so if my V5C is "not proof of ownership" then what is..?

[bint]

Munter said:

[quote..
It's worth doing. Just a piece of A4 with the date, sellers name, buyers name and value on it is what I've seen done before. But at least you have something to show a transaction took place.

Also useful if you sell a car and he gets done for speeding driving it home. As long as you put time of purchase too

[TTmonkey]

Zee Researcha said:

The Proof of Ownership of the car is called "Manufacturer's Statement of Origin", sometimes called the "Manufacturer's Certificate of Origin". THIS IS THE ACTUAL TITLE OF THE AUTOMOBILE. The registration process involves you signing the form allowing the dealer of a newly manufactured automobile to act under the "Power of Attorney". The dealer then sends the Title to DVLA where they take a copy of it and destroy the original. Note; the copy of the Manufacturer's Statement of Origin is not a document for proof since only originals are. What you have just done is allowed the government to own the vehicle making you the "registered keeper". Since the original documentation has been destroyed then there is no way of proving ownership in the future. You have also registered the automobile as a commercial "vehicle". This is why the Police always say "Vehicle" instead of car. Since the car is now owned by the government as a commercial machinery then the operator is required to have training and a license to operate the machinery. Since the government own the vehicle then they car seize it and impound it. If the car is owned by you then this would be classed as theft by the government.

The Police Officer (Officer is another commercial term) can pull you over for operating the machinery incorrectly since the vehicle belongs to the government.

The reason why people don't know about this is because registration is a huge scam on the people where people sign away their wealth. Hope this helps.

thanks for that. 7.5 years to clarify. The OP must have gone mental.

[TTmonkey]

7.5 years for some horsest that is.

[DanL]

Zee Researcha said:

@TT Monkey

Since you have disagreed with what I have said then you must be able to point out which statements are untrue and why providing basis for your reasons.

After 7.5 years must now be able to enlighten us on who actually owns a vehicle.

I trust that you will do this and not display ignorance by not offering any basis and just hurling more abuse.

I eagerly await your reply.

This is freeman on the land nonsense, isn't it... Let's start from the top, as it's nearly time to go home and I need to fill in 5 minutes - my proof of ownership for my car, as covered somewhere near the top of this thread, is the receipt I was given by the garage I purchased it from.

https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q743.htm

From the link above, "the owner is the person who put up the cash (or was given it as a gift)." A car is no different from anything else you might buy, and would have the same proof of ownership as a pair of shoes or virtually any other thing you care to mention.

Zee Researcha said:

The Proof of Ownership of the car is called "Manufacturer's Statement of Origin", sometimes called the "Manufacturer's Certificate of Origin". THIS IS THE ACTUAL TITLE OF THE AUTOMOBILE.

No it isn't - what are you talking about? A car isn't some special sort of property that has a "deed" or "title" attached to it (unlike land, say). 10 seconds on Google tells me that this is just a bit of paper that confirms where the car was made, and is used for import / export tariffs and so on.

[TooMany2cvs]

DanL said:

Zee Researcha said:

The Proof of Ownership of the car is called "Manufacturer's Statement of Origin", sometimes called the "Manufacturer's Certificate of Origin". THIS IS THE ACTUAL TITLE OF THE AUTOMOBILE.

No it isn't - what are you talking about? A car isn't some special sort of property that has a "deed" or "title" attached to it (unlike land, say). 10 seconds on Google tells me that this is just a bit of paper that confirms where the car was made, and is used for import / export tariffs and so on.

I think our post-count-building spambot-in-waiting might be posting some vaguely US-accurate guff. Certainly a lot of other countries have much more in the way of actual recorded ownership than we do here, and need solicitors/notary publics and the like to do the paperwork on owner changes.

[AdeTuono]

I don't think anyone really cares after almost 8 years, do you?

An odd first post. Do you have anything more relevant to offer?

[Fore Left]

Zee Researcha said:

DanL said:

Zee Researcha said:

@TT Monkey

Since you have disagreed with what I have said then you must be able to point out which statements are untrue and why providing basis for your reasons.

After 7.5 years must now be able to enlighten us on who actually owns a vehicle.

I trust that you will do this and not display ignorance by not offering any basis and just hurling more abuse.

I eagerly await your reply.

This is freeman on the land nonsense, isn't it... Let's start from the top, as it's nearly time to go home and I need to fill in 5 minutes - my proof of ownership for my car, as covered somewhere near the top of this thread, is the receipt I was given by the garage I purchased it from.

https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q743.htm

From the link above, "the owner is the person who put up the cash (or was given it as a gift)." A car is no different from anything else you might buy, and would have the same proof of ownership as a pair of shoes or virtually any other thing you care to mention.

Zee Researcha said:

The Proof of Ownership of the car is called "Manufacturer's Statement of Origin", sometimes called the "Manufacturer's Certificate of Origin". THIS IS THE ACTUAL TITLE OF THE AUTOMOBILE.

