Submitted by bostonshopper t3_1201rta in boston
Never tell the government shit. Let them dig for it.
Some folks in bureaucracies enjoy 30-year careers enforcing random shit like this. And they were trained to do it. My experience working in a bureaucracy for several years is that everyone treats it like Skynet, you can’t change it even from the inside. Sorry you got caught in the bullshit.
One last update if they do drop it would provide us all some closure!
Just curious, what should you have said instead of you are here for x amount of time?
“I’m just visiting” alternatively “None of your business”
The RMV has a specific clause around being in Massachusetts for 30 days.
Nonresidents Registering in Massachusetts
Even a nonresident (anyone whose legal residence is outside the Commonwealth) may be required to register and/or insure a motor vehicle or trailer in Massachusetts in certain situations. Following are some examples:
• Nonresidents whose primary residences are in other states may not operate motor vehicles ... in Massachusetts for more than 30 total days in one year unless they have liability insurance
https://www.mass.gov/doc/chapter-6-owning-a-vehicle/download
"having liability insurance" is a far cry from "you have to register your car here" though. If that were the case, why isn't everyone who lives in NH and drives to Massachusetts for work required to get Mass plates?
>having liability insurance"
Could this be a rule since NH doesn't require Insurance?
That is exactly why this rule is in place, i'm not sure what it has to do with the requirement to register the car in Massachusetts though that the RMV appears to see in this legislation
So literally everyone who works in MA from out of state has to dual-register in order to go to their job. This is asinine.
That's the price the free-staters pay for complaining about oppressive taxachusetts while reaping the benefits of our infrastructure and economy.
That's so dumb. A car should only have to be registered in a single state. Tie it to someone's official residence, or maybe whichever state the car is operated in the most.
The reason it is like this is because someone would claim residence in some other state that doesn’t have taxes on cars and register their car there. They could have a friend in Alabama, claim it’s their home state, but live in MA 364 days a year, and skirt the law. So they made a law to force these people to register it here, since they are using the roads, etc. The idea behind it is solid, but of course there are situations like OP’s who get caught up even though they never really lived here, they just visited. This is why the cases need to be looked at when they pop up, and not just blindly apply the law. Common sense needs to be used, but that’s of course lacking in many offices.
How would that be a problem with my proposed rules? In your example the owner of the car resides in MA and the car spends the majority of its time in MA.
Edit: I'm not saying that it would solve people lying about which state their car should be in. I'm just saying it would be more fair and it would solve this ridiculous 30 day issue.
That’s exactly what the rule/law is supposed to do. But MA law says 30 days rather than a majority, because they have to set the limit somewhere, and people will always try to get around it on a technicality. “Well the car was here for 181 days, so that’s not a majority, so I register it in the other state.”
Of course it’s also that MA wants their cut of taxes too when someone is living here for a good part of the year, and it makes sense.
If the car is truly in this state for less than half the year (even 1 day less) and your official residence is in another state I'm fine giving up all the tax revenue.
And for those willing to lie to get around it, they'd also be giving up their right to vote in this state and anything else tied to residence.
What if their residence is officially MA for taxes but they move their car to another state for 184 days of the year because it’s a $250k car and they are just avoiding the excise tax? Then they bring their other $300k car here for 181 days, and just go on vacation somewhere else for the few days they don’t have a car here?
The 30 day limit is to make it very difficult to do this to get around paying your fair share. Don’t believe that people with money wouldn’t do this either. They would claim they shouldn’t have to register it here, even if they live here because the car isn’t here most of the time. They have nice cars that use the roads, but register the car in a state with low/no taxes.
Then the other states get to claim the cars for 100% of whatever taxes they charge.
If those states don't charge excise taxes and yet somehow maintain their roads just fine, maybe we should be looking into how those states are able to do so.
They charge other taxes, or they are southern states that don’t get all the winter damage we get.
I'm glad this seems to be getting resolved in your favor. I'm not surprised some goof ratted you out, given how petty some people can be.
I moved to Quincy, MA from NYC and for over 2 years my car still had NY plates. No one ever bothered me about it and cops used to pass by the car all the time. What made me finally transfer my title and registration to MA was I realized that my insurance would drop to less than half what I was paying for my NY registration. Would have saved myself over $2K had I done it sooner.
