RANT: F*cking NHTSA

[Samdari]

I am trying to buy a new car with the cash for clunkers program. But, basically, because I have moved in the last year, my current registration and insurance documents were valid starting 10/21 of last year, less than the 1 year required to qualify for the program.

But, since the geniuses who wrote the details of how dealers would get reimbursed did not consider that PEOPLE SOMETIMES MOVE, all of the dealers are terrified to advance me the credit, for fear their reimbursement application will be rejected.

[ISiddiqui]

Who would have thought that one day FOFC would have two threads on the first page with the NHTSA in the title?

[Farrah Whitworth-Rahn]

Originally Posted by Samdari

I am trying to buy a new car with the cash for clunkers program. But, basically, because I have moved in the last year, my current registration and insurance documents were valid starting 10/21 of last year, less than the 1 year required to qualify for the program.

But, since the geniuses who wrote the details of how dealers would get reimbursed did not consider that PEOPLE SOMETIMES MOVE, all of the dealers are terrified to advance me the credit, for fear their reimbursement application will be rejected.

Hey, I'm excited these same people want to have a say in my medical decisions. Aren't you?

[CU Tiger]

I think both programs suck

[gstelmack]

I love how they readjusted all the EPA MPG numbers on the day the program activated...

[fantom1979]

My 2001 Hyundia Tiberon does not qualify because I bought a fuel efficient car 8 years ago. I guess I am not buying a new car this year. If I would have bought a tank in 2001, I would have $4500 right now. Thanks Congress....

[lighthousekeeper]

a better way to save $4,500 is to not buy a new car. they are always overpriced when compared to their gently-used 2 year old brethren.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I love how they readjusted all the EPA MPG numbers on the day the program activated...

Up or down? err rather making the program more restrictive or more lenient?

[mauchow]

Some MPG went up and some went down. Pretty even overall, nothing that should make people cry foul too much. It would definitely suck though to be on the wrong side of it.

[RainMaker]

If you make over a certain amount you don't qualify. If you were smart or eco-friendly years ago and bought something good, you don't qualify.

So basically the program fucks over people who were eco-friendly years ago and/or can afford to buy these cars.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

gently-used 2 year old brethren.

Cause, yeah, you know that.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

If you make over a certain amount you don't qualify.

There are no income limits. There is a $45,000 limit on the price of the car you buy.

[Alan T]

I had no problems with this program working for me. No issue with income limits or anything. I took my 2000 Chevy blazer with 150,000+ miles on it to the dealership and got a new Jetta for my wife. Was only a difference of 9 mpg, so only 3500, but we needed a new car anyways, had about $2500 worth of repairs needed on the blazer so this made much more sense.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Samdari

There are no income limits. There is a $45,000 limit on the price of the car you buy.

My bad, I'm thinking of the first-time home buyer credit. God knows we don't want people who can afford houses being incentivized into buying them.

[RainMaker]

I have a 98 Monte Carlo that I'd love to trade-in right about now. I don't drive much at all living in the city, but want to make some long trips next year. I wish mine qualified, I'd probably buy one of the new hybrids.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I had no problems with this program working for me. No issue with income limits or anything. I took my 2000 Chevy blazer with 150,000+ miles on it to the dealership and got a new Jetta for my wife. Was only a difference of 9 mpg, so only 3500, but we needed a new car anyways, had about $2500 worth of repairs needed on the blazer so this made much more sense.

The rules for MPG difference are so random. I am junking a category 1 truck (18 mpg), so I could get $3500 if I bought another category 1 truck that gets as little as 20 mpg. But, my friend, who wants to trade in a 17 year old car for a Diesel, and improve his gas mileage by 14 mpg, does not qualify because his current car gets 19 mpg.

RM: You could argue that the price limit is a de facto income limit. And to further complicate things, I think the limit applies not to the price you actually pay for the car, but the MSRP without options.

[RainMaker]

I don't get the price cap either. So we're in a massive recession and we don't want to incentivize a rich guy to plop down $60k on a luxury car?

[RainMaker]

And shouldn't this be a tax credit instead of a handout? I mean why should those who bought fuel efficient cars instead of gas guzzlers be punished by having to make the down payments for those who didn't?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Now now, we have to remember that they're from the government & they're only here to hellp.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I love how they readjusted all the EPA MPG numbers on the day the program activated...

Really? I know the EPA recently re-did its methodology for calculating MPG, was this the same thing and just a really bad time coincidence? If so: LOL.

Originally Posted by fantom1979

My 2001 Hyundia Tiberon does not qualify because I bought a fuel efficient car 8 years ago. I guess I am not buying a new car this year. If I would have bought a tank in 2001, I would have $4500 right now. Thanks Congress....

Same boat here. Instead of buying a Corolla 10 years ago (that still gets low-30s mpg), I should have bought a truck like I wanted to. Although that would have been hard to park on the street in Chicago.

Come to think of it, however, I could have had a winch installed and just created my own parking spaces. CURSES!!!

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

a better way to save $4,500 is to not buy a new car. they are always overpriced when compared to their gently-used 2 year old brethren.

