Wednesday, April 30, 2008
If you are looking to import a 2004 to 2008 Chrysler Crossfire from the US, you will have to factor in the price of bumper modifications. Until bumper standards between the US and Canada are harmonized, here is what you can expect:
The RIV listing for Chrysler shows two asterisks for these models indicating "that the vehicle in question will require modifications to the existing bumper(s) before it can be registered and licensed. Some vehicles can be readily modified by installing the appropriate Canadian parts. However, some vehicles cannot be readily modified and may require comprehensive and expensive modifications."
Bumper modifications: $1,000
*for the 2005 model
Light Switch Module #5098639AA
Right Front Energy Absorber #5102547AA
Left Front Energy Absorber #5102545AA
Centre Rear Energy Absorber # 5102556AA
Right Rear Energy Absorber #5102554AA
Left Rear Energy Absorber #5102553AA
*for the 2005 model
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
If you are purchasing a brand new vehicle in the US, particularly one that the dealerships are not allowed to sell you because of manufacturer restrictions - think Audi, Acura, Honda, Toyota, Lexus, BMW, Mercedes Benz, Volvo etc - you can use this tip to protect yourself while getting the car you want.
1. Select the new car and engage a US resident to complete the purchase for you using their US address;
2. Have the purchaser register the vehicle with the DMV and request a Title certificate, ensuring that they put your name as the lienholder;
3. As the lienholder, you will receive the Original Title for the vehicle. This means that you are the owner of the vehicle and the vehicle cannot be sold or transferred without your knowledge;
4. Ask the purchaser to provide you with a Bill of Sale showing the sale of the vehicle from them to you. At the same time, have them supply you with the Bill of Sale that they received from the dealership as this may be required for additional proof of purchase price by the CBSA;
5. Use the Original Title with your name, the Bill of Sale from the "purchaser", and the Vehicle Export Worksheet to submit your documents to the US CBP office where you plan to export your vehicle.
6. Use the Original Title, both Bills of Sale (dealership to purchaser, and purchaser to you) at the CBSA to have the duty, GST, A/C Levy calculated.
Why is this tip useful?
1. It allows you to rest easy at night knowing you hold the original Title to the new vehicle;
2. It allows you to circumvent the manufacturers' selling restrictions imposed on their dealerships;
3. It can be used in any State and keeps you protected when someone else is in charge of buying your car;
How can you increase the value of this tip?
1. Choose to purchase your new vehicle in a State that doesn't have a sales tax, like Oregon;
2. Use your personal exemption of up to $750 to lower the purchase price of the vehicle and therfore your GST and duty payable.
Saturday, April 26, 2008
We have just been informed that BMW Canada is refusing to issue letters of admissibility for some models that, prior to the policy change of November 26th, 2007, were listed as admissible.
A recent purchaser of a BMW 2006 Z4 3.0si was denied a Letter of Admissibility even after being told by the dealership that the vehicle would be admitted to Canada.
As of November 23, 2007, just 3 days before BMW changed its importing policies, they had already informed Transport Canada and RIV that the 2006 Z4 was admissible to Canada.
Here is a link to the historical RIV lists very kindly provided by CarsWithoutBorders.com
Now if this doesn't show all importers that BMW refuses - ignores, rather - to honour its own information to Transport Canada and cannot be trusted to do the right thing for its customers, I don't know what does.
Do not purchase a BMW vehicle without a "subject to receipt of a Letter of Admissibility" clause in your purchase agreement.
And if we don't speak out against these above the law decisions that the company keeps making, we are knowingly putting ourselves in harms way. If they do this with a vehicle that was already deemed admissible once, you can be sure they will keep doing it.
Why is Transport Canada sleeping at the wheel? (pun fully intended!)
Friday, April 18, 2008
Submitted by : Mr. Jeff Newton - BMW Importer
Below is the response received from the Office of Honourable Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities to Mr. Newton's inquiry:
Dear Mr. Newton:
Your Member of Parliament, Mr. James Moore, has forwarded to the Honourable Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, a copy of your e-mail of February 15, 2008, regarding the importation of vehicles from the United States. Minister Cannon has asked me to reply on his behalf.
By way of background, I should first mention that the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (MVSA), in effect since 1971, regulates the manufacture and importation of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment to reduce the risk of death and injury, and damage to property and the environment.
