Jump to content

Malaysia may be forced to charge a S$35 VEP for foreign vehicles

Malaysia may be forced to charge a S$35 VEP for foreign vehicles

Sign in to follow this  
chitchatboy

14,191 views

blog-0721307001484729907.jpg

blogentry-133713-0-14225500-1484729906_thumb.jpgMalaysia might be forced to begin charging a daily Vehicle Entry Permit (VEP) fee of S$35 for foreign vehicles entering their country, according to its Transport Minister Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai.

 

As reported by Malaysia's Oriental News Daily, this comes after our government decided to implement the Reciprocal Road Charge (RRC) on foreign-registered cars entering the our country. The RRC is fixed at S$6.40 or RM20 and will come into effect on 15th of February this year.

 

The Transport Minister was quoted by the newspaper saying that Malaysia’s decision to impose the RM20 road charge on foreign-registered vehicles entering Malaysia in November last year was reasonable as Malaysia did not respond to Singapore’s implementation of the VEP fee in 1973. He added on that if Singapore insist on imposing the RRC and do not reconsider doing away with it, they may be forced to implement the higher VEP policy practised by Singapore.

 

Liow did admit that the move could be a viable method of controlling the number of foreign-registered cars driving into the republic but this will definitely be a burden to Malaysians.

Sign in to follow this  


22 Comments


Recommended Comments

It's "Liow Tiong Lai".

 

Malaysia might be forced to begin charging a daily Vehicle Entry Permit (VEP) fee of S$35 for foreign vehicles entering their country, according to its Transport Minister Datuk Seri Liow Tiong.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Just charge no need to think so much... Sg will benefits more...

Share this comment


Link to comment

if I were Malaysia Transport Minister, I will not allow Singapore private vehicle enter Malaysia, see who can win,

if like that Singapore motorists will cry....

Share this comment


Link to comment

I suggest Mr Liow impose RM1000/day for their VEP. We will happy to see how they die bcos of their greediness

Share this comment


Link to comment

I suggest Mr Liow impose RM1000/day for their VEP. We will happy to see how they die bcos of their greediness

 

if I were Malaysia Transport Minister, I will not allow Singapore private vehicle enter Malaysia, see who can win,

if like that Singapore

Share this comment


Link to comment

if I were Malaysia Transport Minister, I will not allow Singapore private vehicle enter Malaysia, see who can win,

if like that Singapore

I will be cheering for you to be the Malaysia Transport Minister!

Share this comment


Link to comment

if I were Malaysia Transport Minister, I will not allow Singapore private vehicle enter Malaysia, see who can win,

if like that Singapore motorists will cry....

Please suggest to your LIOW TIONG LAI... I hope this will be true... 

Share this comment


Link to comment

if I were Malaysia Transport Minister, I will not allow Singapore private vehicle enter Malaysia, see who can win,

if like that Singapore motorists will cry....

 

Singaporean can choose not to go Malaysia for whatever cheaper items.... But for Malaysians driving or riding into Singapore for work, do you think that who will cry if LTA were to banned all Malaysia private vehicles entering Singapore....

 

Hahahaha

Share this comment


Link to comment

You increase to RM35, Sg will reciprocate! LL isn't it?

Share this comment


Link to comment

Crappy lar both sides.....singapore doesnt need to increase the vep......just remove the free-passes from 1700hrs-0200hrs and the weekends and holidays. This will be a checkmate move with MY side unable to counter as they are charging vep 24/7!

Share this comment


Link to comment

1. In the first place, why the need to charge under whatever name VEP or etc? The net revenue collected would be significantly reduced by the cost of maintenance of the administration and equipment needed.

 

2. To those Singaporeans who keep thinking that Malaysia need us more than we need them. Many Singaporeans travel to Malaysia to buy cheap petrol (some go to the extend of tempering with their fuel gauge while some comically perform stunts at petrol station to add a few more milliltres of petrol into their fuel tank), buy cheap groceries and other daily necessities and etc. Do you think the general population appreciate our buying up their daily needs and thus raising the price for them?

 

3. Tick for tack action isnt great for a first world country to do whatever excuse we give.

 

4. Any policies should benefit both countries and not just one. This way, there would be always amicable solutions. We need them just as much as they need us. If they decide to turn of the tap, we would not only drink sai water from newater but also ........