Thanks for letting us know! It’s been a fascinating story!
saw the article on Facebook and let out a loud cheer, all alone in my apartment, for ya!
[deleted]
I read about this. So crazy. How is someone to register their vehicle if they dont have a residence there? To register you have to provide some kind of proof of residency. Just crazy.
The dual registration is designed for cases like where someone lives in NH and parks a van in MA for work, it's not for people visiting and the DMV doesn't seem to get that there's no way or reason for people to actually do that
I feel like that is also stupid/ just a money grab. Welcome to Massachusetts I guess
If it were just a money grab, there would be a way for people who live outside Massachusetts to pay a fee and be done with it.
Like a fucking parking meter?
Fill out a form, pay a fee. The requirement to go through an insurance company, when the insurance company will deny you a policy because you don’t live in Massachusetts, is what makes this so Kafkaesque; compliance is effectively impossible.
Yeah, no. Just set a separate price for meters shift to an app that you enter your plate. Why should I register for a year if I only work there 35 days?
I thought is was for college students and transient professors.
Transient professors sounds like a euphemism for homeless people 😂
Shouty ones in particular.
Although those in academia will claim that "homeless" is a pretty good description of junior faculty moving around all the time to try and get tenure...
Worked at a community college with a lot of adjunct faculty. Can attest those trying to use that as their primary income were one step away from homelessness.
College students are excluded from this requirement
> Exemption for Enrolled Students: While nonresidents who are enrolled as full-time students in Massachusetts schools, colleges, and universities do not have to register their out-of-state vehicles in Massachusetts, they must complete and file Nonresident Student Vehicle Information Form
Wait, are you telling me OP could have avoided this entire thing by just getting admitted to Northeastern?
No, they would also have to fill out the Nonresident Student Vehicle Information Form.
<shakes fist angrily and ineffectively at legislature>
Complete a form? What is this? MIT?
[removed]
How else is Massachusetts gonna collect them sweet registration fee/excise tax/inspection fees. Can't have randos driving around for free! /s
I mean, I grew up on the NH border and every halfway rich fuck with a second property in NH registered their car to cheat the system at their lakehouse/cabin. Fuck those guys for sidestepping it, but also the RMV for hitting these travelers.
shit, i never thought about this. i feel like im gonna be looking at NH plates different now lol.
Could be confirmation bias, but I always noticed the most dickish drivers around had NH plates. I figured it was folks coming down south and thinking that's how you're supposed to drive in the city, but now I wonder if it's more this kind of thing.
New Hampshirites will of course tell you that MA plates drive the absolute worst. The whole “x state plates drive bad” thing is like this little harmless parody of cultural xenophobia.
But trucks with NH plates drive the worst, no doubt.
Trucks with NH plates are typically aggressive, but in my experience, Suburbans and Tahoes with CT or NY plates are typically aggressive AND clueless
All trucks are aggressive. It just is how it is, doesn't matter where they are from, all the same doucehbags buy black Dodge Rams, it's a personality trait.
Nobody drives worse than those jerks from Shelbyville
It’s definitely a bit of both
It's 100% confirmation bias haha. You see 1000x more terrible drivers with MA plates but ignore it because it's not "different", the second it's an out of state driver it's "ohhh of course they are from insert state here".
It’s for this same reason they make you pay sales tax on a car if you transfer the registration to Massachusetts without having owned it for a certain length of time (a year I think)
I moved from MA to NH, and I can tell you that you don’t save much money by registering in NH. We don’t have excise tax, but our registration cost every year is based on the value of the vehicle. So it’s essentially the same thing, just in one bill from the town rather than split between the RMV and the town.
Also, as much grief as the RMV gets, in NH you have to know where to go for different things. You normally get plates (and yearly decals) from the town office, license from the DMV, but if you want a special plate, that is the DMV too. Inspection costs vary from station to station, and you usually have to schedule them. Everything expires on your birthday, so “Happy Birthday! Now pay your car registration bill!” Oh, and the town office is open 9-4 M-F, and closed 12-1 for lunch, so you might as well take the day off to go.
