Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Can a PPC (claimant) refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

bought a car saturday afternoon no tax supplyed are you able to drive it around?


leroist
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5362 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

when i bought my car from a dealer they said they do not tax vechicles they sell. this was on a saturday afternoon so i could only tax it on monday, i had the rest of my particulars, insurance etc was i still legal to drive? i have been unable to find out any were else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 155
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

No.

 

You can't put a car on the public highway unless it is taxed.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

not having car tax is NOT a criminal offence it is a civil offence. afaik no post office opens past 12.30 on a saturday and it is the customers responsibility to make sure all the documentation is in order before the vehicle is used on the public highway un less it is a brand new vehicle

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest 10110001
not having car tax is NOT a criminal offence it is a civil offence.

 

The police say they don't get involved in civil matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

not having car tax is NOT a criminal offence it is a civil offence.

 

There are two distinct offences

 

No VED is a civil offence and is pursued by DVLA.

 

Failure to display VED (regardless of whether you have a disk or not) is a criminal offence and is dealt with by the Police - usually £30 non-endorsement FPN.

Link to post
Share on other sites

NOT having your car taxed, when on a public highway, also invalidates your insurance...;)

 

Was there NO P.O. open in Brum on a Sat afternoon??...:confused:

 

 

i had to collect the car from wednesbury at bout 4pm by the time back in brum all is closed

Link to post
Share on other sites

not having car tax is NOT a criminal offence it is a civil offence. afaik no post office opens past 12.30 on a saturday and it is the customers responsibility to make sure all the documentation is in order before the vehicle is used on the public highway un less it is a brand new vehicle

 

 

2001 car so obviously not brand new, i was'nt coverd then

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know, dealers are not allowed to release the car without all the legal documentation. I bought one several years ago and the dealer took me to the PO for a tax disc for the reason stated.

 

 

 

can any body be sure about this because i might use this in my defence in a on going issue i have with them, need to be sure though:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive bought a number of cars from dealers and they sometimes dont have tax.

 

The reality of the situiation is you run the risk of a FPN for No VEL but thats the risk you take. It certainly doesnt invalidate your insurance.

7 actions in progress

 

amount refunded so far £6500

Link to post
Share on other sites

can any body be sure about this because i might use this in my defence in a on going issue i have with them, need to be sure though:rolleyes:

 

I have been a second hand car dealer for nearly thirty years now and I have never heard anything like that before. As soon as you, the customer hand the money over the vehicle becomes your property and your responsibility. Liability for a RFL lies with you. In fact I always put the time of day by the date on the invoice so I get no nasty surprises in the post. What I sometimes do if the customer has off road parking at home is to run the vehicle home for them on trade plates and the rest is up to them. There are some post offices that are open Saturday afternoons for road tax, we have one locally that is open till 6pm Monday to Saturday. You should have left the car at the dealers and returned for it when you had the road tax. Many dealers will not tax a car for customers simply because more often than not the customer hasn't changed his insurance and they want the dealer to use his trade policy, but then we never can be sure that the customer will actually insure the car. Every vehicle I send to auction has no road tax (any outstanding I always apply for a refund) some have no MoT some have no logbook some might have no paperwork at all, so to say dealers cannot sell a car without all it's documentation I would suggest is ridiculous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

 

You can't put a car on the public highway unless it is taxed.

 

Unless travelling to/from a pre-arranged MOT appointment or for repair work after failing an MOT, or to comply with the instruction of a police officer (if I recall correctly).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been a second hand car dealer for nearly thirty years now and I have never heard anything like that before. As soon as you, the customer hand the money over the vehicle becomes your property and your responsibility. Liability for a RFL lies with you. In fact I always put the time of day by the date on the invoice so I get no nasty surprises in the post. What I sometimes do if the customer has off road parking at home is to run the vehicle home for them on trade plates and the rest is up to them. There are some post offices that are open Saturday afternoons for road tax, we have one locally that is open till 6pm Monday to Saturday. You should have left the car at the dealers and returned for it when you had the road tax. Many dealers will not tax a car for customers simply because more often than not the customer hasn't changed his insurance and they want the dealer to use his trade policy, but then we never can be sure that the customer will actually insure the car. Every vehicle I send to auction has no road tax (any outstanding I always apply for a refund) some have no MoT some have no logbook some might have no paperwork at all, so to say dealers cannot sell a car without all it's documentation I would suggest is ridiculous.

 

Indeed, well said. One question though - dealers taxing cars (using their trade policy) is commonplace. Your bit about "can never be sure the customer will insure the car" - do you say that purely from a sense of community, or is there some kind of obligation upon you?

