ILNews

Judge lets second suit alleging BMV overcharges proceed

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles must answer a second complaint alleging the agency overcharged Hoosiers millions of dollars on almost 30 types of licenses or registrations, a judge ruled Wednesday.

BMV previously agreed to refund $30 million for overcharges of operator’s licenses as a result of an earlier lawsuit.

In the latest lawsuit, Marion Superior Judge James Osborn denied the BMV’s motions to dismiss and stay discovery. The suit seeks class action status.

Lead plaintiff Tammy Raab sued the bureau alleging that 29 BMV fees overcharged people from 50 cents to $11 dollars, according to Cohen & Malad LLP managing partner Irwin Levin.

Among the more commonly alleged overcharges were $3 for motorcycle endorsements, $1 for duplicate titles, $4.50 for chauffeur’s license, $3 for personalized plates, and $1 for plate transfers. Overcharges of $11 are alleged for antique year of manufacture registrations.

“We’re guessing the number is in the tens of millions of dollars” that Hoosiers were overcharged at the BMV, Levin said Friday. The BMV hasn’t provided an accounting of how much it collected from the overcharges, and depositions are scheduled next month.

“We’re going to find out whether the BMV is just reckless in making sure they charge people the legal amount or if something else is going on,” he said.

BMV previously announced it would refund $30 million to motorists who were overcharged $3.50 to $7 for driver’s licenses. That suit  also was brought by Cohen & Malad.

“The court has essentially ruled that the BMV can’t simply say ‘Trust us’ and throw out the case. Hoosiers now get to ask the BMV the tough questions about this debacle and get the answers they deserve,” Levin said in a statement.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT