Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
but I don't believe they will allow it to leave the US
I will have to pay the 6.1% duty as it is made in Japan.
Will Toyota honor the warrenty in Canada?
My Highlander (10/2007 manufacture date), which I intend to import next week, is a V6 4x4 Limited model and has the built-in anti-theft and engine immobilizer. The vehicle is listed as "admissable" with additional information in the "Notes" section on the VAFUS. The notes section indicates that I am to see the "Explanation" section and that I need a letter from Toyota re: compliance. Well, Toyota won't furnish it (though I do have a couple of irons in the fire... will keep you posted). But, the explanations section is pretty clear that AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION I must funish the letter or install a device that meets the INTENT of CMVSS 114. I am no lawyer, but it sure seems to me that I should be able to install an aftermarket device, which does exist, if the inspection indicates the factory device fails.
To make my story better, I bought based on the October 9th VAFUS listing and have a bill of sale for October 23rd. I also have two e-mails from RIV indicating that the vehicle is admissible and nothing indiates that I must have a letter from Toyota.
I have contacted my MP, the reporter at The Gazette, and will continue to escalate. I did my due diligence and have no intentions of being left with a very expensive lawn ornament. All of my paperwork is in order (MSO in my name, recall letter direct from Toyota, etc). The RIV runaround is absurd. Every time I call, I get a different answer. However, I have my documentation and e-mails, which I stand behind.
I wish you luck! I did this once upon a time ago, it was a massive nightmare, but I got it through.
RAV4 and Highlander models, admissible only when equipped by manufacturer's optional electronic immobilization system to comply with CMVSS 114. The importer must provide RIV with a letter from the manufacturer stating the vehicle complies with CMVSS 114."
It clearly states only if equipped with manufacturer's option system. I am also talkint o toyota USa & Canada. I will keep you posted. I am pretty sure picture will be more clear by end of today or tomoroow. Otherwise. I consider these vehicle "inadmissible". We are just moving in circles over here with this " See notes " Section. I also wrote to my own MP. Never got any answer yet. I am also trying to solve this puzzle from different channles. Keep us posted.
ENGINE IMMOBILIZER - Optional on 4x2 V6 and 4x4 V6; standard on all Sport models
ANTI-THEFT & ENGINE IMMOBILIZER - Standard on all Limited models; optional on all others.
Whether or not the system is compliant with CMVSS 114 is the real question?
Unless the policies have changed, the vehicle cannot be imported to another country since ownership is not in your name. In my case, I had to either buy out the vehicle or trade it in and purchase a new one. I chose to trade in the leased vehicle and buy a new vehicle, primarily since the buyout was almost as much as buying a new car, albeit the new car was a step down from the previous car.
I don't think I was upside down or ahead when I traded it in. I bought the vehicle from the same dealership that I leased the previous vehicle from. It was handled in 2 transactions. The dealership bought out the vehicle from the manufacturer and a separate sale transaction, which had no indication of the previous vehicle being included in the sale transaction. I dealt with the owner of the dealership and I knew he gave me a good price since I shopped around before coming back to him and his price was at least $1,000 better than the best price I got. He did show me his cost and we agreed on $500 over invoice. So, I wound up with a new car that I imported into the U.S. brand new.
My advice is to make the transition simple. Relocation is a stressful process in it of itself and complicating it with an attempt to import a leased vehicle will likely not be to your benefit. I would either sell the leased vehicle privately if you think it has a higher value than buyout OR trade it in for a new vehicle. Know what your buyout on the vehicle is. If you trade it in, have the dealership appraise it without telling them how much the buyout is. If their appraisal is lower than buyout, push for more, just enough to cover the payout. Handle the trade-in and the new sale separately. Good Luck.
To get more tax dollars out of you. The higher the sale price, the higher the tax revenue.
Thx Bean jdambrosio@gmail.com
dont worry, i will continue to pay my taxes & thereby support you via EI.
Get a grip.
Thanks.
Colin
All my documentaion is done and I am ready to proceed.
Hopefully by tomorrow the immobilizer issue will be solved.
Keeping some info off the forum is prudent as big brother is probably watching.
If you find out any info that will help e-mail me at
retiredtom@live.ca
I just got off the phone w/ RIV. He just got a memo from Transport Canada & will be circulated to all border crossings.
If your vehicle was purchased prior to November 1st (even in manufacture date after Sept.1st) you can bring across w/o having to meet CMVSS114.
Was told no need for amnesty letter provided you show proof of purchase prior to Nov.1st.
Better hurray up in case they change thier minds.
Flight is already booked for Tuesday morning. Crossing the border Wednesday!!!
Everyone is leaning on the other to make a decision, and now I am told to wait for the Transport Canada to make a release on the news at the end of the week.
