New Bill introduced into the legislater by the Liberals..Bill #173..Heads up here

fatchuk · ST MARYS, ONTARIO

New Bill introduced into the legislater by the Liberals..Bill #173..Heads up here

teejay99 · BELLE RIVER, ONT

In order to properly read this and give it my utmost and undivided attention .....I need my friend Jack ...Jack Daniels biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin ...about the only way to read this stuff .

fatchuk · ST MARYS, ONTARIO

It is complicated, but it looks like they {the Liberal Government) want to take saftey inspection away from your local garage or mechanic and have only special accredited Saftey inspection staions..They need to give a bone to all the E-test stations for the investment in e-test equipment that will soon become obsolete ..I hope I am wrong as they will set some pretty stiff rules and regulations to get us off the road and do not take your eye off the prize here because that is the goal of this government ..It falls right into there green tunnel vision..they would like us gone one way or another...I beleive thaey are fully planing to set some pretty tight hoops for us..I hopw some other licensed techs in the trade on here can shed some thoughts or views..

sasquatch · NORTH BAY, ONT

More BS along with the college of trades screwing!!

Lightspeed Mike · BELLEVILLE, ONT

Thanks for the heads up Chuk. Unfortunately it's written in government speak and I can't decipher it completely.
I have heard about new regulations regarding safety inspections but have failed to see any offical notices form the government about it.

teejay99 · BELLE RIVER, ONT

Translation ...MORE money out of our pockets ......!

Slammed 35 · HOOTERVILLE, ONT

Sounds like they are proposing ALL passenger vehicles will require an annual inspection and proof / sticker just like commercial vehicles. Its like, if you want the drive clean program scraped, then we will screw you more with new vehicle requirements that will cost you more. Either way your going to PAY. cry

Gazoo · BADEN, ONT

Kinda need sections 88 to 100, to try and somehow make better sense of this.
100.1 (2) -The returning of the forms/documents etc...looks to be related to "malpractice" (can I say that?).

100.2 (5) - Certified Safety inspections > Not a Crown Agent.

100.3 - It looks to me like they are just trying to cover there A$$, in case of liabilities.

100.4 - States that only licensed technicians can issue stickers/certificates.

I really don't see anything new there Chuk, aside from a few sub-clauses.
Inspections stations are already being "Checked", all they're saying is they can come to your place, without notice, for an inspection, and you can't refuse it. Just like the ministry of labor.

What section do you have any concerns about? With the Rat Rods and...
I'm not reading what you are out of it.

-- Edited by Gazoo on Tuesday 25th of March 2014 08:32:13 PM

Bruce Rossiter · TORONTO, ONT

A few items I picked out of this possible Government scam are as follows;

1/ It doesn't state that technicians doing the inspections have to be licensed mechanics, it says they have to be "registered technicians" and the Minister has the authority to register any person he/she feels like registering. That leaves the door open for the Minister to hire anyone off the street to perform inspections.

2/ It appears that they are trying to introduce annual or semi-annual inspections of some vehicles which would possibly be imposed on any vehicle the Minister feels is justified. I suppose if the Minister doesn't like a certain type of car, he/she can legislate that that vehicle must be inspected twice a year.

3/ It seems to me that the Minister will be given too much authority and could make changes to the inspection procedure based on a whim. I'm not so sure an elected official would have the necessary knowledge or qualifications to oversee any type of vehicle inspection program.

4/ The current motor vehicle inspection program has been in operation since the 1960's and outside of a few tweeks here and there, it should be left alone. We really don't need to have more Government interference with our lives and we certainly don't need any future cash grabs by the Government.

fatstax · COBOURG, ONT

given the amount of cars on the road I find it hard to believe they would implement an inspection system, it would clog the garages solid. although it may be a ploy to further attack older vehicles and hot rods as there are fewer of them on the road then newer stuff. this could also be trial balloon stuff the gov ment always dreams up to test the waters. seems they endlessly come up with ways to pound on the public. or its yet another ploy to generate more new car sales, the auto makers must be whining again

oldkoot · BROCKVILLE, ONT

Sent an email to our local MP asking for clarification of Bill 173, in particular section 100.1-100.8. Will post what I find out.

