NC title says VOID VOID for ODO and Title Brands

[Rev6868]

Just got my title for the 68 Dart and I noticed the it says VOID VOID in very faint (have to see at an angle, almost looks like just nothing is there) in the boxes for Odometer Reading, Odometer Status, and Title Brands.
Any thoughts or concerns on this? Title in VA when signed over was not this way. Car was in NC before VA.

 

[toolmanmike]

Just got my title for the 68 Dart and I noticed the it says VOID VOID in very faint (have to see at an angle, almost looks like just nothing is there) in the boxes for Odometer Reading, Odometer Status, and Title Brands.
Any thoughts or concerns on this? Title in VA when signed over was not this way. Car was in NC before VA.

Don't ask us. Ask your county court house.

 

[NoCar340]

Is it ink, or is it a watermark?

Due to the age of the car, they may not care anymore. I have a couple of MI titles with "EXEMPT" where the odometer reading should be. My understanding is that because the cars are so old, they just assume it's beyond the mechanical limits of the odo (99,999 miles) and typed that instead. It didn't matter, since both cars were over 100K anyhow. The WI title for my '71 Challenger says "78622 UNVERIFIED MILEAGE" under the odometer heading, but that title was issued in 1986.

 

[bcschief]

Just got my title for the 68 Dart and I noticed the it says VOID VOID in very faint (have to see at an angle, almost looks like just nothing is there) in the boxes for Odometer Reading, Odometer Status, and Title Brands.
Any thoughts or concerns on this? Title in VA when signed over was not this way. Car was in NC before VA.

Maybe to prevent the title from being photocopied.

 

[Professor Fate]

I've seen "Exempt" and "N/A" on titles, so "Void" wouldn't worry me too much. As said, after the car reaches a certain age they don't bother putting in the mileage anymore.
If it still concerns you that much, take it in to your DMV and ask; they should know, they're the ones who issued the title.

 

[Dana67Dart]

Many titles will indicate in some fashion that the milage is no longer valid.

Since our cars only go up to 99,999.0 miles there is no way to document the actual milage.

 

[Rev6868]

I might look in to it a bit more and talk to the DMV. But yeah I figure it doesn't matter, but ofcourse want to know especially since friend of mine who runs a restoration shop said he never heard of it before.
But likely some N/A type stuff for NC. Thanks!

 

[mcodecuda]

Maybe to prevent the title from being photocopied.

I bet that’s it. If you photocopy it on a color printer I bet the void watermark becomes darker and more apparent.

 

[Dana67Dart]

2 Colorado titles

Both 67 darts.

One from 2017 the other from 2023

2017

2023

When I go get smog checks (yep required every year in my part of Colorado, to have standard plates vs collector plates.)

I always give them the actual milage so I have a legal-ish record.

 

[j_anderson]

My Indiana title says "odometer - exceeds mechanical limits" It was titled back in '96

 

[mcodecuda]

I bet that’s it. If you photocopy it on a color printer I bet the void watermark becomes darker and more apparent.

Mystery solved. Just as a trial I photocopied my NC title and when I did the VOID watermark appeared all over the title. Before I photocopied it the void watercolor mark appeared in just the odometer reading, odometer status and title status. FYI, those three blocks on my title are also blank except for the void watermark.

 

[Dana67Dart]

For a second there I thought you were going to say the watermarks showed up ON your original!

 

[mcodecuda]

For a second there I thought you were going to say the watermarks showed up ON your original!

LOL!, I’d post a picture of my partial title but I don’t think that the watermarks would show up.

 

[Dana67Dart]

LOL!, I’d post a picture of my partial title but I don’t think that the watermarks would show up.

I meant to say that the watermark you could barely see on your original became prominent on the original after you scanned it.

Like the light of the scanner activated the watermark ink or something.

Just me overthinking it.

No worries.

 

[mcodecuda]

I meant to say that the watermark you could barely see on your original became prominent on the original after you scanned it.

Like the light of the scanner activated the watermark ink or something.

Just me overthinking it.

No worries.

Actually the watermarks were just as faint but more of them appeared on the copy. The appeared on the copy in places where they didn’t appear on the original.