Yeah, New York sucks with dealing with all that too. It is much more the stereotypical RMV... sorry, DMV... the typical hateful clerks etc.
I think the whole plate thing is to save on car insurance though by having it garaged in another place.
The insurance thing is only true if you don’t have a loan, because most banks require you to carry insurance if you do. And if you have a reasonably new car, you’d be crazy to not carry any insurance on it.
You forgot the best part. Insurance is optional.
Unless you have a loan, because most banks require it. And unless you’re buying a used car cheap, you’re likely to have a loan.
It's not an insignificant number: https://bkwlawyers.com/the-importance-of-having-new-hampshire-uninsured-motorist-coverage/
Though when you look at national and other state averages, it's not bad. None the less, I suspect this is the reason for the law.
[deleted]
I just cannot fathom someone being enough of a busybody to report you to the RMV.
Loads of cars in my building’s garage have out of state plates, it’s never occurred to me to call the RMV. I’m baffled and slightly fascinated about the mindset of the person who reported you.
My friend's neighbor ratted me out for having an expired guest parking pass. My friend had renewed the pass but not gotten it in the mail yet. I appealed the ticket, but it took them like five months to drop it.
I got a ticket for parking on a resident permit only street about an hour after I put on the resident parking permit in the required spot on the rear window. Went back to the clerks office the next day and ended up talking to the same lady who had given me the permit the previous day and she was like "wtf are they doing. They can't ticket you when you have a permit."
This happened to me years ago when I lived in Central Square. One day i randomly got a ticket even though I had a sticker. I fought it but it took forever.
I was once flagged down by a police officer in Central Square for having an expired inspection sticker. After staring blankly at him for a minute I managed to convince him that September came after May, so it was still valid for a few months... He didn't quite apologize, but I took a little joy in the awkward expression on his face.
Awww that police officer thinks the school year is the calendar year.
Can't they see if a vehicle has a valid permit when they enter the license plate #? I feel like that's how they get people who have moved to another city but have a not-yet-expired resident sticker.
Presumably there is a function like that but having worked in government I wouldn't be surprised if the capabilities and/or internal controls have been oversold to the public.
Seriously, what a dick
Some people really have too much time on their hands.
The worst downstairs neighbor I ever had drove a car with CT plates and I never once considered snitching. Who the fuck does that?
The 30 day rule is the dumbest thing that I learned during this entire story. You shouldn’t have to register a car here unless you live here for a majority of the year. It should be a 183 day rule, not a 30 day rule. For fucks sake.
I’m sure a federal court would agree it feels like an overstep by MA government
[deleted]
How is it an overstep, in a federal sense?
You’re regulating things for people who aren’t your “citizens” it would basically be a violation of the interstate commerce clause. It is also entirely reasonable for the people of NH, RI, and CT to operate their cars in ma for more than 30 days in the year. Federal court would probably rule that you have to actually live in MA as a resident to be required to register your car similar yo how income tax laws work.
To the courts we go!
Interstate travel is typically considered to fall under the Privileges and Immunities Clause. Massachusetts is effectively saying that after 30 days in Massachusetts, someone loses the right to move to Virginia; that’s plainly unconstitutional.
But Massachusetts isn't revoking his Virginia license. They're telling Virginia what happened and the decision appears to be up to Virginia.
When assessing residency for state income tax purposes, the rule is 183 days in a year, or 1 day with intent to establish residency in Massachusetts.
It's the latter one that requires tax officials to interpret intent, and the tax version of this RMV official could try the same thing. But tax doesn't have the canceling a driver license enforcement stick, and is all done after the fact.
A change to the car registration rules would likely follow something like the tax system rules, to cover requiring people who move to MA over half way through a year.
i am so committed to this story and its ending. i am just so sorry this happened. what a broken system. i don’t know that i would’ve had your patience. i would’ve lost my fucking marbles….
'murica
Taxachusetts
The nickname is often a joke alluding to the high taxes in Massachusetts. But according to a study by WalletHub, they are not among the highest in the nation.
Massachusetts ranked 21st among states with the highest tax burden.
Be committed to facilitating change through voting and action.
