Vehicle require to get a driver's license? (Texas)

[Bootis]

We recently moved to Texas, and today my wife went to the DMV to get her Texas driver's license. She was told she couldn't get her drivers license until her car passed Texas inspection. (it can't pass at the moment due to a broken mirror)
Is this for real? What if she just wanted to be able to legally drive but didn't own a car? I've never had anyone ask about the status of any car I owned in any other state before. Anyone here from Texas know anything about this?

[Kimmy_Gibbler]

I imagine this has more to do with a restriction being imposed for possessing a non-conforming car (or for possessing an uninspected car) than Texas' requiring a car to get a DL.

[Lord Feldon]

Looks like it:

Provide a vehicle for the driving exam and present current liability insurance, Texas vehicle registration, and inspection for the vehicle.

[Bootis]

Originally Posted by Kimmy_Gibbler

I imagine this has more to do with a restriction being imposed for possessing a non-conforming car (or for possessing an uninspected car) than Texas' requiring a car to get a DL.

So if we just went together with my Texas registered car there shouldn't be a problem. I would hope.

[Kimmy_Gibbler]

Originally Posted by Lord Feldon

Looks like it:

This is just the requirement for taking the driving exam. The DMV doesn't provide you with a car to take it (the situation is similar in Illinois, the state I live in and in which state owning a car is not required for getting a license). You need not own the car, a person can borrow one (provided it is insured by its owner) from a friend or family member.

So if we just went together with my Texas registered car there shouldn't be a problem. I would hope.

Well, what was the DMV's beef when she tried originally. You said Texas wouldn't do it until her car passed inspection. This suggests to me that Texas knows your wife owns a car and that it is uninspected and that her eligibility is conditioned on getting the car they know she owns inspected.

If, on the other hand, she showed up sans car and sought to take the driving test and the DMV said, "So, where's the car you plan to take the test in?" and she said, "The what now?" ..... then yes, your car should work.

[Lord Feldon]

I might have misunderstood. I thought she showed up with the broken car, and they wouldn't let her use it because it couldn't pass an inspection.

[PaulParkhead]

Originally Posted by Lord Feldon

I might have misunderstood. I thought she showed up with the broken car, and they wouldn't let her use it because it couldn't pass an inspection.

Do people moving from one US state to another actually have to pass a new test each time? I thought that was not the case, changing licences was merely an admin type thing. Of course, if she did need to take a test, it's perfectly understandable that the car she used would need to be road legal.

Or am I misreading and OP's wife does not currently possess a licence from any US state?

[Lord Feldon]

I don't know why I thought she was getting a new license.

[LawMonkey]

Originally Posted by PaulParkhead

Do people moving from one US state to another actually have to pass a new test each time? I thought that was not the case, changing licences was merely an admin type thing. Of course, if she did need to take a test, it's perfectly understandable that the car she used would need to be road legal.

Or am I misreading and OP's wife does not currently possess a licence from any US state?

Generally speaking, no. When I moved to New York, all I had to do was go down to the BMV, wait in line for an hour, fill out some paperwork, pay an exorbitant fee, get my picture taken and wait a few weeks.

On the other hand, many years ago I went to Utah to try to learn to drive a big rig. (I didn't, because that shit's scary.) I went as far as taking the written exam to get my learner's permit, which was printed on normal paper and said that it was a valid operator's license on it. I had to surrender my Ohio license at the time. When I went back to Ohio, they made me take the driving test again. I failed it the first time, actually--all the bad habits of years of driving, y'know. Passed it on the second try, though the "maneuverability" test was kind of hilarious. It's theoretically meant to test your ability to parallel park, and is best done in the smallest vehicle you can beg or borrow. In driving school, they teach you a way to do it mechanically--you cut the wheel a certain amount when you pass a particular cone and so on. Me, I did it in a 1969 Oldsmobile Cutlass--a veritable ocean liner of a car. Had actual parallel parking been involved, I would've been in traffic and/or three feet on the curb. But by the rules of the test, I got a 95--only because I had to unbuckle my seatbelt to lean out the window.