The MVSA requires that all vehicles imported into Canada comply with the Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations and associated Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (CMVSSs). However, subsection 7(2) of the MVSA provides an exception whereby vehicles purchased in the United States that are not in full compliance with the CMVSSs, may be imported into Canada, provided the vehicles were originally manufactured to comply with all applicable U.S. Federal Safety Standards, and provided they can be modified to comply with the CMVSSs. In addition, once modified, the vehicles must be inspected by a designated authority of Transport Canada. In this regard, in 1995, Transport Canada contracted with a private company to establish the Registrar of Imported Vehicles (RIV) program to develop and operate a system of inspection and certification of vehicles imported from the United States.
As a convenience to both importers and manufacturers, the RIV posts a List of Vehicles Admissible from the United States on its website at www.riv.ca . The list includes many 2008 model-year vehicles that are admissible for importation. It is the manufacturers' responsibility to certify that vehicles comply with Canadian safety standards or to certify that the vehicles can be modified to meet these standards. The manufacturers are also responsible for providing and updating the admissibility information. I should emphasize that the list is not mandated by law; rather, it is an administrative tool meant to assist in the processing of imported vehicles. Although manufacturers are not obligated to submit admissibility information, most do so voluntarily, since otherwise, they would have to deal with importers on an individual basis.
Because the information provided by manufacturers varies periodically, prospective Canadian importers must exercise caution and inform themselves thoroughly on all aspects of purchasing a vehicle in the United States, including warranty coverage, before purchasing a U.S. vehicle. Any inquiries about the accuracy of the information the List contains must therefore be addressed to the manufacturers directly.
For a variety of reasons, some manufacturers are reluctant to provide vehicle admissibility information to importers, the RIV and Transport Canada. In addition, some manufacturers are charging a fee to importers who ask for a letter specifying that there are no outstanding recalls on the vehicle they wish to import. Transport Canada has no authority to dictate to those manufacturers when and how this information ought to be supplied, or to request that they provide the recall information free-of-charge, since the manufacturers are normally located in the United States, and the vehicles in question are initially produced for the U.S. market.
I should note that neither Transport Canada nor the RIV has access to the recall information of manufacturers that produce vehicles for the U.S. market. The information in the department's database relates only to vehicles produced for the Canadian market and originally sold in Canada. In many instances, the Canadian company and the U.S. company are two separate entities and do not share recall information. Therefore, it is important to firmly establish, in a reliable manner, that there are no outstanding recalls on vehicles purchased at the retail level in the United States and imported into Canada. The verification is specific to each particular vehicle and is performed by manufacturers using the Vehicle Identification Number.
There have been comments that some companies have refused to honour their U.S. warranties in Canada, have instructed their U.S.-based dealers not to sell to Canadian customers, or have delayed-or not responded at all-in providing a determination regarding the admissibility of their U.S. vehicles after September 2007. There have also been comments on price differences and what are alleged to be captive markets. I must emphasize that the MVSA does not mandate or regulate warranties, nor does it deal with the pricing of vehicles by manufacturers and importers. All of these issues pertain to company-specific policies, and these companies must be contacted directly to obtain additional details and clarifications.
In some cases, manufacturers are insisting that the modifications necessary to activate or install daytime running lights be performed by their authorized dealers and, in some cases, are also insisting that the instrument cluster be changed. The MVSA only requires that the importer ensure that the vehicle is made compliant with the applicable safety standards and is not specific as to who must do the work. However, the basic principle of compliance under the MVSA is a regime of self-certification whereby the manufacturer ultimately determines whether its vehicles comply with the CMVSSs and how the vehicles may be modified should they not comply.
A manufacturer can determine that various components must be replaced, and that such work can only be done by a qualified authorized dealer in order to ensure compliance, and Transport Canada is not in a position to challenge such a policy. The cost associated with such modifications is also beyond the control of Transport Canada. Concerns regarding such costs would be best addressed to Industry Canada's Office of Consumers Affairs or to the appropriate provincial/territorial Ministry of Consumer Affairs.
I trust that the foregoing has clarified the Minister's position with respect to this matter. Thank you for writing.
