Returning a Used Car/Buyer's Remorse Question

[RWebb]

parted out

[Tobra]

fine Denis, you are right, everybody else is wrong. Good luck transferring the title on a car with no smog

You really should wash that sand out of your vagina.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by Tobra

fine Denis, you are right, everybody else is wrong. Good luck transferring the title on a car with no smog

You really should wash that sand out of your vagina.

Come on, man. Don't cry over being wrong on the internet.

[speeder]

How many pedicures do you want to bet me on the smog thing?

[Hugh R]

I sued a neighbor on behalf of my HOA for back monthly dues recently. The clerk looked at dates and signature and that was about it. Went to court, the other side didn't show. I got my judgment. No collecting is turning out to be a ***** since his house was sold at public auction and I have no idea where he lives. I've got to serve him with all kinds of notices on his assets, and other stuff before I can garnish his wages, I think I know where he works. A big telephone company that I can't get any information from.

In Small Claims you can sue for anything, literally. Whether you win is something else.

Not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure only a judge can determine the merits of your case. Some hourly clerk can't.

The buyer is equally at fault for not requiring a smog cert. That is why the DMV tells you to "work it out".

[Steve Carlton]

It's the seller's responsibility that the car will pass smog. The buyer will need the smog cert to be able to register the car, which is his responsibility. The problem for the seller is if the buyer drags his heels and by the time the car gets smogged that it will pass.

[RWebb]

hourly clerk? no, they are all salaried!

clerks can and do toss out papers that are improperly filed - a pro se paper is likely to not comport with the filing/formatting rules, much less meet the clerk's high standards for footnotery


now, will some-california-one contact the DMV and ask what the penalty is for a seller not getting smaug to certify a vehicle?

that we we can all have a more intelligent long-winded argument...

[ossiblue]

Originally Posted by RWebb

now, will some-california-one contact the DMV and ask what the penalty is for a seller not getting smaug to certify a vehicle?

California DMV does not penalize the seller for not getting a smog certificate, they penalize the buyer.

Here's the law, as it applies in this situation.

The seller must supply a smog certificate when the vehicle is sold.

The buyer then has ten days in which to transfer title and register
the car.

Failure to register within ten days begins the clock on escalating penalties/fines on the buyer.

Title transfer/registration cannot be completed without a smog certificate.

Registration fees can be paid without having a smog certificate to avoid fines, but registration will not be complete until the certificate is submitted.

The seller should file the release of liability with the DMV which declares he is no longer the owner and to whom the car has been sold.

Until the buyer transfers title and registers the car, however, the old owner is still on record as the last to own the vehicle.

Now, with all that out there, you can see how Ca forces the buyer and seller to work together. The burden is on the buyer to record the sale by transferring the title and registering the car. Without a smog cert. it cannot be done and he either faces escalating penalties, no legal title to the car, or both.

The law states that the seller must provide the smog certificate, but failure to do so does not invoke any DMV punishment. It does, however, leave the seller open to civil action should the buyer decide to sue. And, though he may not be criminally or civilly liable for the vehicle, he is still the owner of record.

[Steve Carlton]

The seller can wind up paying who knows what to get a car to pass smog when he could have put the problem to bed with a smog check prior to sale. I don't see being liable for that as an advantage to the seller.

If the buyer posts the fees in a timely fashion, as he's required to do, there are no penalties. Having no smog certificate isn't an excuse to not post the fees.

Having the title linger in the name of the seller is no plus to the seller.

Nothing stopping a buyer from smogging the car and completing the transfer. As mentioned, the seller is legally responsible for the cost. This car will very likely only need a $50-80 smog inspection done, problem solved.

[asphaltgambler]

Originally Posted by Seabear

As uncomfortable as the situation is, with no PPI I don't see where the buyer has a complaint.

This>

[Jim Richards]

So, how has this whole transaction turned out, or is it still unresolved?

[techweenie]

Hmmm. The last three smoggable vehicles I sold, I did not bother to get smog certificates for. In both cases, the buyers were enthusiastic and I took advantage of that. The first vehicle, we negotiated a discount off my asking price and I said, okay, but you take car of the smog cert. In the second and third instance, the issue didn't come up at all.

Yes, technically, you shouldn't buy a car without a smog certificate in the seller's hand (they are good for 90 days). But people do. And as was pointed out above, there are no penalties involved for a seller who fails to provide the certificate.

[Jim Richards]

When I was buying a pickup truck a few months ago, the seller hadn't smogged it at time we were negotiating the transaction. I asked the seller to get it smogged in advance of us handing over money and the title. I registered it within a couple of days. I like the no drama route to transacting business.

[Joe Bob]

Smart sellers have smog in hand and take the buyer to AAA or DMV and get it out of their name.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by Joe Bob

Smart sellers have smog in hand and take the buyer to AAA or DMV and get it out of their name.

I agree that this is the best, cleanest way to do it. But like others here, I've bought and sold many a car w/o smog certificate. I occasionally buy broken vehicles to fix and a smog is never part of the transaction. I assume the responsibility of any repairs necessary to smog/register it and factor that into the price.

The lack of smog certificate could only give someone a legal "out" from a transaction if the vehicle cannot be smogged, i.e. missing emissions related equipment on an older car where the parts are no longer available, etc... In the case presented by OP, the lack of smog cert would have zero bearing, IMO.

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by McLovin

My dog could sue your shirt.

I just received papers on that. My shirt is counter-suing your cat. I'll have my filing cabinet call your sofa to set up depositions.

[pbs911]

Originally Posted by nostatic

I just received papers on that. My shirt is counter-suing your cat. I'll have my filing cabinet call your sofa to set up depositions.

Now that would be something you can sue for based upon permissive joinder and an abuse of process claim,but I'm sure you would have to wait until the dog's suit is dismissed which should take about 5 minutes.

Just because your mom told you that you can do anything, doesn't mean you can.

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by pbs911

Now that would be something you can sue for based upon permissive joinder and an abuse of process claim,but I'm sure you would have to wait until the dog's suit is dismissed which should take about 5 minutes.

Just because your mom told you that you can do anything, doesn't mean you can.

My dog's suit is at the cleaners. My mom however said that I'm way too permissive with my joinder and that I should be more strict. I'm getting out the belt...

[rusnak]

Once the buyer signs the release of liability and the money is in the seller's hands, the deal is done.

The seller has no obligation to give any money back, and the buyer is stuck with the car.

Any judge will ask the buyer: "Didn't you see the oil?"..Bang...rule for the Defendent.

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by nostatic

My dog's suit is at the cleaners. My mom however said that I'm way too permissive with my joinder and that I should be more strict. I'm getting out the belt...

verĄ funny - but watch out for offensive non-mutual collateral estoppel

well, I will let you R.A.P. on...