PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Late licensing Penalty
minunel
post Mon, 3 Mar 2014 - 08:13
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27
Joined: 6 Feb 2014
Member No.: 68,576



Good morning,

would like some views from some of you around here if possible.

- changed house in May 2013
- did not change address on the V5C
- tax on my vehicle was due to expire on 31/10/2013
- vehicle kept on a Self Storage yard since August 2013
- sent SORN which I filled in myself to DVLA in October 2013 - 23/10/2013 (my sister was present when filling up the form)
- checked mail at old address and DVLA are charging me Late Licensing Penalty £80 and arrears for the TAX.
- replied to that letter with a copy of the SORN declaration and a letter from the SELF STORAGE FACILITY confirming that my vehicle was parked at their place since August 2013.

Now DVLA replied to the new address as below attached. Letter is dated 24/02 but was received 01/03 ohmy.gif

Is there any way I can dispute this or request a different opinion. It doesn`t seem fair especially when I am paying for parking somewhere outsite the public road and did not use the vehicle even before the tax finished.


Much appreciated.



This post has been edited by minunel: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 - 14:34
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 18)
Advertisement
post Mon, 3 Mar 2014 - 08:13
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Logician
post Mon, 3 Mar 2014 - 09:33
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,578
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



QUOTE
- tax on my vehicle was due to expire on 31/10/2013 - this was sent to DVLA by 1st class


What does this mean, what was sent to DVLA?


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



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AFCNEAL
post Mon, 3 Mar 2014 - 10:37
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,226
Joined: 3 Sep 2007
Member No.: 13,453



You appear to have declared SORN? When was that?


--------------------
www.BMWEnthusiasts.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
minunel
post Mon, 3 Mar 2014 - 14:31
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27
Joined: 6 Feb 2014
Member No.: 68,576



SORN document was sent on the 23/10.

I have attached a copy of it to my reply and a letter from the Storage company confirming the vehicle been at their premisses since august.

They still want me to pay .

What to do ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AFCNEAL
post Mon, 3 Mar 2014 - 14:48
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,226
Joined: 3 Sep 2007
Member No.: 13,453



More knowledgeable than I will comment, but I'd write back and restate as SORN and licence expired simultaneously, no offence has been committed.....see you in court. Was it insured though until end Oct?


--------------------
www.BMWEnthusiasts.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ojnab
post Mon, 3 Mar 2014 - 15:35
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 102
Joined: 23 Jun 2010
Member No.: 38,471



QUOTE (AFCNEAL @ Mon, 3 Mar 2014 - 14:48) *
More knowledgeable than I will comment, but I'd write back and restate as SORN and licence expired simultaneously, no offence has been committed.....see you in court. Was it insured though until end Oct?


My experience with the DVLA after selling a vehicle and getting a speculative bill for £80 nearly a year later, is that they tend to use debt collection agencies rather than issuing a summons, and they don't accept the possibility that they can lose post.

The vehicle being kept in storage is not the main issue (albeit still important), what is more important is that you have declared a SORN and posted it to the DVLA. It is advisable to get proof of posting from the Post Office when sending such documents, as it proves your defence. However, you have your sister as a witness (not a perfect witness as she's not independent).

In my case I wrote to the DVLA explaining that the vehicle was sold and the correct documents were sent to them. I advised them that although I did not receive a confirmation letter from them nor chase them for one, I had completed all my responsibilities under the law. They ignored that, and sent a DCA after me. I then wrote to them and the DCA advising that as no summons has been issued that their demands for payment constituted harassment, and that I would take action against them if they did not desist. I told them that all further correspondence from them would be ignored unless they sent me a summons. After that, I heard nothing more.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
minunel
post Tue, 4 Mar 2014 - 10:19
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27
Joined: 6 Feb 2014
Member No.: 68,576



QUOTE (ojnab @ Mon, 3 Mar 2014 - 15:35) *
QUOTE (AFCNEAL @ Mon, 3 Mar 2014 - 14:48) *
More knowledgeable than I will comment, but I'd write back and restate as SORN and licence expired simultaneously, no offence has been committed.....see you in court. Was it insured though until end Oct?


My experience with the DVLA after selling a vehicle and getting a speculative bill for £80 nearly a year later, is that they tend to use debt collection agencies rather than issuing a summons, and they don't accept the possibility that they can lose post.

The vehicle being kept in storage is not the main issue (albeit still important), what is more important is that you have declared a SORN and posted it to the DVLA. It is advisable to get proof of posting from the Post Office when sending such documents, as it proves your defence. However, you have your sister as a witness (not a perfect witness as she's not independent).

