I would like to import a car from overseas. The car i am thinking about is a 2004 Mercedes Benz M class. What are the laws regarding the import/registration of cars in nz?
When i search on nzta they say that the car has to meet frontal impact/emissions standards but does not really tell you how to know whether a car is permitted or not. I've heard rumors that a car can only be less than a certain number of years old. I've heard other rumors that the car has to have 3 letters on the front of the chassis code and other rumors that it cannot be older than 2003.
kazbanz,
Oct 25, 9:50pm
MMG-short version. ALL other requirements regarding imports are for this purpose replaced by the emission requirement. ALL cars into NZ must have a minimum of A 3 didget emission code or be euro 4 or higher compliant. The ABSOLUTE cut off for this is 2004. 04 M class has a GH emission so doesn't comply Don't quote me but it looks like 06 is the first year M class can come in but I'd be checking the particulars of the specific car
moviemakerguy,
Oct 26, 12:37am
Hmm. so the mercedes i am looking at has a chassis code that starts with "WDC" but a model number that starts with GH. DOes the 3 letter rule only apply to japanese cars?
This is how stuffed up we are, these apply to vehicles to be road legal, yet to bring in a machine there is no regulations, we are classed as a unregulated country, so you can bring in a 100 tonne wheel loader or digger that consumes a couple of thousand litres of diesel a day and it doesn't have to meet any emission rules yet if you bring in a new 1500cc diesel it has to be the latest emission regulation to go on the road, one year with a big machine will use more than a small diesel vehicle will ever use in its lifetime.
tgray,
Oct 26, 8:21pm
An yet you can bring in a 40 year old American car with no safety features and left hand drive, with no restriction on getting them registered for use on NZ roads - And import as many as you want! Just fit a high level stop light and change the headlight beam to the left and off you go for compliance.
kazbanz,
Oct 26, 9:28pm
Tgray--Um I would be quiet on that one matey.
franc123,
Oct 26, 9:50pm
Also the effect of banning diesel vehicles made before date XXXX and emission code XXXX and therefore putting a big price gap between the old and new simply meant the old polluters stayed on the road, held their value better than what would have been the case if the govt had not interfered and owners were spending money on them, suddenly major work to drivetrain and suspension etc was being done to the old Surfs, Terranos and Bighorns to keep them going and roadworthy instead of being scrapped or relegated to unregistered farm hacks, I know, I was fixing the damn things. It was a good money spinner for the trade but did bugger all to achieve any other 'green' objectives. At least those that had pump and injector work (usually by necessity) would have ran better and polluted less but that's about it.
elect70,
Oct 27, 3:03am
Qualify as classic & collectable dont have to comply except for headlights .
kazbanz,
Oct 27, 3:46am
Again--SHHHHHH.
tgray,
Oct 27, 4:02am
Old USA cars don't have to be classic or collectible - No restrictions on them. I think you are confusing it with the requirements of the special interest Catagory A permits for cars under 20 years old. Funnily enough, of the 10 late model USA cars I imported and sold, NONE had to have the headlights adjusted. Hi Kaz!
westwyn,
Oct 27, 8:16am
Franc, the regulators now are well aware of the "unintended consequences" of the Diesel emission-related restrictions from that era, and are at pains to make sure such consequences through knee-jerk regulation does NOT happen again. It was a lesson leant, as they say.
Subsequent legislation (at least since the Government changed) has been based around proper industry consultation and modelling- the introduction of ESC a good case in point.
Heavy vehicle chassis ratings are then next issue being worked through constructively.
westwyn,
Oct 27, 8:19am
In the scheme of things, the number of post-20 year old cars, and SIV permits for under 20-years, are negligible compared to the volumes of the "regular" fleet, so the eyes of the regulators are not fixed upon the so-called import paradox. Unless we suddenly see 500-1000 a MONTH coming in, which seems unlikely.
kazbanz,
Oct 27, 7:19pm
Some bright eyed fulla looking to make a name for himself will see this^^^^ as a loophole in the law.
kazbanz,
Oct 27, 7:31pm
What I find utterly frustrating is that there is a very simple and virtually cost fee way to avoid constant "fits and starts' changes wwith imported used cars. It would be simplicity itself to administer and run. Simply have a rolling 10 year rule for used import vehicles. A specific car must be 10 years old or less when it crosses the NZ borders. When you look back at all the "big changes" that have happened in the industry over the past few years you will see every one of them would have been taken care of with no disruption to the supply chain by that simple rule.
tgray,
Oct 27, 9:09pm
Yes, but constantly shifting the goal posts year by year creates it's own problems. A car that was legal to import in Dec, is suddenly is not permitted in Jan? With shipping and customs hold ups, there would have to be some surety before buying a car in Japan, that it would be road legal in NZ and not caught up in red tape due to year end cut offs. Also, car models don't change every year, so is it fair a 2005 car is OK and an identical model of 2004 is not? Some car brands have better safety features and less emissions than newer cheaper brands, so is a 10 year rule the fairest way to go? Should we be banning 2004 Toyota's, but welcoming in 2005 cars from China?
westwyn,
Oct 28, 8:03am
The old "7 year ban" or "10 year ban" is an old chestnut that is trotted out regularly by the MIA (the new car people) on a regular basis, but in reality, it is both unliked and impractical (if not unworkable).
