SC MV bill

[Ferroequinologist]

Ok everyone,

I've decided to try and get a bill passed for SC, similar to the GA and WI bills. I hate having to deal with the DMV and such right now and would like to see something happen to make it easier, and possibly more affordable. Well, as they say, if you want something done, do it yourself.

I'm going to need the help of those who worked on the GA and WI bills. I hope you don't mine me calling on you and asking for your assistance. Also, I'm going to really need the support of all the SC Steel Soldiers members. I would like to compile a list of things WE would like to see in OUR state when it comes to our MVs.

All thoughts and opinions are most definitely welcome.

 

[gerrykan]

The bill that was signed into law in WI may offer cheap license plates, but restricts vehicles to parade use only.
Why would you want that?

 

[undysworld]

Ferro,
I sent you a PM.

Gerrykan,
AGREED WHOLEHEARTEDLY!! I would certainly hope that any efforts would include EVERY user of ex-military vehicles, including the restoration/collector AS WELL AS farmers, carpenters, lumbermen, hot-rodders, etc.... A bill needs to make provisions for those who maintain their vehicle to be historically accurate and use it just for parades, as well as us guys who rely on their trucks for everyday functions - like hauling stuff whenever we dam well please!

Kudos to Ferro for asking for input, and he may be wise to start this before some butt-inski from his DMV gets there first. Learn from the mistakes that occurred in Wisconsin and get it right.

Best wishes.

Paul Underwood

 

[col.halftrack]

My advice is free you can PM for details.
I would be VERY careful opening this pandora's box. You would need to make sure that most of the pieces to the puzzle are already in place before even introducing a bill. Remember that once a bill is introduced anyone can add to or delete from if they have the power. Many bills change before final votes.
Wisconsin has recently passed a law that is the most restrictive of any state. Heck its more restrictive than many foreign nations.
In Kansas we were forced to fight this same legislation and fortunately we were victorious and killed the restrictive legislation. We offered our own bill and passed it into law preserving our rights to full road use.
Kevin Lockwood

 

[Crash_AF]

Colorado just passed a bill to allow HMVs (including trailers) to not have to display license plates. The vehicles must be registered and titled, but the plates can be kept in the vehicle instead of mounted on it.

We were trying to get the same law as TX passed where the bumper number or displayed reg number was the license, but some legislators got all wrapped around the axle about VINs and how they relate to reg numbers so our club president got them to agree to this instead.

In these financially strapped times, I'm not sure any legislation that is going to reduce fees is going to gain traction. Of course, you are welcome to try, but just know that you are going to face heavy opposition. Make sure you have a clear objective in mind before going forward.

Later,
Joe

 

[saddamsnightmare]

April 26th, 2010.

FERRO:

Copy the TEXAS bills as displayed in several of my posts, DON"T use that Wisconsin abortion that got passed or you'll really regret it . The TEXAS bills were also on OliveDrab.com under registration....... I wish you luck, but be sure your ducks (or DUKWs) are in a row....! Oh, by the bye, in Texas you have to have a truck registration and a boat registration to run a DUKW on land and water!

Good Luck.

 

[Ferroequinologist]

The bill that was signed into law in WI may offer cheap license plates, but restricts vehicles to parade use only.
Why would you want that?

I don't want that, thats why I wanted to use only parts of the WI bill. I wanted to look at all of the bills that have been passed, to learn what works and what doesn't, and where the pitfalls might be. I want to write a bill to preserve my rights to haul anything of my own anytime, without having to pay for commercial tags and commercial insurance.

I would like to at least get a tag for HMV, maybe not super cheap, but one that would allow us to have an umbrella tag, to put deuces, 5 tons, goats, ferrets, jeeps, etc under. Instead of historic tag for this, commercial for that, weighted for this, etc. What I would really like would be a transporter tag setup like NC.

The stipulations I am looking for are with a HMV plate, I can put my trailer, on my 818, and pull my trucks, without paying commercial tags, and insurance. Which would translate into the freedom to haul a load of gravel/mulch, drive your jeep daily to work, etc.

I'm just trying to head any conflicts off at the pass.

Another thing I would like to see a provision for- right now, if I get a SF-97, I have to have a DMV inspector go over the truck in person to title it. Well, if you can't register it, until it is inspected, then how the heck are you legally able to drive it to the DMV to be inspected?????? My friend is a trooper, and they used to be able to do the inspections, not anymore. He had a long conversation with the head of the local DMV to that effect, that I would have to break the law to abide by it. Lucky for me I have a truck that I already got registered before this mess, so I can tow the others to DMV without breaking the law. But what about those of us getting a truck for the first time?

 

[gerrykan]

I don't want that, thats why I wanted to use only parts of the WI bill.

