Well, he’s absolutely wrong, of course, but there are folks who don’t let the facts stand in the way of what they “know.”
Yeah? So what? That’s meaningless in terms of ownership.
Okay, and again so what? The reason for this has been adequately and accurately explained in this thread, as has the fact that it doesn’t convey ownership.
Like hell. It proves no such thing. But save your breath, he doesn’t understand because he doesn’t want to understand.
Let us know when he proves his claim. You know, that’s how it’s supposed to work.
The only way for him to prove his claim (I think) is for him to get hold of the MCO to his newly purchased car, drive it unregistered, get a ticket, and then prove in a court of law that he was denied absolute ownership to the MCO by the DMV. And if you knew him the way I know him, (he’s a staunch Libertarian), he’s crazy enough to try this.
The state doesn’t own your car in any defintion. The major flaw is ownership implies you could sell the car at anytime you want. The state couldn’t do this, ergo they don’t own it.
Even if the bank has the title to offset your loan you still own it. The bank can’t sell it, until they complete a legal process, and TAKE ownership back.
You can sell it anytime you want.
I’ve heard we don’t have any legal obligation to pay taxes, either…and that I don’t actually “own” my stocks…
Forcing him to even begin this process seems to be far more entertaining than a mere $20 worth of beer could be. If you can get & provide video or even audio of him making this argument in court, I’ll buy the beer.
You’re assuming all banks secure car loans with liens. Some secure car loans with the title itself. Some states do not allow this, but in the states that do, banks love it, and yes, the bank often technically owns your car until it’s paid off.
The way I understand it, in the few states where I have bought and sold cars, when money changes hands and the title is signed, the ownership of the vehicle has been legally transferred. Registering that vehicle requires dealing with the state where it is to be registered, but selling it doesn’t.
This is my favorite part. :rolleyes: I guess that means the state (in part with the city) owns every elevator, construction site, scale in a store, restaurant, Doctor and Professional Engineer, too. Because they all have to be registered and licensed by the state.
The state is supposed to have/hold the necessary** documents** to help prove who owns what. If I stole all their documents, I’d not own anything referenced in any certificates of origin.
Even if the state had papers that say they own my car, they are not the owner. I am.
I own this computer, no matter what you have in your possession that says otherwise.
Philster, you are 100 % right-on-the-money with your assessment. I couldn’t of said it better myself.
Here’s an update on his newly formed argument: he’s claiming that since the MCO is his property he can exercise his 4th Amendment rights to be secure in his effects. He asserts that the State cannot coerce you to forgo the right to property of the MCO by penalties (monetary) if you do register your vehicle as laid down by MVC mandate. When I presented to him your argument that the State NEEDS copies of these documents to settle disputes of ownership, he sniffed and remarked, “Meh, I can provide proof as I hold ownership to the document. I present this in court, how can they dispute it?”
On the upside, my buddy has AGREED to let me film his ordeal. He’s actually going to attempt it! Now my next question is, can I film him in court after he gets the ticket and goes before the Judge?
I would like a cite that indicates the bank’s name is on the title of the car as the owner of the vehicle, and not merely the lien holder. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but that would be something i’ve never seen.
i’m not talking about possessing the actual title document, which is different.
ETA Re: filming
Unlikely, but possible. Different rules for different jurisdictions.
Others have said that it’s certainly possible to own an unregistered vehicle and I think (although IANAL) it’s also legal to drive it around on your property. But I think his argument breaks down as soon as he attempts to drive it on public roads. I would think that even a staunch libertarian would agree that as the state pays for the roads, they can require that vehicles driving on them be registered.
I don’t know what kind of cite you want. I don’t work at the bank any more, but when I did (in the loan maintainance department – worst job I ever had), each active car loan file contained the actual title. Written on each one under “owner” was “Bank of XXXX.” On the back of each title, where there were spaces to list up to four lien holders, there was nothing written. When each loan was paid off, we went through the process to transfer title, and gave the customer the physical title.
Sorry to the OP for the continued hijack.
No sweat… your discussion is the very reason WHY I keep coming back to SD. It’s fascinating to see where a thread goes sometimes.
If the state owns my car, which is completely paid off and free of any liens, then I’m sure that they would have a problem with me destroying it. They don’t have a problem with me destroying it, because it’s my property not theirs.