[Seanette]

Originally Posted by PaulParkhead

Do people moving from one US state to another actually have to pass a new test each time? I thought that was not the case, changing licences was merely an admin type thing. Of course, if she did need to take a test, it's perfectly understandable that the car she used would need to be road legal.

Or am I misreading and OP's wife does not currently possess a licence from any US state?

When I moved to California, I didn't have to take a test, just filled out a form, handed in my still-good Oregon license, paid a fee, and acquired my California license.

Granted, this was in 1994, so not sure if it's gotten any more complex.

[Rick]

FWIW when my kids came of age and went to take their driving tests in California I did not own a car, I had a company car from Volvo that had Distributor plates (like dealer plates, can move from car to car)
They would not let the kids take the test in my company car as the plate was not "valid" according to them for thee kids use (despite of what the vehicle code said)
In short, I had to hire a driving school to the tune of $60 bucks so my kids could use their car to take the test. Grrrr.
So if all else fails, call a driving school.

[core_dump]

Originally Posted by Rick

In short, I had to hire a driving school to the tune of $60 bucks so my kids could use their car to take the test. Grrrr.
So if all else fails, call a driving school.

I was in a similar situation when trying to get my license reinstated. The driving school pretty much laughed in my face. I would have had to take the entire course in order to use their car for 15 minutes.

$60 is cheap. I would have gladly paid 4x that under the circumstances.

[Enginerd]

One other (non-test related) possible explanation: is it an issue of the car's registration?

Say you moved from Ohio (state chosen arbitrarily because it's easy to type), and your wife enters the DMV with an Ohio license and a car registered in Ohio. She has to surrender her Ohio license to get a Texas license, but that leaves a car registered in Ohio to a driver who's not licensed in that state. Maybe the DMV is saying (none too clearly) that she has to transfer the car registration at the same time she transfers her license, and it's all or nothing.

[Tom Tildrum]

Texas says that you have 90 days after moving in to secure a Texas driver's license, but if you have a valid license from another state, the written and driving tests are waived, and you only have to pass the vision exam. Registration of one's car requires state inspection. No word on a link between the two.

[Driver8]

Originally Posted by Seanette

When I moved to California, I didn't have to take a test, just filled out a form, handed in my still-good Oregon license, paid a fee, and acquired my California license.

Granted, this was in 1994, so not sure if it's gotten any more complex.

Probably. When I moved to California in 2008 I had to take a written test (but not the actual driving part). It was pretty easy though: I didn't realize this requirement when I went in so hadn't prepared at all and still passed.

When I moved to Georgia I didn't have to do any more testing. I had to do the full test when I moved to Florida, but in that case my previous drivers license was from a foreign country.

[Saint Cad]

Similarly when I moved from California to Washington I had to take the written (but not driving) test. California -> Arizona -> Colorado were both a pay your fee and here you go license.

[UTejas]

Originally Posted by Enginerd

One other (non-test related) possible explanation: is it an issue of the car's registration?

Say you moved from Ohio (state chosen arbitrarily because it's easy to type), and your wife enters the DMV with an Ohio license and a car registered in Ohio. She has to surrender her Ohio license to get a Texas license, but that leaves a car registered in Ohio to a driver who's not licensed in that state. Maybe the DMV is saying (none too clearly) that she has to transfer the car registration at the same time she transfers her license, and it's all or nothing.

This is it. When I moved to Texas, I had to have my car inspected, then registered and then (and only then) could I get a driver's license. It had to be that specific order. I was turned away from a license center because I had a car that wasn't registered in Texas.

[Turek]

Originally Posted by UTejas

This is it. When I moved to Texas, I had to have my car inspected, then registered and then (and only then) could I get a driver's license. It had to be that specific order. I was turned away from a license center because I had a car that wasn't registered in Texas.

And even before those steps, you'll have to attain liability insurance. You can't get your car inspected if you don't have insurance.

[Donnerwetter]

Isn't this kind of weird? What if I positively don't want to own a car while still being able to legally drive one if needed? There could be plenty of reasons for this.

[Rick]

Originally Posted by Donnerwetter

Isn't this kind of weird? What if I positively don't want to own a car while still being able to legally drive one if needed? There could be plenty of reasons for this.