We did it Reddit.
Edit: hi Daemon
There digging into the craziness because that tip line is going to get overloaded. People don't know about that 30 day rule and are going to start reporting the snowbirds.
How crazy would it be if every out-of-state plate got called into the RMV. I’ll bet the RMV would knock this shit off if they had to deal with it… en Masse
“in Mass” works too
YEAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!’
If there's one thing I think we know about the RMV it's that they don't particularly care about having insane backlogs, sensible bureaucracy, or a good customer facing experience.
Glad things are starting to work out. This is especially crazy because I know a lot of people that have driven in MA with out of state license plates for years... while living here and never going back to the state on their plate
Yeah this is the crazy thing for me. I drove my wife's car with CT plates for 3-2 years because we were not sure if we would stay each year I had it. Kept feeling like a hassle for something that may only end up being necessary for ~6-8 months.
Eventually we bought a new car and had that registered in MA.
But when I lived in Quincy, there was a VT car that had lived across the street for at least the 4 years I was there.
My roommate had CT plates while living in Boston for literally 11 years. 4 years of college and 7 years after until he finally got a new car and got Mass plates thrown on.
Yup...can confirm did this throughout all of COVID and beyond with no issues. Complete BS that OP had to deal with this at all.
> Ben said he did get a call from a supervisor in the enforcement services unit who told him under Chapter 90, Section 3 of the Mass Code, anyone who operates a motor vehicle for thirty days in a calendar year is required to register the vehicle.
Maybe I need to work on my legalese.
> Section 3. Subject to the provisions of section three A and except as otherwise provided in this section and in section ten, a motor vehicle or trailer owned by a non-resident who has complied with the laws relative to motor vehicles and trailers, and the registration and operation thereof, of the state or country of registration, may be operated on the ways of this commonwealth without registration under this chapter, to the extent, as to length of time of operation and otherwise, that, as finally determined by the registrar, the state or country of registration grants substantially similar privileges in the case of motor vehicles and trailers duly registered under the laws and owned by residents of this commonwealth; provided, that no motor vehicle or trailer shall be so operated on more than thirty days in the aggregate in any one year or, in any case where the owner thereof acquires a regular place of abode or business or employment within the commonwealth, beyond a period of thirty days after the acquisition thereof, except during such time as the owner thereof maintains in full force a policy of liability insurance providing indemnity for or protection to him, and to any person responsible for the operation of such motor vehicle or trailer with his express or implied consent, against loss by reason of the liability to pay damages to others for bodily injuries, including death at any time resulting therefrom, caused by such motor vehicle or trailer, at least to the amount or limits required in a motor vehicle liability policy as defined in section thirty-four A.
(emphasis mine)
I'm reading that law as you need to register after 30 days if you don't have liability insurance. There's some exceptions listed later: you have to register if you're using it for a business and you have to register if a MA driver is going to be using it. There's also a very long paragraph covering students. The guide book also lists a registration requirement if the vehicle registration is from a state that isn't the owner's home state, but that's not listed in this subsection.
OP had stated that they had appropriate insurance, so I had assumed that they had accidentally admitted to one of those other subcategories (letting their friend drive the car, driving for Uber, etc.). Either there's a communication failure (RMV not explaining the exact violation correctly; OP not relaying information completely) or the RMV is asserting that the "except" clause wasn't applicable here.
Really great question. So, the RMV supervisor I've dealt with, as well as a lawyer I emailed with, both indicated that simply operating a vehicle 30+ days in a year could be enough to trigger the registration requirement, regardless of having liability insurance. Which, I agree, makes zero sense. So maybe it's still a communications error? But I very clearly don't fall under any of the other provisions, didn't do any Uber or lending my car or anything.
Yeah it really sounds like idiots in the RMV not understanding their own laws with a law targeting NH which doesn’t require insurance
So it sounds like the lawyer agrees with the RMV that they were reading the law correctly. I’ve said it elsewhere, but what irks me about the local news stories I’ve seen about this is that the framing has been that the RMV and the RMV person you had your appeal with are being said to be in the wrong, when it is the legislature that may be in the wrong. I know this doesn’t mean a lot to you as an out of stater who feels aggrieved by a kafkesk bureaucracy, but I’m irked at the local news who should know better deciding to run with the easy “local bureaucrats are assholes” angle rather than the nuanced “Massachusetts legislature is a horrible corrupt mess that can’t do anything behind its veils of secrecy “ angle. Signed, a local bureaucrat who has to do things that I don’t love, but don’t get to make decisions on.