Share this comment


Link to comment

1. In the first place, why the need to charge under whatever name VEP or etc? The net revenue collected would be significantly reduced by the cost of maintenance of the administration and equipment needed.

 

2. To those Singaporeans who keep thinking that Malaysia need us more than we need them. Many Singaporeans travel to Malaysia to buy cheap petrol (some go to the extend of tempering with their fuel gauge while some comically perform stunts at petrol station to add a few more milliltres of petrol into their fuel tank), buy cheap groceries and other daily necessities and etc. Do you think the general population appreciate our buying up their daily needs and thus raising the price for them?

 

3. Tick for tack action isnt great for a first world country to do whatever excuse we give.

 

4. Any policies should benefit both countries and not just one. This way, there would be always amicable solutions. We need them just as much as they need us. If they decide to turn of the tap, we would not only drink sai water from newater but also ........

 

1. Don't think it's about revenue alone, but even so, I'm sure we'll make it net positive.

 

2. Why should I (or anyone else who doesn't do this) give a crap about the opinions of such cheapskates who even flout the law to fill up there?

 

3. In game theory, there are terms like "credible threat", "tit for tat" etc. All sorts of jargon for something that's very simple - if you don't make good on a threat, then you have no more credibility and your enemies/competitors can take real advantage of you.

 

4. If they decide to turn off the tap (despite all the treaties and prior agreements), I hope Singapore treats it as an act of war.

Share this comment


Link to comment

I believe its the Spore Government has a “long-standing policy” of matching any levy, tolls or fees charged by Malaysia at the land checkpoints.

 

The fact is they keep coming out different type of names for charges and the 2 govts can continue to match each other without considering the people pocket.  

 

So only way i can say is vote wisely. 

Share this comment


Link to comment

I think Singapore and Malaysia should Sit down and negotiate, now their behavior is lose/lose solution, not revenue but revenge  

Share this comment


Link to comment

 

1. Don't think it's about revenue alone, but even so, I'm sure we'll make it net positive.

 

2. Why should I (or anyone else who doesn't do this) give a crap about the opinions of such cheapskates who even flout the law to fill up there?

 

3. In game theory, there are terms like "credible threat", "tit for tat" etc. All sorts of jargon for something that's very simple - if you don't make good on a threat, then you have no more credibility and your enemies/competitors can take real advantage of you.

 

4. If they decide to turn off the tap (despite all the treaties and prior agreements), I hope Singapore treats it as an act of war.

 

1. If not for revenue generating, there is little other excuse for implementation.

 

2. We all may be able to afford many times the current petrol price or even daily necessities without even blinking an eyelid BUT there is a segment of our society who are struggling and every cent saved counts.

 

3. To begin with is there a need for tic for tac.

 

4. I believe you are mistake, Singapore cannot afford to make an enemy of any of their neighbours, let alone think of starting or stating intention of a war. Our defence is largely deterrent. In reality our expenditure and obsession with our military is not dissimilar to a peacock. Lots of size and colour but beneath it all it is still feathers and flesh and bones like any bird. Any sizeable bomb dropped on any part of our island will take 1/2 to a decade to rebuild. Can we prevent every single bomb from a barrage of bombs dropping?

Share this comment


Link to comment

 

 

 

1. If not for revenue generating, there is little other excuse for implementation.

 

2. We all may be able to afford many times the current petrol price or even daily necessities without even blinking an eyelid BUT there is a segment of our society who are struggling and every cent saved counts.

 

3. To begin with is there a need for tic for tac.

 

4. I believe you are mistake, Singapore cannot afford to make an enemy of any of their neighbours, let alone think of starting or stating intention of a war. Our defence is largely deterrent. In reality our expenditure and obsession with our military is not dissimilar to a peacock. Lots of size and colour but beneath it all it is still feathers and flesh and bones like any bird. Any sizeable bomb dropped on any part of our island will take 1/2 to a decade to rebuild. Can we prevent every single bomb from a barrage of bombs dropping?

 

U served NS? Because the part about defence/deterrence seems a bit jumbled up. MINDEF/SAF's mission is to safeguard SG's sovereignty through deterrence and diplomacy, and should these fail, to secure a swift and decisive victory over the aggressor.

