A dilemma at work

  • Thread starter Thread starter fermat
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Good discussions.

I researched the law and here is what it says:

*Section 516 of the California Vehicle Code
“Resident” means any person who manifests an intent to live or
be located in this state on more than a temporary or transient
basis. Presence in the state for six months or more in any 12-month
period gives rise to a rebuttable presumption of residency.
The following are evidence of residency for purposes of vehicle
registration:
(a) Address where registered to vote.
(b) Location of employment or place of business.
(c) Payment of resident tuition at a public institution of higher
education.
(d) Attendance of dependents at a primary or secondary school.
(e) Filing a homeowner’s property tax exemption.
(f) Renting or leasing a home for use as a residence.
(g) Declaration of residency to obtain a license or any other
privilege or benefit not ordinarily extended to a nonresident.
(h) Possession of a California driver’s license.
(i) Other acts, occurrences, or events that indicate presence in
the state is more than temporary or transient.
*

I have seen this vehicle for nearly four months now. I am going to wait until I am into the six month of seeing it and then I will just file a complaint against it. At that point, it would be reasonable to assume to this law would apply.

People have raised some great points about a ‘creep factor’. My original intention was to try and give the driver a friendly heads-up that they may be in violation of the law. Maybe 50 years ago that would have been acceptable, but today that seems to freak people out. I think that is unfortunate, but I will file an official complaint and be done with it.

I wanted to address the ‘are you going to check every car you see’ comments. I see this car every day. When I first saw it, it no license plate and a temporary operator tag from Washington. After that it had the Washington plates on it. It is in the same parking spot everyday. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck…
 
fermat said:
Good discussions.

I researched the law and here is what it says:

Section 516 of the California Vehicle Code
“Resident” means any person who manifests an intent to live or
be located in this state on more than a temporary or transient
basis. Presence in the state for six months or more in any 12-month
period gives rise to a rebuttable presumption of residency.
The following are evidence of residency for purposes of vehicle
registration:
(a) Address where registered to vote.
(b) Location of employment or place of business.
(c) Payment of resident tuition at a public institution of higher
education.
(d) Attendance of dependents at a primary or secondary school.
(e) Filing a homeowner’s property tax exemption.
(f) Renting or leasing a home for use as a residence.
(g) Declaration of residency to obtain a license or any other
privilege or benefit not ordinarily extended to a nonresident.
(h) Possession of a California driver’s license.
(i) Other acts, occurrences, or events that indicate presence in
the state is more than temporary or transient.

I have seen this vehicle for nearly four months now. I am going to wait until I am into the six month of seeing it and then I will just file a complaint against it. At that point, it would be reasonable to assume to this law would apply.

People have raised some great points about a ‘creep factor’. My original intention was to try and give the driver a friendly heads-up that they may be in violation of the law. Maybe 50 years ago that would have been acceptable, but today that seems to freak people out. I think that is unfortunate, but I will file an official complaint and be done with it.

I wanted to address the ‘are you going to check every car you see’ comments. I see this car every day. When I first saw it, it no license plate and a temporary operator tag from Washington. After that it had the Washington plates on it. It is in the same parking spot everyday. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck…
Click to expand...
You forgot this part: dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/militaryvr.htm#military
 
fermat said:
Good discussions.

I researched the law and here is what it says:

Section 516 of the California Vehicle Code
“Resident” means any person who manifests an intent to live or
be located in this state on more than a temporary or transient
basis. Presence in the state for six months or more in any 12-month
period gives rise to a rebuttable presumption of residency.
The following are evidence of residency for purposes of vehicle
registration:
(a) Address where registered to vote.
(b) Location of employment or place of business.
(c) Payment of resident tuition at a public institution of higher
education.
(d) Attendance of dependents at a primary or secondary school.
(e) Filing a homeowner’s property tax exemption.
(f) Renting or leasing a home for use as a residence.
(g) Declaration of residency to obtain a license or any other
privilege or benefit not ordinarily extended to a nonresident.
(h) Possession of a California driver’s license.
(i) Other acts, occurrences, or events that indicate presence in
the state is more than temporary or transient.

