Chile Forum

we got advice on this recently. It is only likely to be an issue if you are moving a houseload and big furniture, and you pass a checkpoint where the carabineros have to stop you. Doesn't sound like your case at all. Agree that the bed could be the ojnly issue, and even that not likely.

go play outside wrote: if you are moving a houseload and big furniture, and you pass a checkpoint where the carabineros have to stop you.

It's not just the retenes where they can stop you. Any place, any time, if a load looks as though it may be a mudanza. If you are taking advice from chileans that these stops only take place at retenes, find another advisor and learn to say "chamullo."

chamullo, chamullo, chamullo, jajajaja

After all this back and forth, I want to know the real life results of what the OP decides on.

MercyMe wrote:chamullo, chamullo, chamullo, jajajaja

Escribes jajaja a lo chileno, como si fueras, um, NyC.

To clarify. I got advice on what a salvoconducto should cover. If it is some boxes and a couple of small tables etc, it's no problem. The big furniture, several pieces like a fridge and dining table, things that could that suggest a houseload is being shifted, are apparently what may trigger the need for a salvo. This was from a govt-linked lawyer who I trust, so is as good an opinion as you are likely to get.

The being stopped is my own experience of 4 years in the South and Santiago. The only time I have been stopped, ever, no matter what I was carrying, is at checkpoints. So as you are five minutes down the road, I would humbly suggest there is slim chance of you stumbling upon a carabinero who will give a sh%t considering what you are carrying is in the grey area anyway.

So, chamullo back atcha.

go play outside wrote:To clarify. I got advice on what a salvoconducto should cover. If it is some boxes and a couple of small tables etc, it's no problem. The big furniture, several pieces like a fridge and dining table, things that could that suggest a houseload is being shifted, are apparently what may trigger the need for a salvo. This was from a govt-linked lawyer who I trust, so is as good an opinion as you are likely to get.

The being stopped is my own experience of 4 years in the South and Santiago. The only time I have been stopped, ever, no matter what I was carrying, is at checkpoints. So as you are five minutes down the road, I would humbly suggest there is slim chance of you stumbling upon a carabinero who will give a sh%t considering what you are carrying is in the grey area anyway.

So, chamullo back atcha.

We are back to dealing with the issue of "probabilities" and "what has been our experience" vs "what the law provides for."

I agree that you stand a good chance of avoiding problems by trying to fly under the radar with small shipments. There is a lot of chatter on the forum that suggests violation of the law simply because of a low probability of interception. There are also attorneys in CL who promote violation of the law under the premise that those probabilities are low.

However, despite what our experience may indicate, Carabineros certainly do commonly make control stops outside of the confines of the fixed retenes. And in fact our experience in transporting materials down here that require documentation, is that all of the interceptions have been at places other than retenes. And it's probably just a coincidence that a pacomobile in Chile is called "retén móvil."

patagoniax wrote:We are back to dealing with the issue of "probabilities" and "what has been our experience" vs "what the law provides for."

Indeed, which is what happens when the law itself is not clear and the interpretation down to the individual at the time. Happens a lot here. I even read the law, which I usually now do in such cases. The next step was seeking legal advice and then weighing up the remaining grey area with probability.

Unfortunately I can't back this up with photos, so you win.