California: Is your kit car registered as a 1960 vintage vehicle?

[SL]

Hey Morgan, Morgester is not the one to change the laws. That has to come out of the legislative branch of the California government. The person who is going to be able promote a change is the local Assembly person. Getting someone in the Assembly to sponsor legislation is another whole can of worms, and they would probably end up screwing up the 500 exemptions.

Complaining about Morgester changing the laws and asking what is he doing about it, is like asking a traffic cop what he is doing about getting the speed limit raised.

Just my .02 cents on the matter....

[Michael4yah]

Ernie, A million dollars to the state of california is not a lot of money. ILLEGAL ALIENS COST US 18 BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR IN HEALTH CARE THAT THEY DIDNT DESERVE. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE LIKE ME AND HAVE A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING ALL THE ZEROS, THATS 18 THOUSAND 1 MILLION DOLLAR BILLS.

[Jamo]

Folks...let's keep this thread on track.

Thank you for your expected cooperation.

[mr bruce]

Pehaps it is time for a civics lesson.

[Jamo]

Originally Posted by mr bruce

Pehaps it is time for a civics lesson.

You presume they will be receptive to such things.

[SL]

Jamo, I too would doubt there are any who are interested in civics lesson. It would suck to be owner of one of those that was illegally registered cars, and waiting for the knock on the door, or the letter in the mail.

[Morgester]

Originally Posted by Chaplin

Morgester-
Is CA not going to give full faith and credit to the determination of its sister states that a car should be titled as X year? Certainly CA cannot prosecute the owners of such cars without running afoul of the full credit clause.

Turns out that California specifically addresses this issue:

Vehicle Code § 4304. Effect of foreign certificates of title

Upon application for registration of a vehicle previously registered outside this State, the department shall grant full faith and credit to the currently valid certificate of title describing the vehicle, the ownership thereof, and any liens thereon, issued by the state in which the vehicle was last registered, except that the laws of the state shall provide for the notation upon the certificate of title of any and all liens and encumbrances other than those dependent upon possession.

[Excaliber]

Mr. Morgester,

My Hawaii replica is currently titled by the State of Hawaii as a 'street rod' under our local laws. The year and model are referred to as 1965 Cobra. Even the "Year first Sold" section is 1965! This was totally the States call, I made no statements what so ever to get my car registered as a 1965 anything. Would Calif accept that as the correct year of the car as it concerns the BAR?

[Morgester]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

Mr. Morgester,

My Hawaii replica is currently titled by the State of Hawaii as a 'street rod' under our local laws. The year and model are referred to as 1965 Cobra. Even the "Year first Sold" section is 1965! This was totally the States call, I made no statements what so ever to get my car registered as a 1965 anything. Would Calif accept that as the correct year of the car as it concerns the BAR?

My official answer "ask DMV and BAR"

There are a lot of “ifs” in this response. Both BAR and DMV will have the final word on how this is interpreted.

Your car must be legally registered under existing law and all information disclosed. Any fraud in the state of origin would allow DMV to reject the title. (See Vehicle Code § 4305.) In your case the origin state legally titled the vehicle as a 1965 Ford. Per the statutes plain language “full faith and credit to the currently valid certificate of title describing the vehicle” it would appear that DMV is required to register this vehicle as a 1965 Ford.

The next question is what impact, if any, does this have on SPCN emission requirements? One view point is that since Vehicle Code § 4750.1 requires that emission testing be done by a “model year” that DMV assigns, and in that DMV is required to accept your vehicle as a 1965, that emission standards will be set at 1965.

Regardless of ones stance on emission requirements for SPCN vehicles, Vehicle Code § 4305 raises some very unique and interesting problems by its possible unintended consequences. I am sure that there will be official answers on how all of this will play out.

[Woodz428]

I know it is probably only me....but I find it a little disturbing that an employee of the State Govt. (taxpayer funded) is gleening info to give said taxpayers a rougher time than they already have. All this while on the clock, I know, I know, it is all for our own good...right.

[Randy Rosenberg]

I have a feeling that only someone with deep pockets will have the resources needed to challenge the interpretation of VCC4305 in court, unless SEMA steps up to represent the entire Hot Rod community.

[Jamo]

Originally Posted by Randy Rosenberg

I have a feeling that only someone with deep pockets will have the resources needed to challenge the interpretation of VCC4305 in court, unless SEMA steps up to represent the entire Hot Rod community.

Even then...it would take a cold day down below to disturb an "expert agency's opinion." Not being cute with that phrase, by the way...courts are expected to defer to designated agencies which interpret and enforce administrative codes and regulations. Tied into separation of powers and all that gobbledy-goop. One carries an extremely tough burden into court trying to prove them wrong (fairness, logic and other mundane concepts carry little weight). Been there, done that many times...sometimes successfully, but I won't run out of fingers in counting such times over the past 30 years.

