I just wanted to know if it was allowed. If so then I would be more than happy to register and plate my car to be able to drive it, especially since there is no PST in Alberta. I'm not saying that I wouldn't complete the RIV process in the end, I'd just rather not wait on TC if I don't have to right now. By the looks of things no one will be forced to export their vehicle until TC makes a final decision, and who knows how long that will take. I was told by one of the agents at TC that this would be at least another few weeks. For more details about the export letters check out the latest post on www.carswithoutborders.com
I'm planning on getting a used 2007 Rav4 from a US reseller (not a Toyota dealer). Will Toyota USA actually provide me a Recall Clearance Letter? Anyone with advice or experience on getting this?
MB makes good cars but there is a streak of arrogance there that is costing them business. However, Transport Canada has handed them a weapon (CMVSS114) that they are wielding skillfully. Notice that GM and a few others didn't have the intelligence to milk it like MB. It is Transport Canada and the Minister Lawrence Cannon that have handed the manufacturers $3k to $30k per car on a silver platter surrounded by parsley and cherry tomatoes. As soon as CMVSS114 is modified or the "new gov't" is history the smug looks will be wiped off the manufacturers faces. Vote early and vote often.
Provincial registration means absolutely nothing if you are not in Federal compliance. Successfully registering your car in Alberta will mean nothing when you are issued a notice to export your vehicle from Canada and lose what you would have saved otherwise. Transport Canada requirements supersede any provincial requirements. Make sure you have done research into what is admissable before spending your money. A quick search through these posts should help you with your car.
I called and had it faxed the same day. My situation is a bit different in that my brother-in-law bought the vehicle for me in Montana. They actually faxed it to him in the US.
Is there any concerns about having the recall letter issued by Toyota USA meeting the requirements of the RIV?....Isn't there something on the RIV website stating it has to be worded in a certain way and have a signature etc?
Or am I concerning myself about nothing here?....I would gather that all their letters are templates contextualized with the appropriate VIN and that they meet the RIV requirements?
One more question...I gather that the recall letter was issued in your brother-in-law's name? I guess there is no problem for the RIV that the letter is not in your name? I would imagine all they care about is the VIN....
For anyone that cares: I was checking RIV today and noticed that all 08 hondas are now admissible if built before Sept 1 07. This is new as i didnt notice it a few days ago.
My letter is on Toyota US letterhead in California and states:
"We are in writing in response to your request for information regarding a manufacturer's recall or a special service campaign that would affect your 2008 highlander.
We have checked the serial number of your vehicle, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, with our records and determined your vehicle is not involved in any previous or current service campaigns.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office at 1-800-331-74331"
The vehicle was bought by a US resident so I don't see why it should be an issue. By the time I buy the vehicle from the US resident it will have approx 3000 miles on it. The US dealer was never aware that I would eventually buy it.
if he will sell to you with usa address, he still has to follow washington state rules so either a) he can charge you WA state tax or b) if you have valid proof of residency outside of WA & he will sell to you on MSO you dont have to pay WA state tax. To proove address you will need 2 things. A valid USA drivers licence (tough part) and easy part is a bill to same address (power bill, phone bill, etc) with your name on it.
Why not deal in a state with no sales tax (montana or oregon)
if i am not mistaken gvwr on an F250 diesel is 10,000 lbs = 4536 kgs so you dont need the immobilizer. I am certain that is a fact for F350 (gvwr 11400 lbs)
fyi - RIV not requiring recall letters from Honda as they arent playing along. They will accept printout showing no recalls from owner's link on honda.com 2 new ones sitting in my driveway (both pre-sept1 manufacture). Got form2 on one of them today already. CBSA agent forgot to fill out date of manufacture on the 2nd one so i had to fax them photo of door sticker.....if one thing is important on that Form1 ladies & gents it is Box #11 (date of manufacture)........ PS - helps if they get the VIN right too.....that didnt cause any problems though.
This is off the RIV website concerning the criteria that must be met by the issued recall letter...
The letter must come from the OEM's head office and be written on official company letterhead, duly signed with the name and position of the official at the OEM clearly visible. If the manufacturer's logo is not on the letter it will not be accepted. If your vehicle does not have any outstanding recalls then the letter should say "this vehicle has no outstanding recalls." This letter must be presented to the RIV department prior to your Vehicle Inspection Form being released.
So I assume that your letter has the apparent required signature from an "official" at Toyota? I see it doesn't literally say "this vehicle has no outstanding recalls" but seems to be along those lines...I guess RIV doesn't literally mean that it has to say this word for word or anything...
Did you complete the import process successfully with your recall letter at this point?
Don't mean to keep asking little pointed questions like this but if there is one thing that I have noticed in my research so far, it's that the devil is in the details with this stuff...
No problem. Letter was signed by Toyota Customer Experience rep. Toyota calls their recalls "special service campaigns". I also have the printout from the dealer. Have not yet completed import process as it takes 4 to 6 weeks to get title docs. Will pick up in about 2 weeks hopefuly.
