One of Senator Moore’s constituents recently complained that the Registry of Motor Vehicles was unfairly requiring pick up truck owners with six wheel vehicles to register as commercial vehicles at substantially higher fees. Senator Moore investigated and, subsequently, authored a letter to the Registry and invited other legislators to co-sign the letter to correct in injustice. Read the dialogue between the Webster constituent and Senator Moore below.  To read a copy of the letter Senator Moore has sent to the Registrar of Motor Vehicles, click on the link below the dialogue:

---

From: An Webster Constituent
To: Senator Moore

Senator,

I have a new question about some specific recent changes to the RMV laws that I understand were passed within the last year or so. This is specifically related to requiring commercial plates and DOT inspection on all pickup trucks with 6 wheels or diesels, even for personal use. The situation I have is that I purchased a Ford diesel pickup truck to tow my large but modest camper on weekend vacations. I had another 4 wheel truck some years ago and I found it unstable on the highway and not as safe as I wanted to be. I worked and saved money until I could afford a newer model 6 wheel Ford F350. Although this truck could be used for commercial purposes, I have no intention of doing anything other than towing my camper and picking up a Christmas tree with it. Nonetheless, if I had bought it 2 years ago I would be fine but today I need to register it as commercial and because it is capable of hauling a lot of weight, I need a full commercial DOT inspection in it. I'm told this all was recently passed by the MA General Assy last year and maybe the year prior. 

Does it really make sense that I should pay over $500 a year in annual inspection and registration fees, plus have DOT markings and GVW ratings painted on the side of my pickup truck just to take a family vacation? Were you aware of these new rules or how they are being enforced? My Insurance agent says MA police are handing out hundreds of tickets to people who have always had non-commercial plates on trucks like this before. That seems pretty harsh.

The local Ford dealer in Webster said this was all about stopping commercial businesses from hiding their vehicles on private registrations. I totally appreciate that and applaud the effort at safer inspections but I'm not the one breaking any laws. Commercial trucks carrying commercial loads should be inspected more stringently. But, this law, the way it is now, is way more excessive than New Hampshire, Vermont or Connecticut rules. In fact, I bought my truck used and it had passenger plates on it from CT, all legal for personal use only. I also have a friend with the same F350 truck in New Hampshire and he has passenger plates, no DOT inspections, and no need for painted lettering on the side. NY State changed their rules in this regard many years ago to allow for non-commercial registration of any pickup or van with at least 3 passenger seats and full windows, regardless of wheels or GVW. 

I don't plan to carry 10,000 pounds. I should be able to register it for the use I will employ it for. Having the extra weight capacity means the springs won't be overloaded and it will be more stable and safer on the highway. That should be good for everyone. It feels like the state wants to punish me for that decision. I have many many years of experience using and operating heavy vehicles. I know the difference between trucks and cars and I know the rules for truly commercial DOT uses. This is not even close.

Is there anything you can do about this in the next legislative sessions? The registry people told me this was all in the MA General Laws. I found some of it in 540CMR 2.05. (I can't find the DOT inspection rule.) Maybe propose better enforcement of the laws involving illegal of personal registrations rather than taking them away from legitimate owners like me? Maybe find a way to let people like me just have my truck and camper for a more reasonable yearly fee?

Thanks for your help.

A Webster Constituent

---

From: Senator Moore
To: Webster Constituent

Dear Webster Constituent

I will look into this. This is the first complaint I've received about the situation. Assuming that you've been given correct information, I can see if there is any way to achieve the goals of the change without burdening people who purchase such vehicles for private, non-commercial use. If, in fact, a change in the law is needed, that could take some time even if the Legislature agrees that the law goes too far. However, you cite a CMR - which is Code of Massachusetts Regulations. CMR's are administrative rules developed by agencies, not by the Legislature. Let me see what is involved in this sort of situation and I'll let you know as soon as possible.

Senator Richard T. Moore

---

From: Webster Constituent
To: Senator Moore

Hi Senator Moore:

Following up on this subject, I just checked the CT DMV rules and they are somewhat different but not as generous as I was led to believe. CT goes by GVW rating, not number of wheels. In my case, since my truck is rated over 10,000 it would have been classified as commercial in CT as well. I don't follow how the previous owner had it registered therefore but I saw them take away the passenger plates. See the link below.

http://www.ct.gov/dmv/cwp/view.asp?a=810&q=310268&dmvPNavCtr=|#44828

I guess my argument is not as strong if CT has made this change as well. It would seem more reasonable if we would allow non-commercial use regardless of GVW as long as the vehicle passed a normal safety inspection and was not connected with any business use. It's really the large registration fee and out of state road use restriction that is the most concerning. 

