• Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!

  • Microsoft MSN, Live, Hotmail, Outlook email users may not be receiving emails. We are working to resolve this issue. Please add support@steelsoldiers.com to your trusted contacts.

taboo to talk

Tornadogt

Tornadogt

Member
720
6
18
Location
Adkins, Texas
My 2 cents, all the terms quoted here "off use only", "not road worthy" are correct and true statements in regards to the condition of the Item at the time of the Sale, either from DLA to GovPlanet or from GovPlanet to us. We all should agree that statement is true and we sign papers to that effect. After the sale and we as the final buyer has the Item and paperwork can do whatever we need to do to correct any deficiencies on the Item in order to make these Items "Road Worthy". After these are corrected, to the standards of your states laws, then it is up to the state to determine titling and registration limits. DLA and Govplanet have no oversite (nor do they want to) on the states on road vehicle titling/registration laws.

Just my 2 cents
 
porkysplace

porkysplace

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
9,604
1,493
113
Location
mid- michigan
Tornadogt said:
My 2 cents, all the terms quoted here "off use only", "not road worthy" are correct and true statements in regards to the condition of the Item at the time of the Sale, either from DLA to GovPlanet or from GovPlanet to us. We all should agree that statement is true and we sign papers to that effect. After the sale and we as the final buyer has the Item and paperwork can do whatever we need to do to correct any deficiencies on the Item in order to make these Items "Road Worthy". After these are corrected, to the standards of your states laws, then it is up to the state to determine titling and registration limits. DLA and Govplanet have no oversite (nor do they want to) on the states on road vehicle titling/registration laws.

Just my 2 cents
Click to expand...
It is still a EUC item controlled by the DOD , all they have to do is change the de-mill code and recall them and return the original purchess price .
 
Gunzy

Gunzy

Well-known member
1,769
66
48
Location
Roy, Utah
porkysplace said:
It is still a EUC item controlled by the DOD , all they have to do is change the de-mill code and recall them and return the original purchess price .
Click to expand...
OK, original purchase price. But, and this is a HUGE butt, what do they pay the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th purchaser down the line? At that point there is likely thousands if not 10s of thousands of dollars worth of upgrades, retrofits or mods. All it would take then is a savy lawyer and a lot of mad HMMWV owners to start a real problem that could end ALL future MV sales. I don't think the Government wants that and I know for a fact owners don't want it. They changed the De-mill on HEMTTs and there is no effort to collect the ones already sold.
 
S

Sintorion

Member
286
13
18
Location
Fla
I really wish that someone could come up with the contract number that IP was awarded this contract with. It would help to sort out what is going on. Clearly you are not allowed to alter forms and that would help to know if that is a IP activity or if they were instructed by DLA to stamp them. Also it would help to know why these SF97s and state titles are showing up with IP listed as the owner. It may be worthwhile to contact DLAs OIG to get them to look into the situation.

My view is that we need to get a better idea of what is going on with this public contract before going at it with the state level because the states point back to the confusion and use that as the reason they can't proceed. Personally I think that is a poor excuse because this really is a state decision, but our Federal friends are not helping us.
 
patracy

patracy

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
14,639
4,817
113
Location
Buchanan, GA
Sintorion said:
I really wish that someone could come up with the contract number that IP was awarded this contract with. It would help to sort out what is going on. Clearly you are not allowed to alter forms and that would help to know if that is a IP activity or if they were instructed by DLA to stamp them. Also it would help to know why these SF97s and state titles are showing up with IP listed as the owner. It may be worthwhile to contact DLAs OIG to get them to look into the situation.

My view is that we need to get a better idea of what is going on with this public contract before going at it with the state level because the states point back to the confusion and use that as the reason they can't proceed. Personally I think that is a poor excuse because this really is a state decision, but our Federal friends are not helping us.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if it would be public info or not. But I know IP/GP and GL were bidding for the contract since GL's contract for the rolling stock had expired. It was all rolled into that same contract. As memory serves, GL also auctioned off a few HMMWVs of their own. (Not via DoD though)
 
S

Sintorion

Member
286
13
18
Location
Fla
patracy said:
I'm not sure if it would be public info or not. But I know IP/GP and GL were bidding for the contract since GL's contract for the rolling stock had expired. It was all rolled into that same contract. As memory serves, GL also auctioned off a few HMMWVs of their own. (Not via DoD though)
Click to expand...
It isn't classified so it is public record. If I can get the contract number, I can look it up. It isn't easy to look up without the number because of the huge number of contracts that are awarded. From what I can tell it was awarded July 25, 2014, but I don't see the award for that day.
 
ke5eua

ke5eua

Well-known member
2,568
41
48
Location
Baton Rouge (Central), LA
Only bit of public information I could come up with is this:

http://www.dla.mil/Portals/104/Documents/DispositionServices/FOIA/Rolling%20Stock%20CV4/DISP_IPAwardDocument_150820.pdf

Took me about 2 minutes of searching.

Y'all going to poke and poke until it's all taken away.
Sintorion said:
I really wish that someone could come up with the contract number that IP was awarded this contract with. It would help to sort out what is going on. Clearly you are not allowed to alter forms and that would help to know if that is a IP activity or if they were instructed by DLA to stamp them. Also it would help to know why these SF97s and state titles are showing up with IP listed as the owner. It may be worthwhile to contact DLAs OIG to get them to look into the situation.