 

In other words, it's an open secret that offense IS SAF's form of defence. Rather than allowing the country to be a sitting duck waiting for bombs to be dropped on.

Share this comment


Link to comment

 

U served NS? Because the part about defence/deterrence seems a bit jumbled up. MINDEF/SAF's mission is to safeguard SG's sovereignty through deterrence and diplomacy, and should these fail, to secure a swift and decisive victory over the aggressor.

 

In other words, it's an open secret that offense IS SAF's form of defence. Rather than allowing the country to be a sitting duck waiting for bombs to be dropped on us.

 

The point here is: a surprise rogue attack by a release of bombs can we survive. I believe we cant. The population density means any bomb that is able to land and explode would be deaths in the thousands or ten of thousands.

 

We may have a capable and competent military but is that enough. Also we must not forget the element of never real life tested military (just how many of soldiers would freeze when witness their buddy's head get blown off).

 

You don't get it, whatever way you call you, defensive or aggressive action by us against any single immediate neighbour, the likelihood all of the immediate neighbours ganging up on us is high. All they got to do is block the straits and we are done for. Let alone water supply.

 

 

Realty is very different from theory and ideology.

Share this comment


Link to comment

“This is to ensure that Malaysia takes into consideration our response whenever they raise their tolls or introduce a new levy,” Mr Khaw said.

But before anyone is fooled, let’s look at some events in time:

1923: The Johor-Singapore Causeway was built and completed by the British.

1942: The Causeway was partially severed during the 2nd World War and was rebuilt by the Japanese once they captured Singapore.

Before 1973: There were only toll charges on both sides.

1973: Singapore implemented the Vehicle Entry Permit (VEP), collecting a fee of SGD20.00 per foreign-registered car coming in from Malaysia in addition to the toll. Malaysia did not follow suit.

During the 1990s: Singapore extended the VEP to motorcycles, collecting a fee of SGD4.00 per foreign-registered motorcycle coming in from Malaysia in addition to the toll. Malaysia did not follow suit.

2014: Malaysia finally decide to increase the toll for the first time, the SG Government screamed bloody murder and retaliate by increasing the VEP from SGD20 to SGD35 on Singapore’s side.

1st Nov 2016: Malaysia finally decided to implement the VEP of MYR 20 (officially known as Road Charge or RC for short) on their side 43 years after Singapore has done so, the SG Government once again screamed bloody murder despite them already collecting VEP for all these years. The Malaysia RC do not apply on foreign-registered motorcycles despite Singapore VEP doing so.

2017: The SG Government introduces the Reciprocal Road Charge (RRC) of $6.40 on all foreign-registered vehicles to take effect from 15th Feb 2017.To summarise (from 15th Feb 2017):

Malaysia collects from Singapore-registered cars:
Entry : Toll (MYR 9.70) + RC (MYR 20.00)
Exit : Toll (MYR6.80)
Total : MYR 36.50 (~USD 8.17 at current rate)

Singapore collect from Malaysia-registered cars:
Entry : Toll (SGD 3.80) + VEP (SGD 35.00) + RRC (SGD 6.40)
Exit : Toll (SGD 2.70)
Total : SGD 47.90 (~USD 33.50 at current rate)

To put it in perspective (from 15th Feb 2017) by looking at the USD value, we can observe that Singapore is collecting 4.1 times per foreign-registered vehicle more than Malaysia.

 

 

And if you think this has nothing to do with you because you do not drive, think again. Many of the groceries and commodities you consume o n a daily basis are imported from Malaysia via land-border crossings. Any increase on the border-crossing fees increases the prices of the things you buy.


(NOTE: Copied from somewhere)

Share this comment


Link to comment

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
  • Featured Stories

    Should cyclists be allowed on the road?

