# Verification record — `nl/rdw/vehicle-ownership-transfer` v1.0.0 This file is the **source-review record** for this document version, per the [`manual-source-review-v1`](../../../../../practices/manual-source-review-v1.md) practice. It documents the provenance of the published fields and flow, records a mock-data test run of the field set, and states the current verification claim honestly. ## Current claim - **`status`:** `draft` - **`verification.method`:** `manual-source-review-v1` - **`verification.lastVerifiedAt`:** `2026-07-04` The document was derived from RDW's own service pages describing the online "Voertuig overschrijven" (transfer registration) process — eligibility conditions, the 9-digit tenaamstellingscode, and the fee. The actual DigiD-gated `voertuigoverschrijven.rdw.nl` wizard screens themselves could not be reached or walked through end to end, so the full field-by-field comparison the practice requires (Procedure step 2) has **not** been completed. It therefore remains `draft`, not `verified`. ## Sources examined - **Document `(id, version)`:** `nl/rdw/vehicle-ownership-transfer` / `1.0.0` - **Spec version:** GovSchema `0.3.0` - **Authority:** Netherlands Vehicle Authority (Rijksdienst voor het Wegverkeer, RDW). - **Primary sources (fetched directly, HTTP 200):** - — "Kenteken voertuig overschrijven" (register a vehicle in your name): the buyer's eligibility conditions (18+, registered in the BRP with a Dutch address, valid ID document, DigiD app with ID-check), the seller's document conditions (valid registration card/temporary document number plus the complete tenaamstellingscode — paper-only documents require an in-person counter visit instead), the three channels (online, counter, dealership), and the flat EUR 13.10 fee "the same across all channels." - — "Tenaamstellingscode kwijt": confirms the tenaamstellingscode is a 9-digit code issued to the new owner in 2 parts, used for transfer, suspension, export, or scrapping, distinct from the insurance-purposed "meldcode" (last 4 digits of the VIN), and describes the EUR 1.25 online replacement service (DigiD for private individuals, eHerkenning for businesses) if lost. - — the online service's own landing page, confirmed reachable (HTTP 200) but renders as a JavaScript loading shell ("Aan het laden... een moment geduld a.u.b.") to non-interactive fetch tooling; the actual DigiD-gated wizard screens behind it were not reached. - Secondary corroboration (WAM liability-insurance requirement, not used for field wording): general web search results confirming Dutch law (Wet Aansprakelijkheidsverzekering Motorrijtuigen) requires WA insurance on a registered vehicle from the moment of registration, and that RDW checks this electronically against insurers' notifications rather than collecting an insurer name on the transfer form itself. - **Retrieved / reviewed:** 2026-07-04. - **Reviewer:** GovSchema Engineering (Standards Engineer — initial authoring source review). ## What was confirmed against the source | Source element | Field(s) | |---|---| | RDW 'Kenteken voertuig overschrijven' — buyer conditions | `buyerAge18OrOlder`, `buyerRegisteredInBrpWithNlAddress`, `buyerHasValidIdDocument`, `buyerHasDigidAppWithIdCheck` | | RDW 'Kenteken voertuig overschrijven' — seller document condition | `sellerHasValidRegistrationCardAndCode` | | RDW 'Tenaamstellingscode kwijt' — 9-digit code | `registrationTransferCode` | | RDW 'Kenteken voertuig overschrijven' — buyer enters the vehicle to start the transfer | `licencePlateNumber` | | RDW 'Kenteken voertuig overschrijven' — EUR 13.10 fee, iDEAL/Wero | `documents[].transferFee` | | WAM electronic-insurance-check guidance | `buyerHasValidLiabilityInsuranceDeclaration` | ## What is NOT independently confirmed / out of scope - **The mijn RDW / voertuigoverschrijven.rdw.nl wizard screens themselves.** The exact screen order, whether `licencePlateNumber` and `registrationTransferCode` are entered on the same screen or in sequence, and whether any additional field (e.g. odometer reading, sale price, or an explicit insurer name) is collected online could not be confirmed — the landing page is a client-rendered shell this session's fetch tooling could not execute JavaScript against. This document is transcribed from RDW's own service-page prose, the same discipline `nl/rdw/drivers-licence-renewal` and `sg/lta/vehicle-ownership-transfer` applied to their own gated online services. - **`licencePlateNumber`'s exact format.** Dutch licence plates have used several distinct letter/digit patterns across successive registration series since the 1970s (e.g. `99-99-AA`, `AA-999-A`, `9-AAA-99`); no single source consulted here states the current pattern precisely enough to assert a tight regex, so `validation.pattern` is a loose 6-8 character uppercase-alphanumeric-with-hyphens bound rather than a series-specific pattern. A future reviewer with access to RDW's own kenteken-format reference page should tighten this. - **`registrationTransferCode`'s "in 2 parts" split.** RDW's page states the code is issued "in 2 delen" (in 2 parts) but does not describe which digits belong to which part or why (likely a fraud-prevention measure so the full code is only assembled once the registration card is physically handed over); this document models it as a single 9-digit field the buyer enters in full, consistent with how the online service is described as accepting "de complete en geldige tenaamstellingscode." - **The insurance declaration's exact mechanism.