Re: [MV] Confused in CA about M35 rules.

From: mblair1@home.net
Date: Mon Feb 21 2000 - 23:11:09 PST


*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*

"Henry" <henrya@jps.net> wrote:
> Well, I'm confused. I registered my M35 after driving it here from
> Idaho without a license or registration or a CDL. I just went into
> DMV with the paperwork from Idaho that Alex gave me. It took the guy
> about 30 minutes to figure out how to register it. It is registered
> as an historic vehicle, which exempts it from weight fees, and
> according to him, my need for a special license. The license fees
> are only 60 bucks per year, no weight fees, no smog.

When I got my M109A3 (like an M35A2, but with a shop van body) several
months ago, I researched this topic quite a bit, including talking to
the DMV, talking to the commercial enforcement guys at CHP, and
reading the pertinent sections of CA Vehicle Code myself (they're
on-line at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/). The topic got beaten to death
on this list back in early November, and I figure it'll be re-hashed
over and over in the future... All of you folks lucky enough to live
in the USA may hit the delete key; California residents please read
on... :-)

If I am not mistaken, you're correct about everything *except* the
need for the special license. I am also registering my 2.5-ton as a
historical vehicle, and insuring it as such through J.C. Taylor.

The guy I talked to in the commercial enforcement division at CHP
(unfortunately, I do not recall his name) said that the historical
plates do not remove the requirement for having a class B CDL. I could
not find anything which suggested that they would in the CVC when I
searched it myself. A year or two ago, a MIL-VEH list member said that
he had heard that there was a court case which determined that the CDL
would not be required with a historical vehicle, but the guy at CHP
had not heard of any such thing, and the list member did not provide
any case number(s) or name(s). In particular, section 12804.9(b)(2)(B)
describes the licensing restrictions by vehicle type, and the sections
pertaining to historical plates make no mention of different licensing
requirements.

> I haven't even put the license plates on, just carry them with me, and no
> one asks, yet.

I think that you still need to mount the plates, and light the rear
one. The CVC sections I could find pertaining to historical plates
made no mention of not needing to mount them. I recommend that you call
up CHP and ask about that.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I really, truly, want to
be proven absolutely wrong on this one. Many list members have stated
that they didn't think that CDL should be necessary for non-commercial
use of my truck, but the CA Vehicle Code and the guys who write the
tickets both seem to disagree. So far, to my knowledge, nobody has
produced anything authoritative to refute that. I'd be very happy if
anybody could produce a vehicle code section number, case number, etc.
which would prove to me (and the DMV, and the CHP) that I can legally
drive my historical-plate deuce in CA with my class C license (even
though I have already paid for the class B and the medical card, and
just need to take my drive test).

--
Mark J. Blair, KE6MYK <mblair1@home.net>
PGP 2.6.2 public key available from http://pgp.ai.mit.edu/
Web page: http://www.qsl.net/ke6myk/
DO NOT SEND ANY UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL EMAIL TO THIS SITE



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 02 2000 - 22:30:35 PST