Although the new Mazda3s look soooooooooo spiffy. Now if only the Corolla would die....

[I. J. Reilly]

Damn, my cars at 22mpg.

Here's the website if anyone is interested:

Side-by-Side Comparison

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Really? I know the EPA recently re-did its methodology for calculating MPG, was this the same thing and just a really bad time coincidence? If so: LOL.

The new formula was applied a while ago to old models, and then recomputed, thus changing the eligibility of some models for the program.

[JonInMiddleGA]

My Way News - AP sources: Govt to suspend 'cash for clunkers'

WASHINGTON (AP) - The government plans to suspend its popular "cash for clunkers" program amid concerns it could quickly use up the $1 billion in rebates for new car purchases, congressional officials said Thursday.

The Transportation Department called lawmakers' offices to alert them to the decision to suspend the program at midnight Thursday. The program offers owners of old cars and trucks $3,500 or $4,500 toward a new, more fuel-efficient vehicle.

The congressional officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. Rae Tyson, a spokesman for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which administers the program, declined comment.

Congress last month approved the Car Allowance Rebate System program, known as CARS, to boost auto sales and remove some inefficient cars and trucks from the roads. The program kicked off last Friday and was heavily publicized by car companies and auto dealers.

Through late Wednesday, 22,782 vehicles had been purchased through the program and nearly $96 million had been spent. But dealers raised concerns about large backlogs in the processing of the deals in the government system, prompting the suspension.

A survey of 2,000 dealers by the National Automobile Dealers Association found about 25,000 deals had not yet approved by NHTSA, or nearly 13 trades per store. It raised concerns that with about 23,000 dealers taking part in the program, auto dealers may already have surpassed the 250,000 vehicle sales funded by the $1 billion program.

"There's a significant backlog of 'cash for clunkers' deals that make us question how much funding is still available in the program," said Bailey Wood, a spokesman for the dealers association.

Even before the suspension, some in Congress were seeking more money for the auto sales stimulus. Rep. Candice Miller, R-Mich., wrote in a letter to House leaders on Wednesday requesting additional funding for the program.

"This is simply the most stimulative $1 billion the federal government has spent during the entire economic downturn," Miller said Thursday. "The federal government must come up with more money, immediately, to keep this program going."

Brendan Daly, a spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said they would work with "the congressional sponsors and the administration to quickly review the results of the initiative."

General Motors Co. spokesman Greg Martin said Thursday the automaker hopes "there's a will and way to keep the CARS program going a little bit longer."

[stevew]

Lol nice-

Can see this in gubment medicine....

Sorry, you're going to have to make sure your water doesn't break until we make sure there is money to fund your child's delivery.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by stevew

Lol nice-

Can see this in gubment medicine....

Sorry, you're going to have to make sure your water doesn't break until we make sure there is money to fund your child's delivery.

We have a backlog of waters waiting to break, and we need to be able to make sure we can process yours. Try again in a couple of weeks.

I got to my dealer at 6 last night, and they had gotten wind of this, so decided they were not doing any more cash for clunkers deals until today. They ended up giving me $2500 in trade for my car instead of the $3500 I would have gotten under the program. Considering I pay sales tax on $2500 less, I only paid about $800 more, and don't have to worry about paperwork getting rejected this way.

[flere-imsaho]

Somewhat at odds with this: White House Says Car-Rebate Plan Will Go On - NYTimes.com

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Somewhat at odds with this: White House Says Car-Rebate Plan Will Go On - NYTimes.com

Doesn't really seem to be "at odds" as much as the situation is fluid. Considering that, as of the last half hour, NADA is warning dealers that there's still a risk of being stuck with the tab on any deal completed beyond tonight, I'd say there's still some concern out there.

Obama spokesmen can promise whatever they like but Congress still has to approve the appropriation and Sen Feinstein & others are promising to oppose any additional funding unless the mileage requirements are increased.
Plus the House is due to recess today, the Senate hasn't scheduled a vote (since there's nothing to vote on yet).

[Subby]

Definitely a fluid situation. I am looking for a dealer that will give us full credit on our '02 Kia Sedona. I am commuting in that pig now and will save a ton if I can spin it into a 3rd generation Prius.

It's weird though - even though my vehicle only gets 14mpg, it only has 67k miles on it. Feels weird to be sending it in for junking when a charity could probably use it. I wonder if there are any plans to donate any of the vehicles to charity.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Doesn't really seem to be "at odds" as much as the situation is fluid.

Oh I agree. I didn't mean for that to come off as strong as it did.

[Farrah Whitworth-Rahn]

Originally Posted by Subby

It's weird though - even though my vehicle only gets 14mpg, it only has 67k miles on it. Feels weird to be sending it in for junking when a charity could probably use it. I wonder if there are any plans to donate any of the vehicles to charity.

No. The vehicles are required to be disabled by putting something in the gas tank, and then sent to the junk yard.

