Template letter for SORN fines

[danny_kiernan]

Hi All,

I wanted to include my template letter, for all those people who have received fines from the DVLA, please feel free to adjust the Template for your own circumstances:

The DVLA has issued me with a “penalty” for allegedly not registering my vehicle as SORN.
By virtue of the fact that the DVLA method of trial is a computer database and the postal system, I consider that the DVLA is acting Ultra Vires by attempting to extort monies from me without due legal process, as is my right under article 6 of the human rights convention and under the Bill of rights 1689. The DVLA is not a Court of Law nor is it a competent authority for the following reasons:

Article 6 of the given European Convention on Human Rights provides that -

"In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interests of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice."


The said appeals service offered by the said DVLA is not established in accordance with law, as required by the said Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights -


in that:


The basic laws of the United Kingdom as provided within the Common Law of the Kingdom of England with the Principality of Wales and the province of Northern Ireland, and as further enacted by the Crown and Parliament of the United Kingdom to the purpose of establishing and preserving the Civil Liberties of all people living within the territories of the United Kingdom –

which Common Law may not be repealed and which Statute Law remains un-repealed -

have been and are now being violated by the provisions of such enactment as now claims to provide lawful authority for the existence and conduct of the DVLA, but which fails to provide any such lawful authority, because of the given violations to Constitutional Laws and Provisions which retain the force of law.

In evidence of the submission given, a full reference is made to the text of the Common Law Charter of King Henry III, dated 1225 (the existence of which Charter is now evidenced by the text of the 1297 enactment of King Edward I and his parliament), and a further full reference is made to the several texts of the Declaration & Bill of Rights (variously dated February & December of 1689) –

which latter documents now serve to define and restrict the powers of the Crown in Parliament, to the purpose of preserving Peaceful Government under the Rule of Law,

Article 234 (formerly Article 177), of the Treaty establishing the legal entity that is now known as the European Union now provides -

• that the European Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction to
  give preliminary rulings concerning -
  
  (a) the interpretation of the Treaty;
  
  (b) the validity and interpretation of acts (entered into) by the
  institutions of the Community and/or by the European Bank;
  
  (c) the interpretation of the statutes of bodies established by an
  act of the Council, where those statutes so provide.

• Where such a question is raised before any court or tribunal
  of a Member State, that court or tribunal may, if it considers
  that a decision on the question is necessary to enable it to
  give judgment, request the Court of Justice to give a ruling
  thereon.

• Where any such question is raised in a case pending before
  a court or tribunal of a Member State against whose decis-
  ions there is no judicial remedy under national law, that court
  or tribunal shall bring the matter before the Court of Justice.

Magna Carta of 1225, confirmed by the Statute of 1297.
"We will not pass upon him, nor [condemn him], but by lawful judgment of his peers, or by the Law of the Land."

I contend that the clear option as to method of trial is an option that belongs to me as my property, and that title to this property is confirmed by the Confirmation of Liberties given in Magna Carta-

"We have granted also, and given to all the Freemen of our Realm, for Us and our Heirs for ever, these Liberties underwritten, to have and to hold to them and their Heirs, of Us and our Heirs for ever"

I also contend that the substantive law relevant to this hearing is further declared by the provisions of the Declaration of Rights and further secured by the Bill of Rights subsequently enacted -

"That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void"

As such, I do not recognise the DVLA’s authority to issue penalties/fines nor have I had a trial within a competent criminal Court to find guilt under a section 31A offence of not procuring a vehicle licence. Should the DVLA insist on pursuing this unlawful course of action, then I request that you refer the matter to the European Court of Justice under article 234

[Renta Mouth]

Do let us know if this works.

I do know that Article 6 (and Articles 7 – committal to prison and 12 – depriving a parent the right of a family life by imposing a financial penalty) of ECHR was rebuked by the Child Support Agency citing that an act of parliament namely the Child Support Act 1994 can rebuke another Act namely the Human Rights Act 1998.

This made extortion legal in the UK - and uniquely to the UK that its authorities can threaten its subjects in this way to obtain money regardless on whether or not the subject debt is legitimate.

It is a principle reason why so many working child-support expatriates leave the Britain for the protection of Middle-Eastern jurisdictions (e.g. Dubai and Qatar) which prohibits extortion with a death penalty. They are the unspoken British asylum seekers.

Until reading your post, I wasn’t aware that DVLA were doing the same, but on a lesser extent local councils have been known to pronounce a debt and enforce them with an Liability Order - which cannot be defended in a criminal court - and therefore contradicts Article 6.

