Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi

Just a quick question or two... Can I fax off my import approval and the documents that go with it (ID, supplier invoice)

Also, the de-reg papers arn't available yet for my car. Geoff from PM told me to send off the application without the papers? Whats the past experiences with you guy's applications.. do they just call you up later and ask to fax them the de-reg papers?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/63964-import-approvalde-reg-papers/
Share on other sites

Hi  

Just a quick question or two... Can I fax off my import approval and the documents that go with it (ID, supplier invoice)

Also, the de-reg papers arn't available yet for my car. Geoff from PM told me to send off the application without the papers? Whats the past experiences with you guy's applications.. do they just call you up later and ask to fax them the de-reg papers?

Having just been through this process I can recommend that you get the de-reg papers before sending in your application. I have just spent the last month waiting on my Approval only to find out that DoTars wouldn't accept the FAST printout unless the provider stated that it was a true and certified copy. The supplier wouldn't sign it so I ended up with the de-reg papers that I was told I didn't need.

In short, get the papers. They should be available as soon as you purchase the vehicle.

I think what Geoff is suggesting is that you should lodge your application immediately, even if its somewhat incomplete. Once its lodged they will find it that much more difficult to deny you an import approval due to the new rules as its already "in the system" so to speak.

I would follow Geoff's advice, but fully expect to get a call from DOTARS asking where the deregistration papers are.

LW.

yeah I reckon you are better off filing it correctly the first time. There should be no problem in getting you the de-reg papers. I got mine very soon after I purchased my car. When I sent in my application all complete it was approved in about 5 days.

If you do send off the application and have left out info then dont expect a phone call.

You will recieve a letter in the mail which again delays the whole process.

I know because they couldnt read my photo ID details via the fax copy.

Instead of calling or email they wrote a generic letter.

Cheers

definantly suggest sending it by fax. Then ring up the office 10 minutes later, and get them to check to see if it's come through. They will then give you a reference number, so you can quote it the next time you call them.

Just call them a week later to check on progress (quoting number), makes sure things are ticking along ok, also makes sure the paperwork doesn't get lost.

my photo id didn't come through, and they sent me a fax, so i called them up and emailed a copy to them, import approval arrived 3 days later in the mail.

definantly suggest sending it by fax.  Then ring up the office 10 minutes later, and get them to check to see if it's come through.  They will then give you a reference number, so you can quote it the next time you call them.  

Just call them a week later to check on progress (quoting number), makes sure things are ticking along ok, also makes sure the paperwork doesn't get lost.

my photo id didn't come through, and they sent me a fax, so i called them up and emailed a copy to them, import approval arrived 3 days later in the mail.

Nice. Possibly could send off now and phone up when I get my de-reg papers, quote my ref. number and fax it through.?

maybe just give 'em a ring and ask them what to do.

I was told not to send my approval through till 01 November 04 (coz nov 1989 build), and i called htem up mid October to ask a question, and they just said "yeah send the approval through now, we're a bit behind, and that'll speed things up for you"

Nice. Possibly could send off now and phone up when I get my de-reg papers, quote my ref. number and fax it through.?

Dane Just send off the papers, without the de-registration papers.

I'm in the exact same boat as you. Bought my car from Geoff, Same supplier in Japan, Same Shipping and we will properly be using the same customs agent.

I rang my custom agent up, and he told me that the de-registration papers weren’t necessary, if the car is 15 years or older, and that he doesn’t mind the import approval going off without deregistration papers.

I just got my import approval in the post on Friday, took me three and a half WEEKS to get it since I lodge them. So you’re properly better off getting the papers off ASAP.

I have not even yet seen my deregistration papers from the supplier and I’ve paid it over 4 weeks ago. You could be up for a wait for them.

Just remember our boat leaves Japan late February and arrives early march, around the 14th, could even be sooner. It’s properly a very good idea for you to ring up the custom agent Geoff recommended, and get the info for yourself, as he will be the one doing all the work at the docks for you in getting your car cleared.

PM me the link to the car you have purchased :cheers:

  • 2 weeks later...

this is apparently my de-reg paper

i dont understand how it would have any meaning to dotars tho, as far as i can see there isnt even a date of first registration on here, unless its in japanese

copyofbnr320078027ui.jpg

(oh and if you can see the date on here please point it out )