No it isn't - what are you talking about? A car isn't some special sort of property that has a "deed" or "title" attached to it (unlike land, say). 10 seconds on Google tells me that this is just a bit of paper that confirms where the car was made, and is used for import / export tariffs and so on.

I never mentioned any Freeman stuff and my reply was in direct relationship of how one proves ownership of a car. A receipt IS NOT PROOF OF OWNERSHIP BUT A RECORD OF A PARTICULAR TRANSACTION. A BILL OF SALE IS A CONTRACT THAT ONE SHOULD HAVE. LEARN THE DIFFERENCE.

The Police link is only opinion and in no way tells you HOW TO PROVE OWNERSHIP.

The Title documentation is the must important paperwork you can hold. What proof does the manufacturer have to pass to a dealer proving it has Title to that automobile if not the MCO?

Since you mentioned the US then I leave you what transpired in a court hearing over the pond, enjoy http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?224399...

You need to research more.

In fact, have another

And another

And some more

[Toltec]

How does that work with a kit car then?

[TooMany2cvs]

Zee Researcha said:

Title can be applied to any property (as in asset not just real estate) and typically used for big ticket items of worth if a claim to ownership could be costly if disputed. This includes cars. Obviously, you wouldn't demand title documentation on small every day items.

Lovely. So why not humour me, and explain exactly why none of us here have ever had any kind of official "title" transfer documentation for any UK car purchase, new or used?

Care to link to a scan of such an official "title" document for a car, so we can know what we're missing?

Or even anything that provides any kind of vaguely official backup of this theory of yours?

[DanL]

Zee Researcha said:

I never mentioned any Freeman stuff and my reply was in direct relationship of how one proves ownership of a car. A receipt IS NOT PROOF OF OWNERSHIP BUT A RECORD OF A PARTICULAR TRANSACTION. A BILL OF SALE IS A CONTRACT THAT ONE SHOULD HAVE. LEARN THE DIFFERENCE.

The Police link is only opinion and in no way tells you HOW TO PROVE OWNERSHIP.

The Title documentation is the must important paperwork you can hold. What proof does the manufacturer have to pass to a dealer proving it has Title to that automobile if not the MCO?

Since you mentioned the US then I leave you what transpired in a court hearing over the pond, enjoy http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?224399...

You need to research more.

Hi again. I can assert things with no reference too! I CAN EVEN USE CAPS FOR EMPHSIS! Isn’t this FUN?

A receipt is clearly proof of a transaction, and transactions are how we buy things on planet Earth. You’re fun and all, but I think you might just be a troll or a moron, and either way it’s rather pointless continuing to discuss with you. Particularly as you clearly went searching for a thread on this topic in order to start this little conversation, which I really should have noticed earlier on.

Have a wonderful life, you fruitcake!

[TooMany2cvs]

Zee Researcha said:

I always buy 2nd hand cars so the Title has already been transferred to the government by the previous owner.

Really?

In all my years of buying and selling cars, I've never once "transferred the title to the government", nor have I ever been transferred it back.

Which bit of the V5C would I use to do that?

[Toltec]

Zee Researcha said:

Toltec said:

How does that work with a kit car then?

A Manufacturer Certificate of Origin is also applicable for components. So your big ticket items should come with it. If not then insure it does.

What big ticket items?
The engine, gearbox, differential and hubs from a £350 Ford Sierra?
The chassis made up from steel tube cut and welded by the builder?
The grp bodywork maybe?

The IVA probably cost more than any component.

[AdeTuono]

Zee Researcha said:

Toltec said:

What big ticket items?
The engine, gearbox, differential and hubs from a £350 Ford Sierra?
The chassis made up from steel tube cut and welded by the builder?
The grp bodywork maybe?

The IVA probably cost more than any component.

Sorry I thought you was talking about buying big kits like £10k. Small parts I wouldn't waste my time with a MCO. Common sense should prevail. Last comment from me. Good luck with your kit car.

If that's your last post, then it seems common sense has prevailed.

Still confused as to why you signed up to resurrect this old thread with your madcap musings.

[AdeTuono]

Zee Researcha said:

It is interesting that even the government recommends you see a Bill of Sales as proof of ownership https://www.gov.uk/government/news/dvla-encourages...

Why do they say this? It's because a Bill of Sales is a contract. A receipt IS just a record of transaction. Even when a Judge confirms a MCO is Title people with no knowledge reject this. This is why I am not wasting my time further.

What's your agenda? Do you have a vested interest in 'Bills of sale'?

I've never, in any transaction, for anything, ever seen a Bill of Sale.

[DanL]

Zee Researcha said:

It is interesting that even the government recommends you see a Bill of Sales as proof of ownership https://www.gov.uk/government/news/dvla-encourages...

