Homeland Security took my 110

[Overlander]

This is how I see Will now

[CMSgt Bo]

Originally Posted by Manimal

Yes! Let's make some noise! Perhaps we should start a separate thread to discuss and see who wants to be involved.

Good luck with that; it took Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld 10 years to get the laws changed so they could import their 959's.

[leastonce]

Originally Posted by Manimal

Yes! Let's make some noise! Perhaps we should start a separate thread to discuss and see who wants to be involved.

Bill gates and crew spent 10 years fighting this to get Porsche 959's imported ... You need to think very carefully about the messaging ... the argument ( whether its true or not is immaterial ) supporting current regulation is that older vehicles are less safe and cause more pollution.

Added to that the powerful vehicle manufacturing lobbyists are fighting to keep tight controls on the markets ... preventing both grey imports and now exports.

What messaging are you going to use to convince law makers who basically block any reform whatsoever, are heavily funded by competing arguments to put their neck on the block to do this?

I would totally support this but without a clear messaging strategy you are stuck at first base!

[Overlander]

Originally Posted by leastonce

Bill gates and crew spent 10 years fighting this to get Porsche 959's imported ... You need to think very carefully about the messaging ... the argument ( whether its true or not is immaterial ) supporting current regulation is that older vehicles are less safe and cause more pollution.

Added to that the powerful vehicle manufacturing lobbyists are fighting to keep tight controls on the markets ... preventing both grey imports and now exports.

What messaging are you going to use to convince law makers who basically block any reform whatsoever, are heavily funded by competing arguments to put their neck on the block to do this?

I would totally support this but without a clear messaging strategy you are stuck at first base!

I'm with Jason. Is there any doubt on what side the White House is going to take regarding EPA regulations and the Auto Marque lobbyists?

Now is not the time... Let Will get our flock back as much as he can, then let's return quietly to the grey netherworld whence we came.

[meatblanket]

Originally Posted by mgreenspan

You're the second person to post that. What would be a good compensation for having the vehicle back within about a week? I'm assuming you mean for the "damages" caused by the raids. Mental anguish/what your neighbors think is worth what?

Compensatory damages, not much. Punitive damages, well, it depends on the laws in the forum state and how pissed the jury is. Which of course would be driven by a lot of facts we don't know.

While it's nice to hear that these have been returned, it would also be helpful to learn the explanation.

[Manimal]

Well aren't you all a bunch of Debbie Downers.

I agree with Jason that a carefully thought out strategy is paramount. The intent here was just to sift through the forum to see would actually be willing to contribute. This is not, and should probably not be regarded as a Land Rover issue but as a car enthusiast issue. If we can rally other car enthusiasts groups we have a better chance. I'm going to talk to my friend Keith who owns Sports Car Market Magazine and see what he thinks. I disagree that this is related or will somehow interfere with Wills admirable efforts. This is completely separate. If now is not the time, then when?

[Manimal]

Wah Waaaah.

Originally Posted by CMSgt Bo

Good luck with that; it took Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld 10 years to get the laws changed so they could import their 959's.

[TeriAnn]

Originally Posted by madcowdungbeetle

How about lets work on getting the vehicle importation laws changed to something more reasonable like Canada's 15 year rule rather than this 25 year thing. I'm sure lots of the other automotive enthusiast communities would gladly donate money to the cause if someone were to actually get serious and make some noise....

Granted it would be helpful if the US and Canada had the same regulations for importing vehicles and there would be 10 years less rust on those original frames.

However I think it would be more important to fix the uneven criteria customs uses to determine if a vehicle is legal to import. As consumers we rely upon customs to make sure that the imported items we purchase are in this country legally.

Buyers who are not Land Rover Defender enthusiasts have no way of knowing that a td5 Defender that is registered within the US is not legal to own. Heck prior to this thread I just assumed one could take a 25+ year old Land Rover, reframe it and upgrade the engine then legally import it into the US. I just assumed that all you needed was documentation showing the vehicle age and the work done to the vehicle. I knew VIN swapping was a big red flag no no but assumed that fixing up a 25+ year old vehicle and upgrading the engine before it was imported was allowable if the exporter had the documentation and presented it to customs.

I think the first thing we need is a clear, concise readable set of guidelines that determines what is acceptable to import. Something that allows a person to identify the year of the Land Rover and spells out what modifications and upgrades that are not allowable. Then the guideline needs to be issued to and used by customs to determine if a Land Rover is legal to import.

If each port of entry used the same criteria for determining if a vehicle is legal to import and if the criteria was widely known we would not have enforcement people running around legally stealing people's vehicles. The big problem is that neither customs nor consumers know how to tell legal vehicles from a vehicle that is not legal to import.

This whole mess is really a customs agency problem. Their mistakes cause innocent people who thought they were purchasing a legally imported vehicle to be punished. How come customs is not responsible for their own mistakes? And why doesn't it appear that customs is working to correct the flaws in their processes?