*Kafkaesque
I was going to roll my eyes at you for correcting someone on the internet, then I realized that all I’ve been doing until Reddit knows what hour all day was being a pedant (m)asshole, and also that my spelling mistake was quite novel. So I’ll say thank you instead. 😁
Now kith
Exactly, the RMV operations and customer service could be vastly improved except for the fact that the only people that can enact real change are our legislators. Now if there were a chance that they might lose an election because their constituents were fed up they might do their job but for the most part, they have no opponent to fear. Bill Weld made it a priority and in a short time, the registry experience vastly improved. Instead of voting out these useless people who give us terrible public transport and RMV we vote D and head to AAA to try to get service.
I'd trust the lawyer's advice over my personal reading, but the "except" clause seemed so clear and it's so easy to accidentally admit to something seemingly innocent that I assumed that's what happened.
I'm really curious what the cost of actually registering would be. It'd be a major hassle for you (as I believe all of this needs to be done in person in MA), but the RMV appears to have a supervisor, the press office, and the ombudsman's office working to deal with an issue that amounts to a $60 plate fee. If that's all we're looking at, it makes sense to cut bait and issue a stern warning at this point. Maybe even a wag of the finger and a "now don't you do this again!"
> $60 plate fee. If that's all we're looking at, it makes sense to cut bait and issue a stern warning at this point.
They'd also be on the hook for excise tax which is $25 per $1000 of value (based on a percentage of MSRP based on how old the car is)
The MA excise tax page indicates it's less than that:
> If you own any motor vehicle that has been registered for less than a full calendar year, you will pay the excise based on the entire month when you registered that vehicle, as well as for the remaining months of the year.
> The abatement amount granted to taxpayers who have moved out of Massachusetts, transferred vehicle ownership, or had their vehicles stolen is based on the number of months remaining in the calendar year after the month the last eligibility requirement for the abatement takes place.
So, they would be charged excise tax starting the month they arrived and given an abatement for the months after they left. Even if we assume it's two calendar months, that's $4.16 per $1000 of vehicle value. His car model isn't specifically mentioned in the news story, but I think the picture is a Mazda 3 that's at least six years old (the headlights on post-2018 models are sharper and further down below the hood). If my guess is correct, then the excise is $4.16/$1000 times an excise calculation of 10% (more than 5 years old) of less than $30k original MSRP?
All I can imagine at this point is an accountant walking around the RMV yelling "With the plate fee, this bill comes to dozens of dollars. Dozens!"
Wait it’s 30 days cumulative if I’m reading that right? That’s pretty ridiculous lol. So if I spend a weekend every month they’d still suspend my license? Lol
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity. --Hanlon's Razor (paraphrased)
Well unfortunately you just learned why ppl are suspicious of the government. It’s not always a good idea to let them know what you’re doing
Haha, your story is all over my FB feed.
Same here. I was like “I know this story!”
My sister brought it up as well!.
Popped up on my FB feed too. Pretty cool!
The stupid part is the law clearly states 30 days after you become a resident.
There's actually two separate parts of the law! One is about after you become a resident, but another part is about non-residents who operate a vehicle in MA for any 30 days in a calendar year.
That would be like, half the population of CT and zero RI-ers
Yeah this should go to court and be thrown out by a federal judge under the interstate commerce clause
Lawyer here. That’s not really how the interstate commerce clause works—unless it’s pre-empted federally, states can certainly pass regulations like this. The interstate commerce clause applies to what the federal government can and cannot regulate. I don’t know that a federal court could really do much here.
A family member of mine is in the hospital. I've been down 7 days in a month and more on the horizon. I'll hit 30 by June easily just on visiting them.
Suace? Cuz I looked and couldnt find anything. Other than the resident 30 day thing.
