[upsidedownfunnel]

Originally Posted by Billfitz

That might not be the dumbest thing I've ever heard of, but it's definitely in the top ten.

That is not a really a big deal.

You know what is REALLY stupid in California? New cars don't have temp license plates. They just have tiny stickers on the front right side of the windshield that aren't readable unless they're taken off. So any new-ish looking car can drive around without plates without any repercussion. Less responsible people violate toll booths and traffic cameras by just driving around with dealer paper plates and frames.

[CalCarNut]

Originally Posted by upsidedownfunnel

That is not a really a big deal.

You know what is REALLY stupid in California? New cars don't have temp license plates. They just have tiny stickers on the front right side of the windshield that aren't readable unless they're taken off. So any new-ish looking car can drive around without plates without any repercussion. Less responsible people violate toll booths and traffic cameras by just driving around with dealer paper plates and frames.

I believe that is changing shortly actually.

Most traffic/red light cams have been deemed illegal; the only ones I see that are still working are by the metro system crosses......

I see a Mercedes near me that was bought before my '15 that still has dealer plates on it. That amazes me he hasn't been popped yet.......

[Billfitz]

Originally Posted by upsidedownfunnel

That is not a really a big deal.

It is to the OP. In the real world you buy a car, you register it and put your own plates on it. If you don't register it and get your own plates you can't drive it. You certainly can't drive around with plates that identify the previous owner of the car as the present owner, leaving them in the position that the OP is in. Nothing about it makes any sense. La-la land indeed.

[Y0tsuya]

I have a story even more ridiculous. Earlier this year I was contacted by my insurance company seeking details on a crash. Apparently a lady I don't know driving a car I never owned was covered under my policy #. Not only that, they can't find a policyholder with her name either. I very politely told them it's not my problem, and recorded a brief statement for the other party's insurance. After a few weeks they closed the case and I was never bothered again. I can only guess the lady was uninsured and just gave the other poor SOB fake insurance info.

[Eternal]

I had a similar incident of being blamed for something not my fault. I moved back from overseas and had my wifes car (SUV) shipped to North Carolina from overseas. I got it registered and got my plates. A few days later I get a toll violation....from Florida. And there was a picture of the vehicle. It was a black Nissan Sentra. My wife drives a silver Toyota Highlander. I called them up and told them about it. They asked what my plate number was. I told them, it matched the plate of the vehicle in the picture. I told them I was in the military living in Korea on the date of the violation and that plate number did not belong to me at the time. She told me that is not their problem, the violation when to the registered person of the plate.

Absolutely ridiculous. They called back asking for payment, I told them to piss off. Can't wait to see where it goes. I am not paying a penny.

[Billfitz]

Originally Posted by Eternal

I told them I was in the military living in Korea on the date of the violation and that plate number did not belong to me at the time.

NC DMV can verify it hadn't been issued yet. The plate in the photo was probably a fake. Don't leave it hanging, get a statement from NC DMV, send a copy of it to Florida.

[Eternal]

Originally Posted by Billfitz

NC DMV can verify it hadn't been issued yet. The plate in the photo was probably a fake. Don't leave it hanging, get a statement from NC DMV, send a copy of it to Florida.

I offered to send them a copy of my Registration (which was issued after the date of violation). I could ask DMV for some proof, if Florida presses the issue.

[atam1980]

Originally Posted by jmg

Short version:

Last year I turned in my leased 328i.

A few months later, apparently, the driver of my lease returned 328i ,Party A, got into an accident.

My car was still under my insurance according to the DMV or something, so I got the notice from the insurance company of Party B, the car that Party A hit. (edit: DMV records showed my insurance, but in actuality, that policy was ended when I lease returned the car)

I denied any liability and sent Party B's insurance company the release of liability to BMWFS from the lease return.

Recently, more than a year later, I got a letter from some lawyer saying that Party A is declaring bankruptcy and that I have to file to object to discharge this person' debt to me.

First of all, he is not in debt to me since I had nothing to do with the circus that is his life.

Second of all, I want nothing to do with this deadbeat, who drove a used 328i he probably couldn't afford and didn't have the capacity to didn't have insurance, which is required in the state of CA.

Seriously, what kind of loser has this kind of pathetic life? Get it together man!

