Jump to content

avante

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About avante

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. well, its been over a month since the last letter was sent to me.
  2. Diskmandave this isnt Malvern Hills District Council, it is Malvern Hills Conservators. Putting the details of the ticket into MHDC website shows it as being an unrecognised ticket number.
  3. I have a letter from them. This relates to PENALTY NOTICE No. XXXXXX and Invoice No. XXXXXX If I do not pay in 7 days the matter will be passed to their solicitors. Now to me this sounds like the non-payment of an invoice. I have rescanned and attached the 3 documents I have got so far .MHCletter1.PDF MHCParkingticket1.PDF MHCInvoice1.PDF
  4. That was my thought too, even the yellow and black checked envelope was marked up "Parking Charge Notice" and the PPC's little ticket does say "As driver of this vehicle you are liable to pay......" I'm just the registered keeper!
  5. A ticket was placed on my car when parked in Malvern. Although it looks like a Parking Charge Notice which I'd ignore, it does talk about contravention of Byelaw 9 of the Malvern Hills Conservators. Shall I be safe to ignore this? I received a further letter requesting payment in 14 days, together with an invoice attached to it - which i have attached here. So am I safe to continue ignoring this one?
  6. Show me the law that says that a car needs to be insured to be parked on a public road, I've never found one. Its obviously a criminal offence to drive without insurance, but where does the law say that a car has to be insured to be parked on a public road?
  7. If the car is taxed it can be kept on the public road. Insurance is only relevent if driven as is MOT. The DVLA cannot do anyone for no insurance, insurance is not a DVLA matter.
  8. Lonerider, I think its just a game, which I hope more people will get involved in. Don't pay this penalty, just make sure you hassle them until they give up and look for an easier mark! A couple of things I included in my letters to the Compliance Officer. In the letters from both him and also the Enforcement Officers, they give statements which appear to be providing legal advice such as "If you do not do this, YOU will have NO DEFENCE!" I think those types of statements constitute legal advice, and I asked "Can you provide me with the legal qualifications of Mrs XXXXXXXXXX and Mr XXXXXXX
  9. Best bet would be to get rid of SORN altogether. It is so flawed and is unecessary. With the PNC in place, and reg number recognition, and the DVLA maintaining a database of VED, insurance and MOT, it is far easier now to identify vehicles which are being driven without proper documentation. SORN creates no end of problems due to the fact that it is not possible to even park a vehicle on the public road without VED. Look up and down any street these days and you can see that there is not enough private ground for the number of vehicles owned. It would be nice to think that all cars could fit
  10. Well I got the letter this morning from the DVLA, they've dropped the case against me. BUT, I'm not really in the mood to accept this, they've said that due to my individual circumstances (which are no different to anyone esles circumstances regards SORN or Failure to notify disposal) they accept my mitigation I have provided, Ha! I didnt provide any mitigation, I didnt ask for any mitigating circumstances to be taken into consideration. So, I'm not going to accept this.
  11. My understanding is that they recieve bulk mail, and sign for all recorded post in one lot, they don't individually sign for letters. It will at least give you sa receipt to prove you sent it. However, the DVLA seem to be saying "we don't care if you can prove you sent it, unless you recieve an acknowledgement letter, you can't prove that we recieved it!" There have been tales of people handing these over in person at the DVLA yet still the DVLA say they havent recieved it! They don't send anything to you recorded delivery, so why bother sending to them recorded delivery?? Just keep copies
  12. Don't believe what the DVLA tell you, all they want to do is make you pay. They'll bully you, and they'll make you think that because they are the DVLA, they are the law. They're not! They'll make it up as they go along, the more you read, the funnier it gets. Hold your ground, you'reright, they're wrong.
  13. Read through as many other posts on here as you can, understand the arguments, understand what the defence is. There is no legal requirement for you, or anybody, to contact the DVLA. Any acknowledgement letter sent by them is purely advisory, and when they send is is ambiguous, with different documents saying WITHIN 4 weeks, and AFTER 4 weeks. Detail what you did in terms of selling the car, sending off the V5C, and use one of the templates on here in the posts that suits. Understand the Interpretation Law, and how it means that your letter is deemed as served when yo post it, so long
  14. This goes to show that, if you're going to go to court, you've got to have a good defence, one which you understand and that you can argue. The judge can be questioned directly, and so can the DVLA. If the DVLA were to read out what they say is the requirement of the RK, then even if this was indeed law, it would be totally ambiguous. On my V5C it clearly states that the DVLA send out a letter AFTER 4 weeks, not within 4 weeks but AFTER 4 weeks. It doesn't say when after 4 weeks, it could be 2 months, or a year. Yet in the letters I've got from the enforcement officers it state WITHIN 4 wee
  15. Exactly They make a rod for their own back, poor devils!!
×
×
  • Create New...