 

With the advent of ASKMID it is quite easy to put insurance in place and then be able to tax the vehicle (online if necessary) - though the system can take a little while to be updated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, myself and many dealers that I know are reluctant to tax cars using the trade policy because we take road insurance very seriously. It is as you say due to a sense of community, not obligation. I have read of too many horror stories involving uninsured motorists. Personally I feel that the punishment for such offences makes it sometimes more attractive for the car owner to take a chance and have no insurance.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, myself and many dealers that I know are reluctant to tax cars using the trade policy because we take road insurance very seriously. It is as you say due to a sense of community, not obligation. I have read of too many horror stories involving uninsured motorists. Personally I feel that the punishment for such offences makes it sometimes more attractive for the car owner to take a chance and have no insurance.

 

Take my hat off to you Sir, I respect that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last time I bought a car from a dealer my insurance company faxed a cover note to them with the registration number of the car I was buying - when I picked up the car it was taxed ( I had to pay for it beforehand).

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i was given 7 days free days insurance cover which i did use to tax the vehicle so that was not a problem. my point is i was told by the dealer i would be fine over the weekend & not to worrie, i'd be fine if i explaind i just bought the car and was unable to tax it yet. im getting the picture that this was not true and the car should of been taxed befor driven and if caught i would of been liable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest that the dealer gave bad advice. Having just purchased a car is no defence for having no road tax. You would be liable if pulled up by the police. Obviously some police officers are understanding and would let you on your way, however most would report you to the DVLA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know, dealers are not allowed to release the car without all the legal documentation. I bought one several years ago and the dealer took me to the PO for a tax disc for the reason stated.

 

The above was a small dealer (had less than 30 cars). Other cars I have bought (or attended at the purchase), have been from a variety of main and small dealers. All were old cars and all insisted a valid insurance certificate was produced (usually faxed to them by insurance company) and tax disc before leaving their premises. Apart from the dealer who took me to the PO, all the others added the tax disc fee to my purchase then collected the tax disc themselves.

 

Having experienced the above on over 10 occasions (in different City/Towns) I assumed it was compulsory. Maybe, it is just "good practice".

 

Failure to display a tax disc is a criminal offence. It can be argued that handing over the keys to a car that is known to be untaxed is "aiding & abetting" a crime. I have no idea if the police would try (or have tried) prosecutions on dealers. I would say dealers are taking risks though as they are a key group of people who can limit car tax evasion. If some-one drove uninsured from a garage and had a accident involving fatalities, then the police would probably throw the book at anyone they could.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Failure to display a tax disc is a criminal offence. It can be argued that handing over the keys to a car that is known to be untaxed is "aiding & abetting" a crime. I have no idea if the police would try (or have tried) prosecutions on dealers. I would say dealers are taking risks though as they are a key group of people who can limit car tax evasion. If some-one drove uninsured from a garage and had a accident involving fatalities, then the police would probably throw the book at anyone they could.

 

I disagree. Firstly no road tax is not a criminal offence. If the police stop you they do not prosecute but send the details to the DVLA who themselves take you to court.

Handing over keys to a vehicle without road tax cannot be seen as aiding and abetting, because maybe the vehicle isn't actually going to be used on the road. I have sold cars that are going to be exported, or are going into a private collection and will never be used on the UK roads again. I have sold vehicles to people who don't have a driving licence, the car is a birthday or christmas present for somebody else. It has been up to those individuals to employ a driver to move the car. It is not my responsibility what somebody does with an item once I have sold it to them. If they choose themselves to break the law I cannot see how I could be held responsible. I have on occasions advised buyers to leave the car where it is and come back when they have road tax, some do whilst others laugh and go on their merry way. I would say that my only responsibility with the vehicle lies with the roadworthyness of it.

I would bring up my point again about the vehicles I send to auction each week. If it was illegal then BCA would be out of business next week.

Many a time I have come out from a car auction and have seen the police sitting at the side of the road waiting to pick up private people coming out in newly purchased cars, ready to pounce for no MoT insurance etc. and the only person they prosecute is the man or woman sitting in the driver's seat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly no road tax is not a criminal offence.

 

Correct, but failing to display road tax is a criminal offence

 

Handing over keys to a vehicle without road tax cannot be seen as aiding and abetting, because maybe the vehicle isn't actually going to be used on the road... It is not my responsibility what somebody does with an item once I have sold it to them. If they choose themselves to break the law I cannot see how I could be held responsible.

 

Agreed. The responsibility would be completely of the person driving the vehicle.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys

Been in the car trade all my life and the main reason i would not tax a car with my trade policy is because the car would then be put in my name so if a car needs taxed then its up to the buyer to tax car Some car dealers will tell you whatever just to get the sale

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...