no road tax, got clamped!

[tifo]

My road tax ran out end Nov and the car was not being used and parked in a private driveway.

 

A few weeks ago i had to move the car as the other person needed the driveway and i parked it near my house, as i use my own driveway for my other car that i use.

 

The car is faulty and i was going to get it looked at or scrapped.

 

Today the DVLA van came and i got clamped as no road tax. The car has no insurance as i transferred it to my newer car i bought a few months ago. I went out as soon as the van parked but they would not allow me to move it to my own driveway, a few meters away. The guy said it has come into the ANPR camera now and he will get asked why he didn't clamp it.

 

He said i have to pay £80 to get clamp removed and either get road tax or pay £120 + £15 a day when they take the car away, plus another £160.

 

I've told them to take it away and scrap it. I've made a 'disclaimer'. They'll come on Monday.

 

But, the guy said you need insurance to even have it parked and i was not aware of this. I thought it was needed to drive the car. He said the police can take action if they want to as its come up on ANPR now.

 

Plus i was reading the leaflet which said the DVLA can back date the tax and make me pay, which i don't mind as only 6 weeks. But it also says they may impose a fine of up to a £1,000.

 

Advice appreciated as to what may happen as i have a clean license for 20 years and no criminal convictions or anything.

[patdavies]

Can't be of much help here - basically what the clamping guy told you is true.

 

You may not have a vehicle on the public highway without insurance. Unless it is an exempt vehicle, you may not have a vehicle on the public highway without displaying a valid VED disk.

 

The usual fine for no insurance is either £200 fixed penalty if your local Police operate FPNs for this offence or about the same fine + prosecution costs + £15 victim surcharge in court. Either way will give you at least 3 points on your licence.

 

Whilst this is a criminal offence, it is classed as a non-recordable offence, so you don't get a criminal record

[jonni2bad]

Not sure of the precise requirements, but have been having a little search online and have found this

 

"...Section 143 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 requires that a driver be insured. Failure to do so carries maximum penalties of a £5,000 fine, 6-8 penalty points and possible disqualification. "

 

From HERE

 

Also, "The word "road" is defined in section 192 of the Act. For England and Wales it means "any highway and any other road to which the public has access . . ." Taken from HERE

 

From The Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) Regulations 2000 document.....

 

"Under section 143 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 ("the 1988 Act") it is an offence to use, or to cause or permit someone to use, a motor vehicle on a road unless its use is covered by an appropriate policy of insurance or security ("the insurance requirement"). "Road" is defined in section 192(1) of the 1988 Act, in relation to England and Wales, as any highway or other road to which the public has access and, in relation to Scotland, as any road or other way to which the public has access. In the case of Cutter v. Eagle Star Insurance Company Ltd, [1998] 4 All ER 417, it was held by the House of Lords that the expression did not include a car park or similar public place.

 

For the purpose of complying with the directives these Regulations amend the 1988 Act first by extending the insurance requirement to the use of vehicles in public places other than roads and, secondly, by making provision for the reporting of accidents and the production of insurance documents where an accident occurs in a public place."

 

 

It would certainly appear as though the information passed to you was correct.

[jonni2bad]

Wheelclamping untaxed vehicles : Directgov - Motoring

 

This also has info on fines and charges.

[tifo]

Got clamped on Sat, have a Trader friend who 'bought' the car on Friday to dispose of. That covers the insurance part.

 

As DVLA are only concerned with the tax part of it, they may not pass the insurance part to the police, or so i hope.

 

Does anyone know what exactly a disclaimer is, as the DVLA guy told me it basically means i am passing the car to them and they can dispose of it, without me paying the £80 fine or any removal/storage costs.

 

I can get road tax, pay the £80 fine and keep the car, but as it needs some repairs i am going to rid my hands of it and lose the few hundred i could have got for it elsewhere.

[patdavies]

Got clamped on Sat, have a Trader friend who 'bought' the car on Friday to dispose of. That covers the insurance part.

 

As DVLA are only concerned with the tax part of it, they may not pass the insurance part to the police, or so i hope.

 

Does anyone know what exactly a disclaimer is, as the DVLA guy told me it basically means i am passing the car to them and they can dispose of it, without me paying the £80 fine or any removal/storage costs.

 

I can get road tax, pay the £80 fine and keep the car, but as it needs some repairs i am going to rid my hands of it and lose the few hundred i could have got for it elsewhere.

 

So you have signed a disclaimer to have someone else's property removed and disposed of.

 

I can only assume from your putting bought into quotes, co-incidentally with the purxhase being back-dated, that this is an attempt to avoid the DVLA fine.

 

A) it won't work, at the time the vehicle was untaxed and the fine was applied, you were the RK and B) you are potentially risking a criminal record for attempting to pervert the course of justice.

[tifo]

I can only assume from your putting bought into quotes, co-incidentally with the purxhase being back-dated, that this is an attempt to avoid the DVLA fine.

 

It's not an attempt to avoid the fine as DVLA are making the offer. Don't forget, i lose the car instead.

 

If i do a disclaimer, i am told by DVLA that there is no fine of £80 or removal costs, as they dispose of the car. Is this true because i've rang and asked NCP (who work on their behalf) and been told the same thing. There were two guys who came, one with an NCP uniform and one with DVLA.

 

Is this disclaimer info correct? By disclaiming the car i am passing ownership to DVLA therefore there is no-one to fine.

[patdavies]

But you state that you 'sold' the car on Friday - so it cannot be your property to pass to the DVLA for disposal via the disclaimer notice.