Unliked- the trade is roughly 50/50 divided on whether or not it would be a good idea, and that's not assuming all those are importers, either.
Impractical- both as tgray mentioned, it's a profoundly unfair ruler to use, when model differences do not follow a "year" in production- so a September 2005 Corolla (for example) would not be able to be complied, but an October 2005 one would- with absolutely NO difference whatsoever between the two cars, apart from the unfortunate accident of registration date. It also gets confusing when buying in Japan as not all vehicles entered into auction (for example) have the first month of registration listed in the pre-sale information, while others, through late registration as a "new" car, might indeed be a lot older than others registered 'as they were produced" so to speak.
Quite a few Euros were registered anything up to a year after import (if the distributor imported in larger batches).
Unworkable- the New Zealand importation system is based around standards, not around an arbitrary year. This is, in part, to ensure consistency- after all, what if you have a 2006 car that is not emission compliant, or a class MC next year that does not have ESC? What takes precedence? If it has ESC, but it's a UA-code, and newer than 2005, does it comply? All too easy to end up with a double fence to jump- a 7-year rule 9for example) PLUS whatever new standard a regulator decides upon.
Plus- in the unworkable bracket- under our trading terms (including free trade) it has been considered doubtful if a simple age ban would be a legally enforceable international trading barrier, since we are an export market for Japan. Standards, yes- they are justifiable and acceptable.
kazbanz,
Oct 28, 8:43pm
The 'worry" about cars crossing the border on time would be only for dealers trying to make the last boat/boats. With every move forwards you see the same thing. Guys pushing their luck. Reality is that everybody knows the last ship you can be certain cars will arrive on time on. After that if someone feels like gambling then that is their decision. I hear what you are saying re "perfectly good " cars but current legislation does EXACTLY the same thing except that rather than being a measured fixed progression forwards its in leaps and bounds. Two vehicles that leap to mind would be the Toyota Sienta and Nissan Sylphy. The Sienta has NOT changed one iota mechanically from 2003 to 2004 (for that matter to 2009/10) nope the 2003 model was illegal. Nissan Sylphy 1800 -NO change mechanically from 2000-2005 yet due to legislation the 2000-2003 in one swoop became illegal. So what you are doing by having a rolling year change is to offer stability to everybody. There is no doubt from year to year what cars will and wont be allowed in price spikes in japan would smooth out a fair bit MOST importantly by having this in place it reduces the NEED of the gubbiment to interfere in the industry, The MARKET would dictate things like ESC etc. Whats to stop a 2006 car from China being imported if I had my way? The market would, Where would the incentive be to buy a 10 year old cherry? If they are as bad as said then they would be falling apart. keeping in mind they would still have to pass all current compliance testing.
westwyn,
Oct 29, 6:50am
Actually Kaz, that's not quite right- for example, the Nissan Bluebird Sylphy 1.8Vi in 2004 had slight changes to the emission control equipment to render it able to pass the new "triple digit" JDOT emission standard- although the vehicles are mechanically (in a simplistic sense) identical, their emission controls, and therefore their manufactured standard, are not. The variance in years that certain models became compliant was simply due to when updated models were released- with a new TDN and Variant number, even if the chassis code itself was the same (like the Sylphy).
Some manufacturers chose to run out the old models well into the second half of the decade- like the Toyota Altezza for example, which was built right in to 2007 or so but never modified to be Japan '03 compliant, or the Mazda Bongo / Nissan Vanette which remained in Japan '00 configuration right in to 2008.
Price spikes (and buying frenzy) happens no matter what the standard- there is always a run-up of activity in buying a popular model when the "last rites" for compliance loom.
And no, there is no guarantee whatsoever that there would be no Government intervention ON TOP OF any arbitrary "year" ban. Today, in this Government environment, maybe. But I've sat at the table earlier in the last decade when all the reason in the world did nothing to change the mind of a Minister with a "good idea" despite evidence to the contrary. I'd rather- on behalf of the industry- limit our exposure to doubling-down in the future.
_frodo_,
Dec 19, 8:20am
Having bought in two 20+ year old USA vehicles; the lights were a nightmare to get through north shore complaince. I wondered how the modern stuff with their integrated lights got through. Are the likes of camaros, Vettel, Chargers etc adjustable to point left, of is the whole compliance industry turning a blind eye?
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.