    The Year 2030  “2030” is a synonymous year for all matters environmental-related. If you have read my previous article, "2030 might be the end of the world for car enthusiasts and the sports cars they love”, you would be familiar with the Singapore Green Plan 2030 (SGP 2030). If you have not, feel free to read it: In addition to phasing out Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicles and encouraging the adoption of Electric Vehicles (EV), the government is also promoting sustainable living by encouraging cycling as a mode of transport.    The government has set a target to triple cycling paths from 460km to 1,320km by 2030, hoping that this network would provide cyclists with a safe and comfortable journey within and between various towns in Singapore.    Cycling in Singapore  In recent years, the uptake of cycling as a leisure activity and a mode of transport has sharply increased. This is evident from the increased sighting of cycling enthusiasts, otherwise known as “Tour De Singapore” cyclists and food delivery riders alike.    Furthermore, the banning of Personal Mobility Devices (PMDs) on roads as of 3rd April 2020 has also incited users to switch to bicycles or Power-Assisted Bicycles (PABs), which also contributed to the increase of cyclists.  The Cyclist Segmentation  I learned something rather intriguing yet insightful — Not all cyclists are the same.    Yes, they are all cyclists on the road but their intention and behaviour are grossly different.   “Tour De Singapore” cyclists are those that cycle to maintain an active lifestyle, which can be for leisure purposes or as a mode of transport. More often than not, this segment of cyclists will be riding on their road bikes which can easily hit 20km/h or faster. Their key objective includes clocking in a certain distance during their session (Eg. 20km), completing an entire cycling route (Eg. SG round island route, Marina Bay Loop) or even hitting a personal best for their cycling speed.  Conversely, the key objective for food delivery riders is pretty straightforward — to complete their order in the fastest and most efficient way possible.   And lastly, the final segment of cyclists — Young Punks (YPs) and their fixed-gear bicycles. Frankly, I have no clue as to why they are even on the road. This group of cyclists definitely do not deserve to be on the road, as their bicycles do not even have brakes equipped. These YPs lack the proper Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) such as helmets to make things worse.    Why Cycle On The Road?  From my understanding, there are two main but non-exhaustive reasons why cyclists prefer riding on the road:   Cycling on the road is smoother, as compared to cycling on pavements.   Certain bicycles, such as road bikes, are made to travel fast. Therefore, cycling on pavements or park connectors are unsuitable due to their speed limit restrictions of 10km/h and 25km/h, respectively.  The Black Sheep  They are everywhere. There is almost no escape from encountering these black sheep from the cycling community.    The list of black sheep curated on MyCarForum’s Blog category is sufficient to explain the point I am trying to bring across. Just take a look below:  Notice how all these incidents took place while the cyclist was riding on the road? MMMM...  If you wish to see more instances of black sheep from the cycling community, do a simple search in the search bar of MyCarForum (Refer below).  With the anonymous identity of these black sheep, there is almost no way they can be held accountable for committing traffic offences. The most that could happen to them is getting caught in the act by the police/LTA or being “trended” from online dashcam submissions of these black sheep. Otherwise, they will probably get off scot-free.    In most vehicle-cyclist accidents, the driver would be penalised regardless of who is at fault. However, there are certain occurrences (Refer below) where the errant cyclist is penalised for his wrongdoing.    Despite not being penalised, the driver remains the ultimate loser as the cost of repairing the damaged vehicle will remain borne by him. This frustration undoubtedly creates a sense of anguish and helplessness among drivers whenever a cyclist flouts traffic rules. “Praise is fleeting, but brickbats we recall”  Unfortunately for the cycling community, the presence of black sheep across the various segments has created a typical stereotype on cyclists regardless if they are responsible road users or not.    Sadly, the notorious reputation of cyclists is so deeply ingrained in the public’s perception that it may no longer be possible to remove that stereotypical notion.   For every kind act performed by a cyclist, there are always many others whose actions serve as a disservice to the cycling community. After all, it is in human nature that we remember the wrongs as compared to the rights.  According to the Road Traffic (Bicycles) Rules under the Road Traffic Act (Chapter 276, Section 140), cyclists should practice the following while riding on roads:  Ensure bicycles are equipped with working and functional brakes.   Wearing a suitable protective bicycle helmet securely while cycling.  Using hand signal to inform traffic of the cyclist’s intention (Eg. To stop, slow down, proceed left/right)   Travel in a single file at all times. Unless on a lane with two or more lanes (in the same direction), travelling abreast is allowed.    Cycle as near as possible to the left of the road.   Cycle in an orderly and safe manner and obey the flow of traffic.   If cycling during hours of darkness (7 pm – 7 am), your bicycle must be equipped with appropriate lighting at the front and rear.  In other words, unless the cyclist is an individual with traffic knowledge (driving/riding license) and can ADHERE STRICTLY to the Road Traffic (Bicycles) Rules under the Road Traffic Act (Chapter 276, Section 140), cyclists should be OFF our roads entirely.   If you are interested, feel free to read the online copy of the Road Traffic (Bicycles) Rules under the Road Traffic Act here: https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL/RTA1961-R3#pr5-.     --- Thinking of selling your car? sgCarMart Quotz guarantees the highest selling price for your car. We’ll even give you $100 cash if you find a better offer elsewhere! Get a free quote to find out how much your car is worth today!  

