Cizeta Seizure

[Empty Pockets]

Now there are provisions that allow non DOT approved gals to remain in this country as a static display however as has been shared; THIS GAL WAS BEING DRIVEN. Right or wrong I care not to judge...

Do I think that there was a proverbial whistle blower; maybe and yet I think that it is far more likely that the caretaker/person driving this gal to various events and showing her made statements that bit him/her in the arse.

Takes care

Shadowman

'Agree with your views in general. ESPECIALLY re: this guy DRIVING the car on public streets! That wasn't real brilliant, and >I< don't have a pblm "judging" it! He should be handed a hefty fine for doing it.

My problem is with the, "THOU SHALT NOT OWN OR POSSESS", commandment. Like I stated B4, there is no hazard of any kind created by simply having a car like this sitting in a collection. (I really seriously doubt there'd be any real risk to the general public if it were DRIVEN either - except maybe to the occupants in the event of a wreck - but, as you mentioned, we don't know all the facts re: same. So that's really anybody's guess.) (As a general rule, I just don't regard anything the gov't says as THEE gospel on ANYTHING...)

I do disagree with your take on the whistle blower, though, Bill. Obviously the owner didn't call the feds and say, "Guess what I did today." Someone "in the know" had to have witnessed same & reported it for whatever reason. That very well COULD HAVE come about as a result of the owner's/driver's statements as you suggested, but, someone still had to have made the call.

Regardless, all the controversy about the car meeting this or that standard aside - that's one sweet looking ride. It's a darn shame it doesn't pass muster/isn't/cannot be sold/owned here in a "compliant" form.

:cheers

 

[ChipBeck]

Once we were....

I probably should not make the following comments after reading this thread more than once and yet as much as I “HATE” big brother pointing me in a particular direction, telling when and what to eat, what I should or should not like, etc I also learned long ago that whether I like it or not a framework/structure is needed so as to insure; if such is even possible the lack of total chaos.

Shadowman

...... A nation of laws. We have become a nation of men picking and choosing which laws to enforce and which laws to ignore and that is what frustrates me and destroys respect for all laws. I'm right with you Bill when it comes to enforcing motor vehicle laws. But when we have the time, resources, and will to enforce immigration laws as regards an old car but we will not enforce immigration laws as regards violent criminal illegal aliens, law enforcement becomes a joke. The problem resides in our courts. Fair and consistant law enforcement promotes respect. Selective enforcement breeds contempt.

Chip

 

[BlackICE]

+1 Chip!

 

[Shadowman]

'Agree with your views in general. ESPECIALLY re: this guy DRIVING the car on public streets! That wasn't real brilliant, and >I< don't have a pblm "judging" it! He should be handed a hefty fine for doing it.

My problem is with the, "THOU SHALT NOT OWN OR POSSESS", commandment. Like I stated B4, there is no hazard of any kind created by simply having a car like this sitting in a collection. (I really seriously doubt there'd be any real risk to the general public if it were DRIVEN either - except maybe to the occupants in the event of a wreck - but, as you mentioned, we don't know all the facts re: same. So that's really anybody's guess.) (As a general rule, I just don't regard anything the gov't says as THEE gospel on ANYTHING...)

I do disagree with your take on the whistle blower, though, Bill. Obviously the owner didn't call the feds and say, "Guess what I did today." Someone "in the know" had to have witnessed same & reported it for whatever reason. That very well COULD HAVE come about as a result of the owner's/driver's statements as you suggested, but, someone still had to have made the call.

Regardless, all the controversy about the car meeting this or that standard aside - that's one sweet looking ride. It's a darn shame it doesn't pass muster/isn't/cannot be sold/owned here in a "compliant" form.

:cheers

Thank you for your comments; I desire not to move people into my camp but rather after much thought I shared an opinion, mine.

My comment about whistle blower; one may have but I was suggesting that by driving the gal to public car events and then only speculating on the conversations that took place with many folks that he/she may have become their own personal whistle blower

By the way; you can own such gals however they may not be legal to drive on the road. If one imports for service then such needs to take place however if for static display then the import agreement is different. It would appear that she came in for one thing and then was ultimately used for another.

BTW I like threads that get people thinking..........

Shadowman

 

[Shadowman]

...... A nation of laws. We have become a nation of men picking and choosing which laws to enforce and which laws to ignore and that is what frustrates me and destroys respect for all laws. I'm right with you Bill when it comes to enforcing motor vehicle laws. But when we have the time, resources, and will to enforce immigration laws as regards an old car but we will not enforce immigration laws as regards violent criminal illegal aliens, law enforcement becomes a joke. The problem resides in our courts. Fair and consistant law enforcement promotes respect. Selective enforcement breeds contempt.

Chip

Thank you for your comments Chip

Chip we share many of the same thoughts and associated frustration.

IMO this is a great and sad example of resources; namely ours being poorly used and yet I speculate as I do not have the facts that the situation was created over time and then they aka the agency had no choice but to respond otherwise the risk of selective enforcement could have been viewed with this matter too.

There is no doubt that it is a difficult call and yet I know that I have and suspect that you have also seen folks that allow proverbial crap to happen/hit the fan while all the time they were empowered to make a redirect and yet they act as if it is "everyone but them" that needs to work with the same tools as the bulk of us after which IMO and sadly folks come to their side knowing nothing of the chain of events and yet willing to hold them up high for all to see while saying “you poor thing”.