Why do they say this? It's because a Bill of Sales is a contract. A receipt IS just a record of transaction. Even when a Judge confirms a MCO is Title people with no knowledge reject this. This is why I am not wasting my time further.

Bill of sale, receipt, whatever - same thing in common parlance. I was certainly thinking about whatever printed piece of paper I had from the garage showing the details of the car I’d purchased, rather than the print from the visa machine.

Here’s a question - why is this important? I don’t believe you’re correct, but you asserted this (edited to highlight the items I’m discussing): “Since the original documentation has been destroyed then there is no way of proving ownership in the future...

The reason why people don't know about this is because registration is a huge scam on the people where people sign away their wealth.”

The two statements above are demonstrably incorrect. You’ve said yourself that this magical “bill of sale” is proof of ownership, contradicting your initial statement that there is no way of proving that you own the car. I imagine you’ll state that what I think is a bill of sale isn’t, and I don’t really own my car, just think I do, playing to the second point above.

Even if you’re right, which I dispute, it makes no practical difference. How have I “signed away my wealth”? I still have the car. The world in general (possibly excepting you) accepts I own it, and I can use it as I see fit. Should I wish to sell it, someone else will give me money for it, which rather goes against your claim that I have signed away my wealth... I’m curious what cunning ruse you believe is being pulled on all of us here?

If I own literally nothing, but the world acts as though I own stuff, clearly the outcome is the same.

[TooMany2cvs]

Zee Researcha said:

I am aiding the World Bank in readiness for the coming Global Currency Reset which includes ending the corruption in the legal system & Privy Councils.

Thank you for removing any lingering doubt about your sanity and relationship with reality.

[anonymous-user]

Do love these freeman of the land bullst overnight lawyer wannabe anti government losers.

Ohh you can't sieze my vehicle it's my property and I've deregistered it from the government.

I suspect this is how toomanyposts started out and then he got so frequently batted down he actually learnt some law.

Dude, you're out of your mind, and the hippies have lied to you, all the laws and documents you speak of don't exist, just because hippies have created a new way to annoy and waste court and police time to 'fk the system' doesn't make it genuine.

Your replys are written like a want to be part time 'debt' collectors who try so hard to act like a solicitor but one read of there emails/letters you instantly recognise bullst language.


Anyway, welcome, you will fit in well with the others pretending to be solicitors.

[DanL]

BAM225 said:

Do love these freeman of the land bullst overnight lawyer wannabe anti government losers.

To be fair to them, they have been entirely polite! He's (I presume he) clearly of the FOTL mindset from his initial post, which states that a police officer is a commercial term, and seems to treat words as though they are magical, spell-like things which if arranged in the right order can cause amazing things to happen.

I find the whole thing interesting from a philosophical point of view, and I alluded to it in one of my replies earlier. Still, the thought process is this - let's say the FOTL people are absolutely correct, and everything they believe is true. It still doesn't matter, because the world demonstrably doesn't work in a way that aligns with their beliefs. Coming out with a magic set of words won't get you out of jail - no one is going to say "Ah, I see you know our system well. Be on your way then!". No, you get locked up just the same...

Truth is irrelevant - the outcome is the only important thing. Whether it's gravity or invisible pixies that cause things to be drawn to earth isn't important day to day - my cup stays on the table either way.

[DanL]

Zee Researcha said:

Let's just take this one step at a time in the hope the penny drops. Ok here goes:

1. For an exchange / trade to happen one must prove that you own that in your possession. If you buy something with no proof of absolute ownership then you run the risk of losing it if someone makes a claim.

2. Title is absolute proof of ownership ( just look it up in any law dictionary.

3. For a manufacturer to exchange he must provide proof of ownership. The law is all about proof. Note: possession is not proof hence the DVLA calling people registered keeper. This was the original question I was answering.

Now hopefully you are all still with me and I haven't lost anyone.

4. Since the manufacturer did not receive the car he must prove "ABSOLUTE OWNERSHIP" the car is his. (I hope you guys still remember the definition of Title, if not please see above). Therefore, the MANUFACTURER makes a STATEMENT that he is the point of ORIGIN to determine ownership I.e Manufacturer Statement (Certificate) of Origin.

It is important to point out Origin is to do with ownership and not geography.

5. The manufacturer then exchanges this proof of absolute ownership (Title) for payment. Therefore the M.S.O / M.C.O is the proof of Absolute Ownership.

Show, with references, all of the points you asserted above are correct in the UK. Particularly in relation to the statement that origin is to do with ownership rather than geography, but also the other statements made.

[DanL]

The moon is made of cheese.
Mice eat cheese.
The craters on the moon are due to space mice, who have since died from overeating.

- Who put the mice on the moon?
- Why are we not taught about them?
- Are we supposed to believe it’s coincidence that the great cheese famine of 1874 is unrelated to the death of the space mice?

Points will be awarded for accuracy.