Announcement

Collapse

Seven Wiki Available

Please check out our wiki available at:

http://www.californiacaterhamclub.com/wiki7
See more
See less

CA SB100 Registration

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • CA SB100 Registration

    Hi folks and I am a “newâ€‌ Caterham owner who is up against the wall with CA DMV and wondered if anyone out there has any advice on how to best challenge a DMV interpretation. In August I acquired a 2006 CSR from the East Coast and was proceeding smoothly through the SB100 process. I had done the initial registration, paid my fees and received my certification of sequence number. I completed the CHP inspection (where they attached a new serial number) and also had completed the light and brake inspection. Having got through this I assumed the BAR inspection would just be a formality but when I got there the Referee took copies of my information and pictures of the vehicle and said that SB100 procedures changed last year and he had to send the information to DMV for approval prior to his inspection. One week later I got a call from him saying that DMV had denied the vehicle and had cancelled my sequence number. After many frustrating attempts I finally spoke with the compliance person who told me that DMV was considering a fully assembled vehicle to be a “manufactureredâ€‌ vehicle and therefore not eligible for SB100. When I explained that the vehicle had been assembled by a private owner for private use, not for resale and was not constructed by a licensed manufacturer or remanufacturer (to quote Section 580) it fell on deaf ears and her comment was something to the effect that the decision was final. She told me another department had my file and I would be getting a formal denial letter however this still hasn’t arrived after a few weeks. Prior to buying the vehicle I did a lot of research on multiple chat rooms and on the DMV website and thought I fully understood the SB100 requirements. On the DMV website any discussion of a Specially Constructed Vehicle (Section 580) does not state it had to be assembled by the owner and many out of state vehicles have been registered under SB100 including another Caterham in my area that was registered in August 2013. To me this current DMV interpretation doesn’t appear consistent with the definitions and requirements stated in their website and if nothing else the lack of disclosure as to a policy change has serious financial consequences to anyone bringing in an out of state vehicle that they can’t register. Any comments on a direction to take would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Alan.

  • #2
    Wow,
    I thought once it was a "used" car, registered in another state, that they didn't go thru all that. Looks like a person has to keep receipts of purchased parts, like the drivetrain, from other than the kit dealer. I had to show that the kit was purchased from one vendor and another built/purchased/installed the remaining parts.
    It sounds like you didn't have original documentation to prove that (don't think many owners from other states would think to keep that stuff after getting the car registered). Maybe it's time to see a lawyer... if it doesn't work out you'd be the 2nd person recently who's had to sell the car out of state.
    Mopho might chime in here... I thought there was something a little different for cars that have already been registered in other states.
    Last edited by Mondo; November 17, 2013, 08:26 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Alan

      I have not heard of anyone having the this issue before and there are a few members that have bought and registered an out of state Caterham already assembled with no problems.

      Try a different DMV office??

      Anyone else have any input or ideas?

      The legislature did pass a bill (I think it was SB1578 at the time) just to cover cases like this. The bill numbers get used over so SB100 and SB1578 are what are referred to to as Specially constructed vehicles.

      Doug

      Comment


      • #4
        Alan

        See if this thread helps. See the link to the SB1578 and the code section link.

        http://californiacaterhamclub.com/ch...highlight=1578

        Comment


        • #5
          I would actually write to my CA state senator and provide him with the paper trail and your DMV contact. I believe that they can apply some pressure on state government agencies that are being boneheaded.

          Also, did you provide evidence of previous (out-of-state) ownership to DMV?

          /Magnus F.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Seven2012 View Post
            After many frustrating attempts I finally spoke with the compliance person who told me that DMV was considering a fully assembled vehicle to be a “manufacturered” vehicle and therefore not eligible for SB100. When I explained that the vehicle had been assembled by a private owner for private use, not for resale and was not constructed by a licensed manufacturer or remanufacturer (to quote Section 580) it fell on deaf ears and her comment was something to the effect that the decision was final.
            From your post, it appears DMV believe your car was not originally assembled so as to be eligible for SB100/SB1578 registration for some reason. Are you 100% sure that it was not assembled by a dealer or agent? If you are sure, is there any documentation to support it? Or maybe some other reason? Just wondering if there may exist some legitimate reason why DMV might believe your car to be ineligible.