My view is that we need to get a better idea of what is going on with this public contract before going at it with the state level because the states point back to the confusion and use that as the reason they can't proceed. Personally I think that is a poor excuse because this really is a state decision, but our Federal friends are not helping us.
Click to expand...
patracy said:
I'm not sure if it would be public info or not. But I know IP/GP and GL were bidding for the contract since GL's contract for the rolling stock had expired. It was all rolled into that same contract. As memory serves, GL also auctioned off a few HMMWVs of their own. (Not via DoD though)
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

Last edited:
ke5eua

ke5eua

Well-known member
2,568
41
48
Location
Baton Rouge (Central), LA
marchplumber

marchplumber

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
3,801
2,829
113
Location
Peoria, Illinois
ke5eua said:




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


I don't care who you are, beauty may only be skin deep, but that is one hideously ugly "skin" on that vehicle...................beauty in the eyes of the beholder? Yeah, go a head and shove that in my eye. UGH!
 
A

Action

Well-known member
3,576
1,557
113
Location
East Tennessee
this is all funny. You buy an Off Road Only vehicle then complain and try to find loopholes or faults to get it tagged.
Behr said he met all the requirements of an assembled vehicle. Now, wouldn't that be illegal if he registered it that way?

Behr said:
.... I had this fight already and won early on. I was not rude or disrespectful, only stated the facts that I meet all requirements for a kit car and rejection of my hmmwv was discrimination. ....
Click to expand...
 
dmetalmiki

dmetalmiki

Well-known member
5,523
2,028
113
Location
London England
There's humvvvs all the the place (countries) and no issues buying, registering or using. We all were told "cant sell you one" (you ain't (Not)) "a U.S. Citizen".. Hum..seen em' bought registered and used!. plenty for sale on UK sites!. No restrictions. I personally can't see what all the fuss is about..they's WAY too expensive..not all that clever mechanically and awkward to drive (on our roads) and, use as well as being rather uneconomical. Only my 1/2 penne'th
 
A

ari

New member
233
3
0
Location
dacula Ga
seems like the makers of the most american vehicle one can get arnt very friendly or fond of their own people owning and operating the vehicle. for example humvee c series is only available to individuals in hostile or questionable nations. Secret squirrel dealings if you ask me. But who cares we can buy them now :driver:
 
B

Behr

New member
21
0
0
Location
Denver
Action said:
this is all funny. You buy an Off Road Only vehicle then complain and try to find loopholes or faults to get it tagged.
Behr said he met all the requirements of an assembled vehicle. Now, wouldn't that be illegal if he registered it that way?
Click to expand...

Yes, I spoke with the DMV official above the local desk clerk. Stated all the basic reasons as discussed here for why I shouldn't be denied. Main reason is that my chassis is approved for highway use..H1...best example. Also my engine has an EPA approved sticker on it. If you have an approved engine and chassis then it's no different than a kit car I build in my garage. I now own a street legal hmmwv approved by the city of Denver with a valid title, plates and registration. Now, to make things clear about my situation, I did not buy off an auction. I bought one from plan b supply. They have some sort of deal going where they are buying like they are a police or fire department so I'm guessing the "off road use only" stamp may not be on the paperwork. I'm sure the Denver DOT officials looked into this as at first I was rejected until I laid out everything for them to examine. The plan b guys also contacted them for me and further provided whatever information they needed.
 
ryanruck

ryanruck

Active member
427
46
28
Location
Cincinnati, OH
Does a Polaris RZR meet FMVSS or EPA on road emissions standards? What about a Yamaha or CanAm quad? Were they sold with the intent for them to be operated on road?

Yet, here we are...

maxresdefault.jpg attachment.jpg 4223559482_75cc15f035_z.jpg maxresdefault1.jpg

The fact is many states have a 100% legal and above board process whereby an off road vehicle can be legally titled for on road use, usually with the addition of specific safety equipment and possibly an inspection. For example, I had to add a license plate light to meet the equipment standards and sign an affidavit that my truck was actually equipped with the list of required equipment to be in compliance with my laws.

Compliance with and adherence to state law is no "loophole", it's following the law (reminds me of Liberals talking about gun shows or buying guns online :roll:). Law which can certainly vary state to state and be changed for the better if needed (I'd definitely recommend the residents of Michigan take their elected representatives to the woodshed over how HMMWVs are being handled there!).

For people posting the FUD that it's only a matter of time before sales of HMMWVs are cut off because people are obeying their local laws, do you really think Uncle Sugar (or IP/GP) is going to cut off the cash cow that has been these HMMWV sales? In fact, of all military surplus sales to the public, I'd venture to say this has to have been their most successful (the sale of M1 Garands through the CMP might rival it though). What other surplus sales have generated so much interest and so much of the free press they've gotten through things like an episode of Wheeler Dealers or all the news articles published when sales started? Right here, look at all the new owners with 2016 join dates and how it's helped the SS community (and generated clicks!) grow. Personally, I would be more surprised to see all HMMWV sales halted than I would be for the whole title branding to be dropped and opening bids to be margainally increased (a la the M1123s). With the advent of a Federal administration run by a businessman, throwing away the capital these sales are bringing in seems far fetched, to say the least.

As for the vaunted "Agreement"...

alter_agrerement.jpg

:mrgreen: (Okay, so I'm injecting a little fun and took some poetic license with the original script...:razz:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
110,897members
165,315threads
2,326,244posts
1,720online users
Top