I have seen this vehicle for nearly four months now. I am going to wait until I am into the six month of seeing it and then I will just file a complaint against it. At that point, it would be reasonable to assume to this law would apply.

People have raised some great points about a ‘creep factor’. My original intention was to try and give the driver a friendly heads-up that they may be in violation of the law. Maybe 50 years ago that would have been acceptable, but today that seems to freak people out. I think that is unfortunate, but I will file an official complaint and be done with it.

I wanted to address the ‘are you going to check every car you see’ comments. I see this car every day. When I first saw it, it no license plate and a temporary operator tag from Washington. After that it had the Washington plates on it. It is in the same parking spot everyday. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck…
Click to expand...
So this is the ONLY car you see everyday? :rolleyes:

Perhaps you need a hobby or other constructive outlet for your energy…maybe volunteering at a homeless shelter or a food bank…

This is taking busybodying on a scary level.

Seriously, are you intending to check all the tags in the parking lot and wait and see if they get their new tags on time? How about your neighbors’ cars?

No, really. Are you?

If the law is the law and you are the self-appointed guardian of the tags, does not the law apply to them as well? And wouldn’t someone else violating the licensing law bother you just as much as this car seems to.

Let it go, man. Let it go and be at peace.

BTW, what is the dilemma here? You seem to have already decided what you’re going to do. Almost everyone has advised you to leave it alone.
 
slywakka250 said:
oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/08/portland_lemonade_stand_runs_i.html

Here is an example of the lemonade stand issue.

We are truly losing our freedoms to a bunch of busybodies in government.
Click to expand...
I agree. This is so ridiculous. I have a novel idea… if someone is so worried about the potential health hazards caused by some kids’ dixie cup of Lemonade, save yourself the .25 cents and just drive on by

To think that as taxpayers we are actually PAYING people to crack down on some kid’s lemonade stand in his front yard is infuriating.

What ever happened to live and let live?
 
fermat said:
Good discussions.

I researched the law and here is what it says:

Section 516 of the California Vehicle Code
“Resident” means any person who manifests an intent to live or
be located in this state on more than a temporary or transient
basis. Presence in the state for six months or more in any 12-month
period gives rise to a rebuttable presumption of residency.
The following are evidence of residency for purposes of vehicle
registration:
(a) Address where registered to vote.
(b) Location of employment or place of business.
(c) Payment of resident tuition at a public institution of higher
education.
(d) Attendance of dependents at a primary or secondary school.
(e) Filing a homeowner’s property tax exemption.
(f) Renting or leasing a home for use as a residence.
(g) Declaration of residency to obtain a license or any other
privilege or benefit not ordinarily extended to a nonresident.
(h) Possession of a California driver’s license.
(i) Other acts, occurrences, or events that indicate presence in
the state is more than temporary or transient.

I have seen this vehicle for nearly four months now. I am going to wait until I am into the six month of seeing it and then I will just file a complaint against it. At that point, it would be reasonable to assume to this law would apply.

People have raised some great points about a ‘creep factor’. My original intention was to try and give the driver a friendly heads-up that they may be in violation of the law. Maybe 50 years ago that would have been acceptable, but today that seems to freak people out. I think that is unfortunate, but I will file an official complaint and be done with it.

I wanted to address the ‘are you going to check every car you see’ comments. I see this car every day. When I first saw it, it no license plate and a temporary operator tag from Washington. After that it had the Washington plates on it. It is in the same parking spot everyday. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck…
Click to expand...
I think you should first take a few minutes of your time and find out if it is even possible to register a car in Washington–if you are not a resident of the state. I could find nothing online quickly that didn’t apply to people moving to Washington or who already had their vehicle registered there. The states website does not seem to envision people from other states attempting to register there vehicles in Washington.

Further 6 months may give rise to a “presumption of residency” but that will not be determinative–it will be a facts and circumstances situation. An 8 month assignment in California with periodic trips home will not make you a California resident for vehicle or income taxes.

