Joined
·
299 Posts
This is a story of how "the man" is in the process of holding me down.
I have a bit of a dilemma on my hands. I received a Random Verification of Financial Responsibility notice in the mail requiring me to show proof of insurance. Not a big problem because I have full coverage on my pickup, right? WRONG. I also have a 1969 Rambler of which I stopped driving around at the time I had acquired this pickup, which was Aug. 2nd So of course I didn't want to pay for insurance on a vehicle I'm not driving.
Now, of course I get the notice for my rambler, saying I have to send proof that I had insurance as of Sept 8th. I have until Sept 29th to prove that I had insurance or I will get sent a notice of suspension of my driver's license, after which I have 21 more days to clear this all up.
So....I called the number on the letter I received and explained to the lady on the phone that I had not driven the vehicle for 36 days and that it does not have insurance on it. She replied that you MUST have at least liability on registered cars, even if you don't drive them.
Now, I remained calm and reminded the lady that the nice little document I signed when I got my plates that said I will have insurance. Quoted from the first line of it: "In Ohio, it is illegal to drive any motor vehicle without insurance or other financial responsibility (FR) coverage." (Emphasis added) She tells me that I still have to have at least state minimum insurance for any vehicle that is currently registered in the state of Ohio.
I was informed that the only way to counter this is to get a registered mechanic to sign, with a company header, that the car is in-operable as of a date that is 30 days before the notice was issued. (I guess that means that if you get into a crash and remove the vehicle from your insurance and get notice before the 30 days, you're screwed)
I am outraged that I have to put up with this. I have proof that I switched my plan from a 1969 rambler to a 2004 F-150 on AUG 2nd. Now why would I drive an uninsured vehicle when I have a brand new shiny truck with full coverage? This logic evidently falls on deaf ears and I am at a loss of what to do about this.
I am OUTRAGED that I have done nothing wrong and that I have to PROVE MY INNOCENCE. Isn't this unconstitutional? I thought I was supposed to be innocent until proven guilty upon a reason of a doubt? When did that change........
Has anyone else ever had to deal with this? Also, if you have any comments or helpful ideas I'd love to hear them.
I have a bit of a dilemma on my hands. I received a Random Verification of Financial Responsibility notice in the mail requiring me to show proof of insurance. Not a big problem because I have full coverage on my pickup, right? WRONG. I also have a 1969 Rambler of which I stopped driving around at the time I had acquired this pickup, which was Aug. 2nd So of course I didn't want to pay for insurance on a vehicle I'm not driving.
Now, of course I get the notice for my rambler, saying I have to send proof that I had insurance as of Sept 8th. I have until Sept 29th to prove that I had insurance or I will get sent a notice of suspension of my driver's license, after which I have 21 more days to clear this all up.
So....I called the number on the letter I received and explained to the lady on the phone that I had not driven the vehicle for 36 days and that it does not have insurance on it. She replied that you MUST have at least liability on registered cars, even if you don't drive them.
Now, I remained calm and reminded the lady that the nice little document I signed when I got my plates that said I will have insurance. Quoted from the first line of it: "In Ohio, it is illegal to drive any motor vehicle without insurance or other financial responsibility (FR) coverage." (Emphasis added) She tells me that I still have to have at least state minimum insurance for any vehicle that is currently registered in the state of Ohio.
I was informed that the only way to counter this is to get a registered mechanic to sign, with a company header, that the car is in-operable as of a date that is 30 days before the notice was issued. (I guess that means that if you get into a crash and remove the vehicle from your insurance and get notice before the 30 days, you're screwed)
I am outraged that I have to put up with this. I have proof that I switched my plan from a 1969 rambler to a 2004 F-150 on AUG 2nd. Now why would I drive an uninsured vehicle when I have a brand new shiny truck with full coverage? This logic evidently falls on deaf ears and I am at a loss of what to do about this.
I am OUTRAGED that I have done nothing wrong and that I have to PROVE MY INNOCENCE. Isn't this unconstitutional? I thought I was supposed to be innocent until proven guilty upon a reason of a doubt? When did that change........
Has anyone else ever had to deal with this? Also, if you have any comments or helpful ideas I'd love to hear them.