PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Failure to insure fixed penalty notice
Neil OB
post Tue, 1 Oct 2013 - 13:11
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 1 Oct 2013
Member No.: 65,607



Hi all,

Really hoping someone can help here as I feel like I'm being screwed over.

Heres the situation - I bought a new car back in April this year privately and so with the intention of selling my old one privately too. Unfortunately this ended up taking a lot longer than I first imagined due to working away and actually finding someone to buy the car. In the mean time I have received a failure to insure notice from the DVLA informing me that due to my vehicle not being insured I am liable for a £100 fine which they will reduce to £50 if paid promptly. My old car had been kept off road on a private driveway and was correctly taxed and MOT'd. I even at one point bought 3 days of temporary insurance costing £80 to use the car when I had to have some work done on my new one to enable me to carry on working.

Due to the fact I had not been warned about this I started to try and find some way to appeal with the DVLA. The letter only gives options of having sold the car etc and no number or address to contact to actually talk to anyone. I eventually found an email contact who I explained the situation to, never having any points etc, not been informed of an apparent change to the law and the fact I own another car and clearly was not trying to avoid paying insurance as they appear to believe the new fine will combat. The reply was a clear structured 'automatic' response saying if I had received a fixed penalty 'warning' I could do one of three things to avoid a fixed penalty and some explanation of the fact the law has actually changed. I replied again stating a warning would have been great.. and actually would have avoided this whole situation as I would have taken one of the options. Then got again a generated reply giving my options to pay the fixed penalty. Eventually feeling like I was getting no where I managed to get them to explain I should send the fixed notice to them with a covering letter explaining my dispute, I also said during the days it was taking them to reply the £50 window was fast disappearing. In the time before I actually sent the letter I have also now sold the car and transfered details correctly.

I have now received a letter back saying 'They understand that I intend to dispose of the vehicle... etc etc and that the Continuous Insurance Enforcement was launched in 2011 and details are available online(!) And that the fixed penalty was introduced to help reduce insurance evasion... consequently you remain liable for the £100 fixed penalty. Once again a paragraph on how to pay or phone but that the case CAN NOT BE DISCUSSED ON THE PHONE, should I need to write to them, please quote the reg number of the vehicle. Now its taken them near enough 3 weeks to send this letter to me for a start, secondly they clearly have not taken any notice of what I included in my letter, the fact I was not informed even though one of their emails states I should have received a warning first, the fact it mentions combating insurance avoidance when I have explained I own another car, given details of this and the fact they will find on their records that I purchased temp insurance for 3 days to use the car and the fact I have actually now sold the vehicle - not intending to dispose of!

Sorry for the really long post but what can I do here, certainly does not seem write that they can change the law, not inform or warn me first then issue a penalty when all the facts I can provide show I am not guilty of what the fine is supposed to combat.

Thanks,
Neil

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 9)
Advertisement
post Tue, 1 Oct 2013 - 13:11
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
The Rookie
post Tue, 1 Oct 2013 - 13:18
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,200
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



The law requires any car taxed to be insured, regardless of where it is kept, and you not getting the letter isn't a defence as it doesn't change the facts. I'd pay up to be honest.


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Tue, 1 Oct 2013 - 13:24
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,572
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



The change in the law was widely advertised, including on TV with little red and green cars rushing about, you should have first received a warning letter, but there is nothing you can do about it, you are, as they say, bang to rights.


--------------------



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil OB
post Tue, 1 Oct 2013 - 13:26
Post #4


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 1 Oct 2013
Member No.: 65,607



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 1 Oct 2013 - 14:18) *
The law requires any car taxed to be insured, regardless of where it is kept, and you not getting the letter isn't a defence as it doesn't change the facts. I'd pay up to be honest.


It did not used to be the law though does that not mean anything, how would anyone know without being warned? I appreciate your feedback though but now with all this waiting for replies from the DVLA etc I'd now also have to pay £100 instead of £50? This just seems plain wrong

QUOTE (Logician @ Tue, 1 Oct 2013 - 14:24) *
The change in the law was widely advertised, including on TV with little red and green cars rushing about, you should have first received a warning letter, but there is nothing you can do about it, you are, as they say, bang to rights.


Great, don't remember such a campaign sad.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NeverMind
post Tue, 1 Oct 2013 - 13:26
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 521
Joined: 15 Oct 2011
From: England
Member No.: 50,387



QUOTE (Neil OB @ Tue, 1 Oct 2013 - 14:11) *
not been informed of an apparent change to the law


Not a defence. And it was fairly well publicised on TV, Newspapers and in leaflets that came with tax renewal notices.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 1 Oct 2013 - 13:51
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



The oft quoted maxim "ignorance of the law affords no defence" is apposite here, albeit harsh.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil OB
post Tue, 1 Oct 2013 - 14:00
Post #7


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 1 Oct 2013
Member No.: 65,607



Fantastic sad.gif and I take it my chances of a £50 fine are also well and truly over too??
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 1 Oct 2013 - 14:04
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



If you're past the date of the reduced offer, yes. You could ask.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Tue, 1 Oct 2013 - 22:55
Post #9


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 24,214
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 1 Oct 2013 - 14:18) *
The law requires any car taxed to be insured, regardless of where it is kept,


Not quite. The law requires any car to be insured unless it is declared SORN. If the OP's tax had expired he would not have been exempt from the requirement for his car to be insured.


--------------------
Andy

Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Wed, 2 Oct 2013 - 01:18
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,200
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Yes quite actually, you are adding an extra status, but my statement was still correct, if it's taxed it must be insured, ALSO if it's not taxed and not SORN it must be insured, as the OPs car was taxed I used that example....


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 15:53
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here