Please accept my apologies for misunderstanding your original post.
I would hate to see anyone else take the "Parade Only" path.

 

[Ferroequinologist]

I agree with you 110%! I use my trucks too much to own them simply for 'parade duty only'

 

[saddamsnightmare]

April 27th, 2010.

Ferro:

If you want I can try to transcripe the Texas DMV codes re "Former Militarty Vehicles" and get it to you in the next day or so if you wish....

Bye the Bye, what rail equipment do you now own? Me, if I hit the lotto, theres a pair of Lima Hamiliton RSC switchers down in Pittsburgh, TX I'd like to pry out of a certain packing plant owner, still painted for the "U.S. Army Transportation Corps" ...... Or an ex Navy or Air Force GE 44 T would do it also....

 

[Blythewoodjoe]

I want to write a bill to preserve my rights to haul anything of my own anytime, without having to pay for commercial tags and commercial insurance.

Another thing I would like to see a provision for- right now, if I get a SF-97, I have to have a DMV inspector go over the truck in person to title it.

I don't want to rain on any parade here, but I think I should point out a few things. For the record, I would like special privileges for my MV's but I do fear this could be difficult.

First off, and I reserve the right to be wrong, I'm getting old, tags are by weight and it irritates me to pay big dollars for my 5 ton tags, but every other person with a 24000 pound truck also pays the same price. I just put farm tags on my deuce I have sold. $12 a year. What a joke. Of course I can't drive it for anything but farm use. But that is why it's cheap.

Second, you don't have to have the truck inspected if you have a SF 97, if you are putting a tag on it. I found that out a year ago so if I need a title now I buy a farm tag for $12 and put insurance on it for a week and I don't have to fool with an inspection.

The problems I have with the DMV is the fact that so many MV's have never had titles and South Carolina has no real provision for getting a title if you don't already have one.

I fear we are wanting to have our cake and eat it too if we are trying to get out of paying for heavy tags. I would expect the legislature to think the same thing. Well there's my contribution. I support you, but I will point out any negative possibilities too.

Joe Trapp
Assassin of Joy

 

[Ferroequinologist]

No Joe, I want to hear all the sides. I personally have had a **** of a time whenever I go to title anything. I don't own any land anymore so doing the farm tags is out for me. The issue I am having, is they require me to register my 818 as a commercial truck- hence no insurance company will insure me for anything other than commercial policy, which is way over what I can pay as a hobbiest. I know some people say don't play if you can't pay, but I don't think I should have to pay if I'm not using it commercially.

"The problems I have with the DMV is the fact that so many MV's have never had titles and South Carolina has no real provision for getting a title if you don't already have one."

That's why I wanted to discuss this. The above is something we should make sure is addressed.

 

[undysworld]

Ferro,

Like they say: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it.". But in your case, if you guys are already having problems, maybe something needs to be done.

From your earlier post, it sounds like your concern is not so much over having to register your 818 as commercial, but rather that because you are registered as commercial it ends up costing you more for insurance.

Out of curiousity, how would your DMV handle a 1976 Mack dump truck (for instance) which was privately owned/operated non-commercially and just used for the occasional Sunday drive or load of mulch? Could such a truck be registered as other-than-Commercial? Or is that just the way it is in your state, that any heavy truck must register Commercial?

In Wisconsin (pre-2007), milvehs could register in whatever registration class they fit: Auto, Light Truck A-C (up to 8,000 lbs. gvw), Truck, Farm, etc. and pay a fee yearly and operate normally. (I do not know the specifics as far as when a heavy truck was considered "commercial", because I kept my deuce & 1/2 registered as a Farm truck. I paid "Farm" insurance rates.) Any vehicle older than 20 yrs. could register as a "special interest" vehicle, with a one-time fee, no operating in Jan. and a 500# payload restriction.


Regarding registering a vehicle w/o a title, that remains a bit of an issue all over, and for all types of vehicles, exmil or not. Some states issue title with no more than a bill-of-sale. Wisconsin will not. The reason you get an SF-97 when you buy mil surplus vehicles is in order to use when you apply for the first title. The govt. also sells some vehicles (chopped up, I believe) as scrap or parts without an SF-97 with the intent that the vehicles not be retitled and driven (HMMVV's, I believe are now handled like this.). So a milveh which the govt. intended to be registered for on-road use should already have a title.

However, most states also make provisions for issuing VIN's and registering homebuilt or kit cars. In Wisconsin, this involves an inspection by a State Patrol officer, per statute. Perhaps some similar idea could be expanded to apply to a milveh w/o a title. (To me, it doesn't seem unreasonable that an untitled vehicle might need to at least have a visual inspection, prior to a new title or VIN being issued.)

