California bill of sale question

[WANNAT]

California bill of sale I'm working on buying a 40 coupe that has a pink slip on non op, and has been on non op for a few years.
The seller has a bill of sale From the guy he bought it from, but he says he won't give me a bill of sale because he'll be charged taxes.
instead wants to write me a contract. This doesn't sound legit to me.
has anyone ever heard of this?
In California, I've only bought cars with a Bill of sale and the DMV seems pretty adamant about this .
thanks for any response you can give me...Tom

[TJ]

O.K. If the guy has the pink slip (ownership certificate) and a bill of sale from the previous owner you should be able to bypass the current seller. Is the pink slip signed and dated by the prior owner? If so leave the seller out of it and act as if you bought it from the guy whose name is on the pink slip. You will have to have the VIN verified if the information is out of the system. Make sure when buying the car that the VIN on the frame matches the number on the pink slip. I would recommend you seek out a registration service to help you navigate the process. For the fee they charge it will save you a lot of hassles with those at the DMV office. It's always a toss up at those offices whether or not you get someone who knowledgeable and someone who is not.
I have no idea why he says he will charged taxes on a car he never transferred. I've never heard of writing a contract on something like this. The only person to pay "use tax" is you based on the bill of sale value.

[mrtexas]

In Texas there is a penalty for not transferring the title after 30 days. California the same?

[19Fordy]

Sounds like a "Skipping Title" or "Floating Title" situation. Not legal but frequently done.
http://www.wisdomandauthority.com/bl...-SKIPPING.aspx

[expavr]

This spells out CA DMV requirement for transfer of title.
http://www.dmv.org/ca-california/title-transfers.php
As TJ points out it is you (if a CA resident) who will pay the sales tax based on the value stated on the bill of sale. You say the the pink is "non op". The pink is the legal title to the vehicle. Its licensing and operational control is governed by the CA DMV vehicle registration. Whose name is on the "non op" vehicle registration? There is something fishy going on with this transaction which needs to be cleared up. If you're serious about this deal and a CA resident I think TJ's suggestion about using a registration service is an excellent recommendation. I've used their services in the past and found that the $150 fee was money well invested to avoid the DMV hassle.

[TJ]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Here's another suggestion. Ask the seller if you can talk with the owner on the title. Tell the seller that you want to deal with him on the title issue. Indicate that you want to leave him (seller)out of the issue and this would be the easiest way to do it.It will be interesting to see what the seller has to say. Again, do check the VIN # on the title against the VIN on the frame. If they don't match run from the deal. As expavr says this thing sounds a little "fishy". It may be on the up and up, but do your homework.

[ford38v8]

Rightly or wrongly, the seller may be thinking capital gains tax. I had that happen on a car purchase, and the seller was happy to sign a bill of sale for a reduced amount.

On a related issue to title, I've had sellers accompany me to the DMV to be paid on the spot upon title transfer. Also, it's nice for the car's provenance, to keep the original pink, and pay the DMV the additional $8.00 for "Lost Title".

[Charlie Stephens]

Originally Posted by ford38v8

Rightly or wrongly, the seller may be thinking capital gains tax. I had that happen on a car purchase, and the seller was happy to sign a bill of sale for a reduced amount.

On a related issue to title, I've had sellers accompany me to the DMV to be paid on the spot upon title transfer. Also, it's nice for the car's provenance, to keep the original pink, and pay the DMV the additional $8.00 for "Lost Title".

He is probably thinking of capital gains but also of the California State sales that should have been paid along with the penalty for not having reported the change of title when the first transfer was made. I don't know how much time you have but you do have to report it but there is a limit.

Charlie Stephens

[V8COOPMAN]

California wants a piece of the action EVERY time a car changes hands.....TAX and fees! The guy you're buying the car from technically owes Cal taxes and fees for transacting a purchase from his seller. Since the guy selling to you has no transactional "paperwork" or title from the state of Cal, he figures that HE never "officially" owned the car, and would rather not have to pay Cal transfer taxes and fees, like he "REALLY" never owned the car........wink, wink! This will possibly become ugly before getting through with it. Most states now make it a felony to make any dis-honest statements on automobile paperwork......beware! DD

[Oakhurst]

Years ago a friend of my went with the seller to the DMV to trade $ for title and reg. He gave the seller the cash as they waited. When they finally got to the counter, the DMV lady said something was missing. The seller took the paperwork and said he must have left it in the vehicle. He went out to the parking lot and guess what? He left with the vehicle to be sold and the cash.

[1937pickup]

Didn't Boyd Coddington get in trouble for something like this and wind up being fined a fair amount of money?

[V8COOPMAN]

Originally Posted by 1937pickup

Didn't Boyd Coddington get in trouble for something like this and wind up being fined a fair amount of money?

Boyd was representing his "belly-button", built-from-scratch cars as REAL, legitimate, manufactured cars by using "creative" paperwork. In other words, MOST of that stuff he built (from scratch) could not LEGALLY be registered as a REAL 1932 Ford, for instance. DD

[mrtexas]

Originally Posted by V8COOPMAN

Boyd was representing his "belly-button", built-from-scratch cars as REAL, legitimate, manufactured cars by using "creative" paperwork. In other words, MOST of that stuff he built (from scratch) could not LEGALLY be registered as a REAL 1932 Ford, for instance. DD

"The state of California is cracking down on fraudulent registrations of kit cars as antiques. For example many Cobra kit cars are registered as 1965 Fords using a VIN from some scrapped vehicle. In actuality those are cars of new manufacture subject to smog, crash testing and other regulations that the builder has illegally bypassed by creating a fraudulent title."

When you start with an antique car and title and replace everything on it, is your car then an antique or a kit car? Would also run afoul of the strict smog laws in California.

[V8COOPMAN]

Originally Posted by mrtexas

"The state of California is cracking down on fraudulent registrations of kit cars as antiques. For example many Cobra kit cars are registered as 1965 Fords using a VIN from some scrapped vehicle. In actuality those are cars of new manufacture subject to smog, crash testing and other regulations that the builder has illegally bypassed by creating a fraudulent title."

When you start with an antique car and title and replace everything on it, is your car then an antique or a kit car? Would also run afoul of the strict smog laws in California.

Every word.........TRUE SCOOP! DD

[Floyd]

Best advice is to use a registration service here in California on any old car purchase. As stated above, the fee is very fair for the work and advice they provide. California is pretty easy to register old cars from out of state with or without titles. However doing it yourself is just asking for problems from the DMV. The registration services are legit (they are bonded by the state) and will not do anything wrong or illegal as they will look at your situation and tell you exactly what you need to do and they will give you the exact forms and tell you how to fill them out. You will never figure this out yourself.They can also verify the VIN so you do not have to drag the car down to the CHP or DMV to have it checked. Follow their advice to the letter.
My opinion

[Binx]

And for anyone in Virginia watching this thread, don't even think about bringing in a vehicle without clean, crisp, clear title.

Lonnie

[WANNAT]

Yikes!
Sounds like a nightmare!
I've never had a problem with a lost title... just had the vin verified and filled out a statement of facts.
That and a bill of sale and $15- did it.
Years ago... I had to get the bill of sale from the guy on the title to the guy who was selling it to me. I had to track him down because I just had the bill of sale from the guy he sold it to... which was the guy I was buying it from.... what a ordeal that was!

[WANNAT]

Ok..
Just talked to the seller and he doesn't want to be any where in the middle of the transaction.
He said he can only sell three cars that are not in his name a year.
Said he has a professional that can take care of the paper work.
I'm not ready to give him the $ and hope his professional is working for me.
Then he said that he will put the paper work in his name and sell it to me.
I asked why he could sell more than three cars if there in his name.
He said he could sell as many as he wanted if there in his name.
Can someone explain this to me?

[deucemac]

I would ditch the guy and look for another '40. There are lots out there. I once got a nasty gram from the DMV that if I sold one more car in the year, I would have to register as a dealer. At that time the magic number to get you in trouble was 8 and I had sold my 7th. If your name doesn't appear anywhere on the title, the DMV has no idea how many cars you sold. I've owned 97 cars since my first car in 1962. Most all were bought and sold in California. I have used a title/registration service from time to time and they always were helpful. The DMV is rife with incompetent individuals that only know annual registrations and current transfers. Often the auto club can do what you need or at least prep the paperwork for the DMV. I registered a '40 pickup I did for my brother-in-law and the auto club helped get things in order but couldn't complete the transaction . I took everything to the DMV and the clerk said I needed this form which I produced. That went on several times and she asked me how I knew to have all the forms . I looked in her in the eye and said " 'cause I'm smart!". She just took the cash and gave me the temporary registration. This guy is either a con artist or lost. Either way, find a different '40.