Under the NHTSA rules, the dealer is obligated to disable any vehicles turned in for a federal scrapping voucher by putting sodium silicate in the engine. (Think sugar in the gas tank. Except nastier.) Then the vehicle goes to a junkyard.

A lot of charities out here have been advertising hard for vehicle donations, right along side car dealers advertising for the program.

[RainMaker]

Wasn't part of the plan though to just get those clunkers off the road though? I understand the charity argument, but I thought an underlying feature of this was to get rid of a bunch of 15 MPG cars for a bunch of 35 MPG cars. Cutting back on oil consumption and being a little more eco-friendly in return.

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by Subby

Definitely a fluid situation. I am looking for a dealer that will give us full credit on our '02 Kia Sedona. I am commuting in that pig now and will save a ton if I can spin it into a 3rd generation Prius.

It's weird though - even though my vehicle only gets 14mpg, it only has 67k miles on it. Feels weird to be sending it in for junking when a charity could probably use it. I wonder if there are any plans to donate any of the vehicles to charity.

Not directed towards you, but I have no idea why a 02' with 67K is considered a 'clunker'. If they want to make it a fuel efficiency program, then they should have just said if you get a car with 4/5 MPG better than your current car and your car is older than X, then fine.

[Subby]

If you drove my car you would agree it was a clunker.

In all seriousness though - I'll have a 30+mpg improvement in fuel economy when trading up. Not sure on the fuel tank size of a Prius, but a Kia Sedona is about 16 gallons. That's a massive difference.

If they wanted this thing to have teeth they should have made the *minimum* difference be 10 mpg.

This is just a stimulus measure in greenie clothing.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Subby

If they wanted this thing to have teeth they should have made the *minimum* difference be 10 mpg.

[Alan T]

I think the minimum difference should have been 9mpg instead.




(because that was the difference between my trade in and new car I got)

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Subby

Definitely a fluid situation. I am looking for a dealer that will give us full credit on our '02 Kia Sedona. I am commuting in that pig now and will save a ton if I can spin it into a 3rd generation Prius.

It's weird though - even though my vehicle only gets 14mpg, it only has 67k miles on it. Feels weird to be sending it in for junking when a charity could probably use it. I wonder if there are any plans to donate any of the vehicles to charity.

Yeah-seems stupid that it'd probably run for 3-5 more years, and you could give it to some assisting living facility or something. But KBB is like 2grand, and you get 4500 through the program.

I'm sure you've done the math on it, but unless gas is like 4bucks per gallon, hybrids aren't really worth buying IMO.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Subby

This is just a stimulus measure in greenie clothing.

Not even a stimulus. More like welfare and a bailout. Forcing a large percent of the population who bought sensible cars to have to make the down payments on those that didn't is wrong in my opinion. Just as bad as artificially propping up an un-innovative industry instead of forcing them to actually create something that people want to buy.

[JPhillips]

Tax credits for restricted purchases aren't exactly new. This is very similar to the tax credit that sparked a wave of large SUV purchases a few years ago. I'm still not sold on the idea, but this kind of tax credit is pretty standard fare.

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Not even a stimulus. More like welfare and a bailout. Forcing a large percent of the population who bought sensible cars to have to make the down payments on those that didn't is wrong in my opinion. Just as bad as artificially propping up an un-innovative industry instead of forcing them to actually create something that people want to buy.

Auto industry needs to take notes from the shaving business and add a fifth wheel.

[Subby]

Ehhh...I couldn't bring myself to do it. Junking a vehicle with just 67k miles on it seemed way less "green" than just holding on to what I have...despite the horrendous gas mileage.

[CU Tiger]

Why do I foresee banks repoing vehicles by the masses in 6-12 months.
Does this not reek of the fair housing deal? But I did buy 3 trucks today for $4501 each that had been traded in, stupidly....so Ill have 3 happy employees tomorrow morning.


Take a look at your favorite on line video distributor and check out the cars with the liquid glass (sodium silicate) in the radiator being blown up and tell me how eco friendly that smoke screen is.

I am sorry I think this whole deal is stupid. Sure your new vehicle gets 4 mpg more, ut what about the energy cost associated with destroying your current vehicle and building another one?

[SackAttack]

Question - the cars that are "too old" to qualify here, anybody have an inkling why that is?

Are they generally more fuel efficient than what we're trying to remove?
Generally not worth the value of the rebate?
Somebody in government is afraid people will dump classic cars under this program?

Or is it that there simply aren't enough of those in service on the road to make it worth including them? I mean, seems like a 1970 sedan would be the epitome of 'clunker' at this point.

[JonInMiddleGA]

So it will apparently end by this coming weekend (i.e. before Friday) unless the Senate matches the $2b extra dollars the House approved before recess.

Just a procedural thing here but let's suppose the Senate wanted to approve the same amount but with a different funding source (or whatever other change). Doesn't that mean that the two versions have to be reconciled before a final approval, meaning that it's at best in limbo until the House returns? Or in other words, did the House recess & the current timetable basically put the Senate in the position of having to approve the exact version that passed the House or otherwise the program dies/delays/suspends/limbos/whatever?