You wrote that many milvehs don't have titles. I also remember Jeff Rowsam making comment that many milvehs don't match their titles either by year or maybe by VIN. I'd never heard that prior, and I'm still curious as to how/why. Can anybody shed light on this matter for me?

Thanks,
Paul

 

[Blythewoodjoe]

I, like you, think it is a load of hooie that a 67 F-100 cost almost nothing to tag and insure for the guy that will do the same thing with it that we will do with our bigger trucks. There is a big difference between a "commercial" truck and a hobby truck. I drive a commercial truck every day and I expect to held to a different standard than a rarely driven hobby truck.

The guy with the F-100 can haul anything in the back he wants but if you have a bigger truck why should you be treated differently. What are the laws on RV's? A RV is just a big play toy and if cost less to drive it, why is a M813 different. That is a point that should be addressed.

The DMV is irrelevant in this situation. The law is what matters. I have studied the law in detail on this subject and the DMV will follow the law if you press the point. I know a hand full of lawyers and state reps so as this progresses I will start to "work" on them.

Good luck.

 

[Ferroequinologist]

Joe, sounds like you and I need to have a regular sitdown (maybe for lunch sometime). That is exactly what I would like to see, something in the letter of the law that says it is equal to a pickup if you use it as such and for your own gain. Also something to maybe 'streamline' the title process for older military vehicles. I agree that most states have gotten stricter about titling, so we might not make much headway there.

 

[popacom]

Well guys I gotta throw my at the wall since we are playing craps here. My biggest bit-- is
The SF-97 is strictly a Govt. release to make title......GL has used it to cover their BUTTS ....
read : the vehicle needs to be inspected for the road. Which a title has nothing to do with,its soul purpose is to demonstrate ownership!!! The U.S. Govt. does not have a title,its theirs and if you don't believe it just look at how many of YOUR vehicles have" U.S.Govt. property on them some where.
I bought vehicles for years from Howard Hammonds here in KY. and it got to be a real pain in the keester real quickly. The form -97 is issued to the original purchaser of the vehicle,and is non transferable And it is their responsibility to get title made from this Govt. release form. Which is all good except for the fact
the sheriff in the county Howard lived in would not sign the paperwork unless the vehicle was ready for the road, which is all good EXCEPT Mr. Hammonds couldn't ,nor could many people I know afford to spend time and money on all the vehicles he drug in from Govt. auctions that had the SF-97 issued as some were bought from can-point ,some were worth building back some were not.
So if you wanted the title you had to haul the vehicle home(some 250 odd miles for me,one way)
spend time,money,etc. restoring it even though you TECHNICALLY did not OWN it, and then haul it back to his County,have his Sheriff inspect it for the road and HOPE some pot-head kid hadn't
pizzed in his Cherrio's that day,and then MAYBE you got a title to the vehicle you had already hauled at your expense half way cross the country. Do you feel my pain here? The State and Feds. need to come to some kind of common sense compromise on that issue as well as the
issue of everything from a 3/4 ton trailer to a crescent wrench requiring a EUC which to anyone with half a brain is THE STUPIDEST piece of paper on the planet!!!!! WE(THE GOVT.) which is supposed to be the officials that WE elect to do our bidding. Want YOU (JOE CITIZEN) that's there
bosses if this thing all worked the way our fore fathers planned it. To buy something from US and then(so all these Govt. offices and agencies ) that YOU JOE CITIZEN are on the hook to pay for
don't have to worry about said item any longer as you now are in charge of keeping up with who owns it from now till you die. Cause some towel head might take that trailer you bought and resold and
send it some how to someone we don't want to have it and they might do something that you have no control over. Am I hitting any of the cords here? What ever happened to CONTROL OF EXPORTS FROM OUR SHORES? Well i hope I haven't offended anyone with my take on the situation
but I am not a "ROCKET SCIENTIST" but I believe I have it figured out. Thanks for your time and consideration here.
popacom / BILL in KY.

 

[Blythewoodjoe]

Well here's a crazy thought. I just put a tag on a M818 yesterday and I asked about registering a vehicle as an RV. I have looked over the DMV site and can find no mention of the criteria for a RV. I have also been reading up at Title 56, S.C. Code of laws - www.scstatehouse.gov - LPITS
and can find no criteria. I asked the DMV how to register a RV and they said you do it just like a car. I asked "but it weighs around 15000 pounds?" They said, still like a car. So my question is, at least at this point in time, what constitutes a RV in South Carolina? I'm not sure I can register my M813 as one, but I want to know why not. There has to be a definition for a RV out there and if you use the big old truck for hobby and fun, it is an option.

Just trying to work with in the system at the moment. I had a lady in the main office of the DMV tell me last year that I couldn't get a title for a vehicle unless I had a title. Found a legal and legitimate way to do that. Might be one (other than farm tags) to register a large MV cheap if we look hard enough.

Joe