-- Edited by oldkoot on Wednesday 26th of March 2014 11:59:55 AM

BARRIE, ONTARIO

Fat C , I,ll keep an eye on incoming mail at the shop an see if we get any notifications . the shop I work at does emmissions , used car sales leasing an appraisals so we get lotsa junk mail from federales . I,ll see if any thing interesting shows up ..77.

workin class · FINCH, ONT

Ontario will go liberal again no doubt. I have friends with old cars that only hear what there union says and the unions say liberal.

parklane · St THOMAS, ONT

If they go with the annual inspections, it may be similar to what they had/have in the Lower Mainland, B.C.They made you go to a gov. building, where your front end, brakes, and general condition of body were checked. This was in early 70s, so pre - emissions, so don't know how it's operated now.

DavidP · BRADFORD, ONT

Bill #173 covers many areas ... not just vehicle inspection ... but also Impaired Driving / Bicycling / Pedestrian Safety / Medical Reports / Vehicle Inspection / Miscellaneous ...

http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/bills/bills_detail.do?locale=en&BillID=2956

The 'EXPLANATORY NOTE' at the bottom of the page sums up the Vehicle Inspection as below :-

Vehicle Inspection Centre System

Current sections 88 to 100 of the Act, which deal with motor vehicle inspection stations and related matters, are repealed. They are replaced with sections 100.2 to 100.8, which create a new vehicle inspection centre system. Section 100.1 allows the Minister of Transportation to make transition regulations to facilitate the implementation of the vehicle inspection centre system.

Under new section 100.2, the Minister may establish a program for the inspection of vehicles and the issuance of certificates and stickers and other types of proof of inspection and may appoint a Director of Vehicle Inspection Standards to administer the program. The Minister may enter into agreements with service providers to assist in operating the program. The Minister may also enter into agreements to authorize persons to operate vehicle inspection centres and to authorize service providers to enter into such agreements.

The Director of Vehicle Inspection Standards is given broad authority to issue directives governing certificates, inspection procedures and requirements and equipment and performance standards under section 100.7. It is a deemed term and condition of every agreement to operate a vehicle inspection centre to comply with all applicable directives.

Hopefully ... it is only to tighten up the regulations for people doing the inspections ... wink

slim · DUNDAS, ONT

Just looked up 100. 1 on e laws and it looks very different to what is posted above as it stands 100.1 to 100.3 not sure if this is the most currant version

Regulations, safety standards certificates, motor vehicle inspection stations, etc.

100. (1) The Lieutenant Governor in Council may make regulations,

(a) prescribing the form and content of safety standards certificates;

(b) prescribing inspection procedures, inspection requirements and equipment and performance standards of those items to be inspected for a safety standards certificate, a structural inspection certificate or a vehicle inspection sticker;

(c) governing the safety, equipment, premises, maintenance and operation of motor vehicle inspection stations;

(d) prescribing forms for the purposes of sections 88 to 98 and this section and providing for their use;

(e) prescribing conditions that shall attach to motor vehicle inspection station licences or the registrations of motor vehicle inspection mechanics or any class of either of them;

(f) classifying vehicles, motor vehicle inspection stations and motor vehicle inspection mechanics for the purposes of sections 88 to 92;

(g) prescribing fees that shall be paid upon applications for motor vehicle inspection station licences and upon the issuance of the licences or renewals thereof and upon applications for and the registration of motor vehicle inspection mechanics;

(h) prescribing the amount that shall be paid to the Ministry for forms of safety standards certificates and vehicle inspection stickers;

(i) prescribing the books, records and accounts that shall be kept by licensees;