I did get my inspection today and they said the lettering requirement is only for greater than 15,000 pounds so that was their mistake on Saturday when they looked up the regulation. It still cost $129 each year instead of $29.

Thanks for any help you can give me.

A Webster Constituent

---

From: Senator Moore
To: Webster Constituent

Dear Webster Constituent:

I’ve been in contact with the registry of motor vehicles to try to find out some more information about the commercial registration policies. As expected the new regulations were put into effect to eliminate the problem of businesses registering vehicles used for commercial purposes as private passenger vehicles. Since the implementation of the new regulations the registry has received several complaints from people in a similar position to your own. As a result of these complaints Registrar Kaprielian is reviewing the regulations to see if there is a solution that would allow for people such as yourself to register recreationally used vehicles in some other way to avoid paying the additional costs. However, nothing has been done at this point and the fees will stand for now. I would suggest that you write a letter to the Registrar with your concerns as the decision will ultimately be hers to make.

Senator Moore

---

From: Webster Constituent
To: Senator Moore

Dear Senator Moore:

So, this morning I realized I need to open a separate Fast Lane account and pay commercial toll rates more than double the amounts I currently pay on the MA pike and other roads in the Northeast. Do you realize a trip south would now cost me over $100 in tolls because of the commercial plate designation? This really is [expletive]! 

I've gone from being just annoyed to really really angry. This is more arrogant MA crap on people who work hard. I've counted more than 20 other states that do not have this requirement. 

In short, I'm not satisfied with your answer. I appreciate your efforts but now I'm asking for real attention to this as one of your citizens you represent. I want you guys to work on this and show me that the government can do something once in a while to help people instead of just taxing and burdening the hell out of us! It's these kinds of things that make all the other good work you do diminish when it hits my wallet and kills my hopes for a vacation and a little recreation for my hard work. I'm not planning to let this go. I expect the state to make laws that help honest people, not punish us for those who do wrong. Enforce the rules we have, don't make new stupid ones that screw people like me!

Sorry but my patience has gone away. It's been a lousy year for me and my business. I have seen NOTHING but higher taxes and more crap from the MA legislature and now this bit of extra screwing just in time for Christmas. 

I look forward for some favorable action.

A Webster Constituent

---

From: Webster Constituent
To: Senator Moore

Sen. Moore,

Have you had a chance to find out any more about the questions I had on commercial registration policies? I understand if you have not yet. Further thought about this subject and I really think there is an inconsistency in the law that should be addressed. If I buy a full size bus or motorhome it appears I can register that vehicle for personal use even though it may be well over 20,000 pounds GVW and have 6 wheels or more. But, I can't register a 6 wheeled pickup which is essentially for the same purpose, towing my camper. A gray area appears to be if I buy a camper body and mount it to my truck, that perhaps makes it a camper and then I can register it for personal use. Please see the below and let me know if I have missed something.

The excerpts below are from 540CMR2.

2.05-3 Private Passenger Motor Vehicle, is any vehicle: 

(a) which has a vehicle weight rating or curb weight of six thousand pounds or less as per manufacturer's description of said vehicle or is a sport utility vehicle or passenger van; or which is a pickup truck or cargo van of the 1/2 TON, 3/4 TON or 1 TON class as per manufacturer's description of said vehicle; 

** My truck is a 1 Ton class Ford F350. 

2.05-3 Commercial Vehicle, is any motor vehicle which is not a private passenger motor vehicle, antique motor car, motorcycle, trailer, semi-trailer, auto home, house trailer, taxicab, ambulance, hearse, livery vehicle, bus, school bus, or school pupil transport vehicle, including the following: 

(a) Any vehicle which has a vehicle weight, or curb weight, of more than six thousand pounds, as per the manufacturer's description of said vehicle, unless such vehicle is a sport utility vehicle or passenger van, or a pickup truck or cargo van meeting the definition of private passenger vehicle; 

(b) Any vehicle which has five or more wheels on the ground; 

** My truck meets the exclusion of 2.05-3(a) as it is a pickup truck, although it is over 6,000 pounds GVW. Unfortunately it does not meet the 6 wheeled exclusion of 2.05-3(b). Neither does a motor home with 6 wheels. A motor home or "auto home" is specifically excluded from being a commercial vehicle. 

