Vintage Mustang Forums banner

41 - 51 of 51 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
679 Posts
Discussion Starter #41
It was almost all taxes not fees.

Amazing how easy it was to get a title for a car with very little proof. If anything I would have expected CA to be a little more difficult.
They DO inspect the vin to make sure its the one you're registering.... but yeah...like... this vehicle could have a salvage title in another state and there'd be no way of knowing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
597 Posts
Congrats on getting it sorted out. DMV is a nightmare. I have a car that has not been on the road since about '66. Title? Yea right....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
424 Posts
Schweigert,

I live in So Cal. a couple of years ago I purchased a 65 fb roller chasis in WA.
The fender VIN did not match the door tag, door had been replaced.
I contacted a private DMV agent service. There were many to choose from in Orange County.
They came out to the house to inspect the car, no motor, trans or interior.
The fender Vin number matched the WA pink. They completed & processed all the DMV paperwork and had plates for me to pick up at there office in less than 3 weeks.
The new pink was sent to me direct from Sacramento.
Cost me $110.00 for their mobile service, start to finish.

Not sure if the lack of a pink would be an issue. or just cost a bit more for additional forms and or verification.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
679 Posts
Discussion Starter #45
Schweigert,

I live in So Cal. a couple of years ago I purchased a 65 fb roller chasis in WA.
The fender VIN did not match the door tag, door had been replaced.
I contacted a private DMV agent service. There were many to choose from in Orange County.
They came out to the house to inspect the car, no motor, trans or interior.
The fender Vin number matched the WA pink. They completed & processed all the DMV paperwork and had plates for me to pick up at there office in less than 3 weeks.
The new pink was sent to me direct from Sacramento.
Cost me $110.00 for their mobile service, start to finish.

Not sure if the lack of a pink would be an issue. or just cost a bit more for additional forms and or verification.

yeah it was so expensive not only because of a lack of a pink... but because no pink exists in the DMV system. basically registered a brand new car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
To clarify the VIN verification requirement, unless something has changed recently, the VIN verification is required in California if the car is titled out of state, it was previously registered in California but it is no longer in the CA DMV system, or it is a revived junk or salvage. If you have a valid California pink slip issued for that car, generally no VIN verification is required. Back fees may be an issue if the car is not on planned non-operation status.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
348 Posts
To clarify the VIN verification requirement, unless something has changed recently, the VIN verification is required in California if the car is titled out of state, it was previously registered in California but it is no longer in the CA DMV system, or it is a revived junk or salvage. If you have a valid California pink slip issued for that car, generally no VIN verification is required. Back fees may be an issue if the car is not on planned non-operation status.
Very standard to have a VIN inspection on an out of state vehicle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
357 Posts
In the future, or for any perspective buyers reading, insist on a title or take significant money off the price. The last time I had to have a vehicle verified by the CHP, the VIN Officer told me that he had a guy who brought in a completely restored Chevelle, and he had had DMV run the VIN when he bought it, so he felt confident that his ownership wouldn’t be contested. Well, evidently the CHP database is connected with the rest of the country, and goes back way further than the DMV’s records, and there was a theft reported in like New York or something 30 years before; the officer said they had to impound the car on the spot. He said that the guy who had sunk $50k into this restoration was just out the money, but if he had had a title (even an out of state title) that he would have had some recourse (putting the burden of proof on the owner who had reported the car stolen or something). I don’t remember all the details, but the VIN Officer was a super-cool guy, into cars, and he said it broke his heart to take this guy’s Chevelle, especially since he had done some due-diligence, and obviously wasn’t a crook, but “the law is the law”. Also, he clarified to me that it’s not running/driving, just “complete appearing”.

Another option in the “no title” situation (that I have used successfully in the past) is to have a VIN Verifier file lien-sale paperwork on your behalf. You have to make statements regarding the value of your labor invested and storage incurred, etc, but you do not have to be a licensed shop to put a lien on a vehicle that you are in possession of (you know the saying possession is 9/10’s of the law). What’s nice about this option is that even if there is another registered owner, they would have to provide proof of ownership AND pay the lien to take the car back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
679 Posts
Discussion Starter #50
In the future, or for any perspective buyers reading, insist on a title or take significant money off the price. The last time I had to have a vehicle verified by the CHP, the VIN Officer told me that he had a guy who brought in a completely restored Chevelle, and he had had DMV run the VIN when he bought it, so he felt confident that his ownership wouldn’t be contested. Well, evidently the CHP database is connected with the rest of the country, and goes back way further than the DMV’s records, and there was a theft reported in like New York or something 30 years before; the officer said they had to impound the car on the spot. He said that the guy who had sunk $50k into this restoration was just out the money, but if he had had a title (even an out of state title) that he would have had some recourse (putting the burden of proof on the owner who had reported the car stolen or something). I don’t remember all the details, but the VIN Officer was a super-cool guy, into cars, and he said it broke his heart to take this guy’s Chevelle, especially since he had done some due-diligence, and obviously wasn’t a crook, but “the law is the law”. Also, he clarified to me that it’s not running/driving, just “complete appearing”.

Another option in the “no title” situation (that I have used successfully in the past) is to have a VIN Verifier file lien-sale paperwork on your behalf. You have to make statements regarding the value of your labor invested and storage incurred, etc, but you do not have to be a licensed shop to put a lien on a vehicle that you are in possession of (you know the saying possession is 9/10’s of the law). What’s nice about this option is that even if there is another registered owner, they would have to provide proof of ownership AND pay the lien to take the car back.
really good info.


So I have the Vin Verifier coming to my house (which is the final part I need to complete the paperwork for the new title) - and I was going to start body work on it as soon as the vin verifier gives me the final paperwork but BEFORE i got the final CA title

so you're suggesting I can have him file lien-sale paperwork as well as the Vin verification document for additional safety?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
357 Posts
really good info.


So I have the Vin Verifier coming to my house (which is the final part I need to complete the paperwork for the new title) - and I was going to start body work on it as soon as the vin verifier gives me the final paperwork but BEFORE i got the final CA title

so you're suggesting I can have him file lien-sale paperwork as well as the Vin verification document for additional safety?
If they think the application for title paperwork is cut and dry, there’s no need to file lien-sale paperwork. The cost of doing that was a few hundred bucks as I remember, and I still had to file all the other paperwork as well. But I know my Verifier pretty well (we’ve worked together for years), and they told me before the paperwork was filed that there was an owner of record “in the system” that was not the person I purchased the vehicle from, so I didn’t have a choice.

You’ll find that’s often the situation with lost title cars. Somebody had a title but lost it (party A), but sold the car (party B), and it may have changed hands a couple more times (parties C&D) before you got your Bill of Sale from (party D to yourself). In California, the distinction is if party A filed a Planned Non-Op, then they’ll still be the owner of record in the DMV system (ownership records only fall out of the system if registration is not renewed for something like 10 consecutive years, but stay there forever if a PNO has been filed), and a Bill of Sale from party D means nothing when party A is still the owner of record. Hope all that makes sense, and hope that this isn’t the case for you.

At the end of the day, you’re going about this the best way you can (at this point)z Pick a good verifier, and trust in their professionalism.
 
41 - 51 of 51 Posts
Top