• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Diamondave

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. After multiple attempts to convince local DMV offices that I was entitled to claim collector status thus exemption from back fees and penalties, I was unsuccessful. I did however convince the folks at the La guna Hills office to send my papers to Sacramento along with a cashier’s check for $343. That is the amount I estimated to be the current year fees. I was told to wait six to eight weeks for a ruling. Starting week nine thru week sixteen I made no less than 31 phone calls to the office handling registrations before I finally spoke to a supervisor about the bogas excuses and distinct lack of effort to complete the review of my documents. The following week I received a call from the actual technician who would process my papers. A few days later all my documents were returned “approved” with the note requiring smog certification. They did not actually exempt the back fees and penalties, per se. The itemized billing just stopped charging once the total reached $343. The remaining fees and penalties were left blank or omitted. The end result is the same, I guess. Although I would have preferred an honest accounting and ruling in writing that could be used as precedent. I have not yet had the smog test. The two ‘one-day permits’ I was given for smog test went unused and expired after 60 days. The current year tags expire in April so I will have to pay a couple hundred more for next year by the time I get smogged. All things considered I would have been better off to have accepted the $619 quote given early last August, and skipped the frustration and delay. I received a bunch of abuse from most of the clerks and supers (polite abuse I’ll allow) that I dealt with. The worst from Huntington Beach and the least from Laguna Hills. They all lied or tried to bulls__t me. For example, telling me they had record of a ticket issued after the tags expired, therefore all fees were due. I checked the superior court record and found a ticket issued for seat belt (not) used before the tags expired. To all who are interested, I say keep trying. If we don’t fight for our rights, we will loose them. Just be patient and calm when you present at the DMV, and have all your ducks lined up before you go. Good Luck. Dave
  2. I am aware it needs to pass smog test. DMV has told me also. Once I get a ruling on the back fees/penalties and pay those costs, DMV will give me a temporary pass to drive it to be smog tested. I also need insurance before it is driven anywhere. We will wait for a while longer...thanks.
  3. I have a verification form and can get a local LEO to fill it in. However, in four DMV visits no-one as questioned the vehicle. I do have the expired registration for 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, and 2007 as well as all the lien sale doc's with the same information. Anyway, it seems that my essay has not garnered the support I thought it would. So it will be omitted from my package. I am on hold for the time being, waiting for some back channel negotiations to run their course. Fingers crossed...
  4. I have decided to send my papers to DMV in SACTO and take my chances. I was able to consult Bill Adams (thanks Bill). I have written a cover letter to send with my package explaining in detail what each paper provides in evidence to support my case. Then, I wrote an essay why I believe I am entitled to the exemption provided by cvc4604(d)3. here it is: PHILOSOPHY BEHIND THE PLANNED NON-OP REQUIREMENT IN THE CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE Before enactment of cvc4604 drivers in California were often tardy in paying yearly registration fees, slowing the revenue stream our government bureaucrats depend on. So it was decided that a system of late fees and penalties was needed to encourage the prompt and timely payment of vehicle taxes, thus smoothing out the cash flow. All late Fees are charged for this same reason. That is, to bias the tendency for payment towards early and away from being late. This applies to the short term delinquency. While there are many reasons for short term lateness, such as forgot due date, low on funds etc. all taxpayers will normally pay their taxes on time or as promptly as they can. Now, mindful of those taxpayers who object to paying road taxes on vehicles not actually being used, the category of planned non-operation was conceived to provide relief for those payers whose vehicle was down for extended periods of time. (Partial year or medium term) To prevent abuse, the notice of planned non-op was required to be filed before registration expired. Now, let’s consider the case for long term lapse of registration, often multiple years or even decades. There really is but one, and only one, reason a vehicle has a long term lapse in registration. It is deliberate on the part of the owner/taxpayer, but it is not to drive the vehicle without paying. Not at all. Just the opposite, in fact. It is because the vehicle has broken down before registration has expired, and for whatever reason the owner has elected not to repair. So when the bill for next year’s registration comes, it goes into the infamous circular file. The vehicle then sits, parked in an out of the way location, off street. (It must be off street or it would be towed away and impounded). No one is driving a vehicle that has multiple years expired tags. Obviously, it would be cited and/or impounded by the first LEO who observes it. Now then, we come to the reason that vehicles 25 years old and older and of some interest to at least one collector, is deserving of an exemption from paying those back fees/penalties. First, the vehicle was not being driven by some scofflaw avoiding the payment of road use taxes. Second, it was not the collector who failed to pre-notify DMV of the vehicle’s breakdown. It was the registered prior owner who made that error. But, DMV has not been cheated because the vehicle was not (could not) be driven. Thus, in all fairness, the collector who has resurrected this dead relic is entitled to start over with a new registration, free from any tax and penalty for road use that never accrued. Please note, it has nothing to do with having applied for and receiving historical status and corresponding license plate. That plate