I sent off a sorn document a few weeks ago.

They have not recieved this obviously as today I have recieved a £40 fine

It was sent by regular post, what can I do?

They wont take ANY phonecalls on the matter, only by post, but will it be successful??

The vegicle was scrapped over a month ago

I sent off a sorn document a few weeks ago.

 

They have not recieved this obviously as today I have recieved a £40 fine

 

It was sent by regular post, what can I do?

 

They wont take ANY phonecalls on the matter, only by post, but will it be successful??

 

The vegicle was scrapped over a month ago

Send a copy of the SORN document Special Delivery with a covering letter of when it was posted.

I dont have a copy of it?

Do you mean a new form?

I dont have a copy of it?

Do you mean a new form?

No I mean a copy of the original which will have the date of when you first declared the Vehicle Off Road.

its quite simple if you can have someone validate your vehicle was scrapped like afriend whos a professional solicitor, vicar etc. the other bit of supprting evidence may be if you have claimed a refund on your road tax which proves yr intention the vehicle was of the road.

What about confirmation from your neighbours attesting the vehicle was of the road.

I would be inclined to find out who is in charge of the department and submit your letter to them. I'm sure if you challanged them it would cost them far more then £40 to investigate matters.

O, so they wrote back to me. Pretty much saying " Thanks for that, but as you know you still need to send us a form on time. If you have proof of postage or your original reminder slip we can consider it. As the date of X/X/2007 has passed you owe us £80, as the £40 only applies if you pay the fine within 7 days"

Why would they need the reminder slip?? And why, if in dispute, should THEIR timescales give me more fines?!

I don't have it the original reminder.

Also, the car has been scrapped. As far as I know I wasn't required to send one if scrapped anyway??

Dont the people that scrap the vehicle have to inform the DVLA aswell, my father has had the same thing happen DVLA Swansea sent a letter saying thanks for informing us blah blah, then a fine from some other office of the DVLA arrives. :?

Dont the people that scrap the vehicle have to inform the DVLA aswell, my father has had the same thing happen DVLA Swansea sent a letter saying thanks for informing us blah blah, then a fine from some other office of the DVLA arrives. :?

The same thing has happened to my sister after her car was written off: she informed them that the vehicle was scrapped and received a tax refund. They then fined her for not having tax. I told her to appeal it and hopefully she will keep me informed. Sounds like quite a [problem] they have going.

DVLA are very good at making money. When they don't receive the SORN they will happily send out these fines with little chance of appealing against them. If however you order a tax disc online and it goes missing in the post then their reaction is "nothing to do with us, it's not out fault". Classic dual standards. The most reliable way of declaring SORN is to do it online. You get a confirmation e-mail straight away.

You might find the following links useful:-

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dvla/99888-continuous-registration-fine-cancelled.html

SORN problem - FightBack Forums

New continuous insurance fine

I'm in the same situation - my car was scrapped and my solicitor advised I send a SORN in - my argument was that I shouldn't send a SORN in because all that will happen is that in 12 months time (or however long the SORN lasts), if the garage hasn't done what they are meant to do I will get a fine for having a vehicle without tax!!!

When I went onto the DVLA website it clearly states that you don't use SORN for scrapping - but apparently that depends on which category scrap it is!!!!! How am I meant to know? I was just sent an offer letter which I accepted!!!!!!

I have been informed this morning that I have to write to the DVLA telling them reg no, date of scrapping, and who has the vehicle now.

Why is nothing ever easy??

Their letter is as follows:

Dear Mr X

Thank you for your response concerning the late licening penalty imposed upon you for failing to relicense your vehicle as required.

Although you have indicated that you made a SORN, the Department has not received the notification. When the department recieves a SORN we send acknowledgement latter within 4 weeks. It is a metter for you to pursue the letter. For details on this process please see below. If you can provide an acknowledgement letter that was issued prior to the LAte Licensing Pentalty then no further action will be taken.

However, ont he information before us you are still liable for the £80 penalty. Onlypayments recieved by 01/07/2007 are at the reduced rate of £40.

Please pay this penalty by cheaque or postal order payable to DVLA writing the vehicle reg on the back. The payment with this letter should be returned to the above address. Payaments cannot be made by instalments. If you wish to pay by debit/credit card please phone the above number

Should you need to contact us, please quote the registration mark of the vehicle

yours sincerely

Mrs P. Woolley

Enforcement Manager

Write to your MP, they seem to have some clout with the DVLA over this.

It is very common for this to happen - the DVLA seem to lose a huge amount of these - far in excess of the normal expected loss of post.

