Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
I part exchanged my car on 9 October 2008 for another car. I claimed and received tax refund on my old car. On 20 January I received a penlty form demading £80 for failing to relicence my old car. I sent the V5 slip and received an acknowledgement on 30 January 2009 from the DVLA saying "Thank you for telling us that you are no longer the keeper of or have scrapped the vehicle with the above mention registration mark. I can confirm that we have udpated our records.
If you receive an application form for renewing your vechicle lices for this vehicle, please ignore it. You do not need to contact us as we print these forms (V11 or V85/1) up to 6 weeks before the licence comes to an end"
Well, I was under the impression that the matter is closed and that DVLA have updated their database according. However, I received a letter for the DVLA demanding payment of 80£ as final notification and failure to pay could result in various actions taken. I did not respond to their letter thinking it was overlooked and perhaps the database was not yet updated.
Two later I received a Demad for Payment letter from Philips requesting payment. I explained to them the situation but said that even the record are updated I had received the penalty form before. What they say does not make sense and looks to me as a type of embazelment. I understand that simple business ethos that DVLA should have followed by sending a gentle reminder for the V5 slip.
I am now in dispute with Philips and wonder if you can guide me on how to register a dispute so no additional cost is incurred by the debt collector.
I part exchanged my car on 9 October 2008 for another car. I claimed and received tax refund on my old car. On 20 January I received a penlty form demading £80 for failing to relicence my old car. I sent the V5 slip and received an acknowledgement on 30 January 2009 from the DVLA saying "Thank you for telling us that you are no longer the keeper of or have scrapped the vehicle with the above mention registration mark. I can confirm that we have udpated our records.
If you receive an application form for renewing your vechicle lices for this vehicle, please ignore it. You do not need to contact us as we print these forms (V11 or V85/1) up to 6 weeks before the licence comes to an end"
Well, I was under the impression that the matter is closed and that DVLA have updated their database according. However, I received a letter for the DVLA demanding payment of 80£ as final notification and failure to pay could result in various actions taken. I did not respond to their letter thinking it was overlooked and perhaps the database was not yet updated.
Two later I received a Demad for Payment letter from Philips requesting payment. I explained to them the situation but said that even the record are updated I had received the penalty form before. What they say does not make sense and looks to me as a type of embazelment. I understand that simple business ethos that DVLA should have followed by sending a gentle reminder for the V5 slip.
I am now in dispute with Philips and wonder if you can guide me on how to register a dispute so no additional cost is incurred by the debt collector.
Can you help
Thanks
Sorry to hear about your problems, its becoming a regular problem with Philips demanding payments.
I would contact the DVLA first in an attempt to sort the matter out, request a complaint form from Philips, exaust both of these routes, if you feel Philips are harrasing you complain to the OFT.
Ive listed some contact details below, that you may feel helpfull;
Dealing with Philips in the first instance is easy; as an officially appointed DCA, you only have to write to them and inform them that the debt is in dispute, and as such they are legally required to return the debt to the principle (DVLA) and they may take no further action against you for the debt.
Dealing with the DVLA will no doubt be a much bigger pain in the arse. I would send them one letter only stating that you informed them correctly and you are in receipt of their acknowledgement. Should they wish to pursue the matter further, tell them you will not enter into any further communication with them unless this takes place in court.
if you read it again he had tax refunded , and received "an acknowledgement on 30 January 2009 from the DVLA saying" > "Thank you for telling us that you are no longer the keeper of or have scrapped the vehicle with the above mention registration mark. I can confirm that we have udpated our records."
Thank you guys for the help you providing me in this case. I contacted the DLVA and were reluctant to discuss the matter and referred me to Philips. I e-mailed Philips asking for a complaint form.
I would like to add further information to the case is that when I part exchange the car I kept the tax disc which I posted to DVLA with a letter stating that I longer the keeper of the car and was refunded £90.50.
It looks to me given the fact the I no longer the keeper of the car and an acknowledgement from the DVLA Philips still demanding payment by saying.
