Bad News Georgia HMMWV Owners

[Carrera911]

So I got this in the mail the other day. Says they don't title off road vehicles. Which doesn't matter, because what I have has been inspected by an officer and has been deemed a road-worthy vehicle in the state of Georgia (while I must say it does do very well off-road). I'll have to call on Monday, but I definitely won't send back my title without the 700 dollar fee I paid for it as well as the 30 dollar new tag registration I got less than a week ago.

They also sent me a copy of the non binding BS off road only form. In the condition I bought it in, it might not have been a road worthy vehicle. But in it's current form, it most definitely meets all the required standards set. It was also deemed roadworthy by a cop. I can get a tag for my golf cart or my dirt bike but not my humvee? There's many ways around this (which I won't discuss here) if they do make me send my title back (after they give me MY money).

Love how my tax dollars go to handouts and to the government to give me hoops to jump through.

 

[86m1028]

Do they offer titles to 4 wheelers, dirt bikes, boats or boat motors ?
I do not understand why they are refusing titles !
A title is proof of ownership PERIOD.
Even though I do not agree with it, I do understand that registration can be revoked.

 

[fllaw1]

So your telling me you can't title a dune buggy or a street legal sand rail, there is something more to that?

 

[swiss]

Different states are reviewing. This was bound to happen an ultimately dependent on the state they may not register these any more without law changes. This should not be a suprise to anyone.

 

[porkysplace]

Different states are reviewing. This was bound to happen an ultimately dependent on the state they may not register these any more without law changes. This should not be a suprise to anyone.

It not like it is a new thing for Georgia to stop titling and registering former MV's.

 

[Recovry4x4]

This was inevitable once the first off road only HMMWV was put on the road. It's only going to get worse when all the state DMVs realize that folks have been trying to flank them to get these off road only vehicles tagged. Lots of folks will be saying told ya so.

 

[doghead]

I'd guess just after GP finishes selling off the surplus Humvees, that's when the states will take action.

Heck, maybe even the DLA will get in on the action then too.

Let everyone get their money first...

 

[73m819]

The BIG problem is that some hmmvws ARE STREET LEGAL, these are the ones sold by the Marines some years ago, this is the bunch that pi$$ed of gm which in turn got the road worthy hmmvw sales stopped, after this ONLY crunched hmmvws were sold, NOW gp got the word that a lot of hmmvws were going to be put up for auction so out bid gl, to keep in the gm reg guidelines, they could NOT be street legal, so OFF RORD ONLY. The big question is how can the states justify one bunch of hmmwvs be street legal while the same vihicile from another bunch be off road only, the answer is the law/rule/reg say so, or OK ALL are now off road only because if the new batch is to dangerous for the road then the old batch must be also, this would be the easiest for the states, do not forget that the states ALWAYS take the easiest way out.

EVERYBODY that brought the newer batch of NOT street legal hmmves KNEW that they were not street legal in the first place, they SIGNED the ORO bs so what is the bitech, the law/reg/ect says these newer nmmvws HAVE TO BE NONE ROAD LEGAL, this does NOT matter what the condition is. so STOP crying in your beer, you KNOWINGLY BROUGHT A OFF ROAD ONLY HMMWV, get over it.

 

[whites14]

Do yal think this will affect the newer m1123s that were sold with clean sf97 with no restrictions?

 

[hndrsonj]

Do yal think this will affect the newer m1123s that were sold with clean sf97 with no restrictions?

I would think they would be OK as they weren't sold as off road.

 

[Retiredwarhorses]

One person got revoked...
do we know of more Georgia owners who have receive the same letter?
if I had 3 days I could tell you story's of folks who were denied and allowed to title in calif...everyone of them
went through a different hoop. Bonded titles, safely inspection, FMVSS, CARB compliance...the list goes on.
i knew from the get go this was going to be a Charlie Foxtrot...I've had Hmmwv's titled for over 16yrs.
Now it's a crap shoot even for the 99 auction trucks...the sticking point seems to be the short vin.

 

[Chief_919]

The BIG problem is that some hmmvws ARE STREET LEGAL, these are the ones sold by the Marines some years ago, this is the bunch that pi$$ed of gm which in turn got the road worthy hmmvw sales stopped, after this ONLY crunched hmmvws were sold, NOW gp got the word that a lot of hmmvws were going to be put up for auction so out bid gl, to keep in the gm reg guidelines, they could NOT be street legal, so OFF RORD ONLY. The big question is how can the states justify one bunch of hmmwvs be street legal while the same vihicile from another bunch be off road only, the answer is the law/rule/reg say so, or OK ALL are now off road only because if the new batch is to dangerous for the road then the old batch must be also, this would be the easiest for the states, do not forget that the states ALWAYS take the easiest way out.

