neither did the dealer that sold me my 6 month old used F350 11,400 GVW. EVEN WHEN I ASKED THEM why such a new truck was sitting here for sale already, the sales guy said he had no idea why it was traded in, I figured it was a repo, or the guy dumped it when deisel hit almost 5.00 a gallon last year. I just figured his loss my gain.

In the end it was ok because I got passenger plates and no commercial inspection.

I guess I ain't going to be buying a dually any time soon though...

 

When did you last reg your truck? If it was before July you got in under the old rules so I'm told. Heres the part that sucks...the RMV will not notify you of a rules change. The next time you go to re-new the reg they'll wack you with it and a fine for not going by the new rules. Beprepared for getting pulled over too. State cops know the new rules and are no longer cops but revinue collectors and are out on the hi-way nailing the poor guy who don't know the new rules.

I can't wait to find property over the boarder and get out of this dam state.

 

I registered with passenger plates Sept of '08. And as far as I know the rule change was July of '08. Which was why when I tried to get my original sticker there was a problem. I'll call my insurance agent and have her check it out. But I'm pretty sure that passeger plates single rear wheel, and regular truck body, excludes you from the new requirement.... I'll post what I find out

 

After reading all these responses I am convinced there are several real and significant problems: 1) The registry staff, inspection people, and other officials are not all on the same page, which is further complicated by the vague and unspecific terminology in the CMR rules. 2) The registry has invoked a revenue enhancement strategy that is not clearly defined or communicated, and one that imposes an excessive burden on law abiding citizens simply using their legally purchased and registered trucks for personal use. 3) A separate set of rules related to safety inspection have been imposed and overlayed with the registry stuff making the puzzle even harder to decompose.

In the end, what I think we really want is to get back the passenger plates we were previously allowed to have while in no way trying to cause any public harm or safety issues.

Clearly there are a significant number of us. We certainly have the legal right to file complaints and make rational arguments to the people that make these rules. If enough of us make noise and make fair arguments, I really believe we can get this modified back to it's apparent original intent, which was to stop commercial use people from hiding behind passenger plates.

If you want to work on this with me, please send me an email at "ChangeTheRules@AtwoodRacing.com" I have a copy of the registry letter I wrote after researching the issue last month, which I will be happy to provide. I can provide contact information and this letter which you can use to also file a similar complaint. We can also send combined letters to the governor and our appropriate State Senators asking for further consideration. I really believe there is enough wiggle room in the CMR rules that we could get them to move somewhat on this and still save face. It's worth a try if enough of us spend a little bit of time on it.

Again, just to be clear, I believe this complaint should be focussed directly at the issue of non-commercial vs. commercial registration. I think trying to attack the inspection rules too hard would backfire on us and be perceived as a more complex issue. If we can save ourselves $200-$400 in registration fees I'm more than willing to roll over on an inspection fee.

Thanks for your help.

Steve

 

We may have an opportunity to get some relief on this issue. I have found an ally, a MA State Senator, who is going to draft a letter to the Registrar requesting a fair review of the policy on commercial registrations. The other legislators will be invited to co-sign. Please if you live in MA, contact your representatives and ask them to co-sign the letter as well. It's just an easy email to your specific State Rep and State Senator. There is a very high probability that if enough of us raise this issue we can get some traction. Please do this as soon as you can. As you have all expressed due frustration, this is how that voice can be made into action.

Thanks
Steve

 

Sounds like your doing some good work there Steve.. Keep it up..

Who is writing the letter??

Would be nice to contact our Reps with someones name instead of some senator is writing it..

 

Please post the name of the senator so we can suport this!

44

 

He will when he gets the OK from the Senator to do so..

 

Everyone,

We have great news. MA State Senator Richard T. Moore, (Worcester & Norfolk District) has graciously agreed to circulate the following letter to the other members of the Massachusetts Senate and House for co-signers. It is very urgent that you contact your own local Senator and Representative and urge them to contact Sen Moore's office to co-sign this letter. You must do this by Feb 2nd to make it work! Please do not contact Senator Moore directly unless you live in his district. He is doing everything he can already to help us. If you are in his district, do let him know you appreciate his support as I do. This is by far our best chance to influence the rules change we believe is fair and equitable to pickup owners in MA. We have been pressuring the registry without any response so far. I believe this letter, when it is co-signed by other MA lawmakers will pursuade them to address our concerns.

February 3, 2010

I hope everyone can take the time to do this and we cna have a large list of names at the bottom of this letter.

Thank you for your support,
Steve

 

Also, please if you are members of other similar forums please cross-post this information so we can get as much publicity as we can. I feel a victory coming!

Thanks
Steve

 

Great work Steve..

Don't forget we have a truck advocate in the Senate now with the election of Scott Brown..

 

I would say this had something to do with it but Sen Moore agreed to do this back in early Jan. It just took some time to get it started.

Please round up everyone you know Don. I fear we'll only get one run at this. If the letter does not get endorsed or the Governor does not see enough enthusiasm behind this attempt then the Registrar may not be inclined to respond. She has not answered my letter or returned my calls. She may be very busy or be innundated with complaints. Or, she may not feel complelled to respond. I don't know because I have never met her. It will cost the state money in renewal fees if we get our wish. That's the hard part. I think they are in the mood to listen after the Scott Brown vote.

Steve

 

Boy does THIS sentence need correcting

" It makes the registration, inspection and toll fees hundreds significantly higher with any apparent reason other than to prevent abuse from some businesses seeking to avoid commercial registration fees."

delete "hundreds", change 'with any' to 'without any'

Sam

 

Thanks, we'll get those typos fixed. I got the final text this morning.

 

One other question, sure to come up, is how to verify this
"be registered for recreational use provided that it is legally being utilized for non-commercial purposes"

how does the registrar do that? I suspect the current law is because they were unable to verify in some way.

Sam