It'll be interesting what DVLA will say about A6 without being a court entity.

[danny_kiernan]

Well, it has worked for me personally and other people who have used it. Most of them have sent in the template as soon as they have received the fine through the post. I used it at county court myself and I won.

I did read up on the CSA and their extortion tactics as you have mentioned (didn't know about people moving to the Middle East though ).

There is however a difference between the CSA and the DVLA, in that the CSA has a clearly defined appeals process ( I've never had any experience of it,personally - so couldn't say if it was fair or not), but the DVLA has no appeal process in SORN related cases.

The LA's (Local Authorities) pronouncing civil penalties on parking , do have a defined appeals process, via NPAS or PATA (intermediary agencies) - but as soon as you mention Article 6 and the BoR, they tend to buckle (not in all cases though, I hasten to add).

[Renta Mouth]

My guess is that DVLA might introduce an appeals procedure in its SORN policy to satisfy A6 counter claims.

On a side note, the governments War on Motorists took another step today with an extra 2p a litre making the UK the cheapest place to buy petrol in Europe - but the most heavily taxed petrol in Europe.

Anything that moves is taxed & it's nothing to do with co2 and the environment. We have been exhaling co2 since the beginning of time - so its official - a visit to the gym or riding your bike adds to climate change.

[danny_kiernan]

I hope they do, I wouldn't have taken such offence at the DVLA if they did have an appeals procedure (a fair one I hope).

[Rob 321]

I've had similar problems to many others. In my case I part exchanged my car and sent the documentation for the sale of my old car and purchase of the new one to DVLA. I got the log book back for the new car, but a couple of months later also got a fine as the tax on the car I'd exchanged had run out since I'd exchanged it. I appealed, but the DVLA have dismissed it saying that it was my responsibility to pursue them when I didn't receieve written notification that ownership of my old car had been transferred.
There seems no way round this as they've set themselves up as judge and jury with no independant appeals process. I think you're right in that the whole system is incompatible with Article 6 of the HRA. I'm suprised no-one has already applied for a judicial review of this. My guess is that people would rather pay the £40 than go through a lot of hassle, and I'm tempted to put it down to experience myself. The fact that you've suceeded gives me hope though. Could you post details of the court and date in which your case was heard? A precedent will help me and anyone else thinking of fighting through the courts

[danny_kiernan]

Hi Rob,

Sorry to hear that you have had the same problems. They don't have a recognised appeals procedure, so they are in breach of Article 6.

I actually had 2 county court hearings, one in february and one on May 16th at Mansfield County Court, Beech House, Mansfield, Notts - where the judge ruled against the DVLA, I can post the scans of the documentation (with personal details blacked out, of course) over the weekend - really busy working at mo.

It was Secretary of State V Danny Kiernan and was held at 12:15

Hope that helps, will get round to scans as soon as I can.

Dani

[scousepie]

Originally Posted by danny_kiernan

Hi Rob,

Sorry to hear that you have had the same problems. They don't have a recognised appeals procedure, so they are in breach of Article 6.

I actually had 2 county court hearings, one in february and one on May 16th at Mansfield County Court, Beech House, Mansfield, Notts - where the judge ruled against the DVLA, I can post the scans of the documentation (with personal details blacked out, of course) over the weekend - really busy working at mo.

It was Secretary of State V Danny Kiernan and was held at 12:15

Hope that helps, will get round to scans as soon as I can.

Dani

Hi Dani Did you manage to scann the docs?

cheers

[Conniff]

As this thread has been reopened, may I add the words of the DVLA. This is their own statement:

Consultations have been held with trade organisations and relevant industry contacts, offering a forum for the expression of views regarding the implementation of measures to increase adherence to VED policy and to reduce vehicle crime. These consultations, one held in 2001 and a subsequent, more detailed proposal in 2003, received confirmed support, recognising that the Agency does not intend to persecute honest motorists, but to crack down on offenders who repeatedly abuse the system.

An official appeals procedure has not been established, however, DVLA will treat each case on merit and will view genuine cases with sympathy. Whilst the legislation allows all unlicenced keepers to be pursued, DVLA retains the right to withdraw cases in certain circumstances.

So you can see that if you have missed sorn by a couple of weeks and for the first time ever and are then served a demand for payment, this actually goes against their own principles.
I would think that the above would or should be enough for a non repeat ?offender? to have the demand withdrawn.

