MY FAMILY CAR IS A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE AS DEFINED and is NOT a COMMERCIAL VEHICLE

MY FAMILY CAR IS A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE AS DEFINED

AT ORS 801.208(2)(e) and is NOT a COMMERCIAL VEHICLE

which would require a ORS 807.031

COMMERCIAL DRIVERS LICENSE

801.208 “Commercial motor vehicle.”

. . . (2) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, the term “commercial motor vehicle” does not include the following:

. . . (c) A motor home used to transport or house, for nonbusiness purposes, the operator or the operator’s family members or personal possessions;

. . . (e) A recreational vehicle that is operated solely for personal use. [1989 c.636 §2; 1991 c.185 §1; 1991 c.676 §1; 1999 c.359 §1]

It is clear that ORS 801.208 provides that my “FAMILY CAR” is a recreational vehicle that is operated solely for personal use and is not included within the definition of a “Commercial motor vehicle” as defined in ORS 801.210 that would require me to have a ORS 807.031 COMMERCIAL DRIVERS LICENSE. See ORS 801.210 to wit:

801.210 “Commercial vehicle.” “Commercial vehicle” means a vehicle that:

(1) Is used for the transportation of persons for compensation or profit; or

(2) Is designed or used primarily for the transportation of property. [1983 c.338 §34]

Washington Laws RCW 46.25.050 & WAC 308-100-210 is consistent with Oregon law ORS 801.208.

RCW 46.25.050(1) Drivers of Commercial motor vehicles shall obtain a “commercial driver’s license” as required under this chapter by April 1, 1992. ..., no person may drive a “commercial motor vehicle” unless the person holds and is in immediate possession of a “commercial drivers license” and applicable endorsements valid for the vehicle they are driving. HOWEVER, this requirement does not apply to any person: (c) Who is operating a recreational vehicle for non commercial purposes.

(2) No person may drive a “commercial motor vehicle” while his or her driving privilege is suspended, revoked, or canceled, while subject to disqualification, or in violation of out of service order. Violation of this subsection shall be punished in the same way as violations of RCW 46.20.342(1). And;

(WAC) 308-100-210 Recreational vehicle–Definition. For the purposes of RCW 46.25.050(1)(c), the term “recreational vehicle” shall include vehicles used exclusively for NONCOMMERCIAL PURPOSES which are: (1) Primarily designed for recreational, camping, OR TRAVEL USE. And;

“Sec. 103 It shall be unlawful for any person to drive an automobile or other motor vehicle carrying passengers for hire, within the city of Seattle, without having a valid and subsisting license so to do, to be known as a ‘drivers license’ ...”Driver’s license, ‘first class’ shall entitle the holder thereof to drive any kind or class of motor vehicles for hire within the city of Seattle. “Drivers license, second class’ shall be limited to stages, sight-seeing cars, or other motor vehicles operating over a specified route and having a fixed terminal. “Drivers license, ‘third class’ shall be limited to drivers of taxicabs, for hire cars, or other automobiles not operating on fixed routes, and having a passenger capacity of less than seven (7) persons, not including the driver. ...It is intended to apply to “for hire” vehicles as provided in section 6313, Rem. Comp. Stats., are defined to mean all motor vehicles other than auto-mobile stages used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration of any kind is received, either directly or indirectly.” INTERNATIONAL MOTOR TRANSIT CO. et al. V. CITY OF SEATTLE et al. , (No. 19992) 251 PACIFIC REPORTER 120-123 (Dec. 6, 1926.) And;

“Privately owned Buses not engaged in for hire Transportation are outside the jurisdiction of Division of Motor Vehicles enforcement of N.C. G.S. Article 17, Chapter 20***” 58 N.C.A.G. 1 (It follows that those Citizens not engaged in extraordinary use of the highway for profit or gain are likewise outside the jurisdiction of the Division of Motor Vehicles.)

“Since a sale of personal property is not required to be evidenced by any written instrument in order to be valid, it has been held in North Carolina that there may be a transfer of title to an automobile without complying with the registration statute which requires a transfer and delivery of a certificate of title.” N.C. Law Review Vol. 32 page 545, Carolina Discount Corp. v. Landis Motor Co., 190 N.C. 157.

“The following shall be exempt from the requirements of registration and the certificate of title: 1.) Any such vehicle driven or moved upon the highway in conformance with the provisions of this Article relating to manufacturers, dealers, or nonresidents.”

2.) Any such vehicle which is driven or moved upon a highway only for the purpose of crossing such highway from one property to another. ****20-51(1)(2)(comment: not driven or moved upon the highway for transporting persons or property for profit.) (Case note to North Carolina G.S. 12-3 “Statutory Construction”)

See California Motor Vehicle Code, section 260: Private cars/vans etc. not in commerce / for profit, are immune to registration fees:

(a) A “commercial vehicle” is a vehicle of a type REQUIRED to be REGISTERED under this code”.

(b) “Passenger vehicles which are not used for the transportation of persons for hire, compensation or profit, and housecars, are not commercial vehicles”.

(c) “a vanpool vehicle is not a commercial vehicle.” And;

“A vehicle not used for commercial activity is a “consumer goods”, ...it is NOT a type of vehicle required to be registered and “use tax” paid of which the tab is evidence of receipt of the tax.” Bank of Boston vs Jones, 4 UCC Rep. Serv. 1021, 236 A2d 484, UCC PP 9-109.14. And;

“It is held that a tax upon common carriers by motor vehicles is based upon a reasonable classification, and does not involve any unconstitutional discrimination, although it does not apply to private vehicles, or those used by the owner in his own business, and not for hire.” Desser v. Wichita, (1915) 96 Kan. 820; Iowa Motor Vehicle Asso. v. Railroad Comrs., 75 A.L.R. 22.

“Thus self-driven vehicles are classified according to the use to which they are put rather than according to the means by which they are propelled.” Ex Parte Hoffert, 148 NW 20. And;

“In view of this rule a statutory provision that the supervising officials “may” exempt such persons when the transportation is not on a commercial basis means that they “must” exempt them.” State v. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; 60 C.J.S. section 94 page 581. And;