DOT pulled my Japanese import over today. Need some help (1 Viewer)

[harveya]

Just to throw a few things in here to show that it isn't just in Canada that the JDM vehicles have a few problems thta need fixing. In the UK import vehicle (Grey imports not original manufacturers imports) have to pass an SVA (or ESVA for the newer vehicles) test (single vehicle approval or Enhanced Single Vehicle approval). This tests for compliance to the UK construction and use regulations however I have heard of vehicles that pass this still being pulled over by the police for inspections.

One of the problems that we find is that all external sharp edges must be removed for the test as well as things that can obstruct visibility of the lamps (mainly rear ones in this context).

So what happens is that Tryes get changed as the japanese ones are not european type approved, vent visors get removed and also rear mounted spare wheels and a rear fog lamp gets fitted. The test is passed, the vehicle gets taken away and the rear spare carrier and vent visors get refitted as they are actually legal for use on this country as they are fitted to quite a few UK official imports.

However you can still get pulled over for them if you are driving a JDM truck as they were needed to be removed for the SVA.

Also depending on the tester, sometimes the tyres get through the test and then get failed on the MOT and sometimes not.

Over here you just have to take it on the chin, do what is required and live with it. The rules tend to change depending on who is enforcing them.

 

[Hawke]

The rules tend to change depending on who is enforcing them.

Why does this seem like a common denominator?

 

[crushers]

One part of the problem is having to comply withe the BC Motor vehicle Act and Regulations. Division 4 of the Regs says only lamps autorized by this division may be used and lamps and lenses must be "Equivalent to OEM". That's okay for round or square sealed beam headlights but for tailights it definetly could be a real issue. Same with the glass if it's not AS-1 or AS-2.

"Equivalent to OEM", who dictates what is equivalent and what is not in the Republic of Kolumbia.

as far as i know, (and of course i could be wrong) other than the odd enforcement officer, BC is the only province or state in the world that has deemed itself superior to the country of importation in reference to the 15/25 years ruling. i wonder why that is...

cheers

 

[lshobie]

Wow, with al those kei cars coming off the boats into BC - alot of people will have quite the shock if/when they get pulled over. I guess there wil have to be some kind of a change to the regs to allow them. It can be done.

 

[Stone]

Mermaid:

First of all, thank you very much for taking the time and voluntarily coming to our board and lending us your time. I am sure that I speak for everyone here that we appreciate the opportunity of speaking casually with an enforcement officer with the CVSE. Your job is downright difficult, and chatting here in the board instead of on a roadside inspection is probably a lot easier.

You bring up a valid point about differing standards amongst the government approved inspection facilities here in BC. Some may be more thorough than others in doing their inspection. I know that when I went through with mine in Abbotsford, they went through everything on their list...and it was by no means a cursory glance.

 

[Mermaid.5]

What is the dispute mechanism if the courts of law in this free land are not an option?

Thanks

gb

If a N&O is issued, there is no dispute mechanism other than speaking with the officers regional manager.

Errors can happen at the roadside and N&O's have been withdrawn.

In cases like this where the respective owners have done everything they are supposed to to get their vehicle on the road legally (with the mistake happening at the inspection facility) a violation ticket is not warranted IMHO.

 

[crushers]

oh my, you do sound like a reasonable man. so visitors from other provinces that "might" get pulled over, what paperwork would you require these persons to carry in their vehicle?
cheers

 

[Mermaid.5]

Glad to try and help Stone!!

Usually most of my roadside transactions go very well, possibly due to my stunning good looks.

I try, in my daily travels to tell as many people as I can about the problems faced with importing some of these vehicles. There is no doubt some will never be able to comply. I just want people to look into their model real hard before they invest time and money only to have it all come crashing down at the roadside when I tell them the bad news.

Once again, the inspection facilities have let us down in this case however they have been made aware now.

To answer crushers question about who decides what equivalent means, if there is no definition in the regs then a dictionary is used. Equivalent in this case would mean the same style and type of lens (no round sticky reflectors).

What exactly are KEI cars???

I highly doubt the rules will relax to allow more of these vehicles in. The roads are designed for lhd and problems will arise. How many people do you see in a day that can't drive their lhd drive let alone stick them somewhere where they can't see as well.

In the US the federal imoport rules apply for 25 years insted of 15. I have heard rumours here that a change may be made here to 25 years. Changes like that can take years though.

Inspection manuals are not available online YET. I think it would be a great service to have it online and I believe it may be in the works. For now anyone can stop by your local Gov Agent and purchase one. I think they are $25. Well worth it imho.

 

[Mermaid.5]

Hmmm...well wouldn't that mean then that as long as you have the original equipment that came on your vehicle from the factory you should be OK? IE: Toyota was the Original Equipment Manufacturer...the lights and lenses say TOYOTA on them...therefore the lights and lenses are not just "equivalent to OEM" they are OEM.