Special Assistant - Ontario and Western Canada
c.c. Office of Mr. James Moore, M.P.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Vol. 142, No. 12 — March 22, 2008
Regulations Amending the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations (Bumpers)
Issue and objectives
The proposed amendment to section 215 of Schedule IV of the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations (see footnote 1) would modify the Canadian safety standard for bumpers via incorporation by reference of similar safety standards from the United States and Europe. This would have the effect of aligning the testing speeds with those of Europe and the United States and provide manufacturers the option of meeting the European safety requirements or the safety and no damage provisions of the United States. This proposed amendment would result in one consistent set of globally regulated test speed requirements for the design of bumpers, which would simplify the task of designing bumpers for vehicles destined for North American and European markets. This proposal would also facilitate the introduction in Canada of the impending Global Technical Regulation for pedestrian safety, being developed under the auspices of the United Nations Economic Commission of Europe (UN/ECE).
Description and rationale
Canada and the United States introduced safety standards for bumpers in the early 1970s. When the Canadian and the U.S. regulations were originally introduced, they were harmonized with a test speed of 5 mph (8 km/h) for front and rear impacts and 3 mph (4.8 km/h) for corner impact tests. However, in 1979, the United States added more stringent requirements that included cosmetic damage criteria, while maintaining the (harmonized) test speed and the original safety components damage protection requirements. In 1982, the United States reduced the speed requirements to 2.5 mph (4 km/h) for front and rear impacts and 1.5 mph (2.4 km/h) for corner impacts, and maintained their cosmetic and safety damage requirements.
In 1983, when the Canadian government proposed an amendment to harmonize the test speeds with those of the U.S. requirements (i.e. 4 and 2.4 km/h), many Canadian stakeholders, such as the public, provincial and territorial governments, media and the insurance industry, were against the proposed test speed reduction. As a result, the harmonization of test speed requirements was not pursued; thus for the past 26 years Canada has had a unique higher speed bumper test requirement for passenger cars.
This higher speed has resulted in some vehicle models not being available to Canadian consumers. In addition, in this period there have been some vehicles sold at the retail level in the United States that have been inadmissible for importation into Canada as they have not met the Canadian bumper requirements.
Manufacturers are presently more concerned with the ability to design vehicles capable of concomitantly meeting the unique higher Canadian test speeds and future pedestrian safety requirements that are being developed internationally, rather than the limitation of vehicle models available on the Canadian market. The Global Technical Regulation is aimed at reducing pedestrian fatalities by requiring that the front upper portion of vehicles be designed to reduce head contact forces when a pedestrian strikes the vehicle. This is accomplished by providing space between the vehicle exterior parts, such as the hood and upper fenders, and the solid structure of the vehicle, such as the motor or frame. In addition to reducing head injuries, the Global Technical Regulation on pedestrian safety will require that the bumpers of vehicles be designed to reduce lower leg injuries.
Manufacturers have strongly noted that a conflict exists in meeting the requirements of the three existing world regulations, ECE regulation number 42, Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 215, and Part 581, Title 49 of the United States Code of Federal Regulations. As the European and Canadian requirements are aimed at improving safety, the intention at the time of introduction of the requirements was to protect the safety equipment of the vehicle, such as the lights, from damage in a low speed collision. The intention of the current U.S. bumper standard is to reduce damage to the bumper system and thus provide American consumers with a lower bumper damage replacement and repair cost, while also maintaining the integrity of the safety systems. Manufacturers have noted that from a design standpoint, there is a conflict between meeting the no damage requirement of the United States, the higher test speed in Canada with no damage to the safety systems and the need for bumpers to be designed to meet impending pedestrian safety requirements. Manufacturers have indicated that it will not be possible to meet all three requirements at once. Further, they have suggested that they would be able to meet the U.S. lower speed and no damage requirements and the pedestrian safety requirements with one design.
This proposal would have a positive impact on international trade as the Canadian requirement for bumper testing would be amended to be the same as the requirements in Europe and in the United States. This amendment would assist Canada with its obligation under the Global Agreement made under the auspices of the UN/ECE. Canada’s commitment to review the Canadian bumper test speed requirements was noted in the summary document of the Global Technical Regulation working group on pedestrian safety that is available at the following site: www.unece.org/trans/doc/2006/wp29grsp/ps-186e.doc.