(j) governing the reports and returns that shall be made to the Director by licensees and registrants;

(k) prescribing the qualifications of motor vehicle inspection mechanics;

(l) prescribing other duties of inspectors;

(m) prescribing the form, size and content of signs that identify motor vehicle inspection stations and governing the use of such signs;

(n) requiring and governing the return to the Ministry of unused forms of safety standards certificates, vehicle inspection records and vehicle inspection stickers and providing for refunds of amounts paid for the forms of certificates and stickers;

(o) requiring and governing the return to the Ministry of signs provided by the Ministry to identify motor vehicle inspection stations. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 100 (1); 2000, c. 15, s. 1 (1).

Adoption by reference

(2) Any regulation made under clause (1) (b) may adopt by reference any code, in whole or in part, with the changes that the Lieutenant Governor in Council considers necessary and may require compliance with any code that is adopted. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 100 (2).

Exemptions

(3) A regulation made under clause (1) (b) may provide that a structural inspection certificate is not required for such classes of vehicles or in such circumstances as are described in the regulation. 2000, c. 15, s. 1 (2).

shag766 · FOXBORO, ONT

we already have annual's for the bigger trucks and random inspection blitz's throughout the year. my f 350 dually has an annual do to it being registered in the company name. if it was in my personal name no inspection required. a lot of the read above is pertaining to the inspection persons or stations in itself as i see it. they have always had the power to pull you over at random to inspect or demand an inspect or even put you on a hook till done.
unless you are in the transportation, bigger trucks for hire or private carrier, most people don't realize the power they have at the side of the road or audit your files at place of business, no questions asked. i can see them making some demands on historical plated vehicles as they are losing a good chunk of change yearly on the license sticker and i have 3 of them for the last time.
you guys who do inspections might want to be thinking hard. in section 100.2 sub-section [3] they are already doing it pertaining to importing some vehicles and trailers. how much is canadian tire kicking them back to be the only one allowed to do it. i know there was hub-bub over appraisals when selling a collector car. they were trying to designate certain people or places that were allowed but the fee was not enough for the inspector. don't know where that ended up but it could happen for their chunk of the action. demand it done and tell you who can do it. 100.2-[3] for their chunk. a shop doesn't really make a lot of money on an e/test and now they are thinking a lower price, election promise sort of thing, but at the shops expense/loss. unless the cars are lined up at the door the same tech under a hood is generating a lot more money.

anyway thats my read.

58Chev · ETOBICOKE, ONT

Just hope it does not end up like the registration / certification rules they have in Nova Scotia.
Yearly certs needed, my understanding is you can't modify a vehicle to much without having a structual inspection. Apparently they have 2 inspectors for the province.

Cat in the Hat · BRANTFORD, ONT

This is the only section that gives me concern......

100.8 (1)

(i) the issuance of safety standards certificates, structural inspection certificates, annual inspection certificates and stickers and semi-annual inspection certificates and stickers and other types of proof of inspection,

Who will be qualified to offer....STRUCTRAL INSPECTION CERTIFICATES....? and by what testing?

Not just for rat rods.....but all hotrods with either store bought or custom made or modified frames (backhalf, lengthened, shortened)?

And the catch all.....other types of proof of inspection?

slim · DUNDAS, ONT

Another case of them nickel and diming everyone to death so they can piss it against the wall . Wonder how long the line would be if we stuck Wynne against the wall.

-- Edited by slim on Wednesday 26th of March 2014 09:01:10 AM

hemi43 · ONTARIO

slim wrote:
Wonder how long the line would be if we stuck Wynne against the wall.