Does anyone know if recall letters for Lexus vehicles are issued by Toyota or Lexus, and whose logo should be on it? Are all Lexus vehicles made in Japan and thus subject to 6.1% duty?
my situation is same as yours, as my brother living in Sanjose California is interested to buy a car for me, I have few questions: 1. first he has to buy to his name and then sell to me or directly I have to buy it, which scenario is better, 2. If car is bought at Sanjose then sales tax (7.75%) will be imposed, can we buy at other states and register there or directly register here in canada. 3.If he gives this car to me as gift then PST can be waived (I live in ontario) 4.old cars under 50000 miles are better or brand new one 5.is it must that we have to buy in cash, he can buy on lease but how can I carry this lease here in canada 6.can you guide me which is easier to import from the following cars: acura rdx, bmw x3, lexus rx350, infiniti fx35, lincoln mkx, mercedes-benz r-class, volkswagon touareg
Don't know about the recall letter but most Lexus are made in Japan (I understand) Look at the serial number for the vehicle if it starts with a "J" it was made in Japan.
I spoke with a representative at TC today (deal with RIV as little as possible if you know what is good for you) and she unequivocally told me in no uncertain terms that you will be okay if you can prove to TC (not RIV...the buck stops with TC) that you exercised due dillagence in confirming that your vehicle was admissible at the time of your purchase. As long as you did this they will grant you amnesty.
Now for the ultimate question --> How do you prove to them that you exercised due dilagence and determined to the best of your ability that the vehicle was admissible prior to purchase?
As she explained to me --> As long as the date on your bill of sale for the vehicle is one that is prior to the date indicated on the Admissibility list that changed unfavorably towards your situation they will give you a pass. If this is not the case then you are likely screwed.
She said this applies to the state of the list from Nov. 1st onwards. So basically, as I interpret this, if you have a bill of sale with a date that is Nov. 1st or after and you can substantiate that the list was indeed favourable towards the admissibility of your vehicle on the day that you purchased you are clear cut good to go...
She went on to say that a lot of the folks caught up in the mess currently with their 2008 vehicles could not have possbility exercised due dillienge because at the time of their purchase there was no admissibility information for 2008s on the list. In a lot of cases people apparently went ahead with importing an 08 on the assumption that it would be okay because it was okay for an 07 model....
I hope this helps...I can certainly understand the anxiety you may be experiencing right now. I would call Transport Canada yourself and confirm what I am telling you...but again, this was told to me just today. The women I was talking to really seemed to know her ****...I feel very confident that what she was telling me was good information...
Funny enough....just for [non-permissible content removed] and giggles I cold called RIV right after I talked to TC to see if they would tell me the same thing. The guy there said that he couldn't say for certain what would happen under such a situtation, and that TC would likely evaluate your situation on an individual basis...at least he didn't give me a bunch of ******** random information like I got from them in the past...He said if you got into a situtation like this that TC would make the final decision....which is essentially what TC told me :-)
Thanks for posting this. IF it is legit., then it's great news for me, and I would be one of those that has a 2008 that would be in. The Nov. 5 VAFUS in effect the day I purchased indicates my vehicle as Admissible.
Can you find out from the original poster what number at TC he/she called and the name of the person that gave him this info.
Also, how do we process our vehicle as per TC's instructions when RIV don't know what's going on.
Video news story that gets to the root problem of why 100's of Canadians are frustrated with the bureaucracy involved in importing new vehicles from the USA, re: anti-theft immobilizers.
TC's remarks to westpoint are out of line. 1. regarding the 2008 vehicle the comments are wrong as there was plenty of information on passenger cars admissible/inadmissible in oct. 26 list. page 6
2. All MPV (SUV) models admissible except 2005 GM blazer and mercedes, this implies all years and all other makes admissible. page 17
3. Regarding immobilization on US vehicles RIV list of Oct. 26 page 2 clearly states IN BOLD :RIV inspection (after form 2) requires documentations to prove the presence of immobilizer in your vehicle. Your owner operater manual clearly has this information, perhaps more detailed than any compliance letter from the goons at GM.
I am in the process of getting a RAV4 Limited. It is admissable under RIV. The Dealer is setting up an MSO and hopefully by January 1 I will be driving it home to Ontario. No state taxes to pay just Duty-6.5%, GST and RIV fees Dealer is very helpfull.
I am in the process of importing an 2006 ML350 and Mercedes Canada themselves cannot tell me what is required. MB Canada has told me to contact the dealership, the dealership has told me to contact MB canada. Finally after 3 calls to customer relations... this is what I have managed to understand. They originally told me that bumpers are required, however I have since spoken directly to MB Canada compliance department and they seem to think that the instrument cluster is required and that the bumpers are fine. I am picking my truck up at Canada customs today.... this has truly been a ridicules expierence. I have even sent an open letter to the president of MB Canada and of course I have not received any response
If anyone wants to know more as my situation is quite messy, I would be more than happy to tell them.
