Page 2 of 2
Re: parts availability after govt. decision?
Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2014 9:50 pm
by glenn
You guys noticed that the original post is 7 years old right?
A lot has happened since then, like the ICBC report that the Car dealers association was using as it's primary attack, was challenged and the methodology proven faulty. All the noise that the dealers association was making has largely died down, and the importing business has continued to grow. The fear of the RHD vehicles has largely dissipated, as ICBC has been unable to show any statistical consequence to driving on the right hand side. They have been collecting data on us for all these years, and if these vehicles were more risky than others, we would all know. And it is the safety angle that was the car dealers were pushing - they were doing it for the safety of us all. . . .
Re: parts availability after govt. decision?
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2014 7:03 am
by philmeup1
2007,, DAMN!!!!!! I didn't see that until you pointed it out..... So I guess all that's left is to ask, did collector buy a Mitsu or not...????
I got nothin else....
Re: parts availability after govt. decision?
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2014 8:07 am
by Rattlenbang
Rattlenbang wrote: Haha don't you love resurrected old threads?
Yeah, but only after I posted. Zombie threads never die..
Re: parts availability after govt. decision?
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2014 10:42 am
by FalcoColumbarius
You know that when zombies start walking, there's usually something wrong.
We must remain ever vigilant and remember that freedom is something that must be earned.
We must stop saying mindless clichés and walk boldly into the future with glowing hearts!
Thank god there are some right hand drivers that happen to be crack action lawyers that know how to spot horse feathers in corporate manifestos.
Falco.
Re: parts availability after govt. decision?
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2014 11:55 am
by psilosin
It wasn't the lawyers....its was guys like me that crunch numbers and analyze datasets that exposed the 'study' was as unsinkable as the titanic. The lawyers just stamped things and played golf.
Re: parts availability after govt. decision?
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2014 5:04 pm
by FalcoColumbarius
psilosin wrote:It wasn't the lawyers....its was guys like me that crunch numbers and analyze datasets that exposed the 'study' was as unsinkable as the titanic. The lawyers just stamped things and played golf.
Thank god there are some right hand drivers that happen to be crack action number crunchers and analysts that have an in depth understanding of marine displacement.
Buy the way, you know the difference between a Monkfish and a lawyer?
Falco.
Re: parts availability after govt. decision?
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2014 11:47 am
by patriceboivin
The question that came to my mind was... how do we now reduce that 15 years to 10.
I wonder how that 15 year threshold was set initially. Must have been some political compromise.
Re: parts availability after govt. decision?
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2014 4:02 pm
by Mr. Flibble
patriceboivin wrote:The question that came to my mind was... how do we now reduce that 15 years to 10.
I wonder how that 15 year threshold was set initially. Must have been some political compromise.
It is 25 years in the United States.
Re: parts availability after govt. decision?
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2014 4:12 pm
by glenn
when the 15 year rule was set, 15 year old cars were mostly rusty junk.
Re: parts availability after govt. decision?
Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 7:05 pm
by FalcoColumbarius
Thought this might be of some interest, perhaps food for thought: https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/motorvehiclesa ... ex-448.htm
The above page was last modified on the 10th of December, 2013 ~ three months ago. I've not properly read the article but I've noticed that they are still citing “THE SAFETY OF RIGHT-HAND-DRIVE VEHICLES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA” ICBC report, despite any flaws in the study.
By the way, I have moved this thread to "RHD Political and Legal Matters" for archival purposes.
Falco.