-- Edited by slim on Wednesday 26th of March 2014 09:01:10 AM

Who cares, as long as I'm first !! furious furious furious

34guy · MISSISSAUGA, ONT

Sounds to me that if I owned a rat rod

Or fibreglass car without proper firewall

tags and matching ownership I would be

starting to worry.I have been saying for a few

years now that the mto would start cracking

down on fibreglass cars as they are out and out

fraudulent, and that if I owned a glass car I

Would be moving it along as fast as I could

but that is just my opinion, but I sure am glad

that all my cars have original frames and matching

firewall tags and ownerships .

fatchuk · ST MARYS, ONTARIO

I am still trying to understand the mumbo-jumbo speak..they make it so damn confusing when they do this ..One coma, one sentence, one word can make it completely different or the interpretation is so confusing you have to be a lawyer to understand whet it's saying..but if the police have input or worse some idiot in the police civilian office decides something and they great lets change that word or sentence and we get more cars off the road , or now we look deeper into those awful noisy hot rodders and all those hot rods with tractor grills and implement seats..they are trying to make the law so that it is at the discrection of the officer.. .I don't quite understand if these cnages mean anything or not but they concern me..With any luck they will call an election and this bill 173 will die on the floor before it gets any further reading in the house..I don't see any good in here for us..except more expense and tax to pay for government jobs which we pay for ....anyway I thought it was worth puttingit up for others to see if I was overreacting or maybe I am a bit paranoid about government interference in our life and hobbys.... cry

sasquatch · NORTH BAY, ONT

Chuck always be paranoid of everything the government does, with their record of F*ckups, who wouldn't be?

workin class · FINCH, ONT

I sold all my frame and motor modified projects last year. MY cars now are stock frame and motor. Lowered suspension by blocks and cut coils. All modifications can be returned to stock within a days work. I dont care enough about this government or any government to lose money because of there bull ****. My car will be customized by paint only along the lines of Larry Watson www.google.ca/search

34guy · MISSISSAUGA, ONT

I believe your onto something there workin class!!!

workin class · FINCH, ONT

It sucks but Im not rich enough to gamble on this screwed up corrupt power hungry provincial government.

hemi43 · ONTARIO

workin class wrote:
It sucks but Im not rich enough to gamble on this screwed up corrupt power hungry provincial government.

I guess they win then !!

34guy · MISSISSAUGA, ONT

Why not

It's like everything else the government choses to do

Canadians roll over and take it.

hemi43 · ONTARIO

I don't know why everyone is getting so paranoid about a proposed bill that we don't even know what it's about ???
Even if these Crooks make us get an annual safety, it's not the end of the world. Lots of States and some provinces have had this for years, and they still have cars running around with modified frames. I don't want to see it happen either, but if we have to jump through a few more hoops, then so be it.All our cars should be safe anyway!! If they make us scrap any vehicle with structural modifications, then that's another issue we'll have to deal with later on. Even with the strict laws certain States have like California, they still have custom cars. We all got into this paranoia a couple years ago over emission controls, and not one person has been busted unless they were guilty, and this was on emission controlled vehicles, not the old crap we're into. Relax, crack a cold one because the weather will be warming up soon!!

workin class · FINCH, ONT

Im paranoid I hate people whom I dont know with power making laws that might cost me big bucks. I had a chance to pick up a vary good California car at a good price so I decided to cut any chance of loss and changed build strategies. My 19 year old son is building a western 1965 Ford the same way good solid body stock motor mild custom. Are cars will still be low budget both built for less than $2500.00 each.

hemi43 · ONTARIO

workin class wrote:
Im paranoid I hate people whom I dont know with power making laws that might cost me big bucks. I had a chance to pick up a vary good California car at a good price so I decided to cut any chance of loss and changed build strategies. My 19 year old son is building a western 1965 Ford the same way good solid body stock motor mild custom. Are cars will still be low budget both built for less than $2500.00 each.

