🚀 go-pugleaf

Dave Schreiber <noone@nowhere.gov> whines at me:

> >Of course, they keep records when YOU owe them money, or when they
> >want to impose some penalty, but, when it's in the favor of the
> >People, oh, "we don't have any records..."

> Well, far be it from me to interrupt your rant with mere facts, but
> the DMV never actually said "we don't have any records".

DMV Form ADM 399 states "DMV will not honor refund requests that
are...received more than three years after payment due to the Statute
of Limitations and because department records are no longer available
for verification."

Mere facts, asshole.

> On the contrary, the court ordered the DMV to inform everyone who is
> eligible for a refund that they are eligible.

Indeed it did, back to 1992.  But I have ZERO confidence that DMV will
voluntarily comply with this.  I may be wrong, and I'll make a public
apology if I am.

> Speaking of facts, I decided to see how the DMV itself is handling the
> situation.  As part of their clever plan to ensure that no one gets a
> refund, the DMV has refund instructions on the top level of their web
> site, complete with refund application form in PDF format:

>    <http://www.dmv.ca.gov>

> Now, there have been rumors that the DMV won't refund the fee if the
> vehicle has been sold, or if its been more than three years since the
> fee has been paid.  I don't think that's the case.

A Bee article from Tuesday quoted Deputy Attorney General Michael
Cornez as indicating it was the State's intention not to make refunds
to those ripped off over three years ago, despite the court's clear
command.

> Their refund application form does mention those conditions, but
> it's a GENERIC form, typically used to get refunds for vehicle
> registration fees.  DMV policies on fee refunds _do_not_ apply to
> court-ordered sanctions (and the court has _ordered_ the DMV to
> refund the fee to anyone who paid it since Sept. 1992 and who asks
> for a refund).

And you're trying to say that DMV, and Lockyer's
office/representatives, don't know this?  Yet, it's clearly the
position of the State that they're going to try crap to impede justice
here.  Of course, it's right, and lawful, for DMV to immediately make
payment to those ripped off, but, as I said in another post, do we
really believe that State bureaucrats who imposed this regulation on us
didn't know it was unconstitutional and unlawful already?

> >> Why does CA keep doing unconstitutional things?

> >Because they can.  Simple as that.

> Well, apparently not in the smog fee case.

When I get my refund, I'll believe this.

-- Milton John Kleim, Jr.
   Citrus Heights

--

http://www.efn.org/~mjk/


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.