Frusteraded and angry.
If anyone wants to get in touch with Robert Lamb, send an e-mail to janr@thegazette.canwest.com, and Jan will put you in contact with Robert Lamb.
However, the RIV agent I just spoke to clarified the issue for me. The memo's intent is to allow inadmissble vehicles purchased prior to Nov 1 to cross the border as opposed to being sent back to the US. However the form 1 will be stamped inadmissible and you will not be able to obtain form 2 until Transport Canada has cleared the air on the matter later this week or early next.
I have a flight booked to pick up my Sienna for tomorrow morning - was just about to cancel it but now I'm not sure. This update means that I won't have to worry about getting stuck at the border but I may get stuck forced to export a $30K used vehicle.
More confused than ever ....
netdog
Am currently on the line with RIV - will post more in a few minutes.
Thank you.
http://www.jruslaw.com/classactions/carconspiracy/
Note: i am not personally a ford fan but at least ford has opened the door. I got a call from a ford salesman in Montana stating he had a letter from ford motor company telling him to sell to whoever had money. Would sell on MSO (yes MSO in montana) and i didnt even need to give him a USA address (although couldnt give me rebate without USA address). Good for Ford, might help those Q4 truck sales.
Nice, but on my side I want somebody being able to tell me clearly what makes GM cars INADMISSIBLE (and all others). If it is their compliances to the Canadian Standard CMVSS114 immobilization system, than an aftermarket system should do the job. So, I called GM Canada and asked what kinds of modifications are required to import a Cadillac CTS 2008 from the states. Lady was unable to answer!!! I phoned RIV and they were not able to tell me why it is inadmissible if build after Sept 1, 2007. The answer was something like “doesn’t comply with the Canadian safety laws” and told me to call TC for more information. That’s what I did. But of course, the message box was full
My understanding is let’s install an aftermarket Immobilization system that meets the CMVSS114 and should be good to go ! Please correct me if I missed something.
Thanks.
Toyota will honor all of the US warrant in Canada. Yes, since it's VIN does start with a J you will be required to pay the 6.1% duty.
good shopping!
1) What the hell is TC going to do to hold these manufacturers to task in terms of ensuring that they are not going to be arbitrarily adding vehicles as inadmissible moving forward?
2) What protection will there be in place to ensure this does not happen to more Canadians moving forward? For example, are they going to implement some kind of rule that states if the vehicle was admissible at border crossing time that people will still be able to complete the process even if the vehicle goes on the inadmissible list before they have an opportunity to complete the process on the Canadian side? Or some kind of rule that says a particular admissibility list stays static for at least a 30 to 45 day window before manufacturers can add changes? Or a Deadline atleast --> Something like the manufacturers need to have all their changes in by Jan 1 2009....or something....anything!!!!
Something has to give...this is just silly and unbelievable...
Regarding the last few posts, I don't know the significance of the Nov. 1 date. What I do know is:
1. When I bought my 2008 Maxima on Nov. 5, it was NOT "Inadmissible" as per the VAFUS list in effect at that time (which was the Nov. 1 list). It was also NOT "Inadmissible" on the next revision date which was Nov. 6. It suddenly became "Inadmissible" on the Nov. 8 list.
2. The wording on VAFUS is poor with regards to CMVSS 114. It switches between "intent" and "complies". What is not open to any question is that the VAFUS list and an RIV document on their web-site clearly indicate the VIS can be done as an after-market/by a 3rd party; i.e. once the vehicle has been imported. By TC's and RIV's very own documents, the VIS issue is NOT something that determines admissibility; it does determine passing the Canadian Tire inspection and hence, registration in your home Province. We know Mastergard (perhaps others) have declared their after-market system complies with CMVSS 114. Does that void your warranty ? - I don't care 'cause I don't have it anyway with Nissan.
Each if us may have had a different experience. What vehicle do you have, when was it manufactured, what VAFUS was in effect at the time you bought, what VAFUS was in effect at the time you crossed - these are the facts we should be relying on as far as Admissibility goes. Some have got through and others got screwed. We all have individual circumstances, and the people who pass us through or stop us are also very inconsistent. Bottom Line: stick with what is written. TC and RIV have to realize that importers cannot be held responsible for comlying with a rule regime that cannot be followed. They have set-up an incredibly flawed process.
Also:
- I sent an email to the Class Action lawyers on Monday. No reply. Doesn't exactly make me want them to run with my case (if TC and RIV don't get it together).
- my MP has written to Minister Cannon and is arguing my case for admission.
I think thir are many folks that bought the same car as u and are stuck.... what date was it manufacturered
What do you guys think?..Speaking about GM specifically, do you think there is even a shred of legitimacy to what has happened with the admissibility of their vehicles over night?
Cheers