Again I truly do not know anything significant of this story as such all I wanted to do is compel folks to look at and consider alternate views because it is far too easy to create a cheering session based on the old adage "no group conscience”.

All the best

Shadowman

 

[Shadowman]

+1 Chip!

Thank you BlackICE for your very personal, heartfelt, and definative reply.

Shadowman

 

[Empty Pockets]

(1)My comment about whistle blower; one may have but I was suggesting that by driving the gal to public car events ... he/she may have become their own personal whistle blower.

(2)...if for static display then the import agreement is different. It would appear that she came in for one thing and then was ultimately used for another.

Shadowman

(1) 'No argument! There's absolutely NO question that stunt provided no great assistance in avoiding problems with "the man"!:lol This seizure may never have happened in the 1st place had the car simply stayed in storage - if ONLY because 'twould have been impossible for someone to blow the whistle on something he couldn't have seen. :biggrin But, that said, at some point the "paperwork" would have generated a followup to see what the status of the car was, etc. So, everything would have come to a head eventually anyway.

(2) Undoubtedly there should have been a request for 'change of import status' in this area if it was possible to do that after the car got here under the origional agreement. Especially if the "repairs" the car was shipped here to undergo had turned out to be impossible to do, or were found to be just too costly. One thing is undisputable IMHO: the whole situation AS HANDLED wasn't handled well at all on either side. (For instance, I'd rather have seen the guy FINED "big time" so the gov't would have MADE MONEY instead of having SPENT IT! :lol)

So, generally speaking, I don't believe we really have any disagreement in our viewpoints at all, Bill! :lol


In any event, like I stated back at the beginning of this thread: "There are OTHER "illegal issues" in this country in FAAAAR greater need of attention. SOME that have been proven faaaaar more deadly on more than one occasion...but, I shant go there..."

I think we all know to what I was referring.

 

[Kingman]

Thank you BlackICE for your very personal, heartfelt, and definative reply.

Shadowman

Well done! :lol

 

[Gulf GT]

The U.S. government actually provides a way for someone to own a car like this under show or display and keep it in the U.S. forever and drive it. You are allowed to drive it to and from any show or to and from a repair shop with a limitation of 2500 miles a year. It's a little trouble to get the permit, but not that much trouble. Dick Merritt at the DOT is very approachable; in fact I have talked to him directly on the phone a couple times. The DOT will work with you; all they ask is that you follow a few rules, not really a big deal. Also, getting the "show or display" permit protects the owner from potential lawsuits in the U.S. should there be an accident while driving it on U.S. roads. Driving the car in the U.S. without the proper registration opens the owner up to a huge lawsuit should someone get hurt. The owner’s insurance company would not cover the accident once they find it that the car is here illegally, and oh boy wait till the opposing attorney finds out that the car is here illegally. This can potentially open the owner up to losses in the millions of dollars. As such, driving a car like this is really foolish in my opinion without proper registration. It’s a kin to playing Russian roulette.

 

[Kayvan]

I was thinking the exact same things and wondering who "ticked off whom" politically: who specifically did this particular guy rub the wrong way to get the "whistle" blown on him?

Laws, EPA, regs, safety have nothing to do with it. Most likely this is the result of ego and jealousy. Probably blew away an Enzo, owner flirted with a wife, forum flame, or slighted some other local buffoon. Thats why a lot of folks keep their stuff under wraps and avoid publicity of any kind.

In recessions this stuff always comes out, as chips settle...and real winners losers reveal themselves.

The Zampolli guy seems to have right attitude, with 'call back in a week'

The ICE agent is too embarassed to face the camera.

 

[BlackICE]

The U.S. government actually provides a way for someone to own a car like this under show or display and keep it in the U.S. forever and drive it. You are allowed to drive it to and from any show or to and from a repair shop with a limitation of 2500 miles a year.

Wow, EP could import any car in the world and drive it as much as he wanted to!

 

[Shadowman]

(1) 'No argument! There's absolutely NO question that stunt provided no great assistance in avoiding problems with "the man"!:lol This seizure may never have happened in the 1st place had the car simply stayed in storage - if ONLY because 'twould have been impossible for someone to blow the whistle on something he couldn't have seen. :biggrin But, that said, at some point the "paperwork" would have generated a followup to see what the status of the car was, etc. So, everything would have come to a head eventually anyway.

(2) Undoubtedly there should have been a request for 'change of import status' in this area if it was possible to do that after the car got here under the origional agreement. Especially if the "repairs" the car was shipped here to undergo had turned out to be impossible to do, or were found to be just too costly. One thing is undisputable IMHO: the whole situation AS HANDLED wasn't handled well at all on either side. (For instance, I'd rather have seen the guy FINED "big time" so the gov't would have MADE MONEY instead of having SPENT IT! :lol)

So, generally speaking, I don't believe we really have any disagreement in our viewpoints at all, Bill! :lol


In any event, like I stated back at the beginning of this thread: "There are OTHER "illegal issues" in this country in FAAAAR greater need of attention. SOME that have been proven faaaaar more deadly on more than one occasion...but, I shant go there..."

I think we all know to what I was referring.

On the following I could not agree with you more

"In any event, like I stated back at the beginning of this thread: "There are OTHER "illegal issues" in this country in FAAAAR greater need of attention. SOME that have been proven faaaaar more deadly on more than one occasion...but, I shant go there..."

All the best

Shadowman