    thatJDMahboy

    thatJDMahboy

    Petty Mazda 6 uncle throws temper tantrum in the middle of the road

    Petty Mazda 6 driver pulls several dangerous stunts after getting cut by a parent sending her kids to school. The incident occurred on Thursday morning (July 29) at Yishun, near Chongfu Primary School. According to the camcar’s Facebook post, his wife sent their son to school in the morning and stopped kerbside for the boy to alight. The footage showed that while she was stopping, it looked like she accidentally cut into the navy blue Mazda’s lane as the driver had wanted to move off. Thinking that it was on purpose, the driver got upset and merged into the next lane. From there, he continuously taunted her with dangerous stunts, such as jamming the brakes and blocking the vehicle from moving off while on the road. She tried to shake off the Mazda driver by switching lanes, but the driver kept going back and forth between both lanes just to cut her off. In the middle of the video, the driver suddenly stopped his vehicle in a yellow box and alighted, which obstructed the traffic flow. He then made his way to the camcar and proceeded to scold and threaten the driver for cutting into his lane. This went on for a while as other vehicles tried to move around the parked Mazda while the driver throws his temper tantrum. The rest of the video showed the Mazda driver wildly gesturing to the camcar driver, continuously taunting her before moving off in an illegal u-turn. Netizens’ reactions TBH, there is no way that the childish behaviour of the Mazda driver can ever be justified in this situation. Letting his anger get to his head and lashing out at others while blocking traffic flow is highly immature. Why are there drivers like this in Singapore? --- Thinking of selling your car? sgCarMart Quotz guarantees the highest selling price for your car. We’ll even give you $100 cash if you find a better offer elsewhere! Get a free quote to find out how much your car is worth today!

    unicornfloof

    unicornfloof

    Your Class 3 driving license doesn’t mean you’re a better driver than a Class 3A

    There goes a saying that “Real men drive with 3 pedals./Real men drive manual cars.”, and even though that’s not the case, most male (and female) drivers have certainly had that thought at the back of their mind when it comes to taking their license. According to the 2020 Annual Traffic Statistics, out of the 3 million citizens holding a Qualified Driving License (QDL), 1.7 million (56.9%) individuals have a Class 3 license while only 200 thousand (6.58%) individuals have a Class 3A license. While it was a no-brainer for me to take Class 3A for my driving license, my dad met my decision with a disapproving sigh before simply stating that having a Class 3 license is “simply the better option”. Most of my male (and female) relatives and friends were quick to comment on the convenience of having a manual license. “It’s better because you can drive both manual and automatic cars on the road,” my dad would often say, “and it makes you a better driver.”. Having a manual license isn't all that useful. . .    Oddly enough, that sentence stuck with me throughout my teenage years – “Manual drivers are better drivers”. I wasn’t sure if I believed it wholeheartedly, to be honest. After all, my father (a manual driver) had also gotten his fair share of traffic accidents. Because of their incessant repetition of this traditional mindset, I opted to try for a manual license, only for me to realise that there isn’t a real need for me to learn how to drive with a clutch. . . . here's why: Most cars run on automatic transmission nowadays, and unless I’m intending to get a van or a sports car (that I can't afford), learning how to drive with three pedals was virtually useless. Besides the type of vehicles that one could drive with a manual license, I don’t see it as any different than having an automatic driving license. The only thing that separates these two is pride – pride in the ability to manoeuvre a transmission that is slowly going out of style. As someone who has grown up around manual drivers, I am here to tell you that having a manual license does not make you a better driver. So long as you don’t do stupid things and drive safely, you’re already 100 times better than the idiots listed below.     -------- Thinking of selling your car? sgCarMart Quotz guarantees the highest selling price for your car. We’ll even give you $100 cash if you find a better offer elsewhere! Get a free quote to find out how much your car is worth today!

    unicornfloof

    unicornfloof

    Buying a Tesla is not worth the money. Or is it?

