GL and SF97 issues

[Blythewoodjoe]

I posted this here because it seemed a good spot.

I just left my DMV where I spent some time talking about titles with one of the supervisors. I get the impression from some of you that getting a form 97 from GL is all but impossible. I want to register and drive my new truck now. I believe the state of South Carolina wants me to register this truck too. State law requires it. So Monday I will talk with the DMV some more before I call GL. Here's the thoughts:

Is it legal for GL, a LLC, to sell a vehicle in your state without owning it? If they own it don't they have to have a title or form 97 to prove they own it? How can they sell these trucks with out proof of owner ship. I have noticed in the past when I received form 97's from GL they where made out to GL, not me. When I receive them from GSA they are in my name.

I believe the state of South Carolina is going to have an issure with GL selling vehicles to residents of South Carolina with out legally owning them. I plan to discus this Monday with the DMV. That is what they had a problem with today. The person I talked with today indicated GL was required to provide with the form 97 at the time of the sale. I want to get this on offical letter head before I call GL and get stupid. I wonder if they call legally charge for the form 97? I'm offically fired up about this and I'm the A-hole that people like to avoid.

Joe Trapp

 

[LibertyDeuce]

Joe
Point well taken. Maybe all of us at SS should band together and force G/L to automatically give us a complete SF97 after EUC approval as OUR CONDITION of sale.

 

[Craig C]

CA DMV and GL

I got that question from DMV out here on more than one occasion. The feds supply GL the SF97, WHY DO WE HAVE TO PAY FOR IT, then the state wants the SF97 to prove I own it but it's made out toGL. They give you a letter say you bought it from them, funny how that works.

I think in order to sell used vehicles in CA as a business,first off you or in this case GL, has to be a LICENSED VEHICLE DEALER, they have to collect the tax, provide a title to the vehicle to whomever they sell it to and they have to report it to the state(NOT hold the buyer hostage for the title)...............gee, GL doesn't do that do they. They collect tax, I think, but what do they do with it? Everytime I've been to DMV, they want to collect MORE TAX.

I have a friend who is a DMV Investigator....think I'm going to give him a call Monday and see what I can find out about a few things. Should be interesting.

 

[Craig C]

CA DMV and GL

I got that question from DMV out here on more than one occasion. The feds supply GL the SF97, WHY DO WE HAVE TO PAY FOR IT, then the state wants the SF97 to prove I own it but it's made out toGL. They give you a letter say you bought it from them, funny how that works.

I think in order to sell used vehicles in CA as a business,first off you or in this case GL, has to be a LICENSED VEHICLE DEALER, they have to collect the tax, provide a title to the vehicle to whomever they sell it to and they have to report it to the state(NOT hold the buyer hostage for the title)...............gee, GL doesn't do that do they. They collect tax, I think, but what do they do with it? Everytime I've been to DMV, they want to collect MORE TAX.

I have a friend who is a DMV Investigator....think I'm going to give him a call Monday and see what I can find out about a few things. Should be interesting.

 

[Bigdawgk9]

I know it's been like 10 years since this thread was posted, but would like to learn the findings. I have 3 5T trucks and am stuck holding the BOS and state of CA is requiring SF97, but GL no longer handles rolling stock.

 

[98G]

When GL lost the rolling stock contract they sent out a notice for everyone to request an SF97 who needed one as they were only going to provide them for a limited time. This was something over three years ago. My understanding is GL closed their titling office in Phoenix.

At this point I suspect you're going to have to find alternate means of obtaining a title.

The question arises as to why you waited so long after purchase to request titling documents.

 

[undysworld]

Here's your alternative means of obtaining a title...

Motor Vehicle Ownership Surety Bond REG5057: https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/forms/reg/reg5057/

"This form is used to support the issuance of a California title when regular evidence of ownership for the vehicle is not obtainable. Determination if a bond is required is based on the value of the vehicle."

 

[Bigdawgk9]

When GL lost the rolling stock contract they sent out a notice for everyone to request an SF97 who needed one as they were only going to provide them for a limited time. This was something over three years ago. My understanding is GL closed their titling office in Phoenix.

At this point I suspect you're going to have to find alternate means of obtaining a title.

The question arises as to why you waited so long after purchase to request titling documents.

Yes I see I am going to have to find alternate means to get them titled and registered elsewhere. I never saw any email traffic from GL as I had already stopped doing business with them. Cant see why Govt cant issue SF97 and I still feel it was GL's legal obligation to have provided title as any other auto sales company would have been required.

Thanks for the info, as these three vehicles have only been used around the property and never needed to go out on public roadways.