EVERYBODY that brought the newer batch of NOT street legal hmmves KNEW that they were not street legal in the first place, they SIGNED the ORO bs so what is the bitech, the law/reg/ect says these newer nmmvws HAVE TO BE NONE ROAD LEGAL, this does NOT matter what the condition is. so STOP crying in your beer, you KNOWINGLY BROUGHT A OFF ROAD ONLY HMMWV, get over it.

Actually, those ones from the East Coast/West Coast auctions in the 90's all came with off road only SF-97's also.

People have just laundered the titles between now and then to get them on the road.

 

[clinto]

So I got this in the mail the other day. Says they don't title off road vehicles. Which doesn't matter, because what I have has been inspected by an officer and has been deemed a road-worthy vehicle in the state of Georgia (while I must say it does do very well off-road). I'll have to call on Monday, but I definitely won't send back my title without the 700 dollar fee I paid for it as well as the 30 dollar new tag registration I got less than a week ago.

They also sent me a copy of the non binding BS off road only form. In the condition I bought it in, it might not have been a road worthy vehicle. But in it's current form, it most definitely meets all the required standards set. It was also deemed roadworthy by a cop. I can get a tag for my golf cart or my dirt bike but not my humvee? There's many ways around this (which I won't discuss here) if they do make me send my title back (after they give me MY money).

Love how my tax dollars go to handouts and to the government to give me hoops to jump through.

There's a lot to cover here.

First, what form did the police officer use for the "has been inspected by an officer and has been deemed a road-worthy vehicle in the state of Georgia" inspection? Because the only thing I've ever seen or heard a police officer do is a VIN verification. Most of our military vehicles are 10-40 years old and have never been registered, so the state (naturally) thinks that is weird and they want to verify the VIN. All this consists of is them physically inspecting the vehicle and then calling in the VIN to verify it isn't stolen.

Georgia discontinued their mandatory vehicle safety inspections before at least 1992, which is when I bought my first car. A law enforcement officer is in no way qualified to determine if a vehicle is roadworthy any more than a professional auto technician is qualified to take down eyewitness accounts and search for evidence.

Second......... I'm confused by your post...................... are you saying that the off-road title issued with the vehicle is marked as such due to the vehicle's condition? "In the condition I bought it in, it might not have been a road worthy vehicle. But in it's current form, it most definitely meets all the required standards set."

I apologize if I'm misreading this but the off road stamping on these vehicle's paperwork in no way is linked to their condition. I suspect if you ever got them to actually give you a list of reasons they'd say the vehicle are specially designed and the average operator doesn't have specialized training, or they'd cite the litany of modern FMVSS that the vehicle doesn't meet (padded dash, collapsible steering column, side impact protections, etc.). I suspect the vehicle has no crash test ratings from the IIHS, etc.

To this, many people might say "Well, explain the M44 series being surplussed in the 2000's and 2010's that don't meet any of those". And I'd say most of those vehicles were built before any such regulations existed. Same way you and I can own a '55 Bel Air with no air bag, padded dash, etc., but Chevy can't build one and sell it to the public.

At the end of the day, GP sold these things in a way that they and the DOD hoped would cover their butts and everyone knew people would find ways around the restrictions and tag them. I think I read where Michigan is now aware of the situation.

I think people have 3 choices: buy 'em and not try and tag them and use them off-road only, buy them and get them tagged "however" (a process neither I nor SS would condone) or the hardest part:

Get a group of people together to pool money and hire a really good attorney to look at the issue in it's entirety and ask the attorney if you could either file a lawsuit or get legislation passed that would allow the GP HMMWVs to be titled/tagged. If you want to do that, I highly recommend you PM Swiss here on SS and pick his brain. He is a smart guy and he moved a bill through the Ga. legislature a couple year ago so he is very knowledgeable about what it takes to do this.

 

[Action]

Who would they sue, themselves for violating a signed document. What is that? Breech of Contract?
That GA letter above stated they will not title OFF ROAD VEHICLES. It didn't say they won't title humvees. The m1123 guys should be OK. I am sure all that paperwork gets passed to the DMV, so they will know who signed that document.

 

[MaverickH1]

I'm going to refrain from commenting on this thread until my situation is resolved here in VA. But I'll be following this.

 

[Sintorion]

Get a group of people together to pool money and hire a really good attorney to look at the issue in it's entirety and ask the attorney if you could either file a lawsuit or get legislation passed that would allow the GP HMMWVs to be titled/tagged. If you want to do that, I highly recommend you PM Swiss here on SS and pick his brain. He is a smart guy and he moved a bill through the Ga. legislature a couple year ago so he is very knowledgeable about what it takes to do this.

That is the solution. Well not exactly an attorney, but a lobbyist. These are internal bureaucrats making the decisions on what they will and won't do. The golf cart industry was able to successfully lobby to get golf carts street legal. They don't have padded dashes, emissions tests, etc. The golf carts you see on the road are the same as the ones you see on the golf course with things like lights, horn, turn signals, and other safety features which coincidentally show up on Humvees with no modifications.

