Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

Prime Time Tonight - SUV/VRT scam

Options
  • 19-04-2007 10:11pm
    #1
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,725 Mod ✭✭✭✭


    Very interesting discussion on Prime Time now about SUV scams whereby people convert SUVs into commercial vehicles and therefore are only subjected to €50 VRT.
    They then go out and revert the vehicle back to a non-commercial condition.

    Incidentally Cyril McHugh from the SIMI is as I type accusing the majority of clocking on imported cars. I presume this has nothing to do with the SIMI members losing out to cheaper imports.

    Michael Kilcoyne of the Consumers Assocation is doing yet another good job of defending the consumer against the motoring industry.

    It was great - a motoring excuse to watch Miriam!


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 17,819 ✭✭✭✭peasant


    kbannon wrote:
    .

    It was great - a motoring excuse to watch Miriam!

    [OT]

    watching Miriam is all well and good ...havin to listen to her marblemouth on the other hand is painful

    [/OT]


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,430 ✭✭✭Sizzler


    The guy from the engineering company didnt seem to mind showing the PT lads around did he ...yet the SIMI lad was saying these guys were an accessory to the fraud !

    Must be some serious cash being made on this :eek:


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,776 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    for the record, converting a vehicle from passenger to commercial is not fraud.

    Even converting a commercial to a passenger isn't fraud, either.

    What is fraud, is not declaring the conversion in the case of the latter...........there is nothing to be gained by not declaring the former...........

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,366 ✭✭✭ninty9er


    Serious cash being made, but of 300 cars 240 were X5s!!!!!! BMW must be disgusted, turning the cars into vans...perish the thought:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

    Anyhow, there's an up to €126,970 fine and or 5 years impisonment at the disposal of a judge to use for this scam, plus I presume the VAT and VRT must also be paid!!!

    So basically of the 300 people caught out so far, t'would probably have been half the price to buy the car here in the first place:D :D:D:D


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,252 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dub13


    SIMI are a joke,when a journalist pointed out one of there members clocking and been a tug they do nothing.And here they are going for joe public.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,776 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    ninty9er wrote:
    Serious cash being made, but of 300 cars 240 were X5s!!!!!! BMW must be disgusted, turning the cars into vans...perish the thought:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

    Anyhow, there's an up to €126,970 fine and or 5 years impisonment at the disposal of a judge to use for this scam, plus I presume the VAT and VRT must also be paid!!!

    So basically of the 300 people caught out so far, t'would probably have been half the price to buy the car here in the first place:D :D:D:D

    I didn't see the programme, but how many people got fined the 126k+ ?? And they 'caught' 300 people, or someone has estimated 300 vehicles have been converted??

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Registered Users Posts: 485 ✭✭macshadow


    In fairness this is a very old scam.There's no flies on them revenue boys.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,366 ✭✭✭ninty9er


    galwaytt wrote:
    I didn't see the programme, but how many people got fined the 126k+ ?? And they 'caught' 300 people, or someone has estimated 300 vehicles have been converted??

    They have 300 cases open is what the lady from Revenue said IIRC. Basically 300 high end vehicles have been converted on entry to the state in the last 12/18 months(??). Now they're checking each and every one to make sure it's still a commercial.

    Not sure of timeframes...was on in the background


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,186 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    Are these jeeps then insured also as commericals?
    If they are and they crash carrying passengers, as a passenger car, the insurance company will not want to know.
    I presume it is similiar to changing your engine specifications and not telling insurance company.
    Also do you recommericalise the vehicle every year so that you can do the DOE?

    I am not allowed discuss …



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,776 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    ninety9er, now that reply is at odds with that you inferred earlier.

    So, 300 people have not been caught, and no one has paid a Eur126k fine.

    Instead, 300 vehicles have been reg'd this way, and they are being checked. That's a huge difference. If, after checking, none of the 300 fall foul, nor that fine being levied, your inference is misleading.........

    Finally, we converted a span new ML270 here for a customer. Removed all the rear accomodation (leather !!), manufactured a new steel floor and bulkhead, and WELDED it in place. It was then inspected by Revenue before we re-trimmed the load area with fabric, so that they could see all the modifications were permanent, metal and irreversible (at least without huge surgery). It's now the poshest van in town :rolleyes: (no, I don't get it, either.........) 80k for a van??

    afaik, inspection of the vehicle by Revenue is a requirement for the change in taxation class. This being the case, who DIDN'T inspect that 300 already mentioned, then..............and why not??

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,413 ✭✭✭HashSlinging


    seen a commercial Touareg being pulled over last night, driver was NOT impressed. :D I guess they are checking them all.

    Why would someone go and pay 80k for a 4x4 van, the commercial range rover disco is only 35k!