I would interpret that clause that you can't just design your own lights and lenses in your workshop and slap them on your vehicle and say yeeeeeehaw let there be light....

Yes they must be equivalent to OEM. They also however MUST bear the correct markings listed in the inspection manual, in this case SAE or DOT or both. One of the Japan impots I have looked at without the correct markings on the rear lenses had no reflectors built in the lens. Probably a lot cheaper to manufacture. If the standards are easier in a foreign country and a manufacter will only be producing a cetain model for that country why would they spend more money putting in lenses that they don't need?? It doesn't mean that is okay for use here.

 

[crushers]

Yes they must be equivalent to OEM. They also however MUST bear the correct markings listed in the inspection manual, in this case SAE or DOT or both. One of the Japan impots I have looked at without the correct markings on the rear lenses had no reflectors built in the lens. Probably a lot cheaper to manufacture. If the standards are easier in a foreign country and a manufacter will only be producing a cetain model for that country why would they spend more money putting in lenses that they don't need?? It doesn't mean that is okay for use here.

but in this case couldn't you add a reflector below the lense?

 

[Mermaid.5]

oh my, you do sound like a reasonable man. so visitors from other provinces that "might" get pulled over, what paperwork would you require these persons to carry in their vehicle?
cheers

Other than reg and insurance, a copy of the inspection might be handy. Of course none of that matters if there are items not in compliance. In that case make sure you have your wallet.

 

[Mermaid.5]

but in this case couldn't you add a reflector below the lense?

Well common sense would say that then you'd have a reflector however it wouldn't be equivalent to oem. Tricky eh??

 

[light_duty]

Also, a Peace Officer (which we are) can stop ANY vehicle being operated at any time on the road to check for compliance with the Act and Regs. This can include mechanical checks, and licencing/insurance issues even if there are no apparent defects visible.

Wouldn't it be fair to say that JDM trucks are an easy target compared to many other vehicles out there? It doesn't take a second glance to recognize an imported truck, while a tractor-trailer hauling overweight or a commercial delivery vehicle with no brakes require a more thourough investigation.

The difficulty I have with this is that you have one agent of the government (the inspection facility) clearing the truck while another agent of the same government (the CVSE officer) orders the truck off the road. Until the government can get its act together, it's hard to expect people to be in 100% compliance. Most people don't have the expertise to decipher complex regs - that's why the pros at the inspection facility do the inspection, right? Once folks have passed the inspection, there should be no further hassles.

And, I echo Wayne's question. I live in Alberta, but I visit Mermaid.5's neck of the woods fairly often, and I don't enjoy the idea of someone ordering my truck off the road, stranding me 400 km from home.

I, too, appreciate you taking the time to clarify things here on MUD. I don't agree with the way the government is handling this, but I know you're just doing your job and that's fair. I just think a little common sense needs to be brought to this debate - I'd like to see enforcement agencies recognise the spirit of the law (taking unsafe vehicles off the road) without obsessing over the letter of the law (taking safe, well-maintained vehicles off the road due to the absense of a SAE marking on a side marker lamp).

Cheers

 

[crushers]

Well common sense would say that then you'd have a reflector however it wouldn't be equivalent to oem. Tricky eh??

what i am gathering from his discusion so far is if the agent is having a bad day/week/month and a RHD from another province was spotted the agent can be as cruel as he wants with no real recourse for the owner.
so basicly, the agents have the power of Gods simular to custom agents, am i correct?
even if we try all that is resonable to make a unit acceptable this is unacceptable... correct?
i find your comment about RHD vs LHD interesting, of course you have some facts and figures to back up this statement? accident statistics for example...
or is this just your personal view of RHD units and their drivers...
cheers

 

[mjohn7]

highly doubt the rules will relax to allow more of these vehicles in. The roads are designed for lhd and problems will arise. How many people do you see in a day that can't drive their lhd drive let alone stick them somewhere where they can't see as well.

So is this a case of get rid if those RHD, as thet are dangerous. One would think you would blame the operater not the vehicle for bad driving. Some of your comments, although based on the current B.C. regs appear to be a bit interpretitive and self serving. As the Inpection Centre and the Field Officer appear to be in conflict, why not offer free re-inpections for all RHD & other imports. (how about those German tourist's with the G-Wagan)

 

[lshobie]

Kei class cars are the little fuel effcient cars/trucks/vans liek the Suzuki Carry, nissan s-cargo, suzui every van, - the little tiny cars like the smart cars.

I drive rhd vehicles everyday and i think it is BS that they are unsafe on our roads, there are many countries that have both cars on thier roads- Japan for example has tons of LHD vehicles all over the place. Japan takes it safety very seriously, they have implemented tire chain only areas, strick speed limits etc, if lhd vehicles were considered to be unsafe then I am sure they wouldnt let then in.

