Looking at a used Cobra IN CALIFORNIA that is currently registered as a 196X. Issues?

[intofx]

Title says it... I've been looking for a Superformance or Backdraft with SB-100 in CA with few results. I've found one that is currently legally registered as a 1965 or '66 (not sure which, as I have not seen the title myself). Most registration posts here are regarding bringing a car into the state but what if it's currently titled/registered in CA already? Dealer says it's not an issue but I've read the horror stories about bringing one in so I'd rather find one ready to go here in CA. If it's already registered and titled in CA will this be an issue? Can I just buy the car and register it based on the current title/registration? If not, is it difficult to obtain SB-100 on an already registered CA car? Will I need origin docs, etc? Is it the same loathsome process? If there is an issue would the seller hold any responsibility? Thanks in advance!!

Matt

[twobjshelbys]

It's iffy. Cars registered as 1965 Shelby Cobras do/did exist. I bought mine in 2009 at Barrett Jackson with such a title. But from within CA, they aren't going to let that title stand and will certainly require SB100. Don't buy the car until the owner has SB100 taken care of SB100 for you just in case he runs into a boatload of problems and throws his hands up. You don't want to buy it and end up not being able to get SB100 because he dropped the ball years ago.

[jhv48]

What he said! The car is currently registered illegally in California. Have the current owner complete the SB100 registration process before you hand him a dime.

[twobjshelbys]

The threats by some overzealous states attorney that storm troopers would show up at your door because you didn't fix a car they properly registered for you were extremely over exaggerated. Butr they will in all likelihood expect it to be fixed if re-titling in the state of CA. Move it out of state and the new state will have to honor the old title (it doesn't mean the new state will not have similar draconian rules.)

[Lou1119]

Originally Posted by intofx

Title says it... I've been looking for a Superformance or Backdraft with SB-100 in CA with few results. I've found one that is currently legally registered as a 1965 or '66 (not sure which, as I have not seen the title myself). Most registration posts here are regarding bringing a car into the state but what if it's currently titled/registered in CA already? Dealer says it's not an issue but I've read the horror stories about bringing one in so I'd rather find one ready to go here in CA. If it's already registered and titled in CA will this be an issue? Can I just buy the car and register it based on the current title/registration? If not, is it difficult to obtain SB-100 on an already registered CA car? Will I need origin docs, etc? Is it the same loathsome process? If there is an issue would the seller hold any responsibility? Thanks in advance!!

Matt

I have a SPF that is registered legally in CA that I am seriously considering selling. I am located in Northern CA about 25 miles north of Sacramento.”. Contact me if you are interested

[CHANMADD]

My title says 1965.. I registered it 100 % correctly in Ca. It should have...SPCN .... on the title and then if it does you do not need an sb100.

[NROTOXIN]

What's your point? You could give some details on the justification of the the way you titled your car that was not manufactured in that year.

[eschaider]

California, a number of years ago, decided they did not like replicas registered that way and put a stop to it. They also offered something like a grace period for already registered replicas to confess their sins, ask for forgiveness, and then re-register with an appropriate level of fines imposed to again regain the good graces of DMV and the other regulatory authorities.

Many did, and predictably, some did not. In the 'some did not camp,’ there was a mixture of yet more severe penance (fines) and, in selected cases, supposed confiscation and destruction of the vehicle. You have pulled up a chair to an extremely high-stakes poker table that you probably would not knowingly be otherwise sitting at. Of course, there is always the Russian Roulette Rule that says not every trigger pull finds a primer ...

[hauss]

All I can say after many trips to the DMV and the highway patrol inspection office, it is legally registered as a 1965 Shelby cobra . Yes it was a pain in the a$$. No spcn I did not need one car is legal and been registered and insured in ca over 3 years ! Now with all that said 75K and IT can be yours . A legal to drive in CA. Cobra! It seems that the DMV wants dealers and builders to get the spcns I purchased the car from a good friend and neither of us are builders or dealers.

[panteralee]

I would go to the DMV with the VIN and ask them. In CA, it's not a game of hide and seek with the DMV. If the dealer is honest, they will have no problem with you doing that. Why debate it? I have heard of several guys, some on this forum, that swear they "have a guy" that does all their registrations for kit cars in Ca and NEVER need an SB100 - and we are talking in the last year. I call BS on that these days. Maybe it happened 10 years ago when SB100 was still newer, but not now. So why risk it. Ask DMV directly and get the answer. Of course, you could get 10 different answers at DMV depending upon which agent and manager you talk to. Personally, if it were me, I would be prepared to get SB100. It's not a death sentence. Just a Sxxx load more work than the normal process. And make sure you get as many receipts from the dealer as possible. If they have none on the build, look for a different Cobra. There are plenty of SB100 legit cars in CA. You just need to find an owner and "show them the money"

[CJ428CJ]

If you want to know more about the ramifications of registering a Cobra replica in California as a 1965 model year rather than the SPCN process using SB100, do a forum search and search on the user named "morgester." Lots of enlightening information in those threads.

[jhv48]

As others have said before, registering a vehicle as any year other than the year it was actually completed is considered fraud and can be punished accordingly. California bases registration fees on the year of completion so claiming your car was built in 1965 cheats them of the fees a newer car would be charged. It’s always about the money in California. California holds the car owner completely responsible for correctly registering a vehicle even if the DMV employee screws up and registers it as a 1965. Technically, California is supposed to honor other State’s registrations, and they sometimes do, but they still hold the owner responsible if the year of completion doesn’t match the year on the registration.
Not sure how insurance companies would react if your “1965” replica was totaled and a sharp claims adjuster refused your claim due to you falsely claiming your car was a 1965. Once again, insurance fees are partly based on year of actual production.
I guess, to me, I’m not willing to gamble on a bogus registration. Getting an SB100 exemption and insuring my car as a 2009 Superformance was costly and time consuming. But, I’ve driven 36,000 miles without worrying about it.
Your choice.

[twobjshelbys]

Oh come on now. If haus took his car in to get it registered and through multiple layers of incompetence he comes away with a registration that says he's got a 65 Cobra, that's not his problem. Some kid from Iowa (me) shows up and has no idea of how it is supposed to work simply takes the word of the administration. If it is wrong, it's California's fault. There are many references to the DMV soldiers in jack boots showing up armed with automatic machine guns and tanks and hauling Cobras and miscreant owners off to San Quentin, but there are no first person "It happened to me" accounts. So the draconian measures threatened by some overzealous DA or states attorney or whatever he was remain that - threats.

PS. Haus, you can continue to keep your head buried in the sand but there's a chance "the system" will eventually catch up and you'll be forced to go through the draconian SB100 process. Good luck.

[mrmustang]

Originally Posted by twobjshelbys

Oh come on now. If haus took his car in to get it registered and through multiple layers of incompetence he comes away with a registration that says he's got a 65 Cobra, that's not his problem. Some kid from Iowa (me) shows up and has no idea of how it is supposed to work simply takes the word of the administration. If it is wrong, it's California's fault. There are many references to the DMV soldiers in jack boots showing up armed with automatic machine guns and tanks and hauling Cobras and miscreant owners off to San Quentin, but there are no first person "It happened to me" accounts. So the draconian measures threatened by some overzealous DA or states attorney or whatever he was remain that - threats.

PS. Haus, you can continue to keep your head buried in the sand but there's a chance "the system" will eventually catch up and you'll be forced to go through the draconian SB100 process. Good luck.

As someone who has been here for 20+ years, I post the following:

There are threads on here about getting caught and fined by the CA DMV/MVS. There is at least one person who used to be here, he was in law enforcement, he was also the cause of the whole "Titles Unlimited" meltdown that started with California. There was a time, where DMV/MVS personnel openly trolled and participated on this forum, and others. Don't think so, think it can't happen to you (not pointing fingers at any one person, just leaving it out there as a general statement for the next person who reads this thread in the archives in another 20 years), it can.



Bill S.

[twobjshelbys]

Originally Posted by mrmustang

As someone who has been here for 20+ years, I post the following:

There are threads on here about getting caught and fined by the CA DMV/MVS. There is at least one person who used to be here, he was in law enforcement, he was also the cause of the whole "Titles Unlimited" meltdown that started with California. There was a time, where DMV/MVS personnel openly trolled and participated on this forum, and others. Don't think so, think it can't happen to you (not pointing fingers at any one person, just leaving it out there as a general statement for the next person who reads this thread in the archives in another 20 years), it can.



Bill S.

Not saying it can't happen. In 2011 when I got my Ford GT I momentarily considered the Montana license plate scam. That was just after the counties that comprise Denver - Denver, Adams, Jefferson, Boulder, went on a search for Montana licensed motor homes that were parked openly. Several big names got caught and all of them had to pay registration, sales tax, penalties and fines. One guy's motor home cost him more in assessments than the original. He whined from his 20 room mansion in Cherry Creek.

Now I personally know of at least three "New Ford GTs" licensed in Montana... One MIGHT have a legitimate business based there but that's unlikely. The others do not.

[jhv48]

Originally Posted by twobjshelbys

Oh come on now. If haus took his car in to get it registered and through multiple layers of incompetence he comes away with a registration that says he's got a 65 Cobra, that's not his problem. Some kid from Iowa (me) shows up and has no idea of how it is supposed to work simply takes the word of the administration. If it is wrong, it's California's fault.

Unfortunately, California law and DMV don’t see it that way. They hold the owner 100% responsible for registering their vehicle correctly.

[eschaider]

Originally Posted by hauss

All I can say after many trips to the DMV and the highway patrol inspection office, it is legally registered as a 1965 Shelby cobra . Yes it was a pain in the a$$. No spcn I did not need one car is legal and been registered and insured in ca over 3 years ! Now with all that said 75K and IT can be yours . A legal to drive in CA. Cobra! It seems that the DMV wants dealers and builders to get the spcns I purchased the car from a good friend and neither of us are builders or dealers.

All this means is that you and your friend participated in an illegal motor vehicle transfer, registration, and possibly sale! As multiple others have already indicated, registering a motor vehicle in California as any year other than the year the vehicle being registered was actually manufactured has been defined as a fraud in California.

California places the responsibility for completely and correctly registering a vehicle specifically on the owner of the vehicle. Of course, owners do not have to comply. However, when they do not and when they also get discovered, California has a much more aggressive portion of the code that comes into play, notwithstanding any of the usual objections to the contrary that may come to mind — including the profession of ignorance of the law or any profound representations of innocence, including the ever-popular not-my-fault logic.

You are playing high-stakes poker at a table where the ante is a check you don’t want to write and possibly can’t afford to write — and you have been repeatedly informed/reminded of this.