Not that I'm suggesting it's in their best interests or anything....

letter written, eplaining post losses, their losses, no requirement for recorded delivery, and that contact to mp will be required if I don't get the response i wanted.

The same thing has happened to my sister after her car was written off: she informed them that the vehicle was scrapped and received a tax refund. They then fined her for not having tax. I told her to appeal it and hopefully she will keep me informed. Sounds like quite a [problem] they have going.

If the car was written off, then surely ownership (and responsibility) passed to the insurance company concerned

I sent off a sorn document a few weeks ago.

 

They have not recieved this obviously as today I have recieved a £40 fine

 

It was sent by regular post, what can I do?

 

They wont take ANY phonecalls on the matter, only by post, but will it be successful??

 

The vegicle was scrapped over a month ago

i did the same i send the sorn form of to dvla,before i knew it got a fine through the post,it went through courts so i appealed but in the end i had to pay £80 for the tax & £20 court costs as i didn't have any proof of it been sorn...think you might ave to put this down as a experience & pay the fine

I had a similar problem, the scrap merchants are supposed to alert the DVLA too, but they didn't. I quite happily appeared in court twice and the county court judge ruled in my favour. The moral is - don't be afraid of the court system, the DVLA are just out to make money, and also be prepared - heres my defence:

The DVLA has issued me with a “penalty” for allegedly not registering my vehicle as SORN.

Notwithstanding the fact that I advised the DVLA of the vehicles status, being taken by a salvage company for monies owed, but 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;
   
  © 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.

Hope that helps you out, it sorted out the case in my favour.

Danny

Nearly forgot, do a counter claim for time wasted - I got nearly £2k, which is an added bonus to seeing the DVLA rubbished in court.

I don't guarantee this works for everyone btw, but it worked for me

Well I got a letter back, pretty much saying "thanks for letting us know we cant charge you £80 for because you exceeded the deadline as it was in dispute. We have extended this period so you only have to pay £40"

so, ive slashed it in half but i've still gotta pay up - they're not taking my 'lost in the post' reason seriously despite me stating there was no requirement and the statistics on lost post.

Shall i just pay?

Hi,

New to the forum but not new to the DVLA

The answer to should you pay...

Well yes as the "lost in the post" will not work even if you have proof of recorded delivery this is not always accepted unless the DVLA have written down what was in your package accurately otherwise you have no proof that you sent your SORN/ Disposal Notiication to the DVLA only that something was sent.

The other option, if you wish to take a risk is don't pay.

The DVLA are no longer taking people to court over this offence instead are using debt collection services at the moment these are only taking on "clean cases" ie case where the accused has not written in, phoned or made any contact with the DVLA regarding the fine. This is not to say in the furture they will not start picking up these cases as they have 6 years to do so.

It's a risk and is it worth it over 40 quid, if it is don't pay, you won't be taken to court it'll be a big guy calling at your door!

Hope that helps

x

Sorry Jenna1 - but that is rubbish, ring up a couple of county courts and they have a massive list of DVLA cases, if you call the bulk processing centre, the last one was registered today.

If, as you say bailiffs are coming out, well they can f**k off as there is no court order and, as it says on the registration certificate: A 'fine' will be issued. Not a supplementary charge, as it states in the road traffic act. If the supplementary charge was the case, an invoice would come out to the person with a vehicle. Then a county court case. The government cannot send out bailiffs on a whim - if they could, we would all have blown up the houses of parliament and had a revolution.

Jenna1 you are mistaken

Dani

To RugbyPete,

If you want to pay the fine, that is cool - you have got 50% off.

Personally I would refuse it and go to court as I did before, but I am a stubborn SOB and did it on principle.

Hope that helps

Dani

If you think it's rubbish fair enough, you don't have to believe me

I didn't mean to be offensive Jenna1, but the DVLA are still registering SORN cases in Northampton

not heard anything since

wait for a debt collection letteR?

Ok, got a letter the other day. Basically says "we tried to get money from you but it's still outstanding"

What shall I do now, approach my MP?

To recap:

They have ignored my photocopy of the original

Ignored the fact I pointed out the postal system and DVLA have losses of mail

Pointed out there was no obligation to send by recorded delivery

Stated I had no chance to pay the reduced payment as the timescale was unrealistic

They are gunning for the £80 now and threaten court.

Note: They had my only copy of the application form (should have made a second copy - damn)

I either:

a) Pay £80, all in vein

b) Not pay - await for them to organise debt collectors

c) Explain the above to my MP - but will need help on what to say.