NHTSA rejects shipments of Nankang tires

Toyman! said:

codrus (Forum Supporter) said:

ClearWaterMS said:

when the way you did it was wrong; "we've always done it that way" isn't an excuse. 

It does seem like they could have just moved the container over to the side of yard for a couple of days while they waited to sort out the paperwork, instead of sending it all the way back.

 

The article says the deletion of the address was in the NHTSA's database and was caused by the NHTSA updating its database. So a private company was punished by a bureaucracy because of the incompetence of the bureaucracy. Yeah, that sounds about like most bureaucracies work. They berkeley up, you pay. 

Personally, I hope Nankang sues the NHTSA for lost income and shipping costs plus punitive damages. 

As a shipper of goods, should one not make sure 100% that the info is accurate and complete before sending a boat?  Sure, it could source from a dumb reason, but it is up to the company to make sure all the i's are dotted and t's are crossed.   

Even with a corporation, I would double and triple check everything when I knew there was a system change of any type.  Government isn't the only one who does that.

Hi. I work in international e commerce and move many containers every day.   The rules are confusing and long but usually established for proper purposes. 
 

this is anti dumping laws in action.  As to if they knew about this beforehand etc.   they probably didn't.

 Ever have a container get inspected by the CBP.   Geez.  It goes in this terrible black hole. Everything gets scrutinized.  This is probably where they found this discrepancy during a very in depth inspection because they found something odd during the regular inspections.  Sometimes they just pull random containers and just inspect. 
 

GameboyRMH said:

The company that makes my phone, F(x)tec, was sunk in large part due to a similar issue that caused their entire first batch of phones to be returned to sender when they reached their destination countries, so this tiny company had to pay international shipping costs twice.

Too bad these tires have to make two more trips across the Pacific while this paperwork issue gets sorted out...

I'm STILL waiting on my Astro Slide (yes, that's a real phone name, yes I think it's funny too) to show up. I bought it over a year ago now... Definitely have my doubts that I'll ever see it. I have suspicions that Fxtec and Planet are the same folks running two different companies.

In reply to Toyman! :

ALL bureaucracy is bad, mindless just makes it worse !

Well that sucks. my rear tires have been on order for over a month already. Looks like I need to try and find another solution before my first event mid next month. I'm a little annoyed the shop shipped the front tires separately. Now I'm stuck with half a set I won't be able to run until well into summer it looks like.

In reply to Tom1200 :

NY

Conspiracy theory: Hoosier deleted the address. 

Looks like some containers of new Nankangs are starting to hit retailers, but it appears Phil's has three in CBP exam hell and has for some time.

Toyman! said:

codrus (Forum Supporter) said:

ClearWaterMS said:

when the way you did it was wrong; "we've always done it that way" isn't an excuse. 

It does seem like they could have just moved the container over to the side of yard for a couple of days while they waited to sort out the paperwork, instead of sending it all the way back.

 

The article says the deletion of the address was in the NHTSA's database and was caused by the NHTSA updating its database. So a private company was punished by a bureaucracy because of the incompetence of the bureaucracy. Yeah, that sounds about like most bureaucracies work. They berkeley up, you pay. 

Personally, I hope Nankang sues the NHTSA for lost income and shipping costs plus punitive damages. 

Unfortunately that would mean the taxpayers footing the bill (if Nankang sued and won).

In reply to flyin_viata :

I've been watching that... I'm on the notification list, and it's been almost a month since the first container landed.

In reply to z31maniac :

In the end it would be almost imperceptible to individual taxpayers, but hopefully would force government agencies to take responsibility. 

In reply to No Time :

Why do you assume that it's the government agency that is at fault?  How many other containers have been turned back for the same reason?  If it's a small amount, it's more like everyone but the shipper of this were fully aware of the change, if it's a large amount then it's the sudden change.

But if a large amount of containers were turned back, it would be huge news for everyone.  So it seems to me that almost every other shipper were aware of the upcoming change, and dealt with it correctly.

I get that for this group, it's "cool" to blame the government, but shipping companies need to have some responsibility, too.