    Ever since its first showroom launch in Singapore, Tesla has received a lot of attention and hype from local drivers. Located at One Assembly in Raffles City, the sparkling mini-showroom proudly features two units of what Elon Musk calls an “affordable” electric car – the Model 3 sedan. Intending to bring clean energy solutions to individuals globally, the high-profile American brand has raised the standard through its vehicles and proved that one could achieve a powerful and fast car without fossil fuels. Tesla drivers not only save money overall but save the earth as well. With the government intending to switch to an all-electric vehicle Singapore by 2040, the American brand’s local release came at just the right time. However, the main question still stands – is buying a Tesla worth it?   Are Teslas too expensive? According to Tesla’s sales portal, the Standard Range Plus Model 3 will cost $113,245* while the Model 3 Performance will go for $155,283*. Images were taken from Tesla Both prices do not include the cost of additional features and interior/exterior options, as well as COE, which means you could pay an additional $50,000 - $60,000. With the additional features, expect to pay about $173,245* for the Standard Range Plus Model 3 and $215,283* for the Model 3 Performance. For those prices, you can undoubtedly purchase something similar or more luxurious like the Renault Zoe Electric ($159,999*) or the BMW 2 Series Gran Coupe Luxury ($190,888*) and the Audi A4 ($188,016*). Although, it is worth noting that the Model 3's performance figures (0 - 100 km/h in 5.6s) obliterate every other car in its price bracket, making it an especially good deal. Audi A4 40 BMW 2 Series Gran Coupe Luxury Audi A4 45 Tesla Model 3 Images were taken from The Car Guide The Model 3 enjoys the EV Early Adopter Incentive (EEAI), which includes a 45% rebate of the ARF, capped at $20,000, and an additional reimbursement of $45,000. This rebate is the highest for any car in Singapore and its attractive discounts make drivers eager to own a piece of Elon Musk’s technology.  * All prices were taken from Tesla and sgCarMart Will there be charging problems for HDB owners? After its soft launch in July, Tesla has set up three charging points on the ninth floor in Orchard Central carpark. While private estate owners can opt to install a home charger with the help of Tesla Certified Installers, consumers living in HDB estates cannot enjoy the same luxury. Given that most Singaporeans live in HDB apartments, does this mean that prospective owners are only limited to these three stations? Even though there is a limited number of Tesla V3 Superchargers in Singapore, the Model 3 is compatible with Type 2 AC and CCS2 DC fast-charging stations. This allows drivers living in HDB estates to charge their cars at various third-party charging stations by SP Group, Shell-Greenlots and BlueSG. Image was taken from Shell Greenlots If you’re afraid that there won’t be enough places to charge your vehicle, there is a wide variety of different charging stations powered by various companies across Singapore. With BlueSG having more than 1,000 points across the island, it is safe to say that finding a charging station for your shiny new Tesla will be the least of your worries. Is the cost of maintenance high? Contrary to widely held belief, the cost of maintaining a Model 3 is much more affordable than one thinks. Since Teslas are fully electric, many standard maintenance items do not apply. These include brake jobs, oil and filter changes, accessory belt replacements, engine air filter and fuel filter changes. Image was taken from AsiaOne The recommended routine maintenance includes tire rotation, brake fluid replacement, cabin air filter replacement, windscreen wipers replacement and air-conditioner servicing every two years. Overall, the cost of maintaining a Tesla is cheaper than fuel vehicles in the market. Is a Tesla still worth it? There are still a select few who believe that going electric brings more harm than good. While concerns regarding the cost of a Tesla are still circulating amongst the local driving community, the company has significant plans to expand its offerings and make its luxury sedans more affordable. Coupled with the extensive number of rebates from the government, drivers might find themselves owning a piece of extraordinary technology without paying excessively. At the end of the day, the benefit of owning a Tesla outweighs its cons. Sure, it is a lot of money to invest in a vehicle, but you can’t put a price tag on saving the environment.     --- Thinking of selling your car? sgCarMart Quotz guarantees the highest selling price for your car. We’ll even give you $100 cash if you find a better offer elsewhere! Get a free quote to find out how much your car is worth today!

    unicornfloof

    unicornfloof

×