Hi, I have a 2008 Sienna LE sitting at the Pembina border outside Manitoba, October 07 manufacture date. My bill of sale has a Nov. 2nd date. I was given false information by RIV the day I purchased it. What do you mean by a VAFUS? From the information you have, do you think my vehicle should pass? Thanks Aime
Hi, I am confused by all of this. I purchased a 2008 Sienna LE on Nov. 2nd. It is still sitting at the border. I could not see it on the lists of admissibility and I was given false information by an agent at RIV the day I purchased it. Of course, I have no proof, they tell me. According to your information are you saying that my vehicle should pass? I am waiting for TC to return a call. Any other suggestions? Thanks Aime
Remember that this topic is for sharing information on the process, but we don't permit buy / sell offers of any kind. So, posts asking for customers or dealers for direct contact get zapped.
Also, please don't post contact info such as phone numbers or e-mail addresses that don't belong to you - of course this applies double if it's the contact info of a salesperson! If it's contact info for a public official or a toll-free "general" number for a company, that's OK. But anything that could result in another individual being harrassed or getting tons of unsolicited e-mails has to go.
Thanks!
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
I've talked with an Albertan who bought in Montana (no sales tax), gave a non-verifiable address from no one he knew to get registration and then exported his Toyota to Alberta. Took longer to get the registration, but it worked and no one asked about his Montana address. The dealers will advise there is some risk with that method IF State registry seeks verification, but they did not.
As far as I am aware after asking several US dealers, there is no sales tax paid twice on a vehicle if it is a private sale. (Rav4 is a better car than Outback, IMHOP, stick with what you want).
I recently bought a car in the SF Bay area for my folks, so I can try to answer a few of your questions:
1. If you can find a dealer that can sell it to you directly it would be great. We choose to have my by the car so that it can be registered and insured in California so that my parents can at least drive the car in Canada while the while CMVSS 114 fiasco settles. Also, it might be easier to get a recall letter if it is sold to your friend. Honda/Acura USA would only issue me a recall letter after I provided them a copy of my California drivers license, proof of US insurance, and the permanent US DMV registration.
2. The tax charged is based on where your friend lives. I had asked this when purchasing the car. This is essentially where in the US you will be registering the car. If the car gets sold to you directly, then you probably won't have to pay the sales tax.
3. I am not sure of the gifting. The PST differs from province to province. I know in my case, BC charges you the PST regardless if it was a sale or a gift.
4. You can't take a car that is leased or financed across the border without permission. I am driving back to Vancouver for the holidays and I have a leased car. I had to get a authorized letter from the company I leased the vehicle from. They would only authorize up to a maximum of 30 days. May differ from one institution to another.
6. Best bet here is the check the USVAF list, since it changes ALL the time. I know the RDX is inadmissible at this point, since that is what I am trying to import.
RIV was clearly telling people that their cars were admissible as long as they weren't specifically listed in the inadmissible column.
TC/RIV are saying that because I purchased between the dates of September 1st and November 1st it is up in the air until the Minister comes out with his final decision. It is NOW inadmissible which is why RIV won't provide me with Form2, and RIV has told me specifically that it doesn't matter what they told me before proof or no proof they must follow the newest list. The scenario the guy gave me was this:
If I call to make sure that the car I want to buy is admissible today, and it is, they will tell me yes go right ahead. I can go out and buy the car but of course I can't export it yet because of the 72 hours US customs needs. If the list changes tomorrow, RIV will follow tomorrow's list and if I come back to them saying you told me yesterday....they say it doesn't matter.
I don't know how they expect us to read their minds but it is basically what is sounds like to me.
I tried to get a better answer out of them but the only thing they will say is that the immobilizer probably does not meet Canadian standards. According to Acura USA there have not been any changes made to the immobilizer from the 2007 model (verbally). We need to get some sort of compliance letter from Acura, but of course they won't give it out. I'm going to try again though, because Honda has issued a letter in the past for a Honda civic and I don't know if the immobilizer for the RDX or any other one made for Honda/Acura would be much different.
Don't forget that RIV is not in charge. TC is in charge and RIV tells you what TC tells them. Don't blame RIV. Blame TC. Read "about RIV" at riv.ca and also NEWS ALERTS at riv.ca. TC has been telling everyone about this for a long time. Everyone assumed CMVSS114 would be equivalent to FMVSS114. Bad assumption.
CMVSS 114 - Locking and Immobilization Systems April 24, 2007 The Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (CMVSS) 114 - Locking and Immobilization Systems, has been amended and, effective September 1, 2007, will require that every Multipurpose passenger vehicle, passenger car, truck, and three wheel vehicle manufactured after September 1, 2007, except for an emergency vehicle, or a vehicle that has a GVWR of 4,536 kg or more, or a walk-in van, be equipped with an immobilization system that meets the requirements specified in the amendment.