I suggest that all the inspectors drive some RHD for a few weeks and then make some qualified opinions before just assuming. I for one never assume

Regards, and thank you for your input.

 

[Mermaid.5]

Wouldn't it be fair to say that JDM trucks are an easy target compared to many other vehicles out there? It doesn't take a second glance to recognize an imported truck, while a tractor-trailer hauling overweight or a commercial delivery vehicle with no brakes require a more thourough investigation.

The difficulty I have with this is that you have one agent of the government (the inspection facility) clearing the truck while another agent of the same government (the CVSE officer) orders the truck off the road. Until the government can get its act together, it's hard to expect people to be in 100% compliance. Most people don't have the expertise to decipher complex regs - that's why the pros at the inspection facility do the inspection, right? Once folks have passed the inspection, there should be no further hassles.

And, I echo Wayne's question. I live in Alberta, but I visit Mermaid.5's neck of the woods fairly often, and I don't enjoy the idea of someone ordering my truck off the road, stranding me 400 km from home.

I, too, appreciate you taking the time to clarify things here on MUD. I don't agree with the way the government is handling this, but I know you're just doing your job and that's fair. I just think a little common sense needs to be brought to this debate - I'd like to see enforcement agencies recognise the spirit of the law (taking unsafe vehicles off the road) without obsessing over the letter of the law (taking safe, well-maintained vehicles off the road due to the absense of a SAE marking on a side marker lamp).

Cheers

There is no doubt spotting a rhd is very easy. I'm not sure what you were getting at but they are easily picked out from the bunch, especially when there is a dog sitting in the left front.

As far as one agency approving these units and us guys ordering them off the road goes, it's real simple. The inspection facilities are WRONGFULLY approving these units. The areas of non-compliance are not something new and have been in the manual for years. All of the facilities involved could easily be chraged with Improperly Approving a vehicle. Slam Dunk. The bulletin that was issued specifically for imports was merely to bring to their attention that they weren't adhering to the inspection manual.

You are right when you say it's a lot to ask for people to be 100% in compliance after they have had the so called" experts" at an inspection facility "bless" their vehicle. That is why I personally am not dealing with this issue with tickets. You are right when you say there shouldn't be any more issues after passing an inspection. The problem is the vehicles SHOULDN't have passed the inspection until the "issues" are dealt with.

As far as being ordered off the road 400 k from home, I do not know anyone who has been issue a N&O number 1 for a rhd. It has been a case of a Box 2 (30 days to make it pass) and have a nice day.

As far as "how the Gov is handling this", I'm not sure how to comment on that as nothing has changed in Gov as far as standards go. We are dealing with rules/regs that have been in place for years. The people who you should be getting mad at are the facilities who haven't done their job. Like I said alll of the areas in the manual that the RHD's fail, is clearly written and always has been.

 

[Mermaid.5]

highly doubt the rules will relax to allow more of these vehicles in. The roads are designed for lhd and problems will arise. How many people do you see in a day that can't drive their lhd drive let alone stick them somewhere where they can't see as well.

So is this a case of get rid if those RHD, as thet are dangerous. One would think you would blame the operater not the vehicle for bad driving. Some of your comments, although based on the current B.C. regs appear to be a bit interpretitive and self serving. As the Inpection Centre and the Field Officer appear to be in conflict, why not offer free re-inpections for all RHD & other imports. (how about those German tourist's with the G-Wagan)

Apart from my own opinion that RHD are not as safe as LHD from a visibilty standpoint and the way our highways are comnstructed I'm not sure what part you feel is "interpretive and self serving". If you could be more specific I'll try and respond.

Once again, there is no conflict or difference of opinion between Officers and the inspection facilities. The inspection facilities are not following the manual which clearly states all areas of compliance. The lens and widow marking sections couldn't be written any clearer.

 

[crushers]

Apart from my own opinion that RHD are not as safe as LHD from a visibilty standpoint and the way our highways are comnstructed I'm not sure what part you feel is "interpretive and self serving". If you could be more specific I'll try and respond.

Once again, there is no conflict or difference of opinion between Officers and the inspection facilities. The inspection facilities are not following the manual which clearly states all areas of compliance. The lens and widow marking sections couldn't be written any clearer.

i have been open about my location and business, may i politely ask your name, location and position. a phone number would be much appreciated as well.
i have a couple questions to ask and i really do suck at typing...
cheers

 

[lshobie]

I wonder what the Crown Corporation - Canada Posts take on right hand drive vehicles is - since they own and drive thousands of them around the country I think we can assume that someone has approved thier use from a federal, provincial, and governmental safety stand point.

Like I said, drive a RDH for a few weeks and then offer your opinion - also offer up the stats that show RHD as "RHD are not as safe as LHD from a visibilty standpoint and the way our highways are comnstructed".

Regards