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,366 ✭✭✭ninty9er


    galwaytt wrote:
    ninety9er, now that reply is at odds with that you inferred earlier.

    So, 300 people have not been caught, and no one has paid a Eur126k fine.

    Instead, 300 vehicles have been reg'd this way, and they are being checked. That's a huge difference. If, after checking, none of the 300 fall foul, nor that fine being levied, your inference is misleading.........

    Finally, we converted a span new ML270 here for a customer. Removed all the rear accomodation (leather !!), manufactured a new steel floor and bulkhead, and WELDED it in place. It was then inspected by Revenue before we re-trimmed the load area with fabric, so that they could see all the modifications were permanent, metal and irreversible (at least without huge surgery). It's now the poshest van in town :rolleyes: (no, I don't get it, either.........) 80k for a van??

    afaik, inspection of the vehicle by Revenue is a requirement for the change in taxation class. This being the case, who DIDN'T inspect that 300 already mentioned, then..............and why not??


    Apologies...was actually misleading on rereading. The revenue inspect and pass them as commercials before they are reconverted to Passenger. I'd imagine this conversion process could be costly too!!!


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,725 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    ninty9er wrote:
    Apologies...was actually misleading on rereading. The revenue inspect and pass them as commercials before they are reconverted to Passenger. I'd imagine this conversion process could be costly too!!!
    It was mentioned last night that to convert them to commercial costs about €1200 and takes two days. I would think that reconverting them back for passenger use would cost maybe three or four times this - still a lot less than a 50k VRT bill!


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,105 ✭✭✭hi5


    Why would someone go and pay 80k for a 4x4 van, the commercial range rover disco is only 35k!

    You dont actuall pay the 80k,thats the whole idea of having it converted avoiding 30% VRT and 21% VAT if the customer is VAT registered.

    80k-30%=56k (vrt is on the omsp)
    56k-21%vat=€46'280
    You pay €46'280 plus the welding charge plus €50 vrt.
    Tint the glass and nobody on the outside knows the difference.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,413 ✭✭✭HashSlinging


    This country is gone mad. WTF happened to the trusty transit! ... I seen a hummer last week with someone advertising their "painting and decorating" business on the side..FFS!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,430 ✭✭✭testicle


    jmayo wrote:
    Are these jeeps then insured also as commericals?
    If they are and they crash carrying passengers, as a passenger car, the insurance company will not want to know.

    You didn't see the news yesterday did you?


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,252 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dub13


    This country is gone mad. WTF happened to the trusty transit! ... I seen a hummer last week with someone advertising their "painting and decorating" business on the side..FFS!


    LOL...a Celtic tiger cub in full flow,what a sight.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,193 ✭✭✭PaulieC


    I'm not sure why PrimeTime had SIMI and Consumer Assoc. on as guests in relation to this story. The gist of the questioning was that somehow SIMI and garages were at fault for this scam. As was pointed out above, conversions from passenger to commercial and vice versa are not illegal. What is illegal is not informing the revenue of the change being made, the responsibility for which lies with the registered owner, not the garage owner and definitely not SIMI. Much as I dislike Cyril McHugh and what he stands for, SIMI were not in the wrong here.

    And what did it have to do with ripping off the consumer? Surely it was the government being ripped off by the consumer in this instance?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    ye but surely these guys get done for the extra VRT when they bring the "commercials" in for their yearly DOE and there's seats in the back...


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,725 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    testicle wrote:
    You didn't see the news yesterday did you?
    no - why?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,470 ✭✭✭DonJose


    I think he is refering to the judgement in the European courts. A woman who a passenger who in the back of a van was injured in a crash and was refused compensation because the insurance company said she was in an area of the van that was not designated for passengers. The courts ruled in the womans favour so insurance companies have to pay.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,596 ✭✭✭RedorDead


    hi5 wrote:
    You dont actuall pay the 80k,thats the whole idea of having it converted avoiding 30% VRT and 21% VAT if the customer is VAT registered.

    80k-30%=56k (vrt is on the omsp)
    56k-21%vat=€46'280
    You pay €46'280 plus the welding charge plus €50 vrt.
    Tint the glass and nobody on the outside knows the difference.

    Touareg commercials start at €42k.


  • Registered Users Posts: 21,256 ✭✭✭✭Eoin


    steve06 wrote:
    ye but surely these guys get done for the extra VRT when they bring the "commercials" in for their yearly DOE and there's seats in the back...

    That's what I was wondering, they hardly go through the whole process every year?

    I thought that people who carried out the conversion were used as an easy target. It's like BMW being blamed because someone may speed in a car they sell.
    galwayTT wrote:
    Instead, 300 vehicles have been reg'd this way, and they are being checked. That's a huge difference. If, after checking, none of the 300 fall foul, nor that fine being levied, your inference is misleading.........