*** However, the language is in fact wrong also. The word "not" appears in the first sentence, followed by a list of vehicles, then the phrase "including the following:". sub-section (a) then goes on to list the 6000 pound threshold and excludes SUVs and pickups. In fact, the qualifier "not" has not been changed so really the sub-section (a) is really written in reverse. It literally says a vehicle over 6000 pounds but not an SUV is "not" a commercial vehicle. It never says a commercial vehicle "is". I know this is a typographical error but in fact it appears to be a serious mis-wording.

2.05-4(f) An Auto Home may display a CAMPER registration number plate. A House Trailer may display either a CAMPER or a TRAILER registration number plate. 

In fact, this is the only reference to a camper in 540CMR2. A motor home is generally more than 6000 pounds, GVW, has 6 wheels or more on the ground, yet it gets a person use "camper" plate and is specifically excluded as a commercial vehicle? If a camper can be registered non-commercial then why can not a pickup purchased for essentially the same purpose get the same treatment? 

I think a fair modification would be to allow personal use registration as long as the pickup truck is not used for any of the commercial purposes listed in 2.05-3 and is suitably equipped with towing apparatus such as 5th wheel, Class 3-5 hitch or similar so that the use for a camper tow vehicle is apparent, regardless of the number of wheels. It really is a matter of safety and convenience to use dual rear wheels for towing rather than single rear wheels and there seems to be no other supporting rationale for the 6 wheels when campers and many other 6 wheeled vehicles are excluded.

I would really appreciate it if you could get some consideration of this through the correct channels. Any of my calls to the RMV have been fruitless and I suspect writing to them would not be very effective either.

On a personal note, I sincerely appreciate your willingness to discuss these issues with me, mundane or otherwise. I respect that you have a lot of more pressing matters on your plate, I do also. I wish you a nice holiday.

Best Regards

A Webster Constituent

---

From: Webster Constituent
To: Senator Moore

Senator Moore,

Please indulge me a few more words on this topic. I sent a registered letter to the registrar as your assistant advised. I have not yet received a reply but I have spoken to literally dozens of other F350 and similar pickup truck owners who are also confused, angry, and in many cases not being given consistent information about the new rules or policies imposed. Even car dealers in MA are confused and are experiencing business issues over this situation. I have posted on public forums and found many, many people in MA who agree that this is an unfair and excessive set of new penalties on the use of pickups for recreational purposes. You can see some examples in the thread at the link below which I started a couple weeks ago. 

http://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/912881-commercial-vs-non-com-registrations-in-ma.html

It is my goal to have the policies changed to reflect the way they are actually written in the CMR, that is, any 1 ton class pickup regardless of 4 or 6 wheels, and GVW, can be registered for recreational use provided it is legally being used for non-commercial purposes. I do not want to cause any public harm or skirt any other commercial regulations. This is not an attempt to sanction any other mis-use of the registry laws. I also do not want to cause any public safety issues and I am specifically not opposing the new DOT inspection rules because I know this is a different kettle of fish. 

The policies are silly. I can register a 44,000 pound 6 wheel motor home bus with camper plates for a low fee and no DOT inspection. But, I can't register an F350 6 wheel pickup to tow a 6,000 pound camper trailer without paying commercial registration fees and having a DOT inspection. How can this make sense to anyone and why would the state want to penalize me so severely for this use? Surely you can see the problem here.

I intend to organize letter writing campaigns and bring this issue to all state officials who will listen including the governor. You may think this is a silly cause, or you may not. I sincerely hope you can appreciate that this is a symbolically important gesture to me for working and living in MA for over 20 years and paying endless fees and taxes all those years. I think this is real easy to fix if you and others are just willing to intercede a bit and help. I hope that you will be willing to assist me and recognize how important this is to some of us.

Please let me know what you think.

best regards

A Webster Constituent

---

From: Senator Moore
To: Webster Constituent

Dear Northbridge Constituent:

I agree that the issue seems to be an overly bureaucratic response to a problem of some businesses trying to get around paying their share. I am going to draft a letter to the Registrar and invite other legislators to co-sign it in an effort to seek a fair resolution of this issue. If your advocacy efforts are resonating with other truck owners, perhaps they will urge their legislators to sign on to my letter. We'll be circulating a draft in the next day or so.

Senator Richard T. Moore

---

From: Webster Constituent
To: Senator Moore

Senator,

This is excellent, thank you. May I share your communication with others to encourage them to seek out their own legislators?

Webster Constituent

READ A COPY OF SENATOR MOORE'S LETTER TO THE REGISTRAR