Regardless of fault, why can't the government say "we're going to put a hold on this for X number of days, after which you can return to sender or pay us Y$/day"?

I once got a nice job for the University of California. Part of the submission process was to fill out a stack of papers about 1/2 an inch thick. Turns out that although we were low bidder, we'd missed an initial on page forty-something. My office is ten minutes from theirs, but the reaction was to throw out our bid and take one $70,000 higher instead of saying "y'all need to come back here and initial this page". 

But that's inherent to most rules and laws. If people could be trusted to use common sense, you wouldn't need most of them. 

The article was pretty clear that the deletion of the properly registered address was NHTSA's fault.  And then it took them 20 years to catch the error...  

It's been a properly registered plant for 40+ years, but when NHTSA updated their system in 2002, the address info went missing. It's taken over two decades to discover the error.

In reply to alfadriver :

As Rodan pointed out, the article said it was NHTSA that deleted the address, so I believe my comment was not just blaming the government to be "cool".

<quote>

<end quote>

I was focused on idea that there should be accountability for government actions, and not just allow the error to go unnoticed and the cost to be passed on the company who was not responsible for the error. 

In reply to No Time :

How do you propose to "hold them accountable"?  Suing them won't do a thing.  If it was really NHTSA's fault, it would just take a quick call by a court to fix that- and the container would have gotten to stay.  Which is to say, I don't think the story was as cut and dried of who's fault.

In reply to alfadriver :

I'm inclined to think we're looking at this differently and there is nothing to be gained by continuing down this path. 

Apparently, something similar has happened again...

I've been on a waiting list for CR-S V2s with a vendor, and they just updated their site to report the 3 containers that have been in the port since September are being returned to the manufacturer for a "paperwork" issue...

Now due 1/2025, which is also what TireRack is saying.

This is frustrating.

These shiny happy people need to start using a proper broker and not some E36 M3 ass bottom of the barrel broker.  Crappy brokers or trying to do stuff yourself has this result. 
 

International shipping is hard. This is why overseas shippers rarely change brokers or shipping companies once they find one that works. Sure you can save money.... maybe?

I just spoke with my contact at Nankang Motorsport and he assures me that the three containers at Phil's were the last that should have any import problems.  TR is getting more in late December and Phil's in January....so 2025 should be a very good year.

Meanwhile, I have a very interesting new size headed my way directly...

In reply to Fueled by Caffeine :

In counterpoint. Why is is hard? Why isn't the process simpler and more user-friendly? 

A quick look shows there are something like 28 federal agencies you have to be compliant with to import something. I couldn't find the import regulations but I would bet there are 1000s of pages of them.

When you have to hire professionals to wade through the myriad of paperwork it takes to stay lawful, something is wrong with the law, not the person trying to follow it. 

In reply to Toyman! :

Sounds like you're trying to eliminate jobs from the hardworking people of the brokerage industry.

(This is a joke please no one yell at me)

In reply to Toyman! :

It's not a counter point. I never said it should be hard. 
 

I'd argue there is not much wrong with the laws associated with importation just haphazard and terribly inefficient enforcement.   I don't think you'd argue to say we shouldn't fumigate pallets to ensure invasive and alien bugs doing come into the country.  Just an example. 

I think a corporation bringing in $280 million in revenue can afford to pay a broker to make sure their paperwork is right. We're not talking about some mom and pop here. Nothing involved in moving that much product is simple.

So as a government procurement guy I can tell you that most of these regulations have a solid foundation. Note I worked as a buyer for 15 years in the private sector before coming to the public sector 17 years ago. 

A large portion of the paperwork is documenting that we are indeed following the regulations as well as being good stewards of the taxpayers money.

Does it get absurd sometimes? Yes.  Case in point; there is a state law that says we cannot  do business with any supplier boycotting Israel. There is a form they must sign because the law states the acknowledgment must be in writing. Last month we got a request to purchase something company in Israel; guess what? Yup I needed them to declare in writing that they were not boycotting themselves i.e. sign the form. 

Fortunately those types of stories are few and far between.