40+ Imported Defenders seized by Homeland Security Today (developing story)

[jhill15]

https://www.yahoo.com/autos/news/us-customs-cracking-down-imported-land-rovers-133005490.html

That is on yahoo news this morning. Pretty funny...they're about a week late on their story.

 

[jdlobb]

https://www.yahoo.com/autos/news/us-customs-cracking-down-imported-land-rovers-133005490.html

That is on yahoo news this morning. Pretty funny...they're about a week late on their story.

Yahoo! news comments are always rich.

I think almost every single comment is some variation on "we can confiscate cars but we can't stop illegals"

 

[UnfrozenCaveman]

JLRNA is not endearing themselves to me...though in fairness, I'm likely not their target market.

I think I'll stick with leaf springs from here on.

Sounds like Will has a meeting of some sort scheduled today...maybe we'll have some first hand news sooner rather than later.

 

[proper4wd]

I think I'll stick with leaf springs from here on.

:clapsmile

 

[tacr2man]

someone on a UK forum has posted a link to the list of VIN on the warrant , for people to check if its their stolen one in UK ? , says that a couple of places /firms in UK were feeding the vehicles to US importer/dealer . So its starting to look a bit more involved than just a infraction against compliance ?

 

[Herbie]

WillH over on defender source (lawyer representing several owners) has dug this up: http://isearch.nhtsa.gov/files/23894.ztv.html
.
An advisory opinion letter issued by Counsel for the National Highway and Transportation Association.
.
"Under a long-standing line of interpretations of this agency, the substitution of a new body on a used chassis alone does not result in the creation of a "new" motor vehicle subject to the FMVSS, assuming that the vehicle continues to be titled and registered with its original model year. Thus, under the scheme you outline, the 1967-75 Land Rover with a different body and unmodified chassis could be imported without the need to conform it to the FMVSS."
.
WillH's opinion: "It appears to me that US Customs has been executing inspection of vehicles in a manner that is inconsistent and in opposition to the actual guidelines it is supposed to follow. Under the interpretation above, replacement of non-chassis components should not render a vehicle ineligible for import under the 25-year import rule."
.
http://www.defendersource.com/forum/showpost.php?p=547612&postcount=854

I think this argument presupposes that it really was a swap of body onto a 25y+ chassis/frame. The article I read implied (and stated outright, separately), that there has been an ongoing problem with VIN plates and or brake (boosters?) with VIN plates attached being swapped onto otherwise intact newer vehicles. Merely harvesting the VIN from a vintage junker is not really the same thing as body-updating a vintage frame, and we all know it.

 

[DividingCreek]

I think this argument presupposes that it really was a swap of body onto a 25y+ chassis/frame. The article I read implied (and stated outright, separately), that there has been an ongoing problem with VIN plates and or brake (boosters?) with VIN plates attached being swapped onto otherwise intact newer vehicles. Merely harvesting the VIN from a vintage junker is not really the same thing as body-updating a vintage frame, and we all know it.

Well that is what they are looking for, later trucks wearing early vins. The chassis stampings while hand done @ the factory are actually hard to fake so snagging the alum plate under the hood and trying to restamp a chassis to match is tough and seldom done well, ie they are obvious.

 

[proper4wd]

Doug - in reading through some of the posted information regarding how the Feds view a frame replacement, one question crossed my mind.

It seems that the interpretation of the rule means that anytime a chassis is replaced, "a new motor vehicle is created".

How does this align with frame replacements done by the manufacturer, for example Toyota's replacement of frames on the Tacoma, Tundra, and Sequoia trucks?

I'm just wondering if there is some kind of precedent there that might aid the LR community.

 

[roverandom]

Hot Rod guys put new, fabricated chassis under old vehicles all the time without all this hassle. I've done it myself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Haf-E]

I think the issue is doing it to get around the regulations - i.e. bringing in a non-compliant vehicle prior to the 25 year cut-off or to hide stolen vehicles.

Putting a new chassis on a vehicle which is already 25 years old or already meets the US regulations shouldn't be a problem. Putting a new frame with old VIN numbers on a less than 25 year old vehicle should be a problem.

I still think that there should be a way for US citizen to bring in a non-compliant vehicle for their own use - they could give it something like a salvage title so its obvious when sold (after a period of time) that it was non-compliant. You can buy a motorcycle with a side car with no bumpers or catalytic converters and put 4 people in it and drive around... doesn't make much sense...

 

[Mack73]

I still think that there should be a way for US citizen to bring in a non-compliant vehicle for their own use - they could give it something like a salvage title so its obvious when sold (after a period of time) that it was non-compliant. You can buy a motorcycle with a side car with no bumpers or catalytic converters and put 4 people in it and drive around... doesn't make much sense...

Import rules have nothing to do with safety. Thank Mercedes for that one

 

[wuntenn]

As far as I know (I'm no expert) here in the UK replacement of a chassis with a new one, eg galvanized, is not a problem, and is basically classed as a 'repair'. (I checked before I had mine done). However, and it is a BIG however, afaik the old chassis MUST be destroyed - for obvious reasons. Providing that specific requirement is complied with frame replacement is not a problem. Like all of these things though there are grey areas, but the presumption is that all will be done in a legal and above board manner, and it is when folks stray from doing so that problems occur (maybe for you, or maybe for someone further down the line acquiring in all innocence). It is entirely possible that vehicles that have had chassis replacements done here in the UK have had their 'old' chassis spirited off from scrapyards and rebuilt for export. I'm not saying it is, and I'm not saying I've heard of that happening, only that in theory it is possible. This is a good UK-based company's opinion and guidance.

 

[Muddybaldboy]

You're correct wuntenn.

In the UK chassis replacement is fine if it is a new, unused chassis with a valid purchase receipt to prove this, no matter how old the vehicle is. I think sometimes an issue can arise because, whilst having a rotten chassis replaced the owner often takes the opportunity to overhaul and update the rest of the vehicle while it's in pieces.

 

[Dendy Jarrett]

Starting to make the local news stories:

http://www.wistv.com/story/26075071...land-rovers?clienttype=generic&mobilecgbypass

D

 

[duckear]

Now LR fans are learning about the heavy hand of the feds that gun enthusiasts have been dealing with for decades.

Sad.

I hope those folks are able to get their trucks back.