[pgermond]

WDZ,

You probably are right...... As a California resident and taxpayer, I appreciate Mr. Morgester's input.

[SkipB]

When I was working with the State to get my SB100 and registration, I was told there were as many as 70,000 illegally titled/registered vehicles in California. I believe the lady said there are more 1932 Fords registered in California today than Ford built in 1932! So, as mentioned before, this involves much more than Cobras.

So, if an amnesty bill is passed and all 70,000 owners decide to reregister and pay some kind of fee (tax? penalty?) to do so, what then is involved in getting them smog legal? That is 140 years worth of SB100 exemptions! Obviously this would not work. So, amnesty without a "smog solution" would be pretty useless, wouldn't it?

OK, some of the cars would pass the smog/year test, but a vast majority won't, I am sure. Let's say 50,000 still don't pass. Then what?

If on a federal level we can allow 12-14million illegal aliens suddenly become legal (with a fee paid, of course), just think of the revenue generated if the state suddenly allows the same thing to happen with hot rods, RVs, boats, Cobras, etc. Wow, the money for government would be mind boggling.

This is where I get confused. Is there a solution out there? Our Governor, who used to be a "car guy", has jumped ship and is now out of the closet as a full environmentalist. So, he will be no help. Who in state government still "swings a big hammer"? Any ideas? It may take SEMA or more to accomplish this.

I do appreciate Mr. Morgester keeping us up to date on what is going on in our government. He certainly doesn't have to do so.

Skip B

[Excaliber]

Thanks for your response Mr. Morgester. I shall attempt to contact the BAR or DMV to get further clarification on the 1965 title issue.

[Nails]

Morgster:

Any idea as to when the amnesty will go into effect?

Nails

[Morgester]

The bill has temporally been placed on hold as we look at emissions issues. Under the previous BAR guidelines (testing to year of the engine) we anticipated that the majority (but not all) of the amnesty seekers would have a fair shot and getting their vehicles registered for road usage. Amnesty was designed to get folks back into compliance with existing law. Amnesty was not designed to address any emission issues.

With the recent BAR revelations, it is not anticipated that amnesty vehicles could meet 2008 emission control requirements. The prevailing view is that if an amnesty vehicle can never meet emission requirements then that vehicle would not apply for amnesty.

For BAR to test at 2008 standards will require DMV to set a model year. DMV currently is not choosing to do so at this time for a variety of reasons. At play are the unintended consequence of past legislative actions that play to both sides of this issue. These issues need to be resolved before we can address amnesty.

[badrich]

I usually ignore all this SB 100 stuff, as I've always thought it didn't apply to me. I registered my beast almost five years ago as a '65 Cobra, as that is what it was registered as in Nevada, where it was originally built, and that is what my local DMV folks typed on the registration form. I paid them a huge amount of money for the registration and use tax. I didn't play any games, just paid the full amount. As I read AB 619, it appears to me that the main thing the state wants is money they feel is owed them from individuals who have played games, by improving compliance with state vehicle registration laws and accelerating and increasing collections of certain owed state fees and taxes. If they want me to change my registration, that's fine, but it wasn't registered that way to lower any fees due the state. In other words, I don't need no stinkin' amnesty! Here's a little of AB 619:

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. (a) It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting a
vehicle registration amnesty program to improve compliance with state
vehicle registration laws and accelerate and increase collections of
certain owed state fees and taxes.
(b) The Legislature finds and declares that a public purpose is
served by the waiver of criminal prosecution in return for the
immediate reporting and payment of previously underreported,
nonreported, or certain nonpaid vehicle registration fees and taxes.
The benefits gained by an amnesty program include, among other
things, accelerated receipt of certain owed fees and taxes,
permanently bringing into the vehicle registration system vehicles
that have been previously misidentified to avoid appropriative state
taxes and fees and providing an opportunity for vehicle owners to
correct their vehicle registration requirements and satisfy tax and
fee obligations before stepped-up vehicle registration enforcement
programs take effect.

I don't have any problem with that. Rich

[Excaliber]

badrich, Calif laws affect anyone who owns a replica that may eventually want to sell it as Calif is a HUGE potential market. Do you have your car 'smogged' every two years (I think thats the requirement for a 1965 model/year type SPCN vehicle)?

Interesting that Nevada, like Hawaii, identifies the car for what it represents, a 1965 Cobra. I find this method wholly reasonable and logical on the States part. I have not yet been able to get a straight answer from Calif in reference to honoring the State of Hawaii's 1965 title issue on my car. It's more like, "Bring it in and then we'll look at it".

[badrich]

My Shelby motor doesn't emit smog.