I had something similar happen on a car I sold. The new owner got the car impounded for some reason, and it was sitting in a lot. I received a letter telling me I had to take action or risk the car being auctioned off. When I called the tow lot, they told me that those letters are sent to everyone that has ever been registered as an owner of the vehicle and that if I'm not the current owner I can ignore it.

[asuh1991]

Sorry to hear about that OP.

What a deadbeat indeed.

[upsidedownfunnel]

Originally Posted by Billfitz

It is to the OP. In the real world you buy a car, you register it and put your own plates on it. If you don't register it and get your own plates you can't drive it. You certainly can't drive around with plates that identify the previous owner of the car as the present owner, leaving them in the position that the OP is in. Nothing about it makes any sense. La-la land indeed.

But the DMV updates registration info. The license plate is just a number. As long as you follow all proper procedures when selling a car, you're fine. I'm from Illinois so it was a little weird to me too, but California probably sells the most used cars in the country. If not the most, pretty close to it. The system so far hasn't introduced many issues. Even the lack of a temporary plate isn't a problem for us. It's more a problem for the state identifying scofflaws.

[rlmesq]

Originally Posted by upsidedownfunnel

That is not a really a big deal.

You know what is REALLY stupid in California? New cars don't have temp license plates. They just have tiny stickers on the front right side of the windshield that aren't readable unless they're taken off. So any new-ish looking car can drive around without plates without any repercussion. Less responsible people violate toll booths and traffic cameras by just driving around with dealer paper plates and frames.

I got a notice of parking ticket in Los Angeles last year. It was issued while I was at a community event here in Northern California, 600 miles away, with the District Attorney, Sheriff and Chief of Police.

In order to meet the deadline to respond, I had to send a declaration before I had access to the photos... and my response was overruled.

When I got the photos a few days later, it turned out it was a very similar 435i, but blue instead of SBM, with a VIN that was a couple of digits off from mine... that had been running around for almost two years without plates.



I faxed all of the correspondence -- which, at that point, was about thirty pages -- to the ombudsman in the LA mayor's office. I have to give them credit... the issue was resolved the next day

[Billfitz]

Originally Posted by upsidedownfunnel

As long as you follow all proper procedures when selling a car, you're fine.

Does that include going to the DMV with the buyer to be sure that he registers it?

[chiefneil]

Originally Posted by Eternal

I had a similar incident of being blamed for something not my fault. I moved back from overseas and had my wifes car (SUV) shipped to North Carolina from overseas. I got it registered and got my plates. A few days later I get a toll violation....from Florida. And there was a picture of the vehicle. It was a black Nissan Sentra. My wife drives a silver Toyota Highlander. I called them up and told them about it. They asked what my plate number was. I told them, it matched the plate of the vehicle in the picture. I told them I was in the military living in Korea on the date of the violation and that plate number did not belong to me at the time. She told me that is not their problem, the violation when to the registered person of the plate.

Absolutely ridiculous. They called back asking for payment, I told them to piss off. Can't wait to see where it goes. I am not paying a penny.

A few years ago there was a somewhat similar story here in AZ. By law, photo radar tickets have to be served in person if the recipient doesn't acknowledge the mailed notice.

The company doing the serving was apparently taking short-cuts, as there were cases where they claimed to have served people who had documentation that they were not even in the country at the time.

Tickets still got upheld because Muni court judges don't give a crap.

[madmonkey]

Originally Posted by jmg

Yes, I was very thorough. I was informed by Party B's insurance that they found out my information from DMV records.

I thought so too. Someone else pointed out that the DMV won't wipe the insurance information from the car until it is insured again by the new owner...Looks like gap in DMV logic to me, but not the first time red tape has been more cumbersome than it has to be.

Something similar happened many years ago when my dad sold our old Ford Maverick. 3 months later SFPD called our house to to ask, "if we reported a stolen vehicle and that they have recovered it."

Turns out the nice girl that bought our car never registered it with the DMV, so they still had my dad's info, even though he had gone to the DMV to hand in the ownership recording the sale. Public tax dollars hard at work for you! Lucky for us he had a notarized copy when the cops showed up to take his statement.

I suppose since Person A filed for bankruptcy protection, Person B's insurance is just grasping at straws to try and get someone else to pay. Weak and flimsy on their part - sucks that you got caught up in something you have no responsibility or obligation for.