I hear what you're saying, but we're surrounded by people in power that dictate how we lead our lives, and we can't bury our heads in the sand because of it. I hate the way things are going as much as anyone else, but things here aren't bad enough (yet) for us to do anything drastic to change it. One day soon, we're going to have so much civil unrest here in North America that we will be just like the rest of the f-up world. Things can only decline so far before the masses give our Governments back what they deserve. With more guns in the US in private hands than there are people, it should make for an interesting fight. Until then, I'll enjoy my car because there are much bigger things we should be worried about.

parklane · St THOMAS, ONT

hemi43 wrote:

I hate the way things are going as much as anyone else, but things here aren't bad enough (yet) for us to do anything drastic to change it. One day soon, we're going to have so much civil unrest here in North America that we will be just like the rest of the f-up world. Things can only decline so far before the masses give our Governments back what they deserve. With more guns in the US in private hands than there are people, it should make for an interesting fight. Until then, I'll enjoy my car because there are much bigger things we should be worried about.

Hate to disagree with you, but don't think that Canadians will ever get pi$$ed off enough to change things. In general, Canadians are just a bunch of passive limp dicks. If stuff that goes on here, were to happen in the USA, they would be strung up by the short & curlies.

Fishhooks · FONTHILL, ONT

It sounds similar to how they did it where I used to live in the states. Yearly inspections and NO emmissions testing. Started off being state run inspection stations, but then with budget constraints on the shops and manpower, they eventually switched it back to the "garage" style of inspection stations.

It was the only thing that I was used to when I lived there, so it wasn't really anything out of the norm for me. Now with living here, I'm not sure how I will feel if they do go this direction....it wasn't too much of a bother then, but only time will tell.

Keeper · OSHAWA, ONT

34guy wrote:
Sounds to me that if I owned a rat rod
Or fibreglass car without proper firewall
tags and matching ownership I would be
starting to worry.I have been saying for a few
years now that the mto would start cracking
down on fibreglass cars as they are out and out
fraudulent, and that if I owned a glass car I
Would be moving it along as fast as I could
but that is just my opinion, but I sure am glad
that all my cars have original frames and matching
firewall tags and ownerships .

I am baffled by your logic.

It is only fraud if you misrepresent what you have.

If you go through the process PROPERLY and not through fraud using "Historical Documents" you are fine.

Just because some folks abuse the system, does not mean all of us are screwed.

shag766 · FOXBORO, ONT

Keeper wrote:
34guy wrote:
Sounds to me that if I owned a rat rod
Or fibreglass car without proper firewall
tags and matching ownership I would be
starting to worry.I have been saying for a few
years now that the mto would start cracking
down on fibreglass cars as they are out and out
fraudulent, and that if I owned a glass car I
Would be moving it along as fast as I could
but that is just my opinion, but I sure am glad
that all my cars have original frames and matching
firewall tags and ownerships .

I am baffled by your logic.
It is only fraud if you misrepresent what you have.
If you go through the process PROPERLY and not through fraud using "Historical Documents" you are fine.
Just because some folks abuse the system, does not mean all of us are screwed.

34 you are on to something there. coddington and james both got fined big time for passing kits off, as original. yea it was a 34 but a kit that makes it a new car. being a new car it has to be todays standards. coddington got hit large with using old original registrations on new kits he got from some guy in the carolinas. as for rats, i don't know but i could see it being a new car and needing todays specs. hope not but maybe.

hemi43 · ONTARIO

Fiberglass bodied cars with a custom chassis must be registered as a "kit car". If it's not, then it was registered fraudulently.

427CARL · CLINTON, ONT

We might have to sneak around and act like real Hot Rodders screw them steal a sticker from a parking lot the fines for getting caught are cheaper than conformity

34guy · MISSISSAUGA, ONT

So if you go to the ministry and tell them you are registering a 32 ford

But it has a fibreglass body and no vin, A reproduction frame and no vin and

a 1932 ownership that does not belong to that frame or body, you will walk out with

an ownership ,Not likely,

but by not telling them it is a glass body ,an ownership from a different car

And a reproduction frame, and leaving with a 1932 ownership That my friend is committing fraud!!!

flatblack55delivery · PORT HOPE, ONT

I think Carl is on to something .Truely back to the 50s. I have always said that the government makes us all criminals at some time. Ed

Keeper · OSHAWA, ONT

34guy wrote:
So if you go to the ministry and tell them you are registering a 32 ford
But it has a fibreglass body and no vin, A reproduction frame and no vin and
a 1932 ownership that does not belong to that frame or body, you will walk out with
an ownership ,Not likely,
but by not telling them it is a glass body ,an ownership from a different car
And a reproduction frame, and leaving with a 1932 ownership That my friend is committing fraud!!!

