Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Titling Exemptions topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee examines title‑exemption bills for older vehicles and motorcycles; DMV warns of fraud risks

House Transportation Committee · January 13, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Bills would relax title requirements for older vehicles (HB1421) and motorcycles (HB1430), aiming to ease tow‑yard and owner burdens; DMV warned exemptions increase fraud risk because exempt vehicles are not tracked on the national title database and explained existing abandoned‑vehicle and antique‑title pathways.

The committee considered two related measures that would alter vehicle‑titling rules for older vehicles and motorcycles.

Representative Granger presented HB1421 FN to change title exemptions for vehicles manufactured before 2000 (returning to a rolling‑age model favored by some tow operators). Representative Reid presented HB1430 FN to ease title requirements for motorcycles, arguing motorcycles are often seasonal and owners lose paperwork; sponsors said roll‑back of exemptions would ease disposal and registration burdens for hobbyists and tow yards.

DMV witnesses Jen Bailey and Jennifer Gornert provided technical testimony: titles are secured documents recorded on the national database (NMVITS); exempt vehicles sold by bill of sale are not tracked nationally and that increases risk of title fraud, odometer tampering and ownership gaps if vehicles move between states. DMV outlined abandoned‑vehicle procedures and said tow companies can follow steps to obtain a title or junk/sell a vehicle after notification, but acknowledged the administrative process creates delays and costs for tow operators.

Committee members asked detailed process and cost questions and sought data on fraud exposure, cross‑state title gaps, and the administrative burden on tow companies. No decision was made; several members suggested staged implementation or retaining pathways to protect consumers while addressing towing‑industry concerns.