Just what is it about this that you find so irritating? It’s not like the person is not paying vehicle license fees–he is. He is paying Washingtons farily steep fees–so he is not avoiding some cost that you are paying. There has got to be more to it than than you are letting on. From the facts as you have related them–I’m don’t think I would conclude that any law is being broken or that you need to do anything.

Do you get this concerned that you neighbors and co-workers may be making trips to Oregon and purchasing items for which they fail to declare and pay sales tax when they file their taxes each year? If they come back from a trip to Oregon and say “hey look at this cool xyz I got on my vacation” Do you ask if they declared it and paid they sales tax they owe California? Just currious. This tag issue as you have presented it seems --well odd. I could understand if your neighbor–who you know lives in CA–had his car registered at a child or friends house in Oregon where we pay about $70 + DEQ fee to license our cars. I can see how that might irritate you a little. You’ve just offered no proof that this car has a permanent residence in California.

Peace,
Mark
 
fermat said:
I

Does this seem un-Christian? I figured my three options were to ignore it, report it, or this.

Any other suggestions?
Click to expand...
no it seems nosy. You have some proof this person is not a Washington resident working on contract in California? You have been appointed by your employer to police cars in the parking lot? you have some other interest in this matter?
fermat said:
So even though I suspect a crime is being committed I should do nothing because it isn’t any of my business?
Click to expand...
this law in California is part of the criminal code rather than a civil matter? I highly doubt it. Perhaps if you get back to work and quit looking out the window at cars in the parking lot that might solve your dilemma

and I think a lot of us here need to get back to our regular forum sounds like we have been drinking the lemonade
 
Wow.

I am REALLY glad neither Fermat nor Apollos is my neighbor.

What busy-bodies. Get a hobby, or get back to work.
 
I am surprised and more than a little disappointed with the attitudes I have encountered in this thread. As citizens of our respective states and countries, we have an obligation to be vigilant when it comes to violations of the laws that govern us. The notion that this function is reserved for sworn law enforcement is ludicrous. I challenge you to find an officer who would prefer that the citizenry just stay out of the way and leave all the work to them.

I have taken the time to become familiar with the basic laws that affect my day to day life. Have you? I don’t call in every speeder I see, or people who run red lights and stop signs. I was not actively looking for violations of the vehicle code, but when you see the same vehicle in the same spot for an extended time, it becomes hard to ignore. I am completely with my right to bring the matter to the attention of local law enforcement. If you read my initial post, you will see that I wasn’t even thinking about turning them in. I just wanted to leave a friendly note that they may need to look into registering their vehicle in the state. That’s it. Why is this gesture so offensive?

My proposed actions do not make a busy-body or someone with too much time on their hands. Heaven forbid that you report something unusual in your neighborhood. How many of you have ever changed a course of action because someone was interested enough to intervene? If you suspect that there is a violation and you do nothing about it, you are giving tacit approval to that act. Once you start ignoring the laws that are inconvenient or don’t matter to you, it is only a matter of time before you start ignoring more serious offensives.
 
Tarpeian_Rock said:
Hardly the same thing as failing to report a violent crime in progress. Stop being a vigilante wannabee. You might also want to consider the possibility that the motor vehicle laws in your neck of the woods require a leased car (since that is what it might be) to be registered in the state of the owner and not the lessor.
Click to expand...
In California, the registration is based on the location where the car resides on a permanent basis. That’s usually the “Registered Owner.” When there is a bank or other entity having property rights to the vehicle, they’re called the “Leinholder.” Therefore, I can own my car here in California but I could have a car loan with a bank out of New York. The car is registered in California because that’s where I keep and operate the car.

By the way, to the OP, you have totally insufficient facts to make any determination on this case and really have no reason to investigate further. In fact, this kind of nosiness is what gives Christians a bad name. Chalk it up to an interesting observation and move on.
 
LCMS_No_More said:
By the way, to the OP, you have totally insufficient facts to make any determination on this case and really have no reason to investigate further. In fact, this kind of nosiness is what gives Christians a bad name. Chalk it up to an interesting observation and move on.
Click to expand...
I agree. You need more facts. Perhaps make friends with the driver of the car as a start??
 
