The import laws were created due to automobile manufacturers lobbying for them. They were afraid people would import "grey market" cars instead of buying their new cars.
The prosecutor in this case should be beaten over the head with a large, dead trout.
Sky_Render wrote: The prosecutor in this case should be beaten over the head with a large, dead trout.
Sky_Render wrote: The import laws were created due to automobile manufacturers lobbying for them. They were afraid people would import "grey market" cars instead of buying their new cars. The prosecutor in this case should be beaten over the head with a large, dead trout.
I think a live flapping trout would be just as sufficient in this case.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: No no no you guys... It was all because he didn't have cats on the cars.
Tell me again why we need to have car titles? I mean, I understand having to pay a user fee to register and use a car on publicly paid-for roads, but why does the government have the right to tell us what cars we may or may not drive? Provided, of course, those cars do not pose any more risk to the other cars on the road than any other car.
Yes, I know, Libertarianism...where does my fist end and your nose start?
mndsm wrote: Even if he bought them as shells..... couldn't they technically be considered kit cars?
Not as I understand it; there's some law that if a car is sold as a complete car in another market, it can't be sold here as a kit.
I'm not exactly sure how that works with Nobles, though, because I thought they were sold as complete cars in the rest of the world. I'm sure there's a few other examples as well.
Maybe that's just a CA thing.
I am no fan of the the import laws on cars such as these, but the dude admits he knows he broke the law. And he is paying the consequences. I can see wanting the law changed, but I am not sure why we are defending a dude who thinks he doesn't have to play by the rules.
How would you folks feel if the dude had sold the car to someone who relied upon his word about the titling issues? You know, say you paid $50K for the car and when you took it to the DMV, they confiscated your car and crushed it?
I would say that if you are buying a pre-R35 Skyline in the US and you expect to be free of title issues.......then I'll have some of whatever you are smoking.
I would say the "title issues" with these cars over the years in the US have been pretty widely publicized, at least among car enthusiasts. I would think anyone thinking of buying one has to be expecting a headache getting it registered, and expecting to work the system a little bit to get a title. Not really a secret.
If you're going to register a kit car, you need a Manufacturer's Statement of Origin from the manufacturer. Just like with a new car, actually. If you build the frame yourself, you have to show that you bought the tube, etc. Nobles will come with an MSO, just like Caterhams and other imported kits. The loophole with a Noble/pre-built Caterham/etc is that you buy the kit, then you buy the drivetrain (possibly through a different legal entity) and then you pay someone to install it. Voila, a registrable kit car.
You can't just wave your hands and make a unibody appear from a legal standpoint 
So the kit car route is not really an option when it comes to a Skyline.
One reason to keep grey market cars off the road is safety. The regs are different in different countries. If the car can be made compliant, then the NHSTA has a procedure for doing so. Sure, it's a bit awkward and it's easy to find goofy exceptions (try to import a 1990 Canadian Miata into the US, for example) but that's a matter of implementation.
I don't want to see these things crushed. Unfortunately, it looks like the seller got himself backed into a corner by doing the wrong thing a few times.
Otto Maddox wrote: I am no fan of the the import laws on cars such as these, but the dude admits he knows he broke the law. And he is paying the consequences. I can see wanting the law changed, but I am not sure why we are defending a dude who thinks he doesn't have to play by the rules. How would you folks feel if the dude had sold the car to someone who relied upon his word about the titling issues? You know, say you paid $50K for the car and when you took it to the DMV, they confiscated your car and crushed it?
Funny you should ask that, a friend of mine just dealt with that issue. He paid a guy 17k for a legit RHD Japanese GC8 Subaru STi Type R. Guy had alllll sorts of wrong things going. Tax evasion, not properly titling the car to begin with, etc. Ends up that the friend of mine gets it licensed as a low production exempt import, and caught an MN blue VIN for it. He can't sell it... but he never really intends to. I would have to imagine that the Skylines could PROBABLY have been done like that correctly. Not to mention the fact that the r33's were the only ones that were actually federalized..... Something about the fed side of the story doesn't seem right.
failboat wrote: so if he sold them for off-road (track) use only he wouldn't be in this mess? maybe? I still think its a bit of an overreaction. crushing perfectly good cars to send a message. woo hoo. you have judicial power. way to save us from ourselves.