No- You go into the MTO telling them what you are building, you leave with a list of docs you need.

- Repeat 5 more times until you have all the required pictures, paperwork, receipts, letter from the manufacturer stating what they body resembles, the appraisal stating the make/model of the car you are building marked as a KIT if it is so.

- They issue you a VIN, they issue you an Unfit title for your vehicle, you pay taxes on the CURRENT value of the car (as per the appraisal)

- Once the build is complete, you get a safety done, not a "safety" a real one that actually checks what is there and ensures that it works.

- You go back with your insurance, and get your plates.

You do all that you are fine. Sure its a PITA, but its legal and they cannot ding you for that. If they ****ed up at the counter, its not your fault, you did your duty and followed the rules.

Now if you do as you stated, sure you may be screwed.

As for the topic and the (possibly) proposed yearly/bi-yearly inspections. I am on both sides of the fence, I had to deal with yearly inspections when I lived in North Carolina, cost $9.99 when you wanted to renew the sticker. It was strictly as safety, lights, tires, wipers, horn, made sure the emissions was present, no rust through holes..etc. While I would love for something like that to happen up here to stop almost rear-ending folks in Oshawa/Whitby because they are to ****ing cheap to fix their brake lights. I would much rather the cops actually issue "fix-it" tickets instead, but no one up here seems to have heard of them, pretty popular in the US.

But nothing like that will happen, it will end up being some over blown screwed up program as the emissions has now.

flatblack55delivery · PORT HOPE, ONT

We used to have fix it tickets issued here as well back in the 80s.You got a ticket and had to show the cop within so many day that either you had it fixed or that you fixed it yourself and whatever the problem was it is working now. Ed

toomuchjunk · S/W ONTARIO

Forgive me if someone has already brought this up as I'm bad for not reading everything above!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In 1995 I bought a '40 ford with no ownership. I went to a lawyer,got a affidavit that told the story of where it came from and who I bought it from and how much I paid. I gave the ministry the number that was stamped on the frame rail by the steering box. There was no plate on the firewall.
I got a ownership totally legal with no problems. I know it has changed since then.
My point is I have a '40 totally legal with no firewall I.D. plate.
A buddy of mine a few years before that did the same thing for a Model A. He didn't have a vin number or a frame. The ministry told him he had to make up a vin number with "X" number digits. He did this and got a ownership.
There is two examples of no firewall I.D. and one with a serial number that was pulled out of the sky and everything is legal.
TMJ

Fordy Acres Car Farm · DORCHESTER, ONT

I was pulled over 30 years ago because my car had 5 different colours- cop thought it was a steaming POS. The car was very close to being ready for paint and after walking around it, he agreed that the body was sound. We had a short argument about the turn downs, he rightfully thought it had to have tail pipes. He sent me to the MTO office at Exeter Road and they did a fairly basic check: body, brakes, E-brakes, driver window function, wiper and washer function, lights, signals, tires, and yes, exhaust. They explained that it would have to be routed to within 6" of the body perimeter, either to the sides or to the rear. Everything else checked out OK, so I got a pair of tail pipes bent up and a quick recheck.

If the cop had have been more sure of himself, I'm sure I would have gotten a ticket. I didn't mind having to put the tail pipes on it though, because it sounded soooo much better - it took away all the obnoxious! I guess the fine may have been less than the cost of the pipes, but it wasn't an issue after they were on there - could have been pulled over weekly otherwise.

