Code Section 1808.22: DMV Address Exceptions and Penalties

California Vehicle Code Section 1808.22 identifies the narrow set of requesters who can obtain a residence address from DMV records despite the confidentiality rule in Section 1808.21. Three groups qualify: financial institutions with a customer waiver or a pre-1990 agreement, insurance companies and their contractors handling accident claims or holding a signed waiver, and attorneys working on a criminal or civil matter that directly involves the vehicle or vessel in question. Each pathway carries a sworn declaration, use limits, and real penalties for misuse.

The Confidentiality Rule These Exceptions Cut Through

Section 1808.21 makes any residence address in a DMV record confidential. It cannot be disclosed to anyone outside a court, a law enforcement agency, another government agency, or the specific requesters authorized by Sections 1808.22 and 1808.23.¹ Section 1808.22 is the list of who gets through, and on what terms.

Financial Institutions

Under subdivision (a), a financial institution licensed by the state or federal government to operate in California can obtain a residence address in one of two ways. It can declare under penalty of perjury that it has a written waiver from the individual whose address it is seeking. Or it can be seeking the address of someone who entered an agreement with the institution before July 1, 1990, so long as that agreement is still in effect.²

The 1990 cutoff grandfathered long-standing customer relationships. For anything opened after that date, the institution needs an explicit signed waiver before the DMV will release an address.

Insurance Companies

Subdivision (b) opens two paths for insurers. A California-licensed insurance company, or a contractor acting on its behalf, can request the address of a motorist or vehicle owner involved in an accident with the company’s insured. The request must be made under penalty of perjury.²

Separately, an insurer can access address information for any individual who has signed a written waiver of Section 1808.21, or for every person insured under a policy where at least one named insured has signed such a waiver. This second route is broader and lets insurers keep current addresses for policyholders and co-insureds without tying each request to a specific accident.²

Rules for Insurance Company Contractors

Subdivision (c) is where the statute becomes prescriptive. When an insurer uses a contractor to pull address information on motorists involved in accidents, the contractor takes on the same use, disclosure, and data security requirements that state and federal law impose on the insurance company itself. The data can be used only to obtain the address of a motorist or vehicle owner involved in an accident with the insurer’s policyholder. Any other use, or any disclosure to any other person, is prohibited.²

The contractor’s specific obligations:

Destroy all DMV-sourced information, including copies, once it has served the permitted purpose.
Never sell the information or combine it with any database for resale or an unauthorized purpose.
Keep a log of the receipt, use, and dissemination of everything obtained, produce it to the DMV immediately on request, and retain it for four years from the date of the original request.
Maintain a $50,000 surety bond.

The insurance company is responsible for its contractor’s misuse of the information, which gives insurers a direct stake in vetting and monitoring the vendors they hire.²

Attorneys

Subdivision (d) lets an attorney obtain a motor vehicle or vessel owner’s residence address outside the Section 1808.21 restrictions. The attorney must state under penalty of perjury that the address is necessary to represent a client in a criminal or civil action that directly involves the use of the vehicle or vessel in question, and the matter must be pending, about to be filed, or under investigation.³

“Directly involves” is the operative limit. Car accident litigation, hit-and-run matters, and criminal cases where the vehicle is central all fit. A contract dispute where an attorney just needs a party’s address does not.

A federal decision reinforces where this exception stops. In Maracich v. Spears, the U.S. Supreme Court held that using DMV records to solicit potential clients for a lawsuit is not a permissible litigation use under the federal Driver’s Privacy Protection Act, even when the solicitation relates to anticipated litigation.⁴ The Court distinguished attorneys acting as officers of the court (serving process, investigating facts for a pending or anticipated case, enforcing judgments) from attorneys acting as commercial actors seeking business. California attorneys relying on subdivision (d) should read the exception as covering genuine case work, not client recruitment.

Penalties for Violations

A contractor that violates Section 1808.22 faces a civil penalty of up to $100,000, payable to the DMV. If the contractor holds a commercial requester code under Section 1810.2, the code can be suspended for five years or permanently revoked.² Losing a requester code closes off commercial DMV access, which for a records vendor is a business-ending outcome.

Unauthorized disclosure of DMV records can also be charged as a misdemeanor under California Vehicle Code Section 1808.45.⁵ And federal law gives the affected individual a separate remedy: under the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act, someone whose personal information is improperly disclosed from motor vehicle records can bring a civil action recovering at least $2,500 in liquidated damages per violation, plus punitive damages for willful or reckless conduct, and attorney’s fees.⁶

Requesting Records if You Qualify

A qualifying requester submits Form INF 70 for driver records, vehicle registration, or other record information. An online driver record request costs $2; a mail request costs $5 per record.⁷ The DMV requires each requester to declare the purpose so it can verify the request falls within a permissible category.

The DMV also conducts periodic audits of entities that access personal information to confirm ongoing compliance.⁸ Holders of commercial requester codes get closer scrutiny, and given the $100,000 civil ceiling and the five-year suspension exposure, a sloppy request can end a business line.

1
California Legislative Information. California Code VEH 1808.21
2
California Legislative Information. California Vehicle Code Section 1808.22
3
California Legislative Information. California Code VEH 1808.22
4
Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center. Maracich v. Spears, 570 U.S. 48 (2013)
5
California Legislative Information. California Code VEH 40000.61
6
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 2724 – Civil Action
7
California Department of Motor Vehicles. Request Your Driver’s Record
8
California Department of Motor Vehicles. Privacy and Security