** No RDW source consulted states whether the online wizard itself presents an explicit "I have insurance" checkbox, or whether RDW's electronic cross-check with insurers happens silently after registration with no buyer-facing screen at all. `buyerHasValidLiabilityInsuranceDeclaration` is modelled as a precondition declaration on the conservative assumption that some form of buyer attestation exists, mirroring `sg/lta/vehicle-ownership-transfer`'s `newOwnerInsuranceValidDeclaration`; a live-portal walkthrough should confirm or remove this field. - **The `meldcode`** (last 4 digits of the VIN, used when arranging insurance) is out of scope: RDW's own page distinguishes it from the tenaamstellingscode and describes it as serving the insurer-facing insurance-arrangement step, not the RDW transfer submission itself. - **Motorcycle/moped transfers, business/dealer transfers, paper-document-only sellers, export, and scrappage** are out of scope, consistent with this registry's one-schema-per-distinct-process convention. The seller's own role (physically handing over the registration card and tenaamstellingscode) is described only in the scope note, not modelled as a separate step, since the seller does not interact with RDW's online service themselves in this flow (unlike `gb/dvla/vehicle-keeper-change-v5c` and `sg/lta/vehicle-ownership-transfer`, where the seller initiates or confirms online). - **The two output documents** the parties receive after a successful transfer — the vrijwaringsbewijs (discharge certificate, for the seller) and the tenaamstellingsverslag (registration report, for the buyer) — are mentioned in the schema `description` only, not modelled as `documents[]` entries, since they are outputs of the process rather than something the buyer submits or provides. ## Scope and jurisdiction notes - This closes one of the three remaining Vehicle Registration/Tag/Title gaps flagged by the GOV-960 per-country x per-vertical audit (CA, NZ, NL had a Drivers-Licence schema but no Vehicle Registration/Tag/Title schema); CA and NZ remain open. NZ's equivalent process (NZTA form MR13B, "Change of registered person - buyer") was investigated first and found to have no independently downloadable/fillable form — `nzta.govt.nz`'s own Forms page and every Wayback capture of it describe MR13A/MR13C as online-only transactions and MR13B only as a form "completed and presented to an NZTA agent," with no PDF asset ever located on the domain (confirmed by CDX search across the whole `nzta.govt.nz` domain for any URL containing `mr13b`, zero results) — a genuine sourcing dead end, not merely a WAF block, worth recording for whoever picks up NZ next. Ontario's general transfer process was also investigated: its "Application for Transfer" is printed on the back of the physical ownership permit (not independently downloadable), and the two standalone downloadable PDF forms that do exist — 1155E (Sworn Statement for the Transfer of a Used Motor Vehicle) and 1157E (Sworn Statement for a Family Gift) — are narrow Retail-Sales-Tax exemption declarations for specific transfer reasons, not the general arm's-length private-sale form, so neither is a clean structural match for a general "vehicle ownership transfer" schema; a future cycle should decide whether to model the exemption-declaration shape instead or find a better primary source. - `fieldRole: "eligibility"` (GSP-0014) is used for every precondition question, matching `nl/rdw/drivers-licence-renewal`'s convention. `buyerHasValidLiabilityInsuranceDeclaration` carries `classification: "financial"` per GSP-0006's advisory vocabulary. - Conditional flow uses `steps[].transitions` with `exitReason` (GSP-0013 §4) for the five eligibility gates that exit this online flow to the unmodelled in-person counter process, the same pattern `nl/rdw/drivers-licence-renewal` uses for its three eligibility gates. ## Review-gate correction (GOV-1016) Re-fetching both primary sources during review found two `sourceRef` quotes that did not match the live page text verbatim and corrected them prior to merge (the underlying eligibility conditions themselves were unaffected): - `buyerRegisteredInBrpWithNlAddress`: the live page reads "U staat in de Basisregistratie Personen (BRP) ... met een woonadres of briefadres in Nederland" (no "ingeschreven"; "briefadres" — a correspondence address, not "postadres"/mailing address as originally quoted). Field `label` and `description` were reworded from "mailing address" to "correspondence address" to match, and the `sourceRef` quote corrected. - `buyerHasValidIdDocument`: the live page reads "U heeft een geldig legitimatiebewijs" (not "U hebt een geldig identiteitsbewijs" as originally quoted — both terms mean "valid identity/legitimation document" in Dutch administrative usage, but the quote must match the source verbatim). - `buyerHasDigidAppWithIdCheck`: corrected "U hebt" to "U heeft" to match the live page's conjugation exactly. All other sourceRef quotes (18+ condition, seller's kentekencard/ tenaamstellingscode condition, the 9-digit code, the EUR 13.10 fee/iDEAL-Wero payment line, and the JS-shell wizard-page claim) were re-verified against the live pages during this review and match verbatim. ## Path to a `verified` claim (next step) To advance to `status: verified`, a reviewer with a genuine Dutch DigiD account, an eligible vehicle, and its tenaamstellingscode completes an actual `voertuigoverschrijven.rdw.nl` online transfer (or has independent confirmation from someone who has), confirming: the exact screen order and field set, `licencePlateNumber`'s validation pattern against RDW's own kenteken-format reference, whether an explicit insurance-declaration screen exists, and the current fee and accepted payment methods. ## Re-verification Per the practice's Cadence, `nextReviewBy` is set to **2027-01-01** (6 months).