My $90 Bill to the State of California 

If what I did below to resolve a problem sounds strange to you, then I urge you to find a way to start thinking outside the box.  (Unfortunately, I know of no course in California, in a university, community college or high school, which teaches us to think outside the box.) 

Below is an excerpt from a letter mailed on June 12 to the Department of Motor Vehicles.  The subject is the export of a car to a relative in another country.  The reason for the bill is that Californians did a service to the Department of Motor Vehicles, by finding and reporting a flaw in DMV’s processing system .  How would you have handled this? 

This is a bill to the California Department of Motor Vehicles (“Department”) for $90 for a service to Department  provided by [Californians]… 

In October, 2006, Californians came to the Montebello office of Department to deliver signed export papers.  Upon handing said papers to a Department employee, [daughter] asked said Department employee whether there was anything else to do.  The answer was “no”.  After exiting the building, [daughter] returned and asked the same employee, wanting to ensure that [eighty-three year old father] had signed the export papers.  Said employee again assured that there was nothing more to do. 

In January, evidenced by the first attachment, a notice [of deficient  paperwork] came from Department.  Californians went in February to the aforementioned office of Department and spent an hour as an employee and supervisor decided what to do.  The decision was that a copy of title to the vehicle be obtained from Department;  the supervisor waived any applicable fee.  [Daughter] filed a complaint. 

After the copy of the title arrived, Californians went in March to the aforementioned office and spent an hour processing, as a Department employee and supervisor had to decide what to do.  [Father] signed the export papers at said office.  The employee then faxed the papers, presumably to Department in Sacramento. 

In June, evidenced by the second attachment, a notice [of deficient paperwork] came from Department. 

We assume, with this explanation, that everything would be in order and that Californians would not have to return to aforementioned office of Department.  We thank you for the opportunity to be of service and look forward to Department’s remittance or credit…. 

If you answer the multiple-choice questions below and e-mail to lessonanswers@mymontebello.com with “Lesson answers” in the subject field, you will be credited toward a “certificate of recognition in community affairs” to be awarded in 2007 by a local nonprofit organization.

1.  Where did the problem lie in this transaction with the State of California?

(a) The Californians did not know what to do.

(b) Either the Sacramento or Montebello office of the Department of Motor Vehicles did not know what to do. 

2.  Why do you suppose that I did not write a complaint to the Department of Motor Vehicles?

(a) Department staffers are busy and something unusual is needed to draw their attention.

(b) Those who are paid, namely, state employees, should realize that those who are not paid, namely, Californians, still value their time.

June 28, 2007