I'm going off what an RMV supervisor told me, and I believe he was talking about this paragraph from chapter 90 section 3:
"A motor vehicle or trailer owned by a non-resident who has complied with the laws relative to motor vehicles and trailers, and the registration and operation thereof, of the state or country of registration, may be operated on the ways of this commonwealth without registration under this chapter, to the extent, as to length of time of operation and otherwise, that, as finally determined by the registrar, the state or country of registration grants substantially similar privileges in the case of motor vehicles and trailers duly registered under the laws and owned by residents of this commonwealth; provided, that no motor vehicle or trailer shall be so operated on more than thirty days in the aggregate in any one year."
You misquoted the law. There’s no period after “in any one year”.
> Section 3. Subject to the provisions of section three A and except as otherwise provided in this section and in section ten, a motor vehicle or trailer owned by a non-resident who has complied with the laws relative to motor vehicles and trailers, and the registration and operation thereof, of the state or country of registration, may be operated on the ways of this commonwealth without registration under this chapter, to the extent, as to length of time of operation and otherwise, that, as finally determined by the registrar, the state or country of registration grants substantially similar privileges in the case of motor vehicles and trailers duly registered under the laws and owned by residents of this commonwealth; provided, that no motor vehicle or trailer shall be so operated on more than thirty days in the aggregate in any one year or, in any case where the owner thereof acquires a regular place of abode or business or employment within the commonwealth, beyond a period of thirty days after the acquisition thereof, except during such time as the owner thereof maintains in full force a policy of liability insurance providing indemnity for or protection to him, and to any person responsible for the operation of such motor vehicle or trailer with his express or implied consent, against loss by reason of the liability to pay damages to others for bodily injuries, including death at any time resulting therefrom, caused by such motor vehicle or trailer, at least to the amount or limits required in a motor vehicle liability policy as defined in section thirty-four A.
Didn't mean to misquote, just cut off at the part that is being applied to my situation, at least according to the RMV supervisor I spoke with. I agree that the way I read it, having MA-compliant liability insurance, like I do, should exempt me from the registration requirement, but they're saying it doesn't...
The legal principle known as the "Rule of Lenity" holds that "Ambiguity in a statute defining a crime or imposing a penalty should be resolved in favor of the defendant." And "The Whole Act Rule" holds that "The text [of the statute] should be construed as a whole." Selectively excerpting from the statute isn't allowed.
I can’t wait to report people I don’t like with out of state plates on the vineyard.
This is the kind of update I like to read. Thanks for posting OP.
I wonder how this applies to rental car companies. Like, could someone walk through the rental car parking garage at Logan and report all the out of state plates?
The issue is this guy left his car in front of someone’s house for a month and pissed someone off enough that they called it in. Not going to happen if it’s just an out of state plate. Cars get dumped all the time in that neighborhood and it’s a major headache.
Probably took up a parking space that meant someone else was out a spot. So they called them in.
For thirty days? Yeah. More likely it was assumed abandoned. Also before they do this they usually issue multiple parking tickets. Sounds like OP dumped his car and never checked on it. It’s unusual in that neighborhood for a car to not move for more than a week or two and someone might have been pissed or concerned. The registration law is secondary to the problem that initiated this. He’s lucky it wasn’t towed and accruing $1000s in impound fees while he wasn’t checking on the vehicle. If he had moved his car even once guarantee this wouldn’t have happened.
Just to clarify, I definitely didn't leave my car sitting in the same spot for a month. I agree that would be extremely obnoxious! I was coming and going, not always parked on the same side of the street, sometimes parked on a nearby street, went on a little NH trip, etc.
This would all make a lot more sense if I'd done something obviously offensive with my car, but I just honestly didn't.
Also, if I had received a ticket for "excessive non-resident parking" or something, I would have been frustrated but understood. And if someone had said something to me about it or left a note, I would have happily parked on different side streets on different days, I definitely had no intention of causing issues for anyone.
It's the registering my vehicle in 2 states with 2 license plates that's the issue, especially since my insurance company says that they literally can't give me MA insurance since I don't live there.
