Sign In Join 



Importing Car into Canada from US

4513 messages,  Last post on Dec 02, 2009 at 8:40 PM

You are in the Smart Shopper Forum. Your Hosts are kirstie_h & tidester

What is this discussion about? Car Buying, Legislation, SUV


Messages Page 229 of 452
1
...
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
...
452
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#2273 of 4513
Re: Manufacture Date? [volvomax] by bodble2
Nov 20, 2007 (2:02 pm)
Reply

Replying to: volvomax (Nov 20, 2007 1:50 pm)

"...and I can tell you in no uncertain terms that an immobilizer does not make a whit of difference for a professional car thief."
 
We can debate till the cows come home whether the immobilizer is effective or not. Data suggest that it is, as opposed to alarm systems, which generally are not effective. But it doesn't matter here. My point is that the intent, I repeat, the intent, of the immobilization standard is for public safety and security, not as a tool for manufacturers to stop importation of cars into Canada.
 
"Why should they cost their Canadian operations money?
What is in it for them?"
 
Are you kidding me?! What's in it for them? Is that what you said? There's everything in it for the manufacturers!! They can artificially keep prices high!! There may actually be very little impact on the dealers if the manufacturers adjust Canadian prices to fall in line with US prices. Lower MSRP, lower invoice cost = similar margin. In fact, I dare say if the manufacturers adjusted Canadian prices, the Canadian dealers will stand to gain, because more people will buy cars in Canada. Almost every dealer in Canada is hurting right now due to the disparity between Canadian & US prices.
 
You are so out to lunch on this one.
#2274 of 4513
Re: Found something new [maluna] by northernkiwi
Nov 20, 2007 (2:03 pm)
Reply

Replying to: maluna (Nov 20, 2007 12:19 pm)

GVWR is the Gross Vehicle Weight. If the vehicle is under 10,000 lbs (4,536 kgs) it must comply with the CMVSS 114 standard if built after Aug 2007.
 
This standard does not apply to vehicles over that weight - mainly trucks and buses. Few consumers use vehicles which have a GVWR over 10,000 lbs.
 
This advice is not new. I have seen it elsewhere. I think that they may have flagged it NEW for the particular section whereas it may have been included in a general section.
 
On the VAFUS pdf files which have not recently been posted but is now posted again at this site
http://www.tc.gc.ca/roadsafety/importation/VAFUS/list/VAFUS.pdf
this data is in paragraph 9 on page 2. Obviously RIV is being given a hard time on this so they have spelled it out in each section to which it applies.
#2275 of 4513
Re: not enough support [darfer] by edmunds07
Nov 20, 2007 (2:05 pm)
Reply

Replying to: darfer (Nov 20, 2007 11:39 am)

It may be not that easy.
My dealer told me that he cannot take my car because the car does not have the title. The car is considered as ‘sold’, the paperwork was done but the car was not registered.The dealer cannot take used vehicle that has MSO, the dealer needs the title.
 
Did anybody investigate the issue of returning unregistered car to the dealer?
#2276 of 4513
2008 Ford Escape by whiterock2
Nov 20, 2007 (2:13 pm)
Reply
I was planning on getting a Rav4 or CR-V but Toyota and Honda have lost my business due to their actions on this issue. I am now looking at the 2008 Ford Escape Hybrid (we currently have a Camry Hybrid and love the hybrid funtion and economy). The 2008 Escape Hybrid comes standard with an Anti-theft device.
 
I see that under section 5.3 for vehicles manufactured after Sept 1 2007, the RIV lists under Admissable "2008 All Models" for Ford, however, the Notes says "See explanations section". Does that mean that even though 2008 all models are admissable, I would still need Ford to provide a letter stating that the vehicle comes with an imobilizer that meets CMVSS 114?
 
Also, does anyone have experience dealing with Ford on this issue, and/or on US Ford dealers selling to Canadians?
#2277 of 4513
Re: not enough support [edmunds07] by darfer
Nov 20, 2007 (2:15 pm)
Reply

Replying to: edmunds07 (Nov 20, 2007 2:05 pm)

I spoke to the US boarder and we will have to re-import it. As for the title, we have the original title from our dealer. Not sure what has to be done next to resell in US.
#2278 of 4513
Re: 2008 Ford Escape [whiterock2] by darfer
Nov 20, 2007 (2:16 pm)
Reply

Replying to: whiterock2 (Nov 20, 2007 2:13 pm)

I beleive Ford is cooperating for a fee $.
#2279 of 4513
Re: no letter for highlander Sport & limited [wrajinder] by gabeman
Nov 20, 2007 (2:28 pm)
Reply

Replying to: wrajinder (Nov 20, 2007 1:21 pm)

I wrote to RIV couple of days ago asking about the requirements for CMVSS114 compliance letter, and I got the response today:
 
"To import a vehicle from the U.S. the vehicle must be cited as admissible on Transport Canada's List of Vehicles Admissible from the United States. Assuming this vehicle is listed as admissible, the vehicle must also bear a Statement of Compliance label affixed by the Original Equipment Manufacturer stating that "the vehicle as manufactured to comply with all US federal emission, bumper and safety standards on the date of manufacture". Failing that, we will accept a letter from the manufacturer stating the same."
 
I wrote back and ask them to clarify... if the vehicle bears the statement of compliance label, no letter is required? I'll keep you guys posted.
 
Cheers.
#2280 of 4513
Re: no letter for highlander Sport & limited [gabeman] by wrajinder
Nov 20, 2007 (2:37 pm)
Reply

Replying to: gabeman (Nov 20, 2007 2:28 pm)

I also got same letter. You do not need compliance letter if you have compliance label on vehicle. its not something new. This policy was there from day one.
#2281 of 4513
CBC national :Watch for this by kbrar
Nov 20, 2007 (2:45 pm)
Reply
watch cbc national I think this Harvard Gould is on at 5:30 est. with the business news… and the National is of course at 10:00…
#2282 of 4513
Re: not enough support [altaboy] by netdog
Nov 20, 2007 (2:50 pm)
Reply

Replying to: altaboy (Nov 20, 2007 12:06 pm)

darfar, altaboy's got a point.
 
If you've failed to cross once due to this technicality, try and try again. Many posters here including myself went through customs without any physical inspection of the vehicle. Same thing goes for the CT inspection, although you may be dinged with re-inspection fees on that end if you need to try and try again. Regardless, the laws of averages are on your side and the costs are likely to be lower than the loss you will incur to return it.
 
Best of luck.
 
netdog

Messages Page 229 of 452
1
...
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
...
452
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement