Thread: DVLA back-tax on Untaxed Vehicle.

Hi, i have been thinking:

How much back-tax can DVLA charge on a vehicle to a new registered keeper?

I have a tax problem with DVLA, as they are attempting to charge me £249 for back-tax on a hyundai Lantra which had not been taxed since august 2008,
they are also trying to charge me for keeping an untaxed vehicle on the road (which as i have no driveway i had to keep it on the road overnight so i could move it in the morning.)
so they are also trying to fine me for keeping an untaxed vehicle on a public highway. Despite the fact that they clamped the vehicle on the day in question and charged me £250 to have it released.

I obtained the vehicle in February 2009 and filled in a V62 to have vehicle registered in my name (the V5 had been destroyed)

I know its daft to buy an untaxed vehicle with no V5, but i know not to do that again, but only after i filled in the V62, and received my V5C did the DVLA decide that i owed them tax for the period before i even owned the vehicle...

Some help please?

Thanks.

They can only charge you back tax to the date they accepted your name as the new keeper.

i.e. if they are agreeing and accepting you didn't own the car prior to that date, any outstanding tax from then has nowt to do with you.

Originally Posted by crem

They can only charge you back tax to the date they accepted your name as the new keeper.

i.e. if they are agreeing and accepting you didn't own the car prior to that date, any outstanding tax from then has nowt to do with you.

I'm not so sure. A few years ago I took a vehicle in part ex which wasn't taxed and in the process of moving cars around I left it out on the road for an hour. I ended up in the magistrates with a massive fine and also had the pleasure of paying eighteen months worth of back tax on the car. I had only had it in my possession for a few days, and had proof with an invoice, but the DVLA prosecutor convinced the magistrates that I should pay for the total time that the car was untaxed even though I didn't own it. As I say, this was a few years ago and the law may have changed since then. Also it must be remembered that a car dealer entering Court is assumed guilty from the outset and must be punished hard.
I think in the OP's case they have made the mistake of applying for a V5 in their own name but have not at the same time declared SORN.

Originally Posted by gwc1000

I but the DVLA prosecutor convinced the magistrates that I should pay for the total time that the car was untaxed even though I didn't own it.

I fail to see how that could ever get sanctioned through a legal court! Not that I doubt your word, I'm just shocked.

Originally Posted by gwc1000

Out of the thousands of vehicles I have bought and sold it's funny how minute details of certain vehicles stick in my mind.

Yeah. usually the bad ones!

Originally Posted by Lifesontheup

If I read this correctly then the DVLA are charging you for having an un taxed vehicle. This falls under the Vehicle Exise and Registation Act - Section 29 if I remember correctly. If you look at that the above Act it is entirely different the Continuous Registration fine of £80.

The Act allows them to claim back duty to when the vehicle was last licensed.

Do you have a bill of sale to show when you got the vehicle?

No, section 30. S.29 deals with the offence of having an unlicensed vehicle; s.30 deals with back tax as a supplementary matter.

30 Additional liability for keeper of unlicensed vehicle

(1) Where the person convicted of an offence under section 29 is the person by whom the vehicle in respect of which the offence was committed was kept at the time at which it was committed, the court shall (in addition to any penalty which it may impose under that section) order him to pay the amount specified in subsection (2).
(2) The amount referred to in subsection (1) is an amount equal to one-twelfth of the annual rate of vehicle excise duty appropriate to the vehicle for each month, or part of a month, in the relevant period (within the meaning of section 31).
(3) In relation to any month or part of a month in the relevant period, the reference in subsection (2) to the annual rate of vehicle excise duty appropriate to the vehicle is a reference to the annual rate applicable to it at the beginning of that month or part.
(4) A vehicle is to be taken for the purposes of this section to have belonged throughout the relevant period to the description of vehicle to which it belonged for the purposes of vehicle excise duty at—
(a) the date on which the offence was committed, or
(b) if the prosecution so elect, the date when a vehicle licence for it was last issued,
except so far as it is proved to have fallen within some other description for the whole of any month or part of a month in that period.
(5) In the case of a conviction for a continuing offence, the offence is to be taken for the purposes of this section to have been committed on the date or latest date to which the conviction relates.
31 Relevant period for purposes of section 30

(1) For the purposes of section 30 the relevant period is the period—
(a) ending with the date on which the offence was committed, and
(b) beginning as provided by subsections (2) to (4).
(2) Subject to subsection (4), if the person convicted has before the date of the offence notified the Secretary of State of his acquisition of the vehicle in accordance with regulations made by the Secretary of State, the relevant period begins with—
(a) the date on which the notification was received by the Secretary of State, or
(b) the expiry of the vehicle licence last in force for the vehicle,
whichever is the later.
(3) Subject to subsection (4), in any other case the relevant period begins with—
(a) the expiry of the vehicle licence last in force for the vehicle before the date on which the offence was committed, or
(b) if there has not at any time before that date been a vehicle licence in force for the vehicle, the date on which the vehicle was first kept by the person convicted.
(4) Where—
(a) the person convicted has been ordered to pay an amount under section 30 on the occasion of a previous conviction for an offence in respect of the same vehicle, and
(b) that offence was committed after the date specified in subsection (2) or (3) as the date with which the relevant period begins,
the relevant period instead begins with the month immediately following that in which the earlier offence was committed.
(5) Where the person convicted proves—
(a) that throughout any month or part of a month in the relevant period the vehicle was not kept by him, or
(b) that he has paid the duty due (or an amount equal to the duty due) in respect of the vehicle for any such month or part of a month,
any amount which the person is ordered to pay under section 30 is to be calculated as if that month or part of a month were not in the relevant period.
(6) Where a person has previously been ordered under section 36 to pay an amount for a month or part of a month in the case of a vehicle, any amount which he is ordered to pay under section 30 in the case of the vehicle is to be calculated as if no part of that month were in the relevant period.
(7) In this section references to the expiry of a vehicle licence include a reference to—
(a) its surrender, and
(b) its being treated as no longer in force for the purposes of subsection (2) of section 29 by subsection (4) of that section.
(8) In the case of a conviction for a continuing offence, the offence is to be taken for the purposes of this section to have been committed on the date or latest date to which the conviction relates.

Sorry perhaps I wasn't clear - the "offence" is under Section 29 and it follows on that the claim for back duty is under Section 30 and 31. My main point was that this isn't a Continuous Registration matter as the enquirers vehicle was clamped and therefore falls into being seen unlicensed.