Please be advised that if you are planning to import a vehicle manufactured after September 1, 2007, that the vehicle may be affected by this requirement and if an immobilizer that meets CMVSS 114 is not already installed in the vehicle, that an immobilization system will have to be installed. You may also want to verify the cost of such an installation prior to importing a vehicle.
Regarding who at Transport Canada: It was post 9957.
"I am sorry that I do not have a name for you. I didn't ask because I am not buying immediately at this time. Just call the main transport canada general inquiries line available on their website and listen to the menu items...follow the menus that say press number X for importing vehicles etc..."
There is really only one equitable solution to the conundrum and impasse that Transport Canada finds itself in, with all of the post Sept 1 2007 manufactured vehicles that are currently in "limbo". Realistically, and even perhaps legally, TC cannot justify NOT enforcing CMVSS 114. They cannot do this because to do this would be selective enforcement that would expose them to legal action from those that they now try to enforce CMVSS 114 upon, after they give "amnesty" to those that have the subject vehicles in "limbo" that currently do not comply with CMVSS 114. There is nothing wrong with CMVSS 114, in which it calls for every passenger car(etc) manufactured after Sept 1 2007 "shall be EQUIPPED (emphasis mine) with an immobilization systems that meets one of the following sets of requirements as modified by subsection (5), (6) or (7): (a) "of National Standard of Canada CAN/ULC-S338-98". Nowhere in either CMVSS 114 or CAN/ULC-S338-98 is there set out that ONLY the OEM, of the vehicle, can install the equipment meeting CMVSS 114 or CAN/ULC-S338-98. In fact the Insurance Bureau of Canada List four (4) AFTER-MARKET systems that DO COMPLY with CAN/ULC-S338-98. Because there is nothing wrong with CMVSS 114, (in fact the benefits a potentially very large), TC should insist, that all of the post Sept 1 2007 vehicles, that do not meet CMVSS 114 and are stuck in "limbo", be equipped, per CMVSS 114, with an After Market unit from the list of four from IBC. To continue to pursue the current situation, in which TC will only allow importation of vehicles with vehicle OEM installed Electronic Immobilizers, effectively means that almost ALL vehicles sold in the US that were manufactured after Sept 1 2007(even if they were made in Canada under the Auto Pact/NAFTA and shipped to the US), will NEVER be allowed, new or used, into Canada. This because with very few exceptions the CMVSS 114 equivalent OEM option is NOT available in the US, it is a Canadian only requirement. Continued pursuit of this policy has TC being perceived as "protecting" Auto Manufacturer's profits, where those same manufacturers charge significantly more in Canada, than for the same equivalent unit in the US, in a market where the value of the dollar is approximately equivalent. The current actions and policies of TC have effectively "killed" the auto trade, between the US to Canada, new or used, of almost ALL post Sept 1 2007 manufactured US car models, because, currently, TC will not allow the use of After Market CMVSS 114/CAN/ULC-S338-98 compliant products. This is a "restrictive" trade practice that just might awake the "sleeping giant". In conclusion, there does not need to be any "amnesty" for the 1000 to 3000 units caught in "limbo". Simply allow, as is proper, for the use of "approved" after market products to comply with CMVSS 114. Governments should not be in the business of business!
I spoke with a representative at TC today (deal with RIV as little as possible if you know what is good for you) and she unequivocally told me in no uncertain terms that you will be okay if you can prove to TC (not RIV...the buck stops with TC) that you exercised due dillagence in confirming that your vehicle was admissible at the time of your purchase. As long as you did this they will grant you amnesty.
Now for the ultimate question --> How do you prove to them that you exercised due dilagence and determined to the best of your ability that the vehicle was admissible prior to purchase?
As she explained to me --> As long as the date on your bill of sale for the vehicle is one that is prior to the date indicated on the Admissibility list that changed unfavorably towards your situation they will give you a pass. If this is not the case then you are likely screwed.
She said this applies to the state of the list from Nov. 1st onwards. So basically, as I interpret this, if you have a bill of sale with a date that is Nov. 1st or after and you can substantiate that the list was indeed favourable towards the admissibility of your vehicle on the day that you purchased you are clear cut good to go...
She went on to say that a lot of the folks caught up in the mess currently with their 2008 vehicles could not have possbility exercised due dillienge because at the time of their purchase there was no admissibility information for 2008s on the list. In a lot of cases people apparently went ahead with importing an 08 on the assumption that it would be okay because it was okay for an 07 model....
I hope this helps...I can certainly understand the anxiety you may be experiencing right now. I would call Transport Canada yourself and confirm what I am telling you...but again, this was told to me just today. The women I was talking to really seemed to know her stufff. I feel very confident that what she was telling me was good information...