Thanks for highlighting this--I'm here as a travel nurse till July. I'm just here to work and don't plan to stay, you've given me a new fear. But I definitely appreciate the heads-up
What’s funny is that I live in Denver and there’s so many out of state tags, cars without tags, and cars with expired tags here. They literally don’t enforce it.
For those in similar situations:
Good advice. Would also advise that you can’t take what one staffer said in person or on the phone and expect the next one to be aware of it/agree. Need to treat every interaction as if it’s your first about the issue.
Jesus Christ man I am so sorry, as someone who’s dealt with my fair shair of RMV problems, I feel for you.
My radio station in DC talked about this today
Hooray!
As a side note.. what if you drive to MA for 28 days, leave on the 29th day and then come back? Does the 30 day clock reset?? I also thought this only applies to people who MOVE from out of state. Like if you move to MA, then you have 30 days to register here. Not people just doing an extended stay here. But I guess that would make too much sense??
Tbh I lived in NH for 3 years with MA plates and no one ever batted an eye. I have many questions for the RMV.
[deleted]
Car reported abandoned; check EZ pass data. It’s super easy.
[deleted]
My neighbor has been driving and living here for two years with a Virginia license plate, nobody cares. How does this guy get in trouble for a month?
I am so happy for you my man. Fuck the rmv
The common sense solution is to change the code from 30 days to 6 months plus one day.
Maybe this was covered elsewhere, but wouldn't a literal reading of this mean anyone who lives in another state (RI, NH, etc) and drives to work in MA would have to register? No way that's actually happening.
VERY glad to see the RMV has dropped this. Good for you for holding them accountable!
Thank you! Definitely would not have happened without everyone on r/boston and sending me to the news stations...
good luck! hope everything works out.
The Massachusetts oligarchy has a lot of catch 22s. Call out overreaching bureaucracies where you see them
This is so exciting
[deleted]
Folks, this is actually a law in Massachusetts, which you'll find berried in the subsections of Chapter 90 as well as the Massachusetts Driver's manual. It aint nothing new. They are just reinforcing it now for reasons, as many of you mentioned above. I say it cause I've worked for the department for 18 years.
Is there a way for him to register his vehicle if he doesn't have a MA address?
Ugh the RMV is a nightmare. I actually did move here from Virginia and it was a huge pain.
Just making sure this is the same RMV that didn’t bother looking into anything sent from out of state regarding driver violations and is culpable in the deaths of several motorcyclists? That one?
[deleted]
werk.
Sully! We have saved you a stool PJ O’Potatohans in Sadchester.
I find this hilarious.
15 years ago I moved from RI to MA. Completely forgot about my plates. I was running on expired RI tags for well over a year.
Jeez I saw the headline earlier but I didn't read the story, I guess I'm liking that nobody's reported to me and for living here for a year and a half with out of state plates. I'm not sticking around so hopefully this crap doesn't happen to me.
This is completely unreasonable but tbf there aren't enough spots for residents as it is and leaving your out of state car parked for 30 days is annoying af. It takes a spot away from the elderly woman up the block who has walking issues, the pregnant lady next door, etc.
What if he’s parking in his friends driveway? Plus registering it doesn’t create a space for the old lady who can’t walk
He isn’t parking in his friend’s driveway. He left his car in a neighborhood where street parking is the main and only option for the majority of residents. It’s dense and parking is tough. Nobody should be leaving their car on the street in JP for 30 days at a stretch unless they live on the street and even then, it’s kind of inherently uneighborly. Space is limited and It’s like musical chairs. if car doesn’t move in from front of her house for 30 days old lady gets fucked on parking. These aren’t public parking lots lmao
Just to clarify, I definitely didn't leave my car sitting in the same spot for a month. I agree that would be extremely obnoxious! I was coming and going, not always parked on the same side of the street, sometimes parked on a nearby street, went on a little NH trip, etc.
This would all make a lot more sense if I'd done something obviously offensive with my car, but I just honestly didn't.
Also, if I had received a ticket for "excessive non-resident parking" or something, I would have been frustrated but understood. And if someone had said something to me about it or left a note, I would have happily parked on different side streets on different days, I definitely had no intention of causing issues for anyone.