Any such guideline should be readily available to consumers in the market for an imported ninety or one ten. And hopefully well known enough that a seller can state that the vehicle was imported in compliance with guideline document XYZ.

Illegal vehicles will continue coming into the US and be purchased by people who assume the vehicle is legal until such time as customs fixes their own processes and have a consistent way to identify legal to import vehicles. Go after the root cause and not the symptom.

[Manimal]

I completely agree TeriAnn but I think it is a false choice that we only allow ourselves to act on one of these things. Getting the trucks returned and ensuring consistent enforcement are two very important short term goals. Improving the exemption is a long term goal. By the way, I just got off the phone with Bill Gates and he's in.

[javelinadave]

TeriAnn,
CBP can't come up with a legal definition of an illegal alien (unregistered future Democrat) so why would they come up with a definition of an illegal vehicle. Washington is in chaos and this current regime isn't going to make a decision on anything let alone making it easier to import any vehicle that the UAW didn't build.

[the rover shop]

If we are waiting for common sense to be implemented...we are seriously screwed...

[Red90]

Originally Posted by JSBriggs

It boils down to the fact that the laws in question lack common sense.

If we are to go as far as aligning our regulations with Canada, why stop there.

Don't worry... There is a lot of talk in Canada of aligning our rules with yours....

There was a humourous article on this a few years ago. Basically it explained that the reasoning was to improve safety. The article then went and provided the statistics showing that the rate of collisions and injuries for (+15 year) imported vehicles was substantially lower than the general population.

For those seriously looking to change the rules, that would be my first stop. Find the insurance statistics. I can guarantee that they will show a much lower claim rate on these 25 year old imported vehicles.

[flippedrover]

Originally Posted by JSBriggs

It boils down to the fact that the laws in question lack common sense. If we are to go as far as aligning our regulations with Canada, why stop there. All of these trucks are legal in Europe. Its not like Europe is the 3rd world when it comes to emissions and safety. Are we actually cleaner and safer here? As you are aware, here in the Republik, he have the arbitrary and unaccountable regulatory agency called CARB. Which takes insanity and BS to a completely different level. -Jeff

part of the on going trans Atlantic trade talks is making vehicle standards the same between the us and EU. It's just going to take awhile for the talks to result in a trade deal.

[Rocky]

If Harry Potter can't use his powers to get past the CBP and into America, what chance to us Muggles have?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...sa-issues.html

[ceedy]

Will,

You might not be able to answer this but was there any explanation for how they could have made these mistakes? Its inconceivable that JLRNA can't tell the difference between an 1984 and a 2000 truck.

[mongosd2]

Captain Obvious here...It seems pretty simple to me:

"25 years old or older in the original configuration as it left the factory"

Original Frame
Original engine
Original body

WOW, that's so hard to understand…

Engine swapped, frame swapped, different body style, probably isn't gonna get in.

As for the rules once it's here, that's different ball game and has different rules than modifying any US SPEC vehicle. You can't compare a frame swap on "02 D2" to a frame swap on your imported vehicle because it was allowed in based on the age of the vehicle. If you follow the letter of the law, you can't change the frame on your "import" because it changes the age of the vehicle. Same with engine swaps, the language exists, and not in legalese, that explains pretty clearly whats legal.

I'm not gonna lead a horse to water, but it's actually clear what's considered legal. I'll gladly pm you guy's some info obtained by doing some due diligence about what can be once the they are here...

[Red90]

Originally Posted by mongosd2

Captain Obvious here...It seems pretty simple to me:

"25 years old or older in the original configuration as it left the factory"

Original Frame
Original engine
Original body

WOW, that's so hard to understand…

Engine swapped, frame swapped, different body style, probably isn't gonna get in.

It is more than that though.... Can't convert RHD to LHD. New doors, aftermarket seats...can get you refused. It is not clear and it has been shown that they are enforcing beyond the written law.

[mongosd2]

Ok, Captain Obvious again…and I'm not looking to debate, but if it was RHD when it left the factory and you change it to LHD, it's not in it "original configuration". As with the doors, are they the original doors? No…silly yes, but ...

Original configuration

[Red90]

Originally Posted by mongosd2

Ok, Captain Obvious again…and I'm not looking to debate, but if it was RHD when it left the factory and you change it to LHD, it's not in it "original configuration". As with the doors, are they the original doors? No…silly yes, but ...

Original configuration

But you start to debate what "parts" can be changed. No 25+ year old vehicle on the planet has the same parts on it that it left the factory with. Why would anyone think that replacing a door "changes its configuration"? Or putting in a different seat? What if I change the steering wheel?

What Terriann wants is the rules clear in black and white written by the people enforcing them.

[mongosd2]

Silly, yes…the rules are clear, but your asking why you can't change old parts. It's not thier problem thats its a old truck, find one thats not a POS and original. Your asking why you can't do things which is mudding the water.