delaware dmv "no more mv registrations"

[therooster2001]

If you are bugging out, then why even register it? Tow it on the property and call it good. (Check the local laws however on insurance and such as well).

Get a good understanding of the state statutes if you are registering it, and stick to the laws. They aren't that complicated to find nor to understand. Even though my state was VERY clear on the laws, which had changed 5 years ago, the local DMV manager ran it up to the state and even worked to get their permission for a waiver (sort of). I ended up registering my MV with reduced fees. You just got the wrong persons, just be persistent. Maybe not tomorrow, but it will happen. Mine took 3 months, but I am golden now. I feel they went above and beyond, and in no small manner because I was informed and worked with them, and never lost my cool.

 

[georgie c]

I did not just get the wrong person . even though I am moving this ticks me off . others will walk in my shoes. lets confront it now is my attitude

 

[georgie c]

I like my s.u.v. with the 5 star crash test rating

 

[USAFSS-ColdWarrior]

First of all, I would like to mandate an
IMMEDIATE STANDDOWN
of any further commentary on this topic until the posting Member and all other contributors here can certify that
THEY HAVE FULLY READ AND UNDERSTAND
the TWO threads referenced in this post.....

I would read the registration process documentation on Delaware to first understand the laws and procedures. If they decided to stop registering them it would have been the result of a law change in most instances. There is few long threads on this related to WISC and GA that will give you alot of background on the process and how change was enacted.

There are many other Delaware members that have not yet brought this up to my knowledge so this may not be true.

Look in my signature for more details.

The key is to first be educated about the situation and then formulate a plan of attack if this is true.

Unless a posting Member has SPECIFIC knowledge of DELWARE's LAWS and REGULATIONS, little can be added here that has not already been stated in those threads.

Let's us all remain calm and start by getting on the same page when confronted with these bureaucratic befumblings.... There is no help in cluttering this thread with offsided commentary indirectly related to the SOLUTION. Since much ground has already been plowed in Wisconsin and Georgia, it would be good to learn from their experiences BEFORE saying anything more here.

THANK YOU.

 

[123mack]

Contact Tom or John Murry at TNJ Murry . They have been selling MVs there for years, and know the regs there.

 

[swiss]

Contact Tom or John Murry at TNJ Murry . They have been selling MVs there for years, and know the regs there.

I realize a lot of people are trying to help and offer opinions. No disrespect to mac123 but why would you want to ask opinions from somebody else who may or may not have the facts.

I have always believed that it is best to find the facts and understand them first before getting a bunch of information from somebody else.

I would stress again to get in writing why you were denied. Only then do you have an official fact in writing for your situation clearly defining the problem.

If if Zout had not done that we would not have been able to register bmy vehicles in Georgia.

 

[Flyingvan911]

Hang in there and remember that cool heads prevail. Do your homework and legwork carefully. Justice prevails sooner or later.

 

[georgie c]

thank you all, as stated before 1) have read de. motor vehicle code 2) am getting my state rep. involved 3) am keeping a cool head

 

[undysworld]

Like Swiss, I also believe you should get the department's refusal in writing with the applicable statute identified.
I urge you to also read the court decision and MIL-SPEC document. They are relevant.

From the Kasberger Case:


After the final decision was issued, the Kasbergers became aware of new evidence thatsupported their position that their vehicle did meet FMVSS. The Kasbergers presented adocument that unequivocally states the category of vehicles into which the Kasbergers’ vehiclefalls were to be built to meet FMVSS. This new evidence is sufficiently strong that it establishesa presumption that the petitioners’ vehicle does meet the FMVSS






From the MIL SPEC document:


Aithough vehicies and equipment rnanufactureafor. and soid directiy to, the Armed Forces of the llnitedStates in conformity with contractual specifications are specifically exempted from the provisions of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (WSS), it is the established policy of the Army to comply with the intent of those standards as long as compliance does not degradeessential military characteristics. With the same limitation, compliance with applicable provisions of (Federal) Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (MCSR) is an Army requirement.
This military standard provides guidance to assure proper safety characteristics associated with FMVSS are designed into military vehicles in aconsistentmanner. Inestablishingthi5standard,fullconsiderationhas been given to the following constraints listed in order of precedence:
(a) Military mission requirements.
(b) FederalMotorVehicleSafetyStandardsandMotorCarrierSafety Regulations.
[c) Requirements of friendly nations within whose borders US vehicles are operated by PoD personnel.
Individual requirements are identified to correspcmd with comparable FMVSS numbers and the applicable provisions of MCSR are as specified in the


‘; detailedrequirements.




4.1 ~. Allmiiitarygroundvehicies,delineatedinvehicle specifications, shall be equipped with safety devices as specified herein. ‘I’hperovisions of this standard shall not be construed to prohibit any agencY oftheFederalGovernmentfromprescribing~fety standardswithrequirements greater than those prescribed in this standard. Specific elements of these standards may be waived when the acquisitioning activity, in coordination with the combat develognent and ueer communities, determines that application would degrade essential military characteristics.