In my case I wrote to the DVLA explaining that the vehicle was sold and the correct documents were sent to them. I advised them that although I did not receive a confirmation letter from them nor chase them for one, I had completed all my responsibilities under the law. They ignored that, and sent a DCA after me. I then wrote to them and the DCA advising that as no summons has been issued that their demands for payment constituted harassment, and that I would take action against them if they did not desist. I told them that all further correspondence from them would be ignored unless they sent me a summons. After that, I heard nothing more.


Thank you,

I shall write again.

Witnesses may be two : 1 is my sister when I was filling the form up and the second one is a friend that went with my sister to post the letter to them.

Unfortunatelly I have no proof from Post Office.

-Going to court would be a wise move ? How can I back my statements ? I never had anything to do with court so I am quite
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
enfield freddy
post Tue, 4 Mar 2014 - 10:24
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 985
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
From: up north , but not scootland
Member No.: 17,975



tell then to see you in court! the next letter will be one from them with a court date on it and a reply back to DVLA , say thank you , see you there and bring your witness , at which point they will back down.

"if" they proceed , you stand in court hold he bible and speak the truth! this stage will not happen ,,,
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ojnab
post Tue, 4 Mar 2014 - 12:13
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 102
Joined: 23 Jun 2010
Member No.: 38,471



QUOTE (enfield freddy @ Tue, 4 Mar 2014 - 10:24) *
the next letter will be one from them with a court date on it

In my case the next few letters were from one debt collection agency pretending to be 3 different companies being solicitors and bailiffs, and threatening to enter my home and seize goods. Which they have no right to do without going to court first.

Hence, the need to send them all a "cease and desist" letter warning them that they are guilty of harassment. After that you might get one more letter that crossed in the post, and then you sit back and wait for a summons ... and wait ... and wait ... 4 years later and still waiting ....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
minunel
post Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 06:22
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27
Joined: 6 Feb 2014
Member No.: 68,576



Good morning,

I did write to DVLA (on the 24/02) a letter stating that I have already proved my case and that they should either see me in court or stop asking for the late licensing fee.

Friday I received through post a letter from SIGMA RED stating that they have been instructed to recover £80.00 by DVLA.

Letter below:


And on the day after I have received an Acknoledgement from DVLA for the car SORN but dated on 27/02/2014



What should I do ? Should I write again to DVLA to stop these debt collectors or what? The above letter is the only one received - no summons or anything else. ?!


Now I have also received the FORM V991 .


Could someone please advise me . I am now in trouble with these bailiffs .
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Unzippy
post Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 06:34
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,006
Joined: 29 Oct 2013
Member No.: 66,323



Fill out the V991 - that is their official dispute form.
Maybe along the lines of this - use the relevant parts to you:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.a...uery+&mid=0


You are not in trouble with the bailiffs, reply to them telling to cease and desist and that you are discussing the issue with DVLA.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 06:34
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 44,993
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



They are NOT bailiffs they are debt collectors, the only power they have is to write you letters (wow scary).

Write back, deny any debt exists and tell tell them to refer it back to the principle (DVLA).


--------------------
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
Unzippy
post Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 06:35
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,006
Joined: 29 Oct 2013
Member No.: 66,323



Be cheeky and send a letter to DVLA saying they have got the DORN wrong, it should be dated 23/10/2013 biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
minunel
post Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 06:43
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27
Joined: 6 Feb 2014
Member No.: 68,576



QUOTE (Unzippy @ Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 06:34) *
Fill out the V991 - that is their official dispute form.
Maybe along the lines of this - use the relevant parts to you:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.a...uery+&mid=0


You are not in trouble with the bailiffs, reply to them telling to cease and desist and that you are discussing the issue with DVLA.

Thank you Unzippy , I will draft two letters today - DVLA and Debt Collectors

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 06:34) *
They are NOT bailiffs they are debt collectors, the only power they have is to write you letters (wow scary).

Write back, deny any debt exists and tell tell them to refer it back to the principle (DVLA).

Thanks - I didn`t know that !

QUOTE (Unzippy @ Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 06:35) *
Be cheeky and send a letter to DVLA saying they have got the DORN wrong, it should be dated 23/10/2013 biggrin.gif

It did cross my mind biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
minunel
post Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 08:30
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27
Joined: 6 Feb 2014
Member No.: 68,576



Thanks to the Unzippy reference I have prepared the V991 response.

Can I please have some thoughts before I send it.

I will attach to this following:
- copy of letter from Self Storage Yard confirming that vehicle has been kept at their site since 15/08/2013 (which is a paid service)
- printed pictures showing: the car parked with the parking permit , the parking permit on the car`s window in close showing date gated in.
- copy of the internal document that Self Storage Yard have on file for the parked vehicle

QUOTE
Late Licensing Penalty (LLP) dispute form

Your dispute
1a – Please tell us why you think our decision is wrong. It is not enough to say ‘I disagree with this decision’ or ‘I do not think I am liable’.

I think your decision is wrong, because when I have prepared the SORN declaration on 25/10/2013, I posted the document by 1st class post. By doing this, I have satisfied my legal obligations in full. May I refer you to the Interpretation Act of 1978, section 7:

References to service by post.
Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

Or, in other words, by posting the SORN document by 1st class mail at the time of the transfer, I have done everything required of me by law. It is up to the DVLA to prove that this did not happen, and not for me to prove that it did happen.

I did not receive an acknowledgement letter, however the DVLA have no statutory power requiring anyone to contact them should they not receive an acknowledgment letter.


2 – Please enclose the evidence that:
• Shows you had taxed the vehicle or made a sorn when it was due, or
• Demonstrates that you had told the DVLA of the sale or transfer of the vehicle before the breach of the CR.

I do not have any such evidence. This is because the SORN Declaration that I posted on 25/10/2013 did not reach the DVLA, or has been lost by the DVLA. Again, I have satisfied my legal obligations in full by posting the SORN Declaration 1st class. Legally, it is the duty of the DVLA to prove that this did not happen; I am under no legal obligation to prove that it did happen.

3 – Please tell us about any circumstances surrounding the breach that you feel we have not taken into account.

My previous correspondence with the DVLA regarding this matter contained the following:
• An explanation that I had sent the SORN Declaration by first class on 25/10/2013
• my argument that by doing so, I have satisfied my legal obligations in full
• evidence that the vehicle has been kept off-road , in a self-storage yard since 15/08/2013

It is my opinion that none of this was taken to account. The letter I received in response contained no reference whatsoever to my individual case, or the evidence and explanations I supplied. To me, it looks like a generic template, simply explaining to me WHY the late licensing penalty exists.

Once again, I have supplied evidence which clearly shows that I have SORNed the vehicle before the date that the tax ran out. This is undeniable proof that I am not liable for the LLP since SORN has been sent to DVLA before the tax ran out. I have even included a copy of the Self-Storage Company Parking Permit, a Picture of the vehicle being parked at the yard with the parking permit on the window which clearly show was stored since August 2013 the 15th.
In conclusion:

• I have supplied sufficient evidence to show that I have kept the vehicle in a private PAID parking space since 15/08/2013.
• I have informed you that I sent the SORN Declaration by 1st class mail on 25/10/2013, and that by law, this was everything required of me
• I did not receive an acknowledgement letter from the DVLA, but the DVLA has no statutory power requiring anyone to contact them should they not receive an acknowledgment letter.
• Legally, I am under no obligation to prove that I sent the SORN Declaration; by posting it 1st class, I have done everything required of me. It is up to the DVLA to prove that this did not happen.

I see the DVLA’s demands for me to pay this penalty as nothing short of attempted aggravated theft. I look forward to hearing your decision, and I would add that if the decision is not satisfactory, I will happily have the case referred to the PHSO, or see you in court.

Regards,
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 08:51
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 44,993
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



What the vehicle was doing is irrelevant, that is not being challenged, just the declaration of SORN, so personally I'd leave those irrelevant bits out.


--------------------
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
minunel
post Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 08:58
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27
Joined: 6 Feb 2014
Member No.: 68,576



Rookies, I was thinking that adding the details re off-road parking would just straighten my case . Is it not helping at all ?!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 10:45
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 44,993
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



As it's not relevant, I think it will just serve to make it even less likely they will actually read the relevant bits, so I would be stroingly in favour of leaving it out, at no point has it been questioned that the car was off road so I'd leave it that way.


--------------------
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
sgtdixie
post Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 11:03
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,529
Joined: 5 May 2011
From: UK
Member No.: 46,399



I would also be careful with your interpretation of what is required. You are required to notify the DVLA (or SoS). Simply posting irrelevant of what happened next does not comply with that requirement. Instead there is (if the interpretations act applies as most here believe it does) a rebuttable presumption it has arrived. So if the DVLA could satisfy a court their admin system is so good that nothing gets lost or overlooked you would likely be convicted. As it is they admit (I know someone has posted links before but I can't be bothered to search at the moment) a % of mail gets lost and it is likely they couldn't convince a court your notification didn't arrive.

Your letter implies that as soon as you put it in a letter box you have done your bit even if hypothetically the sorting office burned down. They do not have to prove you didn't post it. You must prove you did and if that is accepted the burden of proof shifts to them to prove it didn't arrive.

So you are waving a big stick but your argument is flawed in your interpretation.
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: Sunday, 5th July 2020 - 22:23
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.