Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:02/14/2023

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I purchased one of their ******* Title Loophole packages. The website led me to believe I would be receiving a ******* registration. However, I did not. Everything arrived quicker than expected, but the package contained an application for a ******* registration and instructions on where to send it. I probably could have completed my own application and saved the money spent. ****** learned. It does not end here. I submitted the required documents and payment only to have it rejected by *******. ******* now requires applicants to have their vehicles inspected, which means they have to make the trip to *******. This is not mentioned anywhere on the Car Titles website. Now I have an untitled truck sitting in my driveway that I would have never purchased if I had known I could not get a title. I am researching other ways to title me vehicle, but it would be nice for Car Titles to acknowledge their error, update their website with this information and maybe even refund my money.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 02/15/2023

  We would be glad to be of assistance. If the client can provide us with the documentation from the *** that indicates the need for an inspection, we can look into the reason this is being requested of the client. We had no previous notice from the customer that they needed assistance. If we can have more details from the customer we can certainly determine how to proceed. Please advise the customer that if they would be willing to reach out to our office we can help, but this is the first we are hearing of any problems.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 03/04/2023

  ***Document Attached***
  Attached is the response from Vermont DMV. It appears the ******* Title Loophole is no longer possible without physically being in ******* since the vehicle needs to have an inspection. Cartitles.com needs to be aware of this and change their website. Their response states they have not heard from me regarding this issue. I have left two voicemails on this and have never heard back.
  See Attachment/File: ** reject.pdf

  

  Business Response

  Date: 03/08/2023

  We have performed an investigation into this case. We have discovered that the client was attempting to title a vehicle which is illegal for road use, in violation of the *** requirements and against our companies terms and conditions. The client was informed by the Vermont *** that they had to have their vehicle inspected, due to it having a non-standard VIN. This VIN was not issued to a road legal vehicle, and was red flagged. The ******* process is fully operational for actual legal vehicles, contrary to the statements of the claimant. The client failed to disclose this vehicle status to the company, and violated the agreed terms which states:
  --"Eligible Vehicle: Customer is solely responsible for having a vehicle eligible for title or registration. This may include that the vehicle is a "clean title", not stolen, not subject to liens, is not restricted due to improper importation, is legal for road use, "-----
  The customer did not abide by this part of their agreement. We advise this customer and others to not use our service as a means to attempt titling of ineligible vehicles.
  Further investigations are ongoing but it appears that the original sale of this vehicle from the government agency specified that it was disqualified from title availability, and that this was made aware to the buyer at the time of sale. Records from the public sector armory have been requested for verification and filing.
  The vehicle is a special purpose military vehicle that even when properly de-milled, requires an extensive inspection and certification process which can not be circumvented. Attempting to avoid these requirements may constitute title washing.
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 03/09/2023

  (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
  This vehicle is definitely not "illegal for road use" There are hundreds of these vehicles legally registered and in use on roads across the country. It requires no "demilitarization" and is safe for driving. The letter I received from the VT DMV and sent to you said nothing it not being eligible for a title. It merely stated it needed to be inspected. I called the VT DMV and was told the same thing. I would need to transport the vehicle to ******* to be inspected before they would issue a title. They stated this is the standard for ALL vehicles. The "******* Loophole" is no longer a loophole.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 03/10/2023

  The Vermont DMV has refuted this consumer statement, and has processed hundreds of files for eligible vehicle in the past week. The customer is correct, that suspicious vehicles such as theirs do require inspection. Notice to civilian consumers: Please do not attempt to "loophole" these types of off-road vehicles through our firm, as we state in our written terms and conditions. Consumers who are considering using our title services should heed this customers message, DO NOT try to get titles for GovPlanet vehicles or vehicles not manufactured for road use. This is NOT the purpose of our service. We make it very clear in multiple places in our product description and service terms, that our service is NOT to be used for these types of vehicles. We do not wish to be involved with this type of attempted activity. This customer accepted and agreed to these conditions IN WRITING prior to placing the order.
  Further responses are being withheld pending legal and investigative actions.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 03/14/2023

  (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
  I would like to know to whom you spoke with at the VT *** who "refuted" what I have said. I called the *** and was told all vehicles needed an inspection. This vehicle was not purchased from GOVPLANET. Although it has off-road capabilities, it was not exclusively designed for off-road use. The response from the VT *** stated nothing about being red-flagged or not being eligible due to off-road use. Cartitles dot com seems to be changing their reason every time I respond. The letter from VT *** only stated that all vehicles need an inspection. They even told me I could get a temporary registration to drive my truck to ******* to get an inspection. This vehicle does have all lights and safety features required to be "street legal".