restricts use of the vehicle to a very limited scope, and therefore the owner pays an extremely low, one time fee. The statute providing exemption to the collector uses the DESCRIPTION found in the code for historical status to define the historically interesting vehicle belonging to the collector as eligible for the exemption from paying those back taxes/penalties that never accrued. The collector still must pay for the current year road taxes because the vehicle is now using the road. I hope this essay has made clear to the reader why the exemption for collectable vehicles per California vehicle code 4604(d)3 is fair and just. It is not a loophole exploited by a person of questionable character to avoid paying fees. In reality, it is DMV whose denial of state mandated fee relief procedures that may well be questioned. It is my opinion that DMV should be in all cases fair and trustworthy for its clients, and not driven to gouge the highest possible tax from us. I am sure, nearly everyone will agree, DMV works for us, not the other way around. Signed, DAVID J DEVONSHIRE CAR & MOTORCYCLE COLLECTOR, TAXPAYER, CITIZEN SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA
  5. Well, I called the 916.657.6560 DMV customer service line this morning. My call was answered by a live person within a few minutes, but was not able to give any help except to transfer my call to 916.657.8035. There my call was on hold for 20 minutes or so before allowing me to request a call back. After waiting another 20 minutes without result I called again and asked again for a call back. When the call came i was asked for my name and plate number, then put on hold "for just a moment" . 7 minutes of awful musac later the line went silent. 3 minutes after that the call disconnected. So again I called and requested a call back. about an hour later my call was returned. I explained the reason for my call and my name and plate number. the "technician" looked at his computer the told me my vehicle was not designated historical already so was not exempt. I asked if he was familiar with this procedure and his response was "could I read the code 4606(d)3 to him, please" I requested that his manager call me as I had already have spoken with low level tech's and mid level super's enough to realize he had not a clue. A short time later another tech returned my call from earlier. She explained that they were just phone answer folks who knew nothing and could do nothing to help. Her advice was to mail all my papers to SACTO attn. REGISTRATION and let them sort it out. I'm still waiting for that manager to call, but not holding my breath. I really need Bill Adams help if he is still available. Can anyone contact Bill for advice? I see it's been a couple of years since his last post. I have already sent 2 emails without response. HELP!
  6. Well, I tried again at a different DMV office, in Santa ANA this time. I was told that to waive back fees/penalties I had to already have HISTORICAL plates. I am frustrated as this was my fourth DMV trip. I tried to convince them that to qualify under cvc5005 was sufficient but again I was refused. Interestingly, the amount due is now down to $619 from over $1200 then $1100, Then $700 from each previous trip. And still they would not transfer title unless I paid the fees/penalties. I guess I will send the papers to SACTO and hope for the best. I sure would like to pull rank on them but who can I call? added info... They also told me the highlighted info I supplied was not real, did not come from DMV website, and I was not allowed to have that information anyway... and they refused to even try to verify even when I told them how to access it in three clicks. On Monday, I will call the Public Inquiries Unit for more reference materials and try again. I'll report the results when and if...
  7. I guess your'e right. I was thinking of elevating to the manager of this office because I'm sure that I am correct. However, I recognize that one bureaucrat is more likely to support another rather than a citizen who disagree's . Although, I feel a need to adjust this person's attitude. It is a sad day when one is unable to obtain a fair ruling in spite of presenting clear evidence of the law and official procedures. In fairness I have to say that the lien sale procedure does not specifically exclude historical vehicles, although it should .The authority to charge back fees and penalties is based on the PNO (planed non-operational ) requirements, which do not apply to historical vehicles. I may elect to start over at a different DMV office.
  8. Hi. New member here. Just had my third trip to DMV without success. I can't seem to convince a stubborn supervisor to follow the law or the instructions in her manual. here are my details: I bought a 1987 chevy pickup from a repair shop owner who had a lien sale because he went out of business. The registered owner and the lienholder are both deceased. No one contested the sale. no one bid on sale day. I bought 2 weeks later for $200. Last registered in 2011. vehicle was flat bed moved from private property to private property. (no wheels touched highway) I quoted cvc 4604 (d)3 as instructed with I am a collector... this vehicle is exempt... statement. I have provided CNO to cover entire period from 2010 to today. (actually 3 separate cno's that overlap). I brought highlighted copies of cvc 4604; 5004; 5050: 5051. I also brought highlighted copies of DMV handbook "Vehicle Industry Registration Procedures (REG 611 ) chapter 3 copied straight from DMV website. The handbook states historical vehicles are exempt from PNO req's, and CNO req's apply to dissallow penalties and back fees. And still this supervisor insists that nothing matters except that my purchase was at lien sale and back fees/penalties apply. I pointed out that back fees/ penalties are based on PNO req's and do not apply. She say's if I had a title then ok, but it's a lien sale and I must pay (originally $1250, then $1100, then $700 if and only if I apply for historical plates) So I asked to transfer title only without registration ( it doesn't run yet anyway) but that was refused. (must pay first) I showed the section on transfers without registration but was sent away. I am more than a little frustrated but not yet angry. Any suggestions? (I'm referring to DMV office in Costa Mesa, CA)