Wa. - No front licence plate waiver.

Whoa... Thanks for forwarding..

 

Better have a copy of said waiver attached to the registration and insurance papers though.

 

I tried for a waiver a few years ago. I sent pictures and plead my case. I told them that I didn't want to deface the car etc. They responded by saying that I could attach the plate to the grill with tie wraps and that way I could remove the plate whenever I was at a car show or whatever and re attach when I was on the road. Never mind that the plate was too low for the height spec, they wanted a front plate on the car. The way I got around it was to get a collector car plate.

 

Here's the list and some more info from this thread... http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=162305 , especially check out the last few pages........




"Law enforcement will oppose doing away with all front plates on all cars. He said they need them mainly for vehicle identification. The law, RCW 46.16.240 requires the front plate. It is a $124 fine and first/primary offense if you do not have one. About 9 states do not require a front plate he said. There are about 6 million registered cars in WA..

State law provides an exemption to the front plate requirement on a case by case basis. Attached below is a list of successful and unsuccessful applicants for an exemption. Evidently I was mistaken about the Viper but it appears that at least one model of Ferrari has been exempted. To apply for an exemption contact:

Melissa VanGorkom
360.596.4017
[email protected]

She's the equipment specialist at WSP and can help anyone who needs to file an application for an exemption to the front license plate requirement.

Vehicles issued front license plate waivers are listed below.
1972 Italian DeTomaso Pantera
1974 Jaguar E-Type
2000 Panoz
1971 DeTomaso Pantera
2000 Plymouth Prowler
2000 Jaguar XK8
Caterham/Lotus Super 7
1984 Ferrari 512 BBI
1967 Ford Cobra

Vehicles denied waivers for attaching a front license plate include:
Toyota MR 2
Porsche 928
Corvette
Mini Cooper
Ford SVT Cobra
Lotus Elise
Ford Escort
Nissan 30ZX
BMW Z8
Dodge Viper
Mercedes-Benz
Mazda Miata
Maserati."






Oh, and you can add Ferrari 308 to the list of cars that have now officially been DENIED waivers!! Funny how I just noticed that if a car has been granted a waiver the model year is listed with it. The denied list though includes entire makes (Maserati)!!! How convenient, I guess that way they can just point to the list and say, "Uh, no, that ones' already been denied!".

 

They accepted a 2000 Jaguar XK8 but denied a 308? What a joke. Is this totally random, or did the XK8's owner know a ton of the 'right people'? And who was the smartass who tried to get his Ford Escort exempted?

 

Might have been an older Escort RS? I've seen one in the north end running around.

 

I was thinking about this today - a lot of the cars they were accepted are front-engined (Lotus Seven, Jaguar XK8, Jaguar E-Type) except for those whose front ends make it absolutely impossible to mount a plate (Ferrari Boxer, DeTomaso Pantera). Many of the rejections are mid-engined (Toyota MR2, Ferrari 308). I wonder if the way to get an exemption is to claim the license plate blocks airflow to the engine and can cause overheating. In reality, this is the reason a lot of states did away with front license plates in the first place.

By the way, I don't live in Washington and have no real vested interest in this. I just find it rather intriguing that they're giving exemptions - I've never heard of a state doing that before except perhaps for collector vehicles.

 

I tried that too. When I sent my letter in I took detailed pictures of the front end and explained that it says right in the owner's manual not to block the radiator. All they care about is whether there is a bracket available or not....period.

 

You can add FORD GT to the denied list. I applied for an exemption about two years ago and the state patrol said no.

 

Maybe if they deny you, you should make part of your application a request for signature that if the car is damaged in any way, the state will pay for repairs or loss of value. I'm thinking that the engineers that design these cars have a few more brain cells than the clods at the state. Conversely, how about a flat thin plate like you see everywhere in Europe. Gee, were those designed not to obstruct the intake maybe?

 

They did deny me but it doesn't matter anymore since I've licensed it as a classic which legally only requires the front plate. Ironic isn't it???

 

If it's the revenue they want from 2 plates, I'll still pay for 2!

 

You can add LP670 Murcialago SV to the ACCEPTED category for exemptions now. A local owner got it approved.

 

No, not true. Having just made application and having received the waiver, I know the drill. If a front plate bracket exists as a part number, forget it, you won't get the exemption. I have another rare car that won't qualify for that reason. The WSP will call and check with the dealer or area rep to see if such bracket exists, if it does, you're screwed. It's not a matter of you personally not having one. The exemption only applies if the part doesn't exist, and it isn't attachable, and there are VERY few cars that come to the US without some type of bracket as a part number.

 

The list of cars that was posted as exempted is wrong. The WSP has been whittling away at that list for several years now. I am one of the lucky few (1987 Countach). When I got my exemption, there were only four other cars with exemptions in Washington. A Caterham(SP), a 512 bb, and I have forgotten the other two.

Tom is right about the license plate bracket and the WSP searching for one. I was denied three times before being granted the exemption. I took a picture of the front, photoshopped a semi opaque license on the car, and argued that it obstructed over two-thirds of the brake cooling ducts. They are used to this argument and will just deny you. My strategy was to ask if they were willing to be held liable if my brakes faded and resulted in an accident or loss of life, since they stated in writing that it didn't matter if the plate covered these ducts. Suddenly, exemption granted.

You receive nothing more than a short letter granting the exemption that you carry in the car in case you are pulled over for no plate.

 

I've always enjoyed the argument "the tag needs to be there in order to get an accurate reading with a radar gun". To me this means if a tag not present then you should not be able to issue a speeding ticket, and if a tag is the only place to get an accurate reading, then the radar gun is not a reliable piece of equipment.

 

Laser, not radar.

 

But even without a front plate it is possible to target and pull over a 308.

 

The idea is the plate has a fixed, known reflection coefficient and is a flat vertical surface.
Makes it MUCH easier to get a laser fix on a plate than other parts of the car. It's the
whole reason many states don't emboss the numbers into plates but print them. Makes
the surface of the plate a better and more reliable reflector of laser light.

Sucks I know.

But then, I've been by a HUNDRED cops and have never been pulled over for no front
plate. [knocking on wood]

Jedi

 

Don’t know if the info is accurate, but speaking with a LEO, the new laser guns work equally well on body parts, they don’t need a headlight or plate to target. Does anyone know where we can borrow a unit for backwoods extra curriculum testing? ;-)

 

Doh!

 

I've never been pulled over for no front plate either. In fact I've never been ticketed for no front plate. But l have been lasered, pulled over, and ticketed for "allegedly" speeding [although my innocence was later proven in court ]. It wasn't until he saw the front plate behind my seat that he mentioned it not being on the car. Still no ticket for that though.

 

What's this innocent stuff John? I've driven with you.

 

He never drove over the limit.

Let’s see…. The limit of the 308 is say…. 148 ;-)