Your friend is an idiot and just wants to argue with you. To prove to him that he is the owner of his car, tell him that you are going to destroy his car, with his permission of course and see if the state shows up to collect damages for their property.
A state in which this happened would be helpful. .
Why would the MCO be his “property”? He never actually had it, did he? If the dealership sent the MCO to the state DMV and got back a title, and then sold the car to your friend and gave him the title, he never gained ownership of the MCO in the first place.
Cranks often have strange ideas about ownership and laws and money. Like, that Federal Reserve Notes aren’t “really” money. But money is just a particular kind of good that you can exchange easily for goods and services. Cigarettes, cacao beans, cowrie shells, and cows have been used as money at various times and places, and those things really were real money, because they really could be exchanged for goods and services. And a Federal Reserve Note really is real money because if you take one to the 7-11, the Pakistani guy behind the counter will take it in exchange for a bag of chips. And if someday the 7-11 guy refuses your FRN and demands gold or silver coins, then your FRN is no longer a form of money, it’s just a piece of paper with fancy pictures.
So what is the title of a car anyway? Magic? No, it’s just a piece of paper with some words written on it. It is a record of who owns what. If I sell you a car, and some random guy in a basement office types up a piece of paper that declares that random guy to be the real owner of the car, does that piece of paper make him the owner of the car? No it doesn’t, unless he can take that piece of paper to a judge, and use it to convince a judge that he owns the car, and the judge can convince a cop to go over to your house and take the car from your driveway and give it to the random guy.
So in what way does that magical piece of paper make the State the “true owner” of the car? Does it mean that a guy from the DMV can walk over to your house, hop in the driver’s seat, and take the car back to the DMV lot? Does it mean the DMV guy can sell your car to some other random guy?
In a state of nature there is no such thing as ownership. If Og and Thag the cavemen are arguing over who owns a particular shiny rock, and Thag smacks Og on the head and takes the rock, who owns the rock? If Og waits until Thag is sleeping and smacks Thag on the head and takes the rock, who owns the rock?
Ownership as a concept only applies when Og and Thag can appeal to third parties to settle their dispute. If it’s just a case of who’s bigger and stronger and trickier, then ownership is moot. But if Torg and Gack agree with Og that Og should have the rock, and they’re willing to help Og defend the rock against Thag, well, now we’re talking ownership. Og owns the rock to the extent that Torg and Gack agree he owns the rock.
So back to the car. The auto manufacturer builds the car. They own the car. The sell the car to the dealer. The dealer owns the car. The dealer sells the car to your friend. Your friend owns the car. In what sense does the state “really” own the car? Because of a magic piece of paper? No, the piece of paper doesn’t make the manufacturer or the dealer or your friend own the car, the pieces of paper are just records so that when the three of you are smacking each other on the head over who gets the car, a passing cop can read the piece of paper and figure out who’s telling the truth. In no case will the cop take a look at the Manufacturers Certificate of Origin on file down at the DMV, and conclude that the DMV really owns the car, and turn the car over to the clerks at the DMV.
Since in no case will the cops and the judges turn the car over to the DMV as the real owners of the car, then it’s nonsensical to claim that the DMV is the real owner of the car. You don’t have to register your car with the state and get license plates because the state owns your car, you need to register your car and have a license plate before the state will allow you to drive your car on the public roads. As long as you stay off the public roads you have no need for a driver’s license, or a license plate, or a registration.
Your friend’s very premise is flawed. A MSO is in effect a “birth certificate” and has no relevance as to ownership. It simply declares who brought the vehicle into existence and when, much like the DOT paperwork you would fill out if you built a car from scratch and took it to the State Police to have it inspected and subsequently titled. Government is concerned with determining the origin of vehicles because, for one, it helps prevent theft and re-titling.
Since your friend clearly just wants to argue, here’s a few things you can ask him:
Why is it called a “Manufacturer’s Certificate of Origin” and not a “Manufacturer’s Certificate of Ownership”?
Why is there a Bill of Sale when the car is transferred from the manufacturer to the dealer, and another Bill of Sale when it’s transferred from the dealer to the end user? And does a Bill of Sale constitute “ownership”? (I can’t think of an instance where it doesn’t).
Tell your friend to give up and beer you.