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah everyone always seems to refer to them as S13 wheels however they came on R32 Skyline, A31 Cefiro, C33 Laurel etc., and also came polished diamond cut or painted depending on the model. Congrats on your GTS purchase! I'd personally leave it NA.
    • In this thing about this 100% renewal energy stuff I hear no one really talking about anything other than power and fuel really Power and fuel, whilst being a huge part of how we use the billion year old Dinosaur juices, are only 2, of the probably thousands of things that we need to use it for in the chemicals industries for making nearly everything we use nowadays I'm all for a clean planet, but if we want to continue to have all the day to day appliances and stuff that we rely on everyday we will still need fossil fuels Whilst I do love science, and how it can bring innovation, there's really a limit to how far it can go in relation to "going green" As for EV's, unless your charging of your own solar panels, it isn't helping the environment when you consider the the batteries, the mining processes required,  the manufacturing process required, and how long a batteries (read: the vehicle) lasts long term If I was supreme dictator of the world, I would ban the use of sugar for fizzy drinks and food additives and use that for ethanol manufacturing, petrol engines would be happier, and people would be alot healthier  Disclaimer: Whiskey manufacturing would still be required, so says the supreme dictator of the world Same same for all the vegetable oils that get pumped into all our food, use that for bio diesel Disclaimer: the supreme dictator would still require olive oil to dip his bread in This would take some of heat off the use of the use of fossil fuels which are required for everything we use, unless you want to go back to pre 1800 for heat and power, or the early 1900's for plastics and every thing else that has come from cracking ethylene  Would I be a fair and just dictator, nope, and I would probably be assassinated within my first few months, but would my cunning plan work, maybe, for a while, maybe not Meh, in the end in an over opinionated mildly educated arsehole typing out my vomit on my mobile phone, which wouldn't be possible without fossil fuels And if your into conspiracies, we only need the fossil fuels to last until a meteor hits, or thermonuclear annihilation, that would definitely fix our need for fossil fuels for manufacturing and power issues for quite some time  Meh, time for this boomer to cook his lunch on his electric stove and then maybe go for a drive in my petrol car, for fun    
    • It really helps that light duty vehicles have absolutely appalling average efficiency due to poor average load. Like 25% average brake thermal efficiency when peak is somewhere around 38% these days. So even a 60% BTE stationary natural gas plant + transmission and charging losses still doing much better with an EV than conventional ICE. And that's before we get into renewables or "low carbon nonrenewable" nuclear which makes it a no-brainer, basically. In commercial aircraft or heavy duty diesel pulling some ridiculous amount of weight across a continent the numbers are much more difficult to make work. I honestly think in 5-10 years we will still be seeing something like the Achates opposed piston diesels in most semi trucks running on a blend of renewable/biodiesel. Applications where the energy density of diesel is just too critical to compromise. CARB is running trials of those engines right now to evaluate in real world drayage ops, probably because they're noticing that the numbers just don't work for electrification unless our plan is to make glorified electric trains with high voltage wires running along every major highway and only a token amount of battery to make it 30 miles or something like that after detaching. Transport emissions is not insignificant especially in the US, but yes there's a lot of industrial processes that also need to be decarbonized. I agree the scale of the problem is pretty insane but EDF managed to generate ~360 TWh from their nuclear reactors last year and this is with decades of underinvestment after the initial big push in the 70s and 80s. I don't think the frame of reference should be solar-limited. France is not exactly a big country either. Maybe it doesn't work everywhere, but it doesn't have to either. We just can't live off of fracking forever and expect things to be ok.
    • Yeah, all the crude is used for fuels and petrochem feedstocks (pesticides, many other chemicals, etc etc). But increasingly over the last few decades, much of the petrochem synthessis has started with methane because NG has been cheaper than oil, cleaner and easier and more consistent to work with, etc etc etc. So it's really had to say what the fraction either way is. Suffice to say - the direct fuels fraction is not insigificant. Heavy transport uses excruciatingly large amounts. Diesel is wasted in jet heaters in North American garages and workshops, thrown down drill holes in quarries, pissed all over the wall to provide electricity to certain outback communities, etc etc. Obviously road transport, and our pet project, recreational consumption camouflaged as road transport, is a smaller fraction of the total liquid HC consumption again. If you're talking aboust Aussie cars' contribution to the absolute total CO2 production of the country, then of course our share of the cubic mile of coal that is used for power generation, metallurgy, etc adds up to a big chunk. Then there is the consumption of timber. Did you know that the production of silicon metal, for example, is done in Australia by using hardwood? And f**king lots and lots and lots of hardwood at that. Until recently, it was f**king jarrah! There are many such sneaky contributors to CO2 production in industry and farming. NG is used in massive quantities in Australia, for power gen, for running huge water pumps (like, 1-2MW sized caterpillar V16 engines running flat out pumping water) for places like mine sites and minerals/metals refineries. And there are just a huge number of those sort of things going on quietly in the background. So NG use is a big fraction of total CO2 production here. I mean, shit, I personally design burners that are used in furnaces here in Oz that use multiple MW of gas all day every day. The largest such that I've done (not here in Oz) was rated to 150MW. One. Single. Gas burner. In a cement clinker kiln. There are thousands of such things out there in the world. There are double digits of them just here in Oz. (OK< just barely double digits now that a lot of them have shut - and they are all <100MW). But it's all the same to me. People in the car world (like this forum's users) would like to think that you only have to create an industrial capability to replace the fuel that they will be using in 10 years time, and imagine that everyone else will be driving EVs. And while the latter part of that is largely true, the liquid HC fuel industry as a whole is so much more massive than the bit used for cars, that there will be no commercial pressure to produce "renewable" "synthetic" fuels just for cars, when 100x that much would still be being burnt straight from the well. You have to replace it all, or you're not doing what is required. And then you get back to my massive numbers. People don't handle massive numbers at all well. Once you get past about 7 or 8 zeros, it becomes meaningless for most people.
×
×
  • Create New...