No it makes sense if you follow the $.
A driver's license is a few dollars. Car registration can be hundreds of dollars. By making sure the car is registered in Texas the state gets more money.
If you don't own a car then hiring a driving school car gets you around that roadblock.

[Donnerwetter]

Originally Posted by Rick

No it makes sense if you follow the $.
A driver's license is a few dollars. Car registration can be hundreds of dollars. By making sure the car is registered in Texas the state gets more money.
If you don't own a car then hiring a driving school car gets you around that roadblock.

So it does make sense from the state's perspective. But I wonder if this rule has ever been challenged by people who resent this scam.

[Rick]

I don't know if you could call it a scam. There is most likely a law in Texas (I know California does) that says if you move into the state you have X days to register your car in Texas. To register it has to be insured and inspected. The state has a valid interest in making sure the cars on the road are safe and insured.
This is how they do that.

[dalej42]

I moved to Texas in 2004 and did not own a car at that time. I got my driver's license with no problem, no driving test required.

[brad_d]

When I got my first driver's license (in Texas) at the age of 16 in 1986, I did not own a car; I suspect this is is pretty common among that demographic.

What was emphasized to us in driver's education classes was that the car you bring to use for the driving test must be properly registered, inspected, and all that jazz. (I don't recall whether Texas registration was required, but it sounds from this thread like it probably was.) You didn't have be the owner.

The main point for the car-less was that the Department of Public Safety would not be providing a vehicle for you - you had to bring one yourself, and how you got your hands on it was your problem. But they did impose the requirement that it be a fully street-legal car; on the surface, that did not and does not sound too unreasonable.

I think there might have been some informal questions from the testing officer as the preparations were being made for the test. "Whose car is this?" "You have a learner's permit, yes?" "Did you drive here today?" "Did a licensed adult ride with you?"

There were definitely some wrong answers to those questions. If you were silly enough to confess that you broke the law getting to the test, we'd been warned in driver's ed that you'd be failed for it.

[CurtC]

Originally Posted by Donnerwetter

Isn't this kind of weird? What if I positively don't want to own a car while still being able to legally drive one if needed? There could be plenty of reasons for this.

I live in Texas, and haven't owned a car in about 20 years. The people at the DPS office ask for proof of insurance for my car, I tell them that I don't own a car, and they have me sign a little form confirming this.

The purpose of all that is to make sure that all cars are properly insured. Texas is largely poor, and there was/is a problem with uninsured drivers. The legislature passed a law that not only do you have to show proof of insurance to a policeman who stops you, you have to show proof when you get your drivers license.

If you don't own a car, this just doesn't apply to you.

[Great Antibob]

People seem to be getting a mistaken impression about the vehicle registration requirement.

If you don't own a vehicle (say you were like me as a grad student moving to the state without a car of my own), you don't need one to simply get a Texas Driver's License.

Here's how it works.

Case 1) You don't own a car personally and have no driver's license. You go through the same procedure as any first time licensee, native Texan or not. If you only want an ID, you can get a Texas ID card without dealing with the driving part of it, though you still need support documents (SS card, proof of residency, etc).

Case 2) You don't own a car personally and have an out of state license. You go to the local DPS office and apply for a TDL. You won't have to pass the written or practical exam but certainly need to pass a vision exam. Since you don't own a vehicle, just tell them that. There's no requirement you own a vehicle. It's not a money grab or anything like that.

Case 3) You own a car and have an out of state license. Just as other posters have noted, you must first get your car inspected, then registered, and then apply for a TDL, in that order. If people can get their TDL first, it's much easier to forget about getting the car registered or inspected for a long time.

Case 4) You own a car and don't have a driver's license. What are you doing driving around unlicensed in the first place?!

[kferr]

Originally Posted by CurtC

I live in Texas, and haven't owned a car in about 20 years. The people at the DPS office ask for proof of insurance for my car, I tell them that I don't own a car, and they have me sign a little form confirming this.

Same for me. Last time I renewed my Texas license was in around 1997. I'd already been living in the UK for 2 years and had no car in Texas. Technically, I had no residence there either, I used a friend's address when renewing.