The following recorded conversation with the New Jersey Department Of Motor Vehicles proves to me that they falsely accused a licensed driver of failing to present acceptable proof of who he was, And by making the said false allegation as a part of the official public drivers abstract ( a.k.a DMV driving record / MVR report which is accessible to employers, auto insures, etc..).
Supported Facts:
Into the recording around 2min. and 30sec., the MVC basically admitted that the drivers abstract noted "Unsatisfied Proof Of Age, I.D." is false and misleading.
Also around 4min. and 55sec. into the recording, the MVC basically admitted that the "Unsatisfied Proof Of Age, I.D." noted on the drivers abstract and letter here, were not productive or not factual to the drivers situation.
Is This "Defamation Of Character" ?
Link to this comment:
All Comments (0)