You would probably be well advised to let the situation work itself out without your intervention. For all you know the person is an out of state contractor or consultant (like me) who drives across state lines in their personal vehicle and parks in an employee lot.
 
Time to open all the doors to the china shop and let the bulls in.

You shouldn’t report anything without facts.

In this case, you do not have all of the facts together.
What you have is a car that is annoying you.
Do you secretly covet that particular parking spot?

anyway…
Confronting this person, you will get only two possible responses.
Either there is a perfectly reasonable explanation or there is not.
If there is not, they are criminals. And willfully flaunting one law are more likely to be in violation of others, and you may well find yourself in a dangerous situation.

If there is a reasonable explanation, the person is likely to become irate at the rentAcop wannabe that is complicating their life.
and you may well find yourself in a dangerous situation.

I am curious here. What exactly do you wish to accomplish?
 
fermat said:
I am surprised and more than a little disappointed with the attitudes I have encountered in this thread. As citizens of our respective states and countries, we have an obligation to be vigilant when it comes to violations of the laws that govern us. The notion that this function is reserved for sworn law enforcement is ludicrous. I challenge you to find an officer who would prefer that the citizenry just stay out of the way and leave all the work to them. My BIL is an officer - he would be offended that you took him away from speeders, drug dealers, and DWIs for this. On the macro scale - it is very minor.

I have taken the time to become familiar with the basic laws that affect my day to day life. Have you? I don’t call in every speeder I see, or people who run red lights and stop signs. Good! I was not actively looking for violations of the vehicle code, but when you see the same vehicle in the same spot for an extended time, it becomes hard to ignore. You still do NOT know WHY this person is there? Consultant? Trainer? Trainee? Contract work? I am completely with my right to bring the matter to the attention of local law enforcement. If you read my initial post, you will see that I wasn’t even thinking about turning them in. I just wanted to leave a friendly note that they may need to look into registering their vehicle in the state. That’s it. Why is this gesture so offensive? BECAUSE IT IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS! You don’t KNOW why this person is there.

My proposed actions do not make a busy-body or someone with too much time on their hands. Heaven forbid that you report something unusual in your neighborhood. Having a car with out of state tags in a BUSINESS parking lot is not unusual. How many of you have ever changed a course of action because someone was interested enough to intervene? If you suspect that there is a violation and you do nothing about it, you are giving tacit approval to that act. Once you start ignoring the laws that are inconvenient or don’t matter to you, it is only a matter of time before you start ignoring more serious offensives.

I work at a school attached to a church. Several years ago, there was a vehicle parked in our lot every day with out of state plates for about 9 months. Had no idea who the vehicle belonged to. Didn’t really care, quite honestly. NONE OF MY BUSINESS. Turns out, a college student was doing an internship at the parish. Student was from another state, went to college in our state, obtained internship, parked car in lot, did internship, etc.

Until you know this person, MYOB, as Ann Landers used to say.

No one is being killed, assaulted, robbed, etc., so move on already.
Click to expand...
 
LCMS_No_More said:
In California, the registration is based on the location where the car resides on a permanent basis. That’s usually the “Registered Owner.” When there is a bank or other entity having property rights to the vehicle, they’re called the “Leinholder.” Therefore, I can own my car here in California but I could have a car loan with a bank out of New York. The car is registered in California because that’s where I keep and operate the car.

By the way, to the OP, you have totally insufficient facts to make any determination on this case and really have no reason to investigate further. In fact, this kind of nosiness is what gives Christians a bad name. Chalk it up to an interesting observation and move on.
Click to expand...
What happens if they would be required to register in Washington as well, since that is where the resident is, etc.

How do the states fight it out?
 
ab75 said:
What happens if they would be required to register in Washington as well, since that is where the resident is, etc.

How do the states fight it out?
Click to expand...
Actually, if it’s based on the resident, then it should only be one state unless the car and the resident are capable of bilocation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top