Funny enough I cold called RIV right after I talked to TC to see if they would tell me the same thing. The guy there said that he couldn't say for certain what would happen under such a situtation, and that TC would likely evaluate your situation on an individual basis...at least he didn't give me a bunch of random information like I got from them in the past...He said if you got into a situtation like this that TC would make the final decision....which is essentially what TC told me
There is your mistake #1...talking to RIV...talk to them as little as possible is what I am learning...refer to post #2651 where it talks about some information that someone posted on redflagdeals.com. That someone was me...I talked to this particular lady at TC until I was blue in the face and she was very clear in telling me that information...
Again, unfortunately I did not think to ask her name at the time....
As long as the bill of sale date for the vehicle is before the date associated with the VAFUS list that changed negatively towards your particular situation you will get a pass....I asked her over and over in many different ways and she kept coming back to me with the same clear and concise answer...I tend to believe her...I picked up a really good vibe...
Assuming that RIV is 100% accurately conveying information that TC is asking them to convey is a big mistake I think....I heard rumors that the RIV was so overwhelmed with calls that they farmed out some of the work to a call center...what do you think this translates to??? Bad information in some cases me thinks....
I would like to see them post this as official policy or something on their website but I don't think it is there to be found currently...
I would add another very important piece of information that she told me. Based on the idea that what she told me is 100% true people should be buying their cars on a Saturday because according to her the VAFUS list will only change during regular working business days. The way I see it, if I buy my car on a Saturday and check that my car is admissible on that day before doing the deal I should in theory be totally safe because the list could only change against me on the Monday...My bill of sale date is 2 days before the changed list date...This is what I will be doing if I end up importing...
Comments
I just wanted to know if it was allowed. If so then I would be more than happy to register and plate my car to be able to drive it, especially since there is no PST in Alberta. I'm not saying that I wouldn't complete the RIV process in the end, I'd just rather not wait on TC if I don't have to right now. By the looks of things no one will be forced to export their vehicle until TC makes a final decision, and who knows how long that will take. I was told by one of the agents at TC that this would be at least another few weeks. For more details about the export letters check out the latest post on www.carswithoutborders.com
Thanks,
Mike
Would you mind sending me your dealer info at jeffthc@gmail.com?
Thanks, and congrats on your successful import!
cheers.
Make sure you have done research into what is admissable before spending your money. A quick search through these posts should help you with your car.
Is there any concerns about having the recall letter issued by Toyota USA meeting the requirements of the RIV?....Isn't there something on the RIV website stating it has to be worded in a certain way and have a signature etc?
Or am I concerning myself about nothing here?....I would gather that all their letters are templates contextualized with the appropriate VIN and that they meet the RIV requirements?
Thanks for any help you can provide...
Cheers
One more question...I gather that the recall letter was issued in your brother-in-law's name? I guess there is no problem for the RIV that the letter is not in your name?
I would imagine all they care about is the VIN....
Cheers
Also ALL BMW'S!!!!
Toyota are same as Lexus --- see this post
http://www.carburner.com/index.php?title=Paperwork_Required_To_Complete_Process
Call 1-800 # shown here and they faxed me recall letter - most professional
Greg
"We are in writing in response to your request for information regarding a manufacturer's recall or a special service campaign that would affect your 2008 highlander.
We have checked the serial number of your vehicle, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, with our records and determined your vehicle is not involved in any previous or current service campaigns.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office at 1-800-331-74331"
Hope this helps.
thecannyscot
What?! That sucks, and just a couple of weeks ago the BMW salesman told me BMW has nothing against people importing BMWs! :mad:
a) he can charge you WA state tax
or b) if you have valid proof of residency outside of WA & he will sell to you on MSO you dont have to pay WA state tax. To proove address you will need 2 things. A valid USA drivers licence (tough part) and easy part is a bill to same address (power bill, phone bill, etc) with your name on it.
Why not deal in a state with no sales tax (montana or oregon)
2 new ones sitting in my driveway (both pre-sept1 manufacture). Got form2 on one of them today already. CBSA agent forgot to fill out date of manufacture on the 2nd one so i had to fax them photo of door sticker.....if one thing is important on that Form1 ladies & gents it is Box #11 (date of manufacture)........
PS - helps if they get the VIN right too.....that didnt cause any problems though.
The letter must come from the OEM's head office and be written on official company letterhead, duly signed with the name and position of the official at the OEM clearly visible. If the manufacturer's logo is not on the letter it will not be accepted. If your vehicle does not have any outstanding recalls then the letter should say "this vehicle has no outstanding recalls." This letter must be presented to the RIV department prior to your Vehicle Inspection Form being released.
So I assume that your letter has the apparent required signature from an "official" at Toyota? I see it doesn't literally say "this vehicle has no outstanding recalls" but seems to be along those lines...I guess RIV doesn't literally mean that it has to say this word for word or anything...
Did you complete the import process successfully with your recall letter at this point?
Don't mean to keep asking little pointed questions like this but if there is one thing that I have noticed in my research so far, it's that the devil is in the details with this stuff...
Cheers
thecannyscot
1. first he has to buy to his name and then sell to me or directly I have to buy it, which scenario is better,
2. If car is bought at Sanjose then sales tax (7.75%) will be imposed, can we buy at other states and register there or directly register here in canada.
3.If he gives this car to me as gift then PST can be waived (I live in ontario)
4.old cars under 50000 miles are better or brand new one
5.is it must that we have to buy in cash, he can buy on lease but how can I carry this lease here in canada
6.can you guide me which is easier to import from the following cars:
acura rdx, bmw x3, lexus rx350, infiniti fx35, lincoln mkx, mercedes-benz r-class, volkswagon touareg
Transport Canada's stand:
I spoke with a representative at TC today (deal with RIV as little as possible if you
know what is good for you) and she unequivocally told me in no uncertain terms that you will be okay if you can prove to TC (not RIV...the buck stops with TC) that you exercised due dillagence in confirming that your vehicle was admissible at the time of your purchase. As long as you did this they will grant you amnesty.
Now for the ultimate question --> How do you prove to them that you exercised due dilagence and determined to the best of your ability that the vehicle was admissible prior to purchase?
As she explained to me --> As long as the date on your bill of sale for the vehicle is one that is prior to the date indicated on the Admissibility list that changed unfavorably towards your situation they will give you a pass. If this is not the case then you are likely screwed.
She said this applies to the state of the list from Nov. 1st onwards. So basically, as I interpret this, if you have a bill of sale with a date that is Nov. 1st or after and you can substantiate that the list was indeed favourable towards the admissibility of your vehicle on the day that you purchased you are clear cut good to go...
She went on to say that a lot of the folks caught up in the mess currently with their 2008 vehicles could not have possbility exercised due dillienge because at the time of their purchase there was no admissibility information for 2008s on the list. In a lot of cases people apparently went ahead with importing an 08 on the assumption that it would be okay because it was okay for an 07 model....
I hope this helps...I can certainly understand the anxiety you may be experiencing right now. I would call Transport Canada yourself and confirm what I am telling you...but again, this was told to me just today. The women I was talking to really seemed to know her ****...I feel very confident that what she was telling me was good information...
Funny enough....just for [non-permissible content removed] and giggles I cold called RIV right after I talked to TC to see if they would tell me the same thing. The guy there said that he couldn't say for certain what would happen under such a situtation, and that TC would likely evaluate your situation on an individual basis...at least he didn't give me a bunch of ******** random information like I got from them in the past...He said if you got into a situtation like this that TC would make the final decision....which is essentially what TC told me :-)
Thanks for posting this. IF it is legit., then it's great news for me, and I would be one of those that has a 2008 that would be in. The Nov. 5 VAFUS in effect the day I purchased indicates my vehicle as Admissible.
Can you find out from the original poster what number at TC he/she called and the name of the person that gave him this info.
Also, how do we process our vehicle as per TC's instructions when RIV don't know what's going on.
Thanks.
Go to 'Put it in Park', November 27.
http://www.canada.com/globaltv/edmonton/features/troubleshooter/index.html#
Article:
http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2007/11/27/used-cars.html
Video:
http://www.cbc.ca/clips/mov/gould-auto-071127.mov
1. regarding the 2008 vehicle the comments are wrong as there was plenty of information on passenger cars admissible/inadmissible in oct. 26 list. page 6
2. All MPV (SUV) models admissible except 2005 GM blazer and mercedes, this implies all years and all other makes admissible. page 17
3. Regarding immobilization on US vehicles RIV list of Oct. 26 page 2 clearly states IN BOLD :RIV inspection (after form 2) requires documentations to prove the presence of immobilizer in your vehicle. Your owner operater manual clearly has this information, perhaps more detailed than any compliance letter from the goons at GM.
It is admissable under RIV.
The Dealer is setting up an MSO and hopefully by January 1 I will be driving it home to Ontario. No state taxes to pay just Duty-6.5%, GST and RIV fees
Dealer is very helpfull.
If anyone wants to know more as my situation is quite messy, I would be more than happy to tell them.
Yes except for the RX 350 which is made in Cambridge, Ontario.
I have a 2008 Sienna LE sitting at the Pembina border outside Manitoba, October 07 manufacture date. My bill of sale has a Nov. 2nd date. I was given false information by RIV the day I purchased it. What do you mean by a VAFUS? From the information you have, do you think my vehicle should pass?
Thanks
Aime
I am confused by all of this. I purchased a 2008 Sienna LE on Nov. 2nd. It is still sitting at the border. I could not see it on the lists of admissibility and I was given false information by an agent at RIV the day I purchased it. Of course, I have no proof, they tell me. According to your information are you saying that my vehicle should pass? I am waiting for TC to return a call. Any other suggestions?
Thanks
Aime
Also, please don't post contact info such as phone numbers or e-mail addresses that don't belong to you - of course this applies double if it's the contact info of a salesperson! If it's contact info for a public official or a toll-free "general" number for a company, that's OK. But anything that could result in another individual being harrassed or getting tons of unsolicited e-mails has to go.
Thanks!
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
As far as I am aware after asking several US dealers, there is no sales tax paid twice on a vehicle if it is a private sale. (Rav4 is a better car than Outback, IMHOP, stick with what you want).
1. If you can find a dealer that can sell it to you directly it would be great. We choose to have my by the car so that it can be registered and insured in California so that my parents can at least drive the car in Canada while the while CMVSS 114 fiasco settles. Also, it might be easier to get a recall letter if it is sold to your friend. Honda/Acura USA would only issue me a recall letter after I provided them a copy of my California drivers license, proof of US insurance, and the permanent US DMV registration.
2. The tax charged is based on where your friend lives. I had asked this when purchasing the car. This is essentially where in the US you will be registering the car. If the car gets sold to you directly, then you probably won't have to pay the sales tax.
3. I am not sure of the gifting. The PST differs from province to province. I know in my case, BC charges you the PST regardless if it was a sale or a gift.
4. You can't take a car that is leased or financed across the border without permission. I am driving back to Vancouver for the holidays and I have a leased car. I had to get a authorized letter from the company I leased the vehicle from. They would only authorize up to a maximum of 30 days. May differ from one institution to another.
6. Best bet here is the check the USVAF list, since it changes ALL the time. I know the RDX is inadmissible at this point, since that is what I am trying to import.
RIV was clearly telling people that their cars were admissible as long as they weren't specifically listed in the inadmissible column.
TC/RIV are saying that because I purchased between the dates of September 1st and November 1st it is up in the air until the Minister comes out with his final decision. It is NOW inadmissible which is why RIV won't provide me with Form2, and RIV has told me specifically that it doesn't matter what they told me before proof or no proof they must follow the newest list. The scenario the guy gave me was this:
If I call to make sure that the car I want to buy is admissible today, and it is, they will tell me yes go right ahead. I can go out and buy the car but of course I can't export it yet because of the 72 hours US customs needs. If the list changes tomorrow, RIV will follow tomorrow's list and if I come back to them saying you told me yesterday....they say it doesn't matter.
I don't know how they expect us to read their minds but it is basically what is sounds like to me.
I tried to get a better answer out of them but the only thing they will say is that the immobilizer probably does not meet Canadian standards. According to Acura USA there have not been any changes made to the immobilizer from the 2007 model (verbally). We need to get some sort of compliance letter from Acura, but of course they won't give it out. I'm going to try again though, because Honda has issued a letter in the past for a Honda civic and I don't know if the immobilizer for the RDX or any other one made for Honda/Acura would be much different.
You can take a look at the letter here:
http://www.carswithoutborders.com/wordpress/wp-content/scarpletter-003.jpg
I interpreted it the other way around. I thought it was inadmissible if it was not in the Admissble column. (I was looking at the BMW section).
Read "about RIV" at riv.ca and also NEWS ALERTS at riv.ca. TC has been telling everyone about this for a long time. Everyone assumed CMVSS114 would be equivalent to FMVSS114. Bad assumption.
CMVSS 114 - Locking and Immobilization Systems
April 24, 2007
The Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (CMVSS) 114 - Locking and Immobilization Systems, has been amended and, effective September 1, 2007, will require that every Multipurpose passenger vehicle, passenger car, truck, and three wheel vehicle manufactured after September 1, 2007, except for an emergency vehicle, or a vehicle that has a GVWR of 4,536 kg or more, or a walk-in van, be equipped with an immobilization system that meets the requirements specified in the amendment.
Please be advised that if you are planning to import a vehicle manufactured after September 1, 2007, that the vehicle may be affected by this requirement and if an immobilizer that meets CMVSS 114 is not already installed in the vehicle, that an immobilization system will have to be installed. You may also want to verify the cost of such an installation prior to importing a vehicle.
It was post 9957.
"I am sorry that I do not have a name for you. I didn't ask because I am not buying immediately at this time. Just call the main transport canada general inquiries line available on their website and listen to the menu items...follow the menus that say press number X for importing vehicles etc..."
There is really only one equitable solution to the conundrum and impasse that Transport Canada finds itself in, with all of the post Sept 1 2007 manufactured vehicles that are currently in "limbo".
Realistically, and even perhaps legally, TC cannot justify NOT enforcing CMVSS 114. They cannot do this because to do this would be selective enforcement that would expose them to legal action from those that they now try to enforce CMVSS 114 upon, after they give "amnesty" to those that have the subject vehicles in "limbo" that currently do not comply with CMVSS 114.
There is nothing wrong with CMVSS 114, in which it calls for every passenger car(etc) manufactured after Sept 1 2007 "shall be EQUIPPED (emphasis mine) with an immobilization systems that meets one of the following sets of requirements as modified by subsection (5), (6) or (7):
(a) "of National Standard of Canada CAN/ULC-S338-98".
Nowhere in either CMVSS 114 or CAN/ULC-S338-98 is there set out that ONLY the OEM, of the vehicle, can install the equipment meeting CMVSS 114 or CAN/ULC-S338-98. In fact the Insurance Bureau of Canada List four (4) AFTER-MARKET systems that DO COMPLY with CAN/ULC-S338-98.
Because there is nothing wrong with CMVSS 114, (in fact the benefits a potentially very large), TC should insist, that all of the post Sept 1 2007 vehicles, that do not meet CMVSS 114 and are stuck in "limbo", be equipped, per CMVSS 114, with an After Market unit from the list of four from IBC.
To continue to pursue the current situation, in which TC will only allow importation of vehicles with vehicle OEM installed Electronic Immobilizers, effectively means that almost ALL vehicles sold in the US that were manufactured after Sept 1 2007(even if they were made in Canada under the Auto Pact/NAFTA and shipped to the US), will NEVER be allowed, new or used, into Canada. This because with very few exceptions the CMVSS 114 equivalent OEM option is NOT available in the US, it is a Canadian only requirement.
Continued pursuit of this policy has TC being perceived as "protecting" Auto Manufacturer's profits, where those same manufacturers charge significantly more in Canada, than for the same equivalent unit in the US, in a market where the value of the dollar is approximately equivalent.
The current actions and policies of TC have effectively "killed" the auto trade, between the US to Canada, new or used, of almost ALL post Sept 1 2007 manufactured US car models, because, currently, TC will not allow the use of After Market CMVSS 114/CAN/ULC-S338-98 compliant products. This is a "restrictive" trade practice that just might awake the "sleeping giant".
In conclusion, there does not need to be any "amnesty" for the 1000 to 3000 units caught in "limbo". Simply allow, as is proper, for the use of "approved" after market products to comply with CMVSS 114.
Governments should not be in the business of business!
Yours sincerely;
Rod M,
Calgary AB
Transport Canada's stand:
I spoke with a representative at TC today (deal with RIV as little as possible if you
know what is good for you) and she unequivocally told me in no uncertain terms that you will be okay if you can prove to TC (not RIV...the buck stops with TC) that you exercised due dillagence in confirming that your vehicle was admissible at the time of your purchase. As long as you did this they will grant you amnesty.
Now for the ultimate question --> How do you prove to them that you exercised due dilagence and determined to the best of your ability that the vehicle was admissible prior to purchase?
As she explained to me --> As long as the date on your bill of sale for the vehicle is one that is prior to the date indicated on the Admissibility list that changed unfavorably towards your situation they will give you a pass. If this is not the case then you are likely screwed.
She said this applies to the state of the list from Nov. 1st onwards. So basically, as I interpret this, if you have a bill of sale with a date that is Nov. 1st or after and you can substantiate that the list was indeed favourable towards the admissibility of your vehicle on the day that you purchased you are clear cut good to go...
She went on to say that a lot of the folks caught up in the mess currently with their 2008 vehicles could not have possbility exercised due dillienge because at the time of their purchase there was no admissibility information for 2008s on the list. In a lot of cases people apparently went ahead with importing an 08 on the assumption that it would be okay because it was okay for an 07 model....
I hope this helps...I can certainly understand the anxiety you may be experiencing right now. I would call Transport Canada yourself and confirm what I am telling you...but again, this was told to me just today. The women I was talking to really seemed to know her stufff. I feel very confident that what she was telling me was good information...
Funny enough I cold called RIV right after I talked to TC to see if they would tell me the same thing. The guy there said that he couldn't say for certain what would happen under such a situtation, and that TC would likely evaluate your situation on an individual basis...at least he didn't give me a bunch of random information like I got from them in the past...He said if you got into a situtation like this that TC would make the final decision....which is essentially what TC told me
Again, unfortunately I did not think to ask her name at the time....
As long as the bill of sale date for the vehicle is before the date associated with the VAFUS list that changed negatively towards your particular situation you will get a pass....I asked her over and over in many different ways and she kept coming back to me with the same clear and concise answer...I tend to believe her...I picked up a really good vibe...
Assuming that RIV is 100% accurately conveying information that TC is asking them to convey is a big mistake I think....I heard rumors that the RIV was so overwhelmed with calls that they farmed out some of the work to a call center...what do you think this translates to??? Bad information in some cases me thinks....
I would like to see them post this as official policy or something on their website but I don't think it is there to be found currently...
I would add another very important piece of information that she told me. Based on the idea that what she told me is 100% true people should be buying their cars on a Saturday because according to her the VAFUS list will only change during regular working business days. The way I see it, if I buy my car on a Saturday and check that my car is admissible on that day before doing the deal I should in theory be totally safe because the list could only change against me on the Monday...My bill of sale date is 2 days before the changed list date...This is what I will be doing if I end up importing...
Cheers