 

[DeadParrot]

Ask the DMV what is the procedure to title a vehicle for which there is no title. Pretty sure all states have a process. Fires and divorces happen. Titles get lost. Vehicles resting on the back 40 since Truman was President get resurrected. If the first answer you get seems overly complicated, ask a different source. Not all DMV folks know all the answers. Some are real good at normal stuff but get lost if asked something out of their comfort zone. Leave out the MV part of the question until you get a good answer to the basic how to title a non-titled vehicle question.

 

[fasttruck]

In the past I bought vehicles from GL and, as I lived in the enchanted state of New Jersey, they furnished a Florida title as GL is a Florida dealer. When the military surplused the vehicle out they made the SF 97 out to GL who then would assign it to the successful bidder unless you lived in NJ which would not accept a SF97 that was assigned. GSA eliminates this step and issues the form to the seller who then can get a title off it as it is not assigned.

 

[Michael]

When GL lost the rolling stock contract they sent out a notice for everyone to request an SF97 who needed one as they were only going to provide them for a limited time. This was something over three years ago. My understanding is GL closed their titling office in Phoenix.

At this point I suspect you're going to have to find alternate means of obtaining a title.

The question arises as to why you waited so long after purchase to request titling documents.

I have to chime in and say that they didn't notify everyone. I didn't get a notice and I bought several things that should have had a SF97. I paid the money for the ones I planned to put on the road but I have several parts trucks and a number of trailers that I didn't. They may have to turn to rust where they sit for technically you need a title to sell a motor vehicle for scrap in the 21st century.

 

[98G]

I have to chime in and say that they didn't notify everyone. I didn't get a notice and I bought several things that should have had a SF97. I paid the money for the ones I planned to put on the road but I have several parts trucks and a number of trailers that I didn't. They may have to turn to rust where they sit for technically you need a title to sell a motor vehicle for scrap in the 21st century.

I suspect that they blanketed every email they had with a form letter. That's what mine was - one size fits all "hey we plan to close our titling office".

It doesn't surprise me not everyone got it.

 

[simp5782]

I have to chime in and say that they didn't notify everyone. I didn't get a notice and I bought several things that should have had a SF97. I paid the money for the ones I planned to put on the road but I have several parts trucks and a number of trailers that I didn't. They may have to turn to rust where they sit for technically you need a title to sell a motor vehicle for scrap in the 21st century.

Just a bill of sale or sales receipt is good enough in Mississippi.

 

[Motiracer38]

I might as well bump this thread as it is the most relevant. I too never got an SF97 from a GL sale in 2013 and am now finally ready to start driving my M923A2 legally. California clarified to all DMV offices in VIN 2017-26 that an SF97 is needed for all military vehicles and that is the script they read off of over the phone. All I can get out of GL is a bonded title. Has anybody successfully done a bonded title? Are there better options that may be a bit further of a stretch? I have have family all over the country if need be but ultimately want a California title for future resale value.

 

[undysworld]

Title bonding is a common method of obtaining a title for a vehicle. It's one of the least-claimed types of insurance around. Google "title bonding in CA", and you'll get hits like this: https://blog.suretysolutions.com/suretynews/how-to-get-a-california-bonded-title

But a SF-97 is the document that the fed govt. issues to authorize a state to issue a motor vehicle title to a private buyer. Seems to me that if you can get a title (bonded or otherwise) from GL, then you don't need a SF-97 to GET a title, since you've GOT one already (or at least a way to get one). ??? Typically, once the bonding period has passed, you can get a clear (non-bonded) title issued for the vehicle.

Licensing out-of-state may be an option, but there may be a problem with this. For instance, in Wisconsin, you can license a vehicle in another state. BUT if you operate that vehicle in Wisconsin, then the vehicle immediately falls under Wisconsin registration requirements and you'd be operating illegally without proper registration. You'd have to check the laws in your state.

IMHO, California is doing it right in refusing initial titling without a SF-97. If you buy a tractor or a lawn mower from GL (and don't get a SF-97), you SHOULDN'T get a motor vehicle title & registration, because those aren't "motor vehicles" as NHTSA defines them. 'True' off-road vehicles should not be issued SF-97s. There's no doubt that your M923A2 was built to drive on-road and off-road, just like a Jeep Wrangler.

I think your situation demonstrates why anyone who buys a motor vehicle from GL should obtain an SF-97 at the time of purchase, even if you don't intend to title and register the vehicle for on-road use at that time. That way you retain your right to obtain a title, as well as maybe make that vehicle more valuable to a subsequent buyer.

 

[Michael]

I have successfully used a title bond for one of my M1009s because I could get it for $50 and less trouble. But that was way back at the turn of the century. I never understood how GL got away with charging so much for something that should have been mandatory but they are ancient history now
Motor vehicle titles is an evolving process. What was okay yesterday may be outlawed tomorrow.