"We are in receipt of your acknowledgement receipt from the DVLA, however, the date of the receipt is after the date of the
Late Licensing Penalty, therefore, your licensing activity was late and you are still liable to pay the outstanding amount of
£80.00."
Thank you guys for the help you providing me in this case. I contacted the DLVA and were reluctant to discuss the matter and referred me to Philips. I e-mailed Philips asking for a complaint form.
You don't need a Philips "complaint form". A simple letter to them as I outlined above will surfice. i.e. Tell the debt is in dispute and as such they are legally required to return the file to the DVLA. State that any further communication from them, bar an acknowledgement that the file is back with the DVLA, will be deemed to be harrassment and reported to the authorities accordingly.
I would like to add further information to the case is that when I part exchange the car I kept the tax disc which I posted to DVLA with a letter stating that I longer the keeper of the car and was refunded £90.50.
There is no legal requirement to use one type of form or another to notify the DVLA that you are no longer the keeper (although the garage should have given you back the yellow portion of the V5 to send to the DVLA). Clearly the car was correctly taxed right up to the day the DVLA generated the VED refund, otherwise the refund couldn't exist! Keep that acknowledgement safe and when you write to the DVLA keep it short and simple along the lines of;
I am in receipt of your demand for an LLP regarding vehicle xxxx xxx. I dispute this is a valid charge as I notified you at the time I disposed of the vehicle. I require you to notify me that your records have been corrected and you are not pursuing this invalid charge.
Should this not be the case, I will not enter into any further corrospondance with you on this matter, and therefore require you to lodge a court claim immediately so that this matter can be resolved within a legal court.
if you read it again he had tax refunded , and received "an acknowledgement on 30 January 2009 from the DVLA saying" > "Thank you for telling us that you are no longer the keeper of or have scrapped the vehicle with the above mention registration mark. I can confirm that we have udpated our records."
And if you read it again you will see that he sold the car on 9th october and sent the tax disc in for a refund, which he duly received although he doesn't say when. He then received a penalty charge on 20 January for not renewing his tax. He THEN sent in the V5 which was duly acknowledged on 30 January 2009.
My point is that although he wrote in and asked for a refund, it was still his duty to notify the DVLA he had disposed of the car correctly. This would be done by sending the yellow portion of the V5 in as mentioned above. He didn't do that, so when the tax became due and the car hadn't been taxed or SORN'd he is liable as the registered keeper.
He did tell them in his letter, but that was for a refund of the tax. IIRC he has to inform DVLA of disposoal of the car by returning the correct portion of the V5.
I agree it is ridiculous, I am just saying what i think DVLA view this as. Why did the OP not just send in the V5c and fill out the correct form for a refund?
I would add that the fine was for the period BEFORE you officially notified them with the V5, however I agree that the OP has notified them by letter and I agree that AFAIK there is no legal requirement to use a particular form for notifying them. He can prove they received that letter because they processed the refund and thus he can prove they knew he disposed of the car.
I think the OP has a good strong case and would win in court. The fine with philips is because the DVLA have not been paid to tax the car or had the car SORN, so start the process of chasing the automatic fine. This would normally eb correct, but as they HAD been told of the disposal and that can be proved, they have no case.
And if you read it again you will see that he sold the car on 9th october and sent the tax disc in for a refund, which he duly received although he doesn't say when.
It doesn't matter when he sent it. Until he asked for a refund the car was still fully taxed up till the day the claim for refund was accepted.
He then received a penalty charge on 20 January for not renewing his tax. He THEN sent in the V5 which was duly acknowledged on 30 January 2009.
He may have sent the portion of the V5 in then, but this is the SECOND notification that he no longer had the vehicle. As they had already acknowledged the first notification, the date of this second notification is irrelevant.
My point is that although he wrote in and asked for a refund, it was still his duty to notify the DVLA he had disposed of the car correctly. This would be done by sending the yellow portion of the V5 in as mentioned above. He didn't do that, so when the tax became due and the car hadn't been taxed or SORN'd he is liable as the registered keeper.
He DID notify them when he asked for his refund. You are suggesting this can ONLY be done by using the yellow portion of the V5 which is incorrect. He is not therefore "liable as the registered keeper" because he was no longer the registered keeper.
He did tell them in his letter, but that was for a refund of the tax. IIRC he has to inform DVLA of disposoal of the car by returning the correct portion of the V5.
Not true. See above
I agree it is ridiculous, I am just saying what i think DVLA view this as. Why did the OP not just send in the V5c and fill out the correct form for a refund?
It's more than ridiculous, it's invalid. The OP clearly thought sending a letter at the time he asked for the refund provided better/more information to the DVLA. Who are we to disagree?
The reason I stopped posting on this forum before was you Crem. Everytime I post, you have to break down and analyse every word as in the above post of yours.
Is this the 'Crem forum'? No. I am entitled to voice my opinion whether you like it or not. Everything I said is quiet valid and doesn't need you to correct me every step of the way.
What exactly is the idea of breaking down every sentence of mine into mini quotes? Is it some power trip of yours to prove me worng? Get a life pal.
Is this the 'Crem forum'? No. I am entitled to voice my opinion whether you like it or not. Everything I said is quiet valid and doesn't need you to correct me every step of the way.
Nobody is denying your right to post your opinion.
Others are equally entitled to post to point out where your opinion is wrong.
In this case, you are wrong
What exactly is the idea of breaking down every sentence of mine into mini quotes? Is it some power trip of yours to prove me worng? Get a life pal.
To make it easier, in the absence of face-to-face conversation to make sure that the parts of any post that are being discussed/corrected are easily separated out from the rest.
It is not a power trip - it just makes it easier to read.
(and I would guess that Crem is quite happy with his life, thanks)
I wonder guys if I have a leg to stand on in court and what are the proper procedures. I e-mail a long letter (thanks to #2 permalink) to npb@philips.org.uk and also sent a letter to DVLA where the Acknowledgement was originated. It seems to me that there are more department within the DVLA (One for LLP and one for updating the records) with no communication between the two.
I sent the tax disc with a cover letter stating that I no longer the keeper of the car. I did not fill a form.
Thanks
That could be the problem. If you use the correct form for a refund there is a box to tick to declare SORN at the same time. It seems that you have claimed a refund, but not declared SORN.
I wonder guys if I have a leg to stand on in court and what are the proper procedures. I e-mail a long letter (thanks to #2 permalink) to npb@philips.org.uk and also sent a letter to DVLA where the Acknowledgement was originated. It seems to me that there are more department within the DVLA (One for LLP and one for updating the records) with no communication between the two.
No probs, exaust all the complaint channels, hope you get the matter sorted.
That could be the problem. If you use the correct form for a refund there is a box to tick to declare SORN at the same time. It seems that you have claimed a refund, but not declared SORN.
AFAIK this wouldn't work for the OP gwc1000. My understanding is that that the SORN can only be used by the RK, so even if you sell a car that is currently on SORN, the new keeper must immediately tax it, or declare a new SORN in his name. i.e. SORN is not transferable like VED is.
The reason I think it perhaps works for you (correct me if I'm wrong) is that you are usually the recipient of the vehicle coming into your garage, and it is you that therefore sometimes claims the refund on the VED, not the (now ex) RK.
Sorry to hear about your problems, its becoming a regular problem with Philips demanding payments.
I would contact the DVLA first in an attempt to sort the matter out, request a complaint form from Philips, exaust both of these routes, if you feel Philips are harrasing you complain to the OFT.
Ive listed some contact details below, that you may feel helpfull;
Received today a complaint form from Philips any tips or suggestions on filling the form are welcome.
There are three facts to this case:
1- Car was part exchanged at a Ford dealer
2- Tax disc returned with a cover letter telling DVLA that I no longer the keeper of the car and received a £90.50 tax refund
3- Acknowledgement letter from DVLA that records were updated
Philips demanding payment
.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Abed