 

[NovacaineFix]

I bought my first MV (1991 bym m923A2) in february and tried takeing it through motor vehicle inspection twice . only to be told de. will not tag any former mv. when i pressed the head of our local dmv, i was told de will not register or re-register any former mv's. the reson is that they were not built to meet federal highway regulations. really? give me a break. how many antique cars on the road meet those standards? for that matter how is it you can buy an after market frame , engine, drive train," 32" ford fiberglass body, and put it together in your garage and have it titled as a "32" ford . federal highway regs my butt. I told him " I know what this all about , the goverment doesn't want the people to have access to the same hardware they have"

I have some experience of what you are dealing with, not with a MV, but another vehicle I "tried" to import to Delaware.
I lived in Delaware for the 1st 25 years of my life and moved to California, some would say not the best decision, but hey.

I had a 1974 VW Bus that I semi restored, was tagged and registered in CA and met all the needed standards in CA. Only to trailer it out to DE, to find that it does not meet their emissions standard, really?
Funny thing was seeing the "kid" wondering why the tailgate door was so hot, duh, the engines right behind there Einstein.

After all said and done, still to this day has the California registration and tags. It was a present for my son, so we took him back to CA to get his CA driver's license to make it somewhat legit.

I think, and this is just a guess since I have not read the newer DE motor vehicle laws, is that they are taking into account that all MV's do not have airbags or anti-lock brakes as part of the Federal Safety Standards, but then again, not all vehicles in 1991 had those. ABS was more common, not the airbags. Since this would be most likely be classified as a heavy duty truck, they will more than likely try to say that you need a CDL, just like CA tries to say.

I agree, if you are moving to WV, then I would just register it there, unless there is an immediate need to drive it now.
But you are on the right track by having them specifically point out the vehicle code where it states the reason for not titling/registering of MV's.
I wouldn't drive it without tags, the Troopers there will have a field day with you.

Hope it works out for you, Good Luck fellow Delawarean!

 

[georgie c]

that's crazy they wouldn't tag a 74 vw . I am not too torqued over this but I am willing to make a few waves ( or maybe ripples) over this. I just tagged another e.m.p. proof vehicle last month, its a 1966 Fairland wagon , no problemo there. as far as the 5 ton goes I can on occasion barrow a dealer tag. and may just wait till I get to w.v. . it may not need to be tagged there I understand that farm vehicles just need a homemade plate that says "farm vehicle" but I will have to check into it . if we have any folks here with w.v. motor vehicle code experience please let me know . thanks again to each and every one for your support

 

[dmetalmiki]

Hopefully you will be posting a positive outcome ( soon) for yourself, your truck, and others coming into the hobbies.

 

[saddamsnightmare]

September 7th, 2015.


get all your ducks in a row and documented in writing, then handle the matter as noted above through the chain of command at the DMV, then on to your representative. If that fails, look at MaDeuce's effort that got the laws here in Illinois changed to a more sensible version for FMV's in normal (non-commercial) use. It can be done in 99.8% of these cases if you use patience and document everything.


Good luck!

You will find that West Virginia has some interesting laws as applicable to larger trucks, FMV or not.

Have a Great Evening!

 

[georgie c]

I got an e-mail from the director of vehicle services at del d.m.v. he seened to be surprised at my problem. long and short of it the truck is now tagged! there should be no more trouble with f.m.v. hobbyists

 

[tommys2patrick]

That is excellent news. I am sure a number of SS members will appreciate this outcome. Thanks for following through and reporting back.

 

[swiss]

George great news, can you post the email in this thread as a reference please for others

thanks for followup

 

[Flyingvan911]

Very glad to hear it.

 

[georgie c]

Thanks to all for the encouraging words. some how I knew this was a bogus mandate, but I just had to work through it. I have some personal satisfaction in knowing I actually did something to keep others in Delaware from this nightmare. As far as the request to post the e-mail from Mr. Clapper at d.m.v. I would not be comfortable doing that.

 

[NovacaineFix]

Thanks to all for the encouraging words. some how I knew this was a bogus mandate, but I just had to work through it. I have some personal satisfaction in knowing I actually did something to keep others in Delaware from this nightmare. As far as the request to post the e-mail from Mr. Clapper at d.m.v. I would not be comfortable doing that.

Good job.
Nothing like standing up for your rights and not taking what the Man tells you, especially at the DMV. Maybe one of the supervisors at the DMV just interpreted the law incorrectly or maybe they just have an attitude in which they feel that they can dictate the laws as they feel, until they are put in check.
Either way, you got your tags and others that may follow [hopefully] won't have to go through the same BS.

 

[Tracer]

Great News.........thanks.