[rlmesq]

Originally Posted by Eternal

I had a similar incident of being blamed for something not my fault. I moved back from overseas and had my wifes car (SUV) shipped to North Carolina from overseas. I got it registered and got my plates. A few days later I get a toll violation....from Florida. And there was a picture of the vehicle. It was a black Nissan Sentra. My wife drives a silver Toyota Highlander. I called them up and told them about it. They asked what my plate number was. I told them, it matched the plate of the vehicle in the picture. I told them I was in the military living in Korea on the date of the violation and that plate number did not belong to me at the time. She told me that is not their problem, the violation when to the registered person of the plate.

Absolutely ridiculous. They called back asking for payment, I told them to piss off. Can't wait to see where it goes. I am not paying a penny.

I'm usually not a big fan of contacting the media, but this has some appeal as a TV news human interest story. Check with your local TV station and contract your local state legislators and members of Congress.

"Waiting to see where it goes" can be a real nightmare. Unpaid violations could be added to your registration bill, holding your renewal hostage until you pay.

[upsidedownfunnel]

Originally Posted by Billfitz

Does that include going to the DMV with the buyer to be sure that he registers it?

If it's a private sale, you submit documentation indicating the car was sold and you release liability of the car. Simple. You don't rely on the buyer to do anything.

[upsidedownfunnel]

Originally Posted by chiefneil

A few years ago there was a somewhat similar story here in AZ. By law, photo radar tickets have to be served in person if the recipient doesn't acknowledge the mailed notice.

The company doing the serving was apparently taking short-cuts, as there were cases where they claimed to have served people who had documentation that they were not even in the country at the time.

Tickets still got upheld because Muni court judges don't give a crap.

Although it's wrong, most tickets get upheld because most people are lying. I don't agree with it, but let's be honest, most people would do/say anything to get out of paying a $50 ticket.

[upsidedownfunnel]

re-reading the first post, there's not really even an issue here. The original issue was that there was a small mixup and Party B's insurance thought you were liable. You weren't, provided documentation, and you're in the clear.

The fact that you got a letter indicating that Party A had declared bankruptcy is NOTHING. They just send that to everybody that Party A might have a debt to. It means nothing to you as far as liability is concerned.

Why you are insulting a guy down on his luck? How do you know he didn't have insurance? Party B's insurance might have just contacted you because they thought you were the current owner. That happens all the time, you'll be fine.

From the info you've given, there's nothing indicating that Party B's insurance is going after you for liability on the car. It just sounds like you want to talk about how much better you are than Party A.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by upsidedownfunnel

re-reading the first post, there's not really even an issue here. The original issue was that there was a small mixup and Party B's insurance thought you were liable. You weren't, provided documentation, and you're in the clear.

The fact that you got a letter indicating that Party A had declared bankruptcy is NOTHING. They just send that to everybody that Party A might have a debt to. It means nothing to you as far as liability is concerned.

Why you are insulting a guy down on his luck? How do you know he didn't have insurance? Party B's insurance might have just contacted you because they thought you were the current owner. That happens all the time, you'll be fine.

From the info you've given, there's nothing indicating that Party B's insurance is going after you for liability on the car. It just sounds like you want to talk about how much better you are than Party A.

Thanks for you input. As I have explained twice now, he is a deadbeat because he did not get insurance, which is required here in CA, and then did not claim responsibility for the accident. By declaring bankruptcy, he is further absolving himself of his responsibilities of not only whatever he owes Party B, but his other creditors. He was reckless enough to get into an accident not 2 months after purchasing the vehicle, again without insurance, and lives in a poverty stricken area. It sounds like he went in over his head on the car he could barely afford because he couldn't even afford insurance or purposefully disobeyed the law so he didn't have to pay. To me, that pretty much fits the definition of a deadbeat in the classical sense: someone who is disreputable and feckless (ie irresponsible).

[upsidedownfunnel]

Originally Posted by jmg

Thanks for you input. As I have explained twice now, he is a deadbeat because he did not get insurance, which is required here in CA, and then did not claim responsibility for the accident. By declaring bankruptcy, he is further absolving himself of his responsibilities of not only whatever he owes Party B, but his other creditors. He was reckless enough to get into an accident not 2 months after purchasing the vehicle, again without insurance, and lives in a poverty stricken area. It sounds like he went in over his head on the car he could barely afford because he couldn't even afford insurance or purposefully disobeyed the law so he didn't have to pay. To me, that pretty much fits the definition of a deadbeat in the classical sense: someone who is disreputable and feckless (ie irresponsible).