I am in favor of police being observant and sending a car for inspection that is obviously full of holes, held together with duct tape or bailing wire - what I'm NOT in favor of, is harassment of anyone, especially those with an agenda against hot rodders and classics!

fatstax · COBOURG, ONT

be thankful we dont live in japan, cars must be spotless, no rust or any body damage, ultra strict emmision standards and a limit of 50000 kms, if you want to drive your car beyond 50000 it is even more costly. as well you dont just go out and buy a car, you have to apply as you have to prove you have a parking spot for it

hemi43 · ONTARIO

toomuchjunk wrote:
Forgive me if someone has already brought this up as I'm bad for not reading everything above!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In 1995 I bought a '40 ford with no ownership. I went to a lawyer,got a affidavit that told the story of where it came from and who I bought it from and how much I paid. I gave the ministry the number that was stamped on the frame rail by the steering box. There was no plate on the firewall.
I got a ownership totally legal with no problems. I know it has changed since then.
My point is I have a '40 totally legal with no firewall I.D. plate.
A buddy of mine a few years before that did the same thing for a Model A. He didn't have a vin number or a frame. The ministry told him he had to make up a vin number with "X" number digits. He did this and got a ownership.
There is two examples of no firewall I.D. and one with a serial number that was pulled out of the sky and everything is legal.
TMJ

Both examples are legal, but yours is the better way to go because it is registered as a 1940 Ford. Your Buddy with the model A now has an ownership that has a 15 digit VIN, and that may cause problems for him if it's modified because the car might have to meet certain safety or emission criteria. I think his car is now registered as a homebuilt. This is another grey area in the system. My car is registered the same as yours, because the serial number is located on my frame even though my "dash" plaque was lost long ago.

hemi43 · ONTARIO

fatstax wrote:
be thankful we dont live in japan, cars must be spotless, no rust or any body damage, ultra strict emmision standards and a limit of 50000 kms, if you want to drive your car beyond 50000 it is even more costly. as well you dont just go out and buy a car, you have to apply as you have to prove you have a parking spot for it

If I lived in Japan, I would starve !! hmm hmm

Boots · MISSISSAUGA, ONT

A little insight regarding all the laws imposed on us and the legalities. New York state has annuals and emissions and they seem to tolerate both...Problem with made up ownerships or titles would be in selling the vehicle to some American states as VIN checks are necessary and any other transaction where the person buying wants to check the VIN # for liens & previous history. (I know I would require to see a legal matching VIN before paying for a street rod or muscle car.) Also what about stolen vehicle reports? Too many grey areas to skirt around but by using common sense and YES, assigned VIN's, we can cruise around and protect ourselves from the MAN. Hot rodders have been skirting the law since the 1920's and we are still here. Boards like this give keyboard bullies a voice but they are not really true hot rodders in the real sense. I build my own cars and legally drive them all year everywhere and try to comply to the laws imposed on us. Let's enjoy the coming season and support all the local swap meets or they will also come to pass. Personal thanks to ALEX in London for putting on one of the best outdoor swap meets, (Rain, Sleet or Snow), and I am sad to see it go. 34guy , F**K Em, and stay true to form....Dave

fatchuk · ST MARYS, ONTARIO

I think if this bill gets passed..scrap that..When this gets passed there will be a sorry bunch of people who did not pay attention and did not act soon enough and get on their MPP to get this beaten down..but you can't say you haven't been warned...Me I only got a few years left so I will not be impacted but most of you will....I can see it now you will all be driving fart-can Mazda's.. biggrin biggrin I will be running on the other side of the county roads..

What the hell is with all these "A" things showing up in so many posts..

-- Edited by fatchuk on Sunday 6th of April 2014 05:58:31 PM

oldkoot · BROCKVILLE, ONT

You're right Chuck, very few people seem to give a rats arse about this but will be the first to whine and carry on when it goes into effect.