This hurts my soul...
 

So a few years ago a guy moved to Australia and brought his Ducati 848 along with him. Only problem was that he did not have an import permit. The government gave him a choice.. Either export the bike, get a permit and then re-import, or we squash your bike.

http://i.imgur.com/hj2ujYy.jpg

The guy chose to get his bike squashed, rather than go through all of the additional hassle.

http://i.imgur.com/18krgli.jpg

Bureaucracy at it's finest.

http://i.imgur.com/WkYPahP.jpg

I understand your sentiment but those are the rules. There are pages and pages of requirements for importing vehicles into Australia (and I imagine other countries). It says very plainly on the relevant page that failure to follow the regulations and paperwork will result in the above. I am suggesting that it is the owner's fault in this case for not following the required procedure.

And not only vehicles. Remember Johnny Depp's dogs?

You mean johny derp for thinking he was above the law lol! :popcorn:

Honestly, im too attached to vehicles to not go through the hasstle of importing one properly with the right paper work. Would have chosen option B but thats just me

That's one expensive bike to just have crushed. I would get it if it was like an early 00s GSXR or something that wasn't worth more than a couple grand..

But a Ducati 848? Seriously? I wish I had 15k to just flush down a toilet lol

Governments showing no ability to make wise use of resources (salvagable parts/auction the bike to someone overseas)...shocking

I don't understand why:

1) The gubment couldn't just let him keep the bike in storage as long as he wasn't driving it

2) He couldn't just put an ad on craigslist for a free bike for anyone willing to go through with the hassle? I guess he was one of those kids who would rather break their toys than let anyone else play with them...

Couldn't he just stick it in his living room (unregistered) as a decoration?

Edit: Murica :popcorn:

@supra2nv

It's laid out in black and white. You fail to follow procedure you don't get your vehicle. The guy was an idiot. You don't have to like it but this is the way it is.


"If you ship your vehicle before receiving an approval and your vehicle arrives before the application is
processed, you may incur storage costs from the shipping company/freight forwarder. You may also be open
to prosecution, as it is an offence to import a vehicle without an Import Approval.
Importation takes place when a vehicle has landed within the port of intended discharge and not once the
vehicle clears customs control. If the import application is not approved, you will have to either export the
vehicle or have it destroyed at your own expense. Destruction will need to take place under Customs
supervision."
http://www.movemetoaustralia.net/upl...cle_Import.pdf

All I see are Termis. Probably worth under $10k, but still a chunk of change.

The vehicle may have been at a tow yard racking up $150/day, and who knows how much paperwork and money and time it would have taken to get it back. Maybe his insurance would consider this totaled :mad0259:

Because its not the govts obligation to compromise with you; it is their obligation to put you in front of an iron curtain

so......................does you friend need a friend in vegas? :D :bonk:

He should have disassembled the bike into it's major component groups and shipped it as parts. I guess it's expensive to be dumb, yet some people can afford it.

Our wise leaders are focused on having safety compliant vehicles rolling around our roads and raising revenue.
They don't give a brass razoo about potholes on our roads or driver (the loose nut that sits behind the steering wheel) education , because these raise even more revenue.

I mean.. really? They give you a choice and it's somehow the government's fault?

If I moved to Australia and wanted to bring something with me, I'll be damned sure to get my paperwork straight first!

Blame government all you want, there is no one here to blame but the bike owner.

-alex

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSjLiQxEZlM"]You can do Anything! - YouTube[/ame]

Something something, Souls being hurt.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrHYl9D5CTI"]2013 Kia Soul small overlap IIHS crash test - YouTube[/ame]

Where in my post did I say it was the government's fault?

Did they squash those too?

Well, rules are rules. You may not like them but you still have to adhere to them. If he has enough money to say "Meh.....take it", then he has enough money to ship it back, do the paperwork and then bring it back again.

You = the owner of the bike for purposes of my post.

But as for you @lupindub, I wouldn't even blame government bureaucracy either. It's just how the rules are, the bike owner chose to not do things right.

-alex

Bro, how is this NOT the perfect example of government bureaucracy? They could have handled this situation in a positive spin such as auctioning it, like any sane person would do, but such is not the case in government BUREAUCRACY.

So just ignore laws that the government set so that the government can auction it with no legal justification for it?

Seems like a good PR spin.

I know it makes sense for you and me. It makes zero sense for the government because they are bound by the law. The law allows for two outcomes in this case, not two + whatever you deem to be the greater good.

-alex

Government makes rules to prevent spending hundreds of thousands of dollars ensuring imported vehicles meet basic road standards or catching problems after the vehicle is imported.