It is important to note that the design of the bumper systems and the percentage of passenger cars sold in Canada have changed significantly since the introduction of the bumper requirement in the early 1970s. In 1970, almost 83% of the vehicles sold were classified as passenger cars. Today, that percentage has dropped to less than 52% because of the consumer demand for trucks and multi-purpose passenger vehicles, which are not subject to the bumper requirements. In the intervening years, vehicle designs have also significantly changed. Vehicle designs in the 1970s frequently included metal bumpers with simple replacement of sealed beam headlamps. In comparison current designs usually include hidden bumper protection systems with moulded plastic covers and integral unique headlamps designs.
In the 1970s, the Government estimated that there would be a very small reduction in fatalities and injuries as a result of the benefit that people would no longer continue to drive a vehicle with damaged non-functioning lights following a small collision. The intention was for this requirement to result in vehicle designs where lighting and similar safety systems would be protected in a low-speed collision so that they would remain functional should the vehicle owner continue to drive a damaged vehicle. Today, several factors may alter this conclusion, such as the significant increase in sales of trucks and multi-purpose passenger vehicles (almost 500% increase), the significant design changes in bumpers and lighting systems in the past 35 years and the requirement of most police forces to have vehicles towed away from even minor collisions. It is now impossible to determine if the unique Canadian test speed requirement of 8 km/h provides any safety benefit. As there are over 370 pedestrian fatalities per year (a significant portion of the 2 900 fatalities per year on Canadian roads), it is proposed that it is time to refocus road safety efforts away from a higher speed test requirement that protects the vehicle safety systems, to facilitating future pedestrian safety designs. Pedestrian fatalities have remained stagnant since 2001, despite Canada’s national Road Safety Vision 2010 target of a 30% reduction for vulnerable road users. Further information is available in the Road Safety Vision 2010 Mid-Term Review report, viewable at the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators Web site www.ccmta.ca and in the Canadian Motor Vehicle Traffic Collision Statistics, viewable at www.tc.gc.ca/roadsafety.
It is understood that making the front of a vehicle softer to protect pedestrians could result in some additional repair costs, especially considering that most low-speed collisions involve rear-ending other vehicles, such as in bumper-to-bumper traffic. This would have an impact on the insurance industry and, in turn, the consumer. In 2007, the U.S.-based Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) released a new (non-regulatory) bumper test protocol to better mimic the performance of a car bumper and to assess under- and override during vehicle-to-vehicle low-speed crashes for all classes of light duty vehicles, with the focus being on damageability and cost of repairs. The impact speed for front and rear full-width impacts is 9.6 km/h and the corner impacts are tested at 4.8 km/h.
This proposed amendment would better serve a greater proportion of the public, as it would facilitate the enhancement in safety for pedestrians without reducing the safety of passenger cars. As the IIHS widely publicizes the results of their test program, Canadian consumers will be able to take advantage of this consumer information as part of their decision-making when purchasing a new vehicle.
Read the full amendment at Canada Gazette
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
The sixth edition of the UCanImport Guide has been entirely reorganized and features a number of new enhancements, including:
NEW VEHICLE COST WORKSHEET AND CHECKLIST TOOLS
At the beginning of Version 6 is the newly revised Vehicle Cost Worksheet and Checklist tools. The Process and Documentation Checklists now feature references to specific pages within the guide, enabling you to peruse the document in the typical linear "start to finish" fashion or skip to only those sections where you require additional clarification. For easier use, you will now also be able to download the Vehicle Cost Worksheet in Microsoft(r) Excel format and the sample letters and cover letters in Microsoft(r) Word format.
project had I not stumbled across your guide. I'll be recommending
this to many others." ~ Les B, Calgary, AB, April 15, 2008
MORE COMPREHENSIVE INFORMATION
The revised guide also feature new discussions such as "the implications of your vehicle choice", "understanding your documentation requirements", and more, that have been written and rewritten so that regardless of the vehicle you choose to import, you will be equipped with the best overall picture of what to expect along the way.
In Version 6, there are also fewer database-style tables, and instead more detailed discussion of the various steps involved. Why? The information in these lists changes too frequently. It makes more sense to include the lists, such as manufacturers' warranty policies, manufacturers' contact databases, trip permit information, border crossing instructions, glossary, etc. in the Resource Library on the UCanImport web site rather than in the guide itself. We can now update the list content more regularly (daily if need be) for our UCanImport Subscribers without any disruption to their importation experience. The guide is now purely focused on teaching you the importation process itself.
"Really Good Job! Version 6 is a great update and very
comprehensive. I hope you do well with this version."
~ Vince M., Ontario, April 2, 2008
NEW ONLINE INTERACTIVITY
All web URL references in Version 6 that link to resources in the UCanImport web site or on other third party web sites are now "active". Readers can click on the links to be directed to the corresponding information online (make sure you are connected to the Internet when you review the new guide).
"Just wanted to say thanks for the comprehensive information
on vehicle importing from the US to Canada. I really appreciated the
detailed and specific information you provide. Good work!"
~ Ian A., Alberta, April 1, 2008
OTHER CHANGES AT UCANIMPORT
With the release of Version 6, UCanImport has also modified the format of its services. Now, for a low ONE-TIME fee of $19.99, you can become a lifetime UCanImport Subscriber. What does this mean? The benefits are threefold:
1. In addition to your initial copy, you will now get all future editions of the guide delivered to your inbox at no additional charge (typically every 3 to 4 months).
2. You will also receive a membership to the UCANIMPORT SUBSCRIBER, an exclusive monthly eNewsletter packed with the latest importing regulatory changes, auto manufacturer requirement changes, money-saving tips, as well as case studies and insights from fellow importers. The eNewsletter ensures you are up-to-date between guide releases. Many of you have already received the UCANIMPORT INSIDER on a trial basis and the feedback so far has been outstanding.
3. You join a national community of vehicle importers. UCanImport is committed to providing the most comprehensive and up-to-date importing information on the Internet. We are acting as a conduit for sharing the latest importing information, experiences, tips.
"Thank for the fantastic job you are doing of getting all the new information
to people like myself who have been a UCanImport Subscriber since early
2007 but who have not yet bought in the States. With your updates, we
always know what has changed, and what we can expect when we begin
our importation. Great service!"
~ Fijay M., British Columbia, April 2, 2008
BECOME A UCANIMPORT SUBSCRIBER TODAY!
UCanImport is the only service that teaches you the ENTIRE importing process from start to finish - from purchasing your vehicle and the implications of your vehicle choice right through to inspections and final vehicle certification! With our educational resources, you will learn each step and their order of execution. You will also have the confidence to perform the importation when you are ready.
If you plan to import a BMW motorcycle from the US and can convince the dealership in the US to print off the DCS showing that no recalls are outstanding on the motorcycle, RIV will accept it in place of the $500 Letter of Compliance that is required for imported BMW motor vehicles.
A recent importer of a brand new BMW motorcycle has informed UCanImport that RIV initially refused the DCS printout, stating that a Letter of Compliance was required. Within a few days, however, they e-mailed the importer asking for the DCS and issued Form 2 within 3 hours.
This could be a one-time incident or may apply across the board to motorcycles only, so proceed with your importation knowing that you may be spared the $500 Letter of Compliance fee.
Submitted by: MB importer in Alberta
Comments and other experiences welcome
”We had our conversions done mid-March to the tune of $4685.00. This covered the $500.00 inspection fee, replacing the instrument panel (which really isn't necessary as it has a built in metric conversion in the computer), and the bumper pads. The bumpers were about $2800 to convert.
Now we are still awaiting the arrival of the phantom MB Inspector to show up and rubber stamp their "exhaustive" repair work. Phoned the other day and he is still not expected into our city until April 23rd!!
I was told by the dealer that Mercedes-Benz Canada is down to one inspector for the country. So who knows when the inspector will return to our city to inspect the work completed by an authorized Mercedes-Benz dealership? How ludicrous that Mercedes Benz-Canada has only one person in the entire country capable of this onerous task, and that Mercedes Benz-Canada does not place enough confidence in their dealers to ensure the work is done safely."
If you import a Mercedes-Benz vehicle from the US, you will have to complete the above documented process to receive a Letter of Compliance. The Letter of Compliance is required by RIV to release your Form 2 (Federal Inspection Form). However, the Letter of Compliance can only be authorized after a Mercedes-Benz inspector has confirmed that the modifications were correctly completed.
All prospective importers should at the very least get a written quote from their local Mercedes-Benz dealership for the modification work required to their vehicle. This can be done by submitting a VIN to the dealership and requesting a written quote. Understanding that you may have delays of up to 2 months, possibly more, before you can operate your vehicle should also be a consideration.