The off road only stamp really is irrelevant. I don't understand how anyone would even need to point that out. No one has ever questioned that. This is simply about meeting on road requirements. Even if it didn't have that stamp, it wouldn't mean that it meets on road standards.

 

[SETOYOTA]

Wouldn't the statute that Swiss pushed through the GA liegislature cover the Hmmwv?

 

[swiss]

Yes and no, the dept of motor vehicles interprets the law and in this case it may be a one off problem or may point to a larger issue. We will know more once the next guy try's to register or if others currently registered get a letter.

Either way this points to a potential larger issue that was always staring everyone in the face.

Let's get more information and the bigger picture will become clearer.

I have ideas but this can be a very sticky issue and anyone thinking of purchasing should be aware of the facts that have been clearly discussed many times before


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ddk2001]

This is all very interesting . . .

First - a "group" effort will be tough - as this is really a state-by-state issue. Some state's DMV's issue titles and register the trucks - others do not.

The "Off-Road" stamp on the SF-97 is what appears to be causing the confusion and creating the most difficulty for some DMVs. It really shouldn't mean anything. Let's say I sold a 2015 Ford F-150 to my neighbor - but stamped "Off-Road Use Only" on the title. No doubt - the DMV would title and register the truck for on-road use. I think that stamp is a convenient way for folks to refuse to do the hard work. For better or for worse - I think that's the reality.

I also agree with Clinto about vehicles meeting safety standards at the time they're built. The only potential problem I see here is the H1. What makes a 1992 Hummer H1 different from my 1992 HMMWV M998? My understanding is that the H1's and the HMMWV's were actually built on the same assembly line - just sent for finishing in different buildings. Here's some interesting first-year info about the H1's - http://www.lynchhummer.com/Changes/h1.changes/92/92.html. So - the real problem for states that refuse to title / register a HMMWV will be in the justification for treating them different from, say, a '92 H1. I suspect every state will gladly title and register your 1992 H1 - which is missing all of the safety features in many other cars - a tuck that has the same chassis and drive train as the HMMWV. That's really where the refusal starts to fall apart, in my opinion.

Until a DMV explains that difference to me in a logical and rational way - I just continue to believe that the refusal to register these trucks is based on a knee-jerk reaction to dealing with a military vehicle. YMMV. -D

 

[swiss]

I also agree with Clinto about vehicles meeting safety standards at the time they're built. The only potential problem I see here is the H1. What makes a 1992 Hummer H1 different from my 1992 HMMWV M998? My understanding is that the H1's and the HMMWV's were actually built on the same assembly line - just sent for finishing in different buildings. Here's some interesting first-year info about the H1's - http://www.lynchhummer.com/Changes/h1.changes/92/92.html. So - the real problem for states that refuse to title / register a HMMWV will be in the justification for treating them different from, say, a '92 H1. I suspect every state will gladly title and register your 1992 H1 - which is missing all of the safety features in many other cars - a tuck that has the same chassis and drive train as the HMMWV. That's really where the refusal starts to fall apart, in my opinion.
Until a DMV explains that difference to me in a logical and rational way - I just continue to believe that the refusal to register these trucks is based on a knee-jerk reaction to dealing with a military vehicle. YMMV. -D

You will loose any argument stating that " The DMV has to explain, " The DMV does not have to explain to anyone in most cases. They make an interpretation of the law, if you feel otherwise then it is up to you to explain not vice versa.

Here is some additional information on the Federal Law that governs this situation.

1.) Military Vehicles in most cases were not submitted for testing by the manufactures as complying with the FMVSS, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. The did not need to do this to fulfill a contract for the Military
2.) The Military has its own safety standards that follow the FMVSS, or exceed, but are different
3.) This is a state issue as the states own the vehicle registration process and interpretation/enforcement of the laws

Additional clarification below:
Key words are as follows: Certify Compliance, if the manufacturer did not go through the process to certify then according to the current law it is not compliant.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has a legislative mandate under Title 49 of the United States Code, Chapter 301, Motor Vehicle Safety, to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) and Regulations to which manufacturers of motor vehicle and equipment items must conform and certify compliance.

FMVSS 209 was the first standard to become effective on March 1, 1967. A number of FMVSS became effective for vehicles manufactured on and after January 1, 1968. Subsequently, other FMVSS have been issued. New standards and amendments to existing standards are published in the Federal Register.In order to sell a motor vehicle in the U.S. market, a vehicle manufacturer must certify that the vehicle meets performance requirements specified in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, or FMVSS.

The FMVSS are codified at 49 C.F.R. Part 571, and encompass 73 separate standards that generally focus on crash avoidance, crash worthiness, and post-crash survivability. Various safety standards apply to different vehicle types, including motorcycles, low-speed vehicles,passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles (such as vans and sport-utility vehicles), trucks, trailers, and buses (including schoolbuses).