"Dude naw, this is a perfect case of red tape paper pushers making bad decisions"

lol you're gonna go far kid.

Okay i'm done arguing with you because you obviously can't seem to grasp the definition of bureaucracy. It doesn't matter if it makes sense or not for the government to "break the law". This wasn't my point. My point was the ridiculousness of the LAWS that have already been set up - i.e BY BUREAUCRACY.

I understand your point exactly, contrary to what you may believe.

What was the ridiculousness of this law in question, if I may ask? That's what I am confused about, because you seem to think it's a stupid law and I don't seem to have any issues with it.

-alex

Do you agree or disagree that it is silly, and quite unreasonable to destroy a piece of property worth $15,000, instead of trying to auction it off like they do here in the states?

Silly, yes.
Unreasonable, no.

sorry, illegally imported vehicles are almost always crushed by US Customs.

Source: I've seen plenty.

-alex

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cult...imported-cars/

You don't have to like it. Just saying there's no auction process in the US nor in many other countries.

-alex

So what the hell are you arguing about if you think it's silly as well, which was my point from the beginning. The man could have made a pretty penny while saving resources (material to make the Ducati) if it wasn't for a silly law that calls for illegally imported cars to be crushed.

Isn't this further proving my point of the ridiculous bureaucracy, since the government ALREADY auctions off vehicles that have been confiscated by criminals (domestically)? So why not auction off illegally imported vehicles as well, since we already have a system set up to auction off vehicles we impound from drug dealers, etc.? One word - bureaucracy, end of discussion.

Source: https://www.usa.gov/auctions-and-sales

Hey Lup the law does not say it "must be crushed". It says it must be either shipped back and brought in properly or crushed. The owner of the vehicle has the choice here and he is the one that decided that it be crushed. He could have simply shipped it back and done the paperwork like he should have in the first place.
Some governments have very strict rules on what cars can and can not be brought in (the US has some of the most stringent). These rules ensure that all vehicles at least start out safe and compliant and protect the auto industry in that country from cheap imports. Can you imagine the roads in the US if anybody that wanted to could bring in any vehicle they wanted whenever they wanted?
Laws like this may seem silly on the surface but there are some very deep reaching and reasonable purposes behind them.

My point is not about bureaucracy. It's about a law that is clearly stated, that the bike owner clearly did not think was a big issue (or worth his time), and he let the bike be crushed.

Australia is way better than the US, at least they allow you the option of exporting and then reimporting with the proper agency. If some rich guy wants to let their properly be destroyed, it clearly was not worth much to them to begin with.

Many of us want these things brought in because we fancy them. It would also help to understand the laws.

But yes, government bureaucracy is what you are worked up over. We definitely need to do away with it, but only for cars.

Auction off to... who? Others who still cannot own or legally possess it since it was brought in illegally? Or auction it off overseas?

-alex

So why not make it "it must be either shipped back and brought in properly or we AUCTION it"? Seems like the more reasonable proposition to me.

Referring back to mavs article he posted, that stuff about safety is just a sham - lobbyists created it to protect the domestic car market - I don't know if this is true or not, but it sure sounds like American politics to me.

Article quote source: "Our problem is with the law that makes this enforcement necessary in the first place. It's touted as protecting American drivers from cars that don't meet our country's crash-safety requirements, but as anyone who's researched the gray market can tell you, that's not why it came about. It was written by automakers and lobbyists to prevent folks from, say, buying a Mercedes in Germany and shipping it here for less than what it would cost to buy from a U.S. dealer."

Uhh we have neighbors both upstairs and downstairs in the United States case. Transportation is cheap nowadays, even if we were speaking of having to ship overseas. Whatever it costs to ship, handle, and process, it will be nowhere near the price of that bike. I still stand by my statement of auctioning off expensive imported exotics instead of crushing them (if it comes this far), and bureaucracy is what is stopping us from doing so. Can we agree on this?

That's not how the law (nor sovereignty) works in this case, but sure, auctioning off seized cars without any way for the bidders to own the cars is a great way to solve a problem.

I think it's better if we just threw them into a volcano as peace offerings.

-alex

Aren't standards for vehicles pretty similar in the US and it's neighbors? So whatever is not legal in the US likely wouldn't be legal in Canada and Mexico either?

Well, we are a bit more open but odds are whoever got it at auction would have to ship it back to the country of origin and do the proper paper work to have it approved or have it destroyed so we are right back to square one.
Then if you got it approved there would be import fees, tariff, taxes and duty on the new value of it (not the auctioned price) which are very high for somebody bringing in one vehicle. Over all it would cost as much or more than buying a used one here and nobody would want it.