            It's possible that someone at DMV got confused and thought you were attempting to register a new build rather than an existing car from out of state that still qualifies, or some other mix-up. Whatever the case, you'll need to be absolutely certain of all the facts before directly confronting DMV. If your CSR is legitimately eligible, you just need to prove and/or convince DMV of that, which will be easier if you don't piss them off.
            | | Sean

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks for the comments guys. As I had purchased this vehicle from a Caterham dealer who provided the bill of sale I did initially think they were confused over the build status. I explained to the compliance person that the car was owned by an individual and was sold through the dealer on consignment hence the bill of sale. I also provided the vehicle title transfer declaration from that individual which was completed on the reverse of the Manufacturers Statement of Origin. I also provided some history on the vehicle in that the components were acquired and constructed by the original owner over a number of years who then sold the vehicle to the person I bought it from. I am attempting to see if the either of the owners has copies of the original receipts for the components however am not hopeful. In my research I did speak with a couple of local Caterham owners who had registered out of state vehicles and none had to produce any documentation as to the build. Doug, the SB 1578 reference seems pretty straightforward that if a vehicle meets the specified criteria of “a vehicle that is built for private use, not for resale, and is not constructed by a licensed manufacturer or remanufacturer” then is should be able to be registered unless the 500 numbers have been used. The compliance person did make the comment that my purchase of a “turn-key” vehicle was why it was being disqualified which seems totally out of context to the bill passed unless there have been some amendments. I am dealing with the compliance division of DMV Sacramento and was able to name of the Chief of Registration Policy from another chat room and am thinking that a registered letter to him explaining the facts may be the way to go (and thanks Magnus I would copy my state senator on that). As this seems to be a Sacramento policy decision I may be up against the politics and it sure would be good to have an “or else” position in the event they close the door. Given the written criteria on their website and the precedents of previous out of state vehicles could I have a small claims action for financial loss due to the inability to register? If nothing else I now would have to get a trailer and tow vehicle to get it to the track. That is probably wishful thinking but DMV shouldn’t be able to arbitrarily interpret what seems to have been clearly defined in law.

              Comment


              • #8
                That is truly bizarre.

                If this I understand this correctly, you would have to knock down a previously owned, out of state vehicle that you wanted to CA register under SB100.

                That is easily done in a Caterham, where you can get the suspension and drive train out in a day or so, but it just doesn't make sense.

                This will be amajor issue for a lot of people looking to buy used Sevens.

                /Magnus F.
                Last edited by magnusfeuer; November 19, 2013, 04:04 PM. Reason: grammar

                Comment


                • #9
                  As I see it, this is just a simple misunderstanding, and maybe even a predictable one. You bought an assembled Caterham from a Caterham dealer. I suspect this must have raised a flag with somebody internally at DMV, so that person declared your car to be ineligible, failing to note that the original owner actually did comply with all of the requirements and that the dealer merely sold the car to you on consignment.

                  Clearing up a DMV mix-up can be trying and difficult, but as everything is legit, I'm thinking you can likely get it cleared up eventually.
                  | | Sean

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Ah. I missed that the seller was a dealer. Sorry about that.

                    There is a used Washington State Seven (IIRC) that is being processed into SB100 right now. I'm talking to the guy (who is not on the web site), and will keep you posted of his progress.

                    /Magnus F.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Alan

                      If you can try a different DMV office unless they somehow have your car flagged already.

                      My understanding is that it cannot be built by a dealer or manufacturer but your car wasn't. Some sort of affidavit from the guy that build it over the years, (with photos if possible) might help.

                      It sounds like the person just doesn't know what they are talking about and/or wants to make an example of your car.

                      Where are you located?

                      Doug

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Sean I hope the misunderstanding aspect is right but they weren't swayed at all by the explanation I provided nor where they interested in additional documentation. Time to draft that letter. Another CSR going through the process right belongs to Simon Cowell (internet picture of it being delivered) and I would be really interested in finding out if he got a plate as his temporary was through November. Alan.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I didn't have to provide any documentation when I brought my car in, just the bill of sale (which they didn't even look at) and the title. What I don't get is how it got flagged after you already got a sequence number, at this point the car should have already been vetted.
                          That said, a lot seems to have changed since I did mine, according to some folks on the other site, they had to get the CHP inspection BEFORE they got the sequence number. When I did mine, paying fees and the sequence # was the first part, then CHP, then BAR. I even had to present the sequence number to the CHP and it is stamped on the VIN plate they put in the car. So who knows what they are doing now.

                          I bought my car from a private owner, I suspect the fact that yours came via a dealer screwed it up. On the other hand, didn't V-Robb buy his from a dealer?


                          .
                          www.morgansegal.com

                          The funny thing is my wife goes " What is that car a Morgan ? " and I said "No that's a Caterham but there is a Morgan driving it " -delise

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Check with Jeff & Julie Hamlin - they just went through this process with a car built in texas.

                            http://www.jhamlinx2.com/Introduction.html

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Just to follow up on this.

                              The Washington state car is now registered in California. The registration process apparently went fairly smooth with no major SB100, CHP, or DMV issues.

                              /Magnus F.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X