    I think there may have been 50 or so cases that had been sent to the DPP or something like that? I know that nobody has been prosecuted yet, but it wasn't a case that they hadn't found any evidence of it at all.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,001 ✭✭✭Mickk


    I seen a hummer last week with someone advertising their "painting and decorating" business on the side..FFS!

    Ha its funny actually both myself and that fella you saw left school early and went to work in burger king and we both have hummers now!?
    I got mine commercialised aswell, I have no kids and I don't want back seats anyway so it saved me 20ish k and loads on tax every year.

    A danger that was not noted was having left hand drive with your back windows completly covered over, its not easy. If I take the cover off the window just purely for safety reasons I might be liable to be convicted!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,121 ✭✭✭Keith C


    DonJose wrote:
    I think he is refering to the judgement in the European courts. A woman who a passenger who in the back of a van was injured in a crash and was refused compensation because the insurance company said she was in an area of the van that was not designated for passengers. The courts ruled in the womans favour so insurance companies have to pay.

    She was in an uninsured van and sitting on floor in the back which had no seats or seatbelts fitted and obviously hurt herself when the van was crashed. She took the case to MIBI who threw it out saying her claim was null & void, she then took them to court.
    Ridiculas if your stupid enough to sit in the open space on back of van thats has no seats or seatbelts, then you should suffer the injuries.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,033 ✭✭✭Mc-BigE


    I thought that before a vehicle leaves the SIMI dealers forecourt, it has to be registered with the VRO office and VAT has to be paid? Why are these suv /4x4's allowed to leave for the conversion garage without been registered in the first place? or do the conversion garage people go up to the north and bring down a transporter full of unregistered SUVs/4X4s?


  • Registered Users Posts: 394 ✭✭mickjohnlong


    in regards to the doing it every year for the doe people are taxing them private and dont need the doe so therefor once it has been vrtd and changed back everything is done as private i am sure alot of customers dont know this is happening its certain dealers who would not be apart of the simi


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,269 ✭✭✭DubTony


    Mc-BigE wrote:
    I thought that before a vehicle leaves the SIMI dealers forecourt, it has to be registered with the VRO office and VAT has to be paid? Why are these suv /4x4's allowed to leave for the conversion garage without been registered in the first place? or do the conversion garage people go up to the north and bring down a transporter full of unregistered SUVs/4X4s?

    A vehicle bought from a dealer has the necessary VRT and VAT built into the selling price. If the customer wants his SUV to be "commercialised" this job is generally done before he takes it from the dealer. The lesser VRT and VAT are paid but a business customer can reclaim the VAT quite legitimately. There's nothing illegal about any of this, and there's no point in bringing loads of them from Northern Ireland as the VRT and VAT are still payable when the vehicle is registered. Remember Irish pre-tax car prices are amongst the lowest in the EU.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Mickk wrote:
    Ha its funny actually both myself and that fella you saw left school early and went to work in burger king and we both have hummers now!?
    I got mine commercialised aswell, I have no kids and I don't want back seats anyway so it saved me 20ish k and loads on tax every year.

    A danger that was not noted was having left hand drive with your back windows completly covered over, its not easy. If I take the cover off the window just purely for safety reasons I might be liable to be convicted!
    they're still a rip off, could pick one up for $40,000, get it commercialised and bring it in yourself... save yourself a hell of a lot more than 20k


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 677 ✭✭✭David Michael


    Mc-BigE wrote:
    I thought that before a vehicle leaves the SIMI dealers forecourt, it has to be registered with the VRO office and VAT has to be paid? Why are these suv /4x4's allowed to leave for the conversion garage without been registered in the first place? or do the conversion garage people go up to the north and bring down a transporter full of unregistered SUVs/4X4s?


    As far as I am aware the importer always arranges the conversion pre dealer delivery. When a vehicle is first brought in they are all passenger as the factories don't do commercials as such. Not on a world wide basis. Ireland = tiny market. This help as the import on Commercials from outside the EU is 20% rather than 10% on passenger. Not 100% sure about the 20%! Still awaiting clarification on that. After that a conversion is done and the vehicle is inspected by the revenue so as it meets the rear space etc criteria and a stat code is given. Then when all is well they get converted some where like NVD in batches. Then the importer has them on their systems as Commercial stock.

    As far as I am aware BMW don't do commercials and there is some one importing passenger versions from the North or the UK and doing it. AND still making money! I can't remeber for the life of me who it is. Some brothers somewhere like ashbounre or summit.

    You would be surprised the amount of people who ring the importers asking if they could buy rear seats.


Advertisement