it, you own it and most importantly you need to pay for it.

If you do not want to pay for your largesse cut back your bleeding heart entitlement programs. It's that simple! Don't come with your hand out asking for someone else's monies to pay for your budget excesses — you will find no sympathy from most other taxpayers, at all.


Ed

So the reason is the Backdraft VIN is associated with the rolling chassis. Then you have an engine serial number and a transmission serial number. The CT VIN is a way to bind all 3.

Is this for every state? How are people selling the cars under the 17 digit VIN and not the "new" one?

Each state has it's own procedure. NY is similar while RI is not. In CT now the cars receive a 1965 registration (but no title).

I've been unsuccessful in getting mine re-registered as 1965 so far. Last conversation over the phone with one of the inspectors is they look at the manufacture date of the frame, not the body style. This contradicts what their website says.

I also submitted a letter to the Middletown Mayor on the questionable actions of the tax office.

We'll see if either of these paths make progress.

When it reopens, go in person and speak to the inspectors in the lane in Wethersfield. Show them photos of the car.

Thanks for the guidance, I hope you are correct.

So, for all you CT residents, this is the week you'll likely receive your annual vehicle tax. Mine arrived yesterday.

...now increased the assessment another $8000.

This is apparently their unethical retaliation for me appealing the 2019 assessment. So, despite my phone calls, emails, appeals and full documentation on the value of the kit car and previous precedent on assessments, they again raised it substantially. If this type of retaliation occurred in the private section, they would be fired.

On June 1, I also submitted a letter to the Middletown Mayor on the questionable actions of the tax office. Never heard anything back. Reviewing their budget for 2020, they are hailing the goodness of lowering the mill rate by 0.2%, "on the back of strong grand list growth". Of course it's strong growth, you're raising the assessments, no need to raise the mill rate! Not to mention, seems like the assessor and deputy assessor pull down some decent coin. Not bad for searching NADA and google all day long.

Wow!!!

That’s got to sting!

You need to find comparable sales of THE SAME MAKE AND MODEL to support your claim. They are looking at overall sales and it is biased up by higher end vehicles. It'll be tough to convince them since of course they will not admit their mistake that their methodology is flawed. But it's worth a shot.

Tony - unfortunately, I did all that for the appeal, but it went nowhere. I laid out the make, model and value differences between my model and others like Superformance, Kirkham, etc. Appeal was denied. Their appeal process is flawed, they didn't even hold an appeal panel. They had me meet with just one person, who didn't seem to know the difference between a steering wheel and a hubcap.

Damon and Deputy Roger now increased the assessment another $8000.


Did I read this correctly, another $8K? Unbelievable!!!!

Glad I moved from Mass / CT to New Hampshire!

As a general rule of thumb when you are attempting to take the hamburger (tax dollars) off the civil servant's picnic table, you are going to need a lawyer. The sooner you get the lawyer the sooner you get relief — just saying ...


Ed

Yep, $8000 increase on the assessment, so takes another ~$250 out of my pocket.

I hear ya Ed, unfortunately, that costs money too. I'm contemplating my options. Lawyering up is one of them, especially since the increase this year is obviously driven by retaliation, the case could potentially capture more than just the assessment appeal. There is an ethics / retaliation component here.

...and if you guys have 12 minutes, let me know what you think. This was the attempt for a 'second' appeal for last year. I think I-Team / Hartford Courant would be interested:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsSDEIcMU8w

Figure I'll provided a bit of an update, and always open to suggestions and advice:

Registration / titling: I think I'm close with getting the car retitled as a 1965. It's been a lot of conversations / communications with forum members, one of the inspectors and the title department. All have been helpful. I'll leave out a lot of the details that got me to this point, but DMV agrees that the title can be corrected to 1965 Composite Cobra, and the registration updated as well.

However, they are saying that composite vehicles do not qualify for Classic plates. This concerns me, since the classic plate is what firmly caps the tax assessment at $500 (vs. the $50,000 they are currently [incorrectly] assessing it at). Without the classic plate, I think the assessors will continue to abuse me, even with a 1965 title. Also, my car is currently registered as a 2004, so would be 20 years old in 2024 (which should then be eligible for classic plates), so should I stick with it as 2004? If I go to a 1965 registration w/o the classic plates, not sure that that means for an assessment. I think they will still use their 'google search' and pick high value, non-representive replicas for the assessment.

Another forum member was titled in CT as a 1965 Cobra Roadster and got classic plates, but I'm told they won't title it like that for me.

Assessment: I appealed the 2020 assessment earlier this week. TBD is approved or declined. I will say that at least this year, the 1-person panel member seems knowledgeable in these cars to an extend, and hopefully I made the case very clear on a 18 year old factory five kit vs. other high end kits. We'll see the result after he reviews it with the other panel members for a decision.

If these paths don't work, not sure what I'm going to do, but I cannot sustain an additional $5000 in vehicle property tax over the next 3 years (or longer!).