It's the registering my vehicle in 2 states with 2 license plates that's the issue, especially since my insurance company says that they literally can't give me MA insurance since I don't live there.
Oof. In that case I’m sincerely sorry you got fucked. Good luck in your quest.
🙏🙏
You're being downvoted, but this is not a bad take at all even if OP's situation sucks. Having lived in a neighborhood that people not from there used as a dumping ground for long term parking, it's irritating to come home from a long day of work and see the same car sitting where you could have parked. Whether you're a resident or not, it's kind of disrespectful to the neighbors to not move your car for a month.
This was my hunch from their initial post; that it had nothing to do with a couple parking tickets. I don't at all support the frustrating outcome with the RMV dealings, but am not surprised some random car just sitting there for 30 days (if this is indeed the case) drew the attention of a resident and pissed them off.
Just to clarify, I definitely didn't leave my car sitting in the same spot for a month. I agree that would be extremely obnoxious! I was coming and going, not always parked on the same side of the street, sometimes parked on a nearby street, went on a little NH trip, etc.
This would all make a lot more sense if I'd done something obviously offensive with my car, but I just honestly didn't.
Also, if I had received a ticket for "excessive non-resident parking" or something, I would have been frustrated but understood. And if someone had said something to me about it or left a note, I would have happily parked on different side streets on different days, I definitely had no intention of causing issues for anyone.
It's the registering my vehicle in 2 states with 2 license plates that's the issue, especially since my insurance company says that they literally can't give me MA insurance since I don't live there.
This is the issue that's being ignored in all these posts. Why is the City of Boston enabling this abusive behavior by out of state criminals at the expense of it's own residents? Every other functional city and town prohibits this thing but TPTB in Boston actively encourage it to spite us.
Just to clear up any doubt, what kind of street were you parking on and how long was the car left for?
I believe you, but I have family saying that you left the car on a busy street for a month straight.
Welp, looks like we found who called the rmv.
Just to clarify, I have one uncle who lives on a street where the locals normally have to circle for like 30 minutes to find a spot. It’s not a big deal, but I could imagine an out of state license plate parked for 30 days would be frustrating.
Fair question, the street I was mainly parked on was definitely not that busy or tight on parking! And I wasn't parked in one spot the whole time at all, not even always on the same street.
OP's visit happened in October. The car hasn't been there for five months. Why call the RMV about it now?
[deleted]
Why would the RMV have evidence of anything if it wasn't reported?
[deleted]
Not sure where summer is coming from. It was mid-October to mid-November, and I didn't abandon my car or anything - I came and went throughout that time. I got one parking ticket near downtown crossing which I successfully appealed due to confusing signage, and a street cleaning ticket which was paid on time (I moved my car 20 minutes late, obviously that's on me).
It would make a lot more sense if I'd done something obnoxious with my car, but I just honestly didn't.
Also, if I had received a ticket for "excessive non-resident parking" or something, I would have been frustrated but understood. And if someone had said something to me about it or left a note, I would have happily parked on different side streets on different days, I definitely had no intention of causing issues for anyone.
It's the registering my vehicle in 2 states with 2 license plates that's the issue, especially since my insurance company says that they literally can't give me MA insurance since I don't live there.
If it was there in the summer, why did your buddy not report it then?
I’m with this guy.
bostonshopper OP t1_jdfau4l wrote
Seems like this will be my last post, and they'll just quietly drop the suspension in a week or two. Obviously if that turns out to not be the case, I'll definitely give that as an update!
Thanks so much to all of you who PM'd ideas, or gave me an email address of someone who could maybe help, or just said "damn that sucks."
I will definitely be much more careful with what I write and say to bureaucracies in the future. I do think this particular bizarre situation was hard to see coming, but volunteering the information that I was visiting the area for a specific amount of time turned out to be a big mistake.
And naively, I do hope the pressure from the news coverage ends up improving things for people interacting with the RMV in general. To just give one example, u/isenfire literally had to sell their car to resolve an issue they had with the RMV, that shouldn't happen to anyone. Whatever oversight or funding or reform the RMV needs to do its job in a more fair and humane way, and if there's a part of the state law that could be fixed, would be great if at least some of that could end up happening.