[scousepie]

Originally Posted by Conniff

As this thread has been reopened, may I add the words of the DVLA. This is their own statement:



So you can see that if you have missed sorn by a couple of weeks and for the first time ever and are then served a demand for payment, this actually goes against their own principles.
I would think that the above would or should be enough for a non repeat ?offender? to have the demand withdrawn.

Excellent post I like it....just goes to show that the system is unfair.....more amo.
thanks

I have fired a letter inviting them to start legal action as they can't win as the process is flawed.....

The very fact I have explained the case and tried to resolve this issue but they have ignored my letters and shows they gust want to extort money. I wonder if they will take my wife to court.

lets see.

[buzby]

It is taking them up to 4 weeks to respond to appeal letters - the first is usually a rejection, but if you press hte point, the second usually results in enforcement action (assuming it's your first and you're not otherwise flagged as a transgressor).

[pcboffin]

Originally Posted by buzby

It is taking them up to 4 weeks to respond to appeal letters - the first is usually a rejection, but if you press hte point, the second usually results in enforcement action (assuming it's your first and you're not otherwise flagged as a transgressor).

Did you mean NO enforcement action in that last post?

I am currently in a letter battle with them, and so far they are refusing to back down even after I used the template letter above (with some additions).

I am proceeding to their customer service manager as the next step, but if they continue to be awkward I am thinking of taking it all the way to court as their attitude is annoying me.

In brief, my car was written off by the insurance company, and collected by them. Following that I sent off the V5 bit, and separately applied for a Vehicle License Refund, which they received and paid.

3 months later I got a letter from them claiming £80 (£40 if I paid up like a good boy) because the vehicle was still registered to me and was unlicensed.

Even when I showed them the proof that the vehicle was collected by the insurance company, their view was that because they did not receive the notification of disposal I am liable, even though they accept that I have no legal liability to chase them up if I do not receive a confirmation letter...

If anyone has any more information on the case mentioned above, or similar when the DVLA have lost, it would be useful to decide whether I really should take it all the way to court, or give in gracelessly and take the hit

Many Thanks

Gavin

[buzby]

Yes, sorry for changing the meaning unintentionally! I do recall a situation similar to yours where this matter was actually handled by the Insurers, insofar as they have online access to the database and can supposedly process write-offs via the MIB automatically (or show the classification of write-off.

If continuous registration are fining you, then the company didn't do what it was legally supposed to. I'd send them a letter denying all responsibility, and advising the matter has been passed to your insurers for their urgent attention. Then forward the correspondence to them and demand they sort out THEIR error.

[Wig]

Originally Posted by danny_kiernan

Hi All,

I wanted to include my template letter, for all those people who have received fines from the DVLA, please feel free to adjust the Template for your own circumstances:

The DVLA has issued me with a “penalty” for allegedly not registering my vehicle as SORN.
By virtue of the fact that the DVLA method of trial is a computer database and the postal system, I consider that the DVLA is acting Ultra Vires by attempting to extort monies from me without due legal process, as is my right under article 6 of the human rights convention and under the Bill of rights 1689. The DVLA is not a Court of Law nor is it a competent authority for the following reasons:

Article 6 of the given European Convention on Human Rights provides that -

"In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interests of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice."


The said appeals service offered by the said DVLA is not established in accordance with law, as required by the said Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights -

Surely, when you refuse to pay -as is your right- the "independent and impartial tribunal established by law" is the County Court that the DVLA then take you to, to determine if you are liable to pay the supplement or not. So I don't really see how your A6 rights are being witheld.

As such, I do not recognise the DVLA’s authority to issue penalties/fines nor have I had a trial within a competent criminal Court to find guilt under a section 31A offence of not procuring a vehicle licence. Should the DVLA insist on pursuing this unlawful course of action, then I request that you refer the matter to the European Court of Justice under article 234

Which would be ok if the DVLA were accusing you of guilt of a section 31A offence. But as I understand it, the DVLA will probably not be saying you are guilty of ANY offence -none that they care about anyway- they will simply be saying that you are liable to pay a supplement under section 7A (1)(a) for falling foul of 7A (1A)(d).

Sometimes the DVLA ask for the supplement (£40/£80) aswell as the whole of the tax that would have been payable since the vehicle was last licensed. I can see that there could be grounds for using your argument against having to pay the back dated tax, as that is not covered by the "supplement" which 7A says you have to pay. But I have not read all of the act and regs so I don't know about this exactly.

[Conniff]

Only good though if you have some sort of proof of posting when you get to court.

There is 'no' appeals system with DVLA.