If anyone from Mercedes-Benz is reading our blog, tell us why you don't trust your dealerships to complete the modifications and why you insist on having only one inspector for the country. Surely, you can't be trying to prevent imports into Canada?
Saturday, April 12, 2008
If you wish to import a Lexus vehicle from the US into Canada, you can now broaden your search to include the 2009 RX 350. The 2009 RX 350 was just added to the RIV admissibility list.
Please not that Lexus claims that it has already provided the 2009 vehicle admissibility listing to RIV and that RIV has just not updated its website. We can't confirm that RIV actually has the list, but knowing that the 2009 RX 350 has been added to the admissible listing means that some information has been transferred to RIV.
Please do not attempt to import any other 2009 Lexus vehicles without confirming admissibility with RIV and/or Lexus.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Comments from a frustrated Volvo Importer:
I just spent 30 minutes with a Lower Mainland Volvo dealer after getting a quote of $1895 for this inspection. Interestingly I asked for the service dept, got passed through to service until I told them that I was looking for a Safety Inspection for a US import. I was then transferred to a another person that I later found out was the General Sales Manager.
At any rate - he tried rather unsuccessfully to defend the rate but couldn't back it up with anything other than some general statements like they needed special tools and special training to do the inspection. I asked him to provide a list of tools or training that was required specifically to do the inspection (that they wouldn't otherwise already have) and he just danced around it and could not provide anything to me. He also tried to tell me that a US v70 was totally different car than a Canadian v70. I told him that was udder cow poop, that I was a mechanical engineer that had studied car manufacturing and sure there would be some differences but that they were not totally different cars.
What's interesting is that after the 30 minutes were up and I started joking around with him I told him that I thought this was gouge and that off the record the $1895 was nothing more than an artificial barrier to importing vehicles - and he agreed with me and said he had wished they would just let the market take care of the pricing.
Anyway it appears to still be $1900 and up in BC for the "safety inspection"
(nudge-nudge-wink-wink) in order to get the Compliance Letter from Volvo Canada. Don Docksteader still refuses to do them and they told me to save my time calling around the other dealers in the Lower Mainland because apparently they are all owned by Jimmy Pattison so the prices weren't likely to be any different. This is so brutal!
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Well, I must say reading the article in the Vancouver Sun this morning totally MADE MY DAY!!!! I have downloaded all the necessary forms from Dinning Hunter Lambert & Jackson, and will be more than happy to join you in pursing a Class Action lawsuit!!!
On March 11th,2008 I purchased a 2007 BMW 328xi from Bellevue BMW . I had originally ordered a car from Brian Jessel, but couldn't believe the price difference in the US, so decided to go that route. I went online to the RIV website to see what was involved. The car I got would have been $76,000 Cdn .I paid $40,045 !!!for a 2007 with 12,000 kms...so it was totally worth it.
I didn't have any trouble getting the car across the border..I regretfully paid for an Admissibility Letter for $392 that RIV told me I had to have in order to get the car into Canada, but when I mentioned it to Customs, they said I didn't need it!!! sooooo, it has been quite a nightmare, all thanks to BMW Canada!
My car is equipped with the IDrive feature, so the US Dealer was happy to switch it over to KMS, Daytime Running Lights, (which all worked perfectly) The instrument cluster was in both Kms and Miles so I thought that was fine..as well as I had a Immobilizer installed, (which I wanted anyways) .They assured me the bumpers were good tether straps in place etc etc..French Labels?? I went to the Inspection place to ask about that, and they just laughed, and said not to worry about it....so I thought I was good to go! Apparently not! The US Dealer also supplied me with a Recall Letter, which was rejected by RIV.
I have just spent the last 2 days.drivng back and forth to Auto West BMW to have my instrument cluster changed, and the daytime running lights switched (which all worked fine to begin with) and now I am left with a $2,400 bill!!
BMW advised me that it nows takes 10-15 days (NOT 5 days which I was orginally told by RIV) for the documents to be cleared, so I can finally insure the car in Canada!!!
Anything I can do to help you in any way, please feel free to contact me. I will be submitting my paperwork as soon as possible.
UCanImport has heard that BMW Canada has informed their dealerships that these policies are aimed at slowing down imports from the US. If you've had direct experience with a dealership who has told you that this is a BMW strategy they are working with, write to us.
Or if you are from a BMW dealership and can justify these expenses and frustrations, please share.