Common law
Inconveniences Due to Missed Car Registration Transfer
“Last May, I sold my car with a sales contract, but the new owner didn’t register the vehicle in their name, and since then, I’ve received several parking and speeding fines. What can I do to legally remove the car from my name?” asks our reader B.I.
In practice, it often happens that when the contract is signed, the seller hands over both the car and all original documents (registration certificate, ownership papers, etc.), fully trusting the buyer’s good faith. Often, either due to negligence or intentionally (to avoid paying fees), the new owner does not fulfill the legal obligations, and despite the car having changed hands several times, it is still registered in the name of the original owner in official records.
As it concerns movable property, under Article 1674 of the Civil Code, ownership transfers to the buyer at the moment the contract is signed, and this transaction must be reported both to the tax office and the relevant public service authorities.
At the tax office, the transfer of ownership can be reported by either the buyer or the seller, so that any further taxes and fees levied on the vehicle will be the responsibility of the new owner. We should not rely on the buyer to fulfill this obligation, as failing to do so may result in the vehicle tax continuing to burden us even after the sale.
However, registering with the tax office does not automatically result in the vehicle registration certificate or ownership papers being transferred to the new owner’s name.
According to Article 11 of Emergency Government Ordinance No. 195/2002 on Road Traffic, in the event of ownership transfer, the new owner (buyer) is required to apply to the relevant authorities for a new registration certificate and to have the old owner’s data removed within 30 days from the signing of the contract.
Failure to comply with this obligation is considered an infraction.
According to Article 8 of Ministry of Internal Affairs Decree No. 1501/2006, at the time of contract signing, the seller has the option to note the transfer of ownership in the “alienated” section on the back of the registration certificate, making it easier for the police to track violations.
If, after the 30-day deadline, the buyer has not registered the car in their name, the seller can apply to the relevant authority to officially note the transfer of ownership in the records. While this does not result in the vehicle being fully transferred, it may relieve the seller from having to pay fines issued for offenses committed by someone else.
The seller can file a complaint with the court against infraction reports containing fines within 15 days of receiving them.
If the buyer fails to meet their legal obligations, the seller can initiate legal proceedings against both the buyer and the responsible office, requesting the court to order the buyer to transfer the vehicle. If the buyer does not comply, the seller may be authorized to complete the transfer process themselves.
The Romanian Radio’s Claims Against Legal Entities
If you are a legal entity and do not benefit from the services of Romanian Radio, it’s understandable that their demands might raise concerns, especially when you notice charges for these services on your monthly electricity bill.
Romanian Radio’s organization and operations are regulated by Law No. 41/1991, which in Article 40, paragraph 3, stipulates that legal entities are required to pay a monthly fee for the institution’s services, as beneficiaries.
This law has been the subject of multiple constitutional complaints, and each time, the Constitutional Court has ruled that the mentioned provision is not contrary to the Constitution. According to the law, the obligation to pay only applies to legal entities that actually benefit from the institution’s services in some form.
The ambiguity in interpreting the public institution’s role, along with potential abuses, stems from the fact that, while the law clearly outlines how individuals can request an exemption from this payment obligation, no such provision is explicitly stated for legal entities.
Romanian Radio, relying on this legal provision, almost always demands that a wide range of legal entities fulfill their payment obligations. If they fail to comply, the institution resorts to legal proceedings to enforce the claims, charging a penalty interest of 0.02% for each day of delay.
The highest body for constitutional protection last ruled on this issue on October 29, 2013, with Decision No. 448, determining that the provision can only be deemed constitutional if interpreted in such a way that only those who actually benefit from the institution’s services are required to pay. Both administrative bodies and courts are obligated to respect this ruling.
Romanian Radio’s public service status, which it frequently invokes, along with the invoices it issues (which the recipients have not signed or accepted), is insufficient grounds for a court to compel anyone to pay the fee.
Lastly, it’s important to note that, unlike taxes, a fee entitles the payer to some tangible service. The law does not establish an absolute, irrefutable legal presumption regarding the obligation to pay the fee. To secure a favorable ruling, the plaintiff must prove the legitimacy of their claims and the actual provision of services.
A true state-owned entrepreneur can “make something out of nothing,” but considering the law and favorable legal precedents, is it really worth paying for nothing?
It seems that many still fail to exercise their rights, and by applying the law of large numbers, Romanian Radio’s business model continues to be profitable.