I'm just curious, how do you know they don't have insurance?

Also, we have no context on why he declared bankruptcy. Yeah, one possible explanation is that he didn't have insurance, got into an accident, and owes more money than he has. The thing is, unless you know something we don't, that is just an assumption. If this guy's life really sucks as much as you say, then what's the point of beating him when he's down? You are HARDLY affected. Why don't you put yourself in Party B's shoes? All you had to do was submit documentation saying you're not liable, no big deal. Party B has to deal with an uninsured motorist (assuming that's the case).

[jmg]

Originally Posted by upsidedownfunnel

I'm just curious, how do you know they don't have insurance?

Party B's insurance told me so.

Originally Posted by upsidedownfunnel

Also, we have no context on why he declared bankruptcy. Yeah, one possible explanation is that he didn't have insurance, got into an accident, and owes more money than he has. The thing is, unless you know something we don't, that is just an assumption. If this guy's life really sucks as much as you say, then what's the point of beating him when he's down? You are HARDLY affected.

I don't know him, he's not on this forum, and I'm not, nor will I ever, reveal his name or address. He is not affected by me venting on a forum.

Originally Posted by upsidedownfunnel

Why don't you put yourself in Party B's shoes? All you had to do was submit documentation saying you're not liable, no big deal. Party B has to deal with an uninsured motorist (assuming that's the case).

I already submitted documentation to Party B's insurance. In no way have I condemned Party B in my posts. This is entirely Party A's fault. Additionally, Party B should have uninsured motorist protection, so they are probably fine. Party B's insurance came after me so that they could recoup some of their money, understandably.

Just to clarify, this thread was made to vent, not necessarily seek advice, although advice is appreciated. I've done what I think I needed to do to legally protect myself. I just hope that I don't have to deal with it in the future should they come after me again. Remember, they can come after me even if they don't have a leg to stand on, it still costs time and money to fight back.

I should note that my wife was victim of a fraudulent insurance claim against her in a separate incident. The other party in the accident claimed all kinds of medical problems from a parking lot bumper rub at 5 mph and wanted to sue for medical bills. My insurance fought back and denied all of their fraudulent claims. They were crooks, another bunch of deadbeats trying to get something for nothing. We fixed their car through our insurance, but they wanted a free ride. These lowlifes probably got charged with fraud and they deserved it.

[jeffc83]

Originally Posted by jmg

Party B's insurance told me so.



I don't know him, he's not on this forum, and I'm not, nor will I ever, reveal his name or address. He is not affected by me venting on a forum.



I already submitted documentation to Party B's insurance. In no way have I condemned Party B in my posts. This is entirely Party A's fault. Additionally, Party B should have uninsured motorist protection, so they are probably fine. Party B's insurance came after me so that they could recoup some of their money, understandably.

Just to clarify, this thread was made to vent, not necessarily seek advice, although advice is appreciated. I've done what I think I needed to do to legally protect myself. I just hope that I don't have to deal with it in the future should they come after me again. Remember, they can come after me even if they don't have a leg to stand on, it still costs time and money to fight back.

I should note that my wife was victim of a fraudulent insurance claim against her in a separate incident. The other party in the accident claimed all kinds of medical problems from a parking lot bumper rub at 5 mph and wanted to sue for medical bills. My insurance fought back and denied all of their fraudulent claims. They were crooks, another bunch of deadbeats trying to get something for nothing. We fixed their car through our insurance, but they wanted a free ride. These lowlifes probably got charged with fraud and they deserved it.

Not sure about others but I knew you were just venting and took it with a grain of salt. You are entitled to your opinions and in my own, yes, the guy is a deadbeat.

Now that next set of people claiming the world in a 5mph fender bender are well beyond lowlife deadbeats! "Whiplash" my ass if that's what they claimed! What else did they go for? You threw out their back and broke their knee caps? (I know that's what some would "like" to do to those people) Friggin' people man.... Just glad to hear the honest party won!