The cars have to be crushed, they have a taste for illegal importation now.
volvoclearinghouse wrote: Tell me again why we need to have car titles? I mean, I understand having to pay a user fee to register and use a car on publicly paid-for roads, but why does the government have the right to tell us what cars we may or may not drive? Provided, of course, those cars do not pose any more risk to the other cars on the road than any other car. Yes, I know, Libertarianism...where does my fist end and your nose start?
Outside of the air quality risk, there's a safety risk. Ignore the crash safety issues, there's insurance. And by defrauding an insurance company to provide him coverage from hitting you, that's a broken law. Insurance companies use titles to know what kind of car so that they can supply proper insurance.
If that's wrong, and he gets into an accident- we all pay for it. There's where my nose starts.
mndsm wrote:Otto Maddox wrote: I am no fan of the the import laws on cars such as these, but the dude admits he knows he broke the law. And he is paying the consequences. I can see wanting the law changed, but I am not sure why we are defending a dude who thinks he doesn't have to play by the rules. How would you folks feel if the dude had sold the car to someone who relied upon his word about the titling issues? You know, say you paid $50K for the car and when you took it to the DMV, they confiscated your car and crushed it?Funny you should ask that, a friend of mine just dealt with that issue. He paid a guy 17k for a legit RHD Japanese GC8 Subaru STi Type R. Guy had alllll sorts of wrong things going. Tax evasion, not properly titling the car to begin with, etc. Ends up that the friend of mine gets it licensed as a low production exempt import, and caught an MN blue VIN for it. He can't sell it... but he never really intends to. I would have to imagine that the Skylines could PROBABLY have been done like that correctly. Not to mention the fact that the r33's were the only ones that were actually federalized..... Something about the fed side of the story doesn't seem right.
The real issue is he didn't have the money to pay people off. How else did Bill Gates get a Porsche 959? Apparently, laws are negotiable for the right fee...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Show_and_Display
In reply to Sky_Render:
I'd think that would be doable for your average person if they had enough time. I've been learning a few political secrets lately. 
N Sperlo wrote: In reply to Sky_Render: I'd think that would be doable for your average person if they had enough time. I've been learning a few political secrets lately.
My point was that the law was pushed through by a couple of wealthy Porsche collectors, notably Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld.
This wouldn't be a problem if the government didn't have stupid laws on what cars you can and can't bring into the US.
Chicken Tax anyone?
93EXCivic wrote: This wouldn't be a problem if the government didn't have stupid laws on what cars you can and can't bring into the US.
If we could bring in anything we wanted, I wonder if the insurance companies would insure them.
Sky_Render wrote:N Sperlo wrote: In reply to Sky_Render: I'd think that would be doable for your average person if they had enough time. I've been learning a few political secrets lately.My point was that the law was pushed through by a couple of wealthy Porsche collectors, notably Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld.
It still took a full decade, though.
Sky_Render wrote: My point was that the law was pushed through by a couple of wealthy Porsche collectors, notably Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld.
93EXCivic wrote: Either way they are incredible stupid laws only enforced to help the car markers bottomline by preventing them from importing cars from any where.
yes and no.. it also saved us from deathtraps like the trabant. The law's intentions are good.. it's how it may or may not get enforced that is the problem
We used to get cars from the manufacturers to race. They would be preproduction cars with no other use, but most of the time had no VIN. You could not title them, but they made great race cars. I do however know of someone that made one into a street car, but it is very illegal. You have to sign documents saying you understand as much when you take possession. It's why many manufacturers just crush them instead of dealing with the issues.
I know it sounds like a silly issue, but trust me, if you hit some one with your illegally imported car, there will be a string of people lining up to sue you and everyone associated with it.
Otto Maddox wrote:93EXCivic wrote: This wouldn't be a problem if the government didn't have stupid laws on what cars you can and can't bring into the US.If we could bring in anything we wanted, I wonder if the insurance companies would insure them.
More then likely someone would because after a certain age you can bring in whatever car anyway.
93EXCivic wrote: More then likely someone would because after a certain age you can bring in whatever car anyway.
How much do you like your money?
Otto Maddox wrote:93EXCivic wrote: This wouldn't be a problem if the government didn't have stupid laws on what cars you can and can't bring into the US.If we could bring in anything we wanted, I wonder if the insurance companies would insure them.
Self insure instead?
You'll need to log in to post.