[WANNAT]

Yeah...
I just don't have that warm fuzzy feeling.
Thank you for all your help!
Tom

[bobH]

One thing not yet mentioned... my experience with the last four that I've registered in CA.... when I buy, I put them on 'non-op'. The DMV has never charged me 'use tax' on something I'm not using. It's usually a 15 buck deal for the transfer, except one time when there were outstanding reg fees. The cleanest deals were with NO paperwork, and the vehicles were not in the computer because they weren't registered in the last 7 or 10 years (whichever it is). I've also used the private registration service which has been GREAT for me. The cost has been nowhere near what expavr posted, maybe a little over half in the 75-90 range. I would shop a little more on that 150 post.
(By the way, that one example with the outstanding registration fees was for a 79 MG, and the fees were substantial. I learned that the fees were 'negotiable', and I got them reduced by more than half. Also noted, the paperwork on this car was 'muddied', with 4 or 5 'in-between' owners between me and the pink slip owner. We never did track down, or identify any of the previous owners. And, I put the car on 'non-op', which got it on 'clean paper', in my name. It took a few months to do this, because of 'timing'. I had to wait until the registration-due date, in order to get the transfer on 'non-op'.)

[Oakhurst]

bobH
Did you have to pay use tax when you took if off non-op?

[TJ]

Originally Posted by Oakhurst

bobH
Did you have to pay use tax when you took if off non-op?

The last time I put one on non-op that I bought they made me pay the use tax up front.

[Charlie Stephens]

Where did "use tax" come from? I always thought it was a sales tax like I would pay if I bought a lawn mower.

Charlie Stephens

[Capsacto]

Charlie, in California they call it "sales tax" when you purchase a brand new car from a new car dealer, that's what is shown on a new car sales contract. When you buy a previously owned car the tax is called "use tax" and is shown as that on a dealer used car sales contract. It also is called "use tax" at the DMV when you register a vehicle purchased from a private-party. The tax is based on the sales tax rate in your city or county of residence. So, bottom line is the tax is the same whether it's called "sales tax" or "use tax". Ain't California great the way the state can make things as complicated as they can....

[Charlie Stephens]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Originally Posted by Capsacto

Charlie, in California they call it "sales tax" when you purchase a brand new car from a new car dealer, that's what is shown on a new car sales contract. When you buy a previously owned car the tax is called "use tax" and is shown as that on a dealer used car sales contract. It also is called "use tax" at the DMV when you register a vehicle purchased from a private-party. The tax is based on the sales tax rate in your city or county of residence. So, bottom line is the tax is the same whether it's called "sales tax" or "use tax". Ain't California great the way the state can make things as complicated as they can....

Thanks for filling me in. I had never gotten down to that level of detail before. Probably more than I really needed to know.

Charlie Stephens

[TJ]

Originally Posted by Charlie Stephens

Thanks for filling me in. I had never gotten down to that level of detail before. Probably more than I really needed to know.

Charlie Stephens

Charlie the term "use tax" was initiated by the state, so they could tax you without the tax having to be voted on by the people. The original sales tax had already been charged at the time of the first sale. It was designed to tax private party sales, as private parties aren't required to collect sales tax like dealers on used cars. They can raise the "use tax" any time they want without a vote. Nice scam isn't it!

[itslow]

If you don't like headaches, walk away, because this transaction is guaranteed to be a migraine.

[Jeff/Illinois]

I agree with itslow and deucemac on this. Something sounds too fishy.

RUN don't walk and look for another '40 Ford they aren't that rare. This guy is trying to pull one over on you and the end result is going to be very ugly and expensive.

[CarlG]

When I bought my Model A Pickup, it had current CA plates & pink, but not from the seller. The seller had only "owned" it a month or so, and had obtained it just in order to flip it. Alaska DMV had no problem accepting the signed pink. Title did match the engine #, but our DMV never checked it.

[WANNAT]

Does anyone know when the watermark started on the California vehicle title and how to tell a fake before the watermark?
Thank you for your time ... Tom

[TJ]

Call DMV about the water mark.