  

  Business Response

  Date: 04/23/2023

  This is either deliberately incorrect or misunderstood information.

  We have spoken with ****************, and **************** at the Vermont DMV and they both have confirmed that VD-119 registration applications DO NOT require a physical inspection unless there is a suspicion that the vehicle is ineligible, modified, or is not a legal US market civilian vehicle Gray market and military vehicle VIN's are flagged for inspection most of the time.

  In addition, we have confirmation that thousands of vehicles have been easily registered WITHOUT any inspection each week. AN example of a (redacted) registration document will be uploaded to the file link shortly. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:10/27/2022

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  misleading website site that they are a professional document preparer BUT
  
  1) they took twice as long as stated because they kept losing my ID (3x) and bill of sale (2x)
  
  2) instead of preparing my document send to Vermont with me paying for taxes, they MAILED (not even fast mail speed- not even something like email which would be instant) me to info form with all information I gave them (minus car value which you can Google)
  
  3) as a result I paid $159 for them to print out a sheet of paper to come through USPS, with info I largely gave them, which might have taken 10 minutes of work, resulting in me still having to pay Vermont $76 to submit the form as well as taxes on the car
  
  I do not feel it is reasonable to pay $159 for their printer and about 10-15 minutes of data entry. This was very misleading!
  
  Also, no, it still has not arrived if you are wondering (ordered Saturday (and started working on it then), they finished Tuesday, and it is now Thursday and does not seem close to arriving yet (tracking number does not show much progress)

  

  Business Response

  Date: 01/18/2023

  Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2022/10/28) */
  Contact Name and Title: **** *****
  Contact Phone: XXXXXXXXXX
  Contact Email: ****@cartitles.com
  Yes, as clearly described, DMV fees are paid by the customer to the government. The company does not pay for the customers title or registration fees. That is obvious from the description of services.
  However, in this case, there are also other factors, in that the vehicle may have an open lien or claim against the vehicle from prior owners. It may turn out that the vehicle in question may not be eligible for a title at all. We are investigating this further and are in contact with the appropriate DMV personnel.
  
  
  Consumer Response /* (3000, 8, 2022/10/31) */
  (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
  1) the service is not obvious at all, which is why many people complain with the same exact complaints as I have. When you include an "*" next to service types, and list a few, many will take that as an indication of what types of fees (and often exact ones) is covered (which were all title fees and not anything to do with registration or processing, etc.) It would have been more accurate if you had left off the * and did not specify which fees. As someone who reads contracts and forms literally, from a legal perspective, and not conversational, it does NOT make sense. Whoever wrote that contract, if they did not mean to be misleading, did not do you any favors and is just terrible at writing to be honest, because that should be obvious to be fair
  
  2) The car is eligible for DMV title. A peace officer has already looked into previous owner for me, and verified his story. How I got the car was interesting so I filed my own car that I purchased as a possible stolen car. You may waste all your own time investigating it, I don't care. However, I find it a strange correspondence to include (not withstanding the previous statements about SUING FOR A BBB COMPLAINT, let's get real here not going to happen). Perhaps, do you think that many who use the Vermont loophole might be unsure of their car ownership? Wanting them to back down? Are you helping verify documents in such a way for some that you might have suspicions of being faulty to help them improve? It is very odd language and the need for such verbiage is baffling and I find complexing. Who would waste their time doing such a thing? Why? Also, what DMV records could there be? It doesn't make sense.
  
  3) I would like to know your relationship to this **** ******* PI from Oregon... it is so odd. I looked up car titles on maps, and it says it is a PI firm as well. There is fishy stuff going on here