Jump to content

Travel

Places to travel and things to see.

438 topics in this forum

  1. Alaska 2014

    • 151 replies
    • 14,676 views
  2. Alaska 2016

    • 137 replies
    • 14,218 views
  3. Alaska 2017

    • 65 replies
    • 4,208 views
    • 53 replies
    • 1,185 views
  4. Alaska 2015

    • 51 replies
    • 6,627 views
    • 41 replies
    • 2,040 views
    • 35 replies
    • 1,565 views
    • 34 replies
    • 3,076 views
    • 32 replies
    • 1,826 views
    • 31 replies
    • 1,842 views
    • 29 replies
    • 2,057 views
  5. Corpis Christy, TX

    • 28 replies
    • 2,786 views
    • 27 replies
    • 3,331 views
    • 27 replies
    • 2,162 views
    • 27 replies
    • 2,153 views
    • 25 replies
    • 1,433 views
    • 23 replies
    • 1,623 views
  6. Dallas RV Resort?

    • 23 replies
    • 2,223 views
    • 23 replies
    • 1,736 views
    • 23 replies
    • 908 views
  7. RVing in Mexico

    • 23 replies
    • 2,604 views
    • 23 replies
    • 892 views
  8. Quartzite 2015 - Tips?

    • 22 replies
    • 3,868 views
  9. Moab, UT

    • 22 replies
    • 2,089 views
    • 22 replies
    • 1,090 views
RVers Online University

campgroundviews.com

Our program provides accurate individual wheel weights for your RV, toad, and tow vehicle, and will help you trim the pounds if you need to.

Rvonthego.com

Rv Share

Dish For My RV.

Find out more or sign up for Escapees RV'ers Bootcamp.

Advertise your product or service here.



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Steve, The requirement for the registration as a commercial vehicle, is as you wrote.  However, the portion of the Regs regarding Private Carrier is not applicable to a non commercial person.  Private Carrier is referring to a commercial entity that carries their own property, such as Frito Lay, Walmart, etc. I will agree that California Code is far more  intrusive than any other state Code I have ever read.
    • The confusion with California law is that the exemptions for authority etc are clearly worded under 26001 GVWR.    All class 7-8 trucks have higher GVWR's.      Because California states that ALL trucks are commercial by license statutes and, then exempts class 6 and under, tells me they DON'T allow that exemption for class 7-8 trucks.      That is the issue I mentioned above, the only change the DMV and CADOT could do without legislative change is to include the bigger trucks in the commercial exemption for personal use.     There is at this time no provision to exclude them from the MCP program at the state level.      I am not sure how the DMV or state would rule on the matter, they seem to have no exceptions for heavy trucks to be used as private vehicles, going as far an mentioning carriers of personal property subject to MCP rules.   Steve   
    • If you look in the beginning of the Commercial Vehicle section, under legislative intent, they spell out that the California Code is to be consistent with the Federal Regulations. The Federal Regulations clearly do not apply to anyone that is not involved in commercial operations.
    • I would say that the link you posted only applies to commercial operations.
×