[tifo]

they have taken the car away today and handed a disclaimer notice which the current owner will have to complete and send back. On it i complete that i 1. own the car, 2. have sold it on ...../...../..... and i am disclaiming the vehicle.

 

then no fine or storage costs are payable as the car will be crushed, after they sent a notice in 7 days to the person who is named as the owner on the form above. If no response, they crush it.

 

this was all done by NCP who are DVLA partners. Clamped Sat AM and taken this PM, form handed. They actually are just meant to take the car and the form is sent afterwards by DVLA but since i had to drag them to my place to take the car away, they handed it to me. They said they were giving me chance to get road tax, which i did actually think about.

[Chesterexpress]

Why would your trader "friend" agree to what you have claimed? As they will now be legally responsible for having an untaxed vehicle on the public highway and any fine that goes with it. Hopefully this ill thought out [problem] of yours will back fire on you and you will be liable for no tax insurance etc.

[tifo]

Hopefully this ill thought out [problem] of yours will back fire on you and you will be liable for no tax insurance etc.

 

Thanks, much appreciated.

[advisee]

What you should have done, even though the guy said that you couldn't, was got back in the car and then drove it onto your drive (or any drive).

 

Mind you, with insurance, there are many people that are of the opinion that insurance is only needed if the car is actually being driven. I'm sure there are people on this forum who have opinions either way.

[tifo]

it wouldn't have started immediately as battery was weak. By that time the clamp was on.

 

anyway, i actually had to chase them to take it away some days later as i wasn't prepared to buy the road tax cos the car needed some repairs and i'd already spent more than i would have got back. I disowned it and it should have been crushed 7 days later.

 

the other thing is the car was written off by insurance in an accident a year ago (still waiting for payment) so i get my money anyway.

[tifo]

i had a thread on here which seems to have gone now ...

 

i got clamped on 12 Jan 08 as my road tax had run out end Dec 07. The car was a few metres away from private land but on a road.

 

the DVLA/NCP guys told me that i can 'disclaim' the car and it will be scrapped or i can buy the road tax and keep the car, then no £80 removal fee. There will be no charge etc if i disclaim.

 

i decided to disclaim it and gave them the key. I also informed DVLA on the form they gave me.

 

today i've received a letter asking me for £75 as an 'out of court settlement' for not displaying a tax disk. This is surprising as i was told the fact i've allowed them to scrap the car would end the matter.

 

anyone advice?

[tifo]

today i've received a letter asking me for £75 as an 'out of court settlement' for not displaying a tax disk. This is surprising as i was told the fact i've allowed them to scrap the car would end the matter.

 

anyone advice?

[patdavies]

There are 2 offences here

 

1) Not having VED - this is what has been dealt with by disclaim/removal.

 

2) Failure to display a valid VED disk - this si what your latest £75 is for.

 

Technically, DVLA are right - if you didn't have a valid disk, then it is impossible to display it. But they are being a bit OTT if they have already removed and crushed the vehicle.

[Guest 10110001]

Section 33(2) of the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 says that a person is liable to a fine upon conviction for failure to display a valid tax dicsc.

 

Your post indicates you havn't been convicted yet, and this letter may be a without prejudice offer where you pay £75, and no proceeding will be brought.

[tifo]

But they are being a bit OTT if they have already removed and crushed the vehicle.

 

I think so, especially since they told me that once they crush the car there is nothing to pay, that's what the disclaimer was for.

 

The letter is an offer to 'settle out of court' for £75 on this offence only, but also states there may be other proceedings as required. It states that even though the vehicle may have been taxed or taken away, the offence was still committed and hence the fine and that if i haven't licensed it, i should do so now. Standard letter i think. How can i license it when i've disclaimed it and it was taken and crushed?

 

Should i ring them and ask why the fine when they clearly told me otherwise?

[Guest 10110001]

I think so, especially since they told me that once they crush the car there is nothing to pay, that's what the disclaimer was for.

 

Good point, you can potentially ask for the replacement cost of the vehicle if your previous car has been damaged beyond economical repair while in DVLA's possession. Do not use the word 'crushed' in your correpondence.

 

The letter is an offer to 'settle out of court' for £75 on this offence only, but also states there may be other proceedings as required.

 

It looks like DVLA is trying to convict you twice for the same offence, you can plead autrefois acquit.

 

Should i ring them and ask why the fine when they clearly told me otherwise?

 

Yes, ask DVLA for their final offer to settle all claims against you. Do not use without prejuduce, you might need to show a magistrate that you tried to seek an amicable resolve.

[patdavies]

It looks like DVLA is trying to convict you twice for the same offence, you can plead autrefois acquit.

 

No, there are two distinct offences.

 

1) Having no VED or SORN - for which the vehicle was seized, disclaimed and crushed.

 

2) Failure to display a valid VED - for which the OP has a £75 settlement offer to avoid court.

[tifo]

No, there are two distinct offences.

 

1) Having no VED or SORN - for which the vehicle was seized, disclaimed and crushed.

 

2) Failure to display a valid VED - for which the OP has a £75 settlement offer to avoid court.

 

I understand the two reasons above, but only one can apply at any time.

 

How can you have #2 if #1 applies, i.e. no VED means there is nothing to display for which the car was seized and crushed. If #2 applied, then #1 would not, i.e. i had the tax but did not display it.

 

This way i'm being done twice.

[tifo]

if i pay the £75 and they agree to end any action, does this mean i get a criminal conviction as it is apparently a criminal offence or would that be only if it went to court?

 

what are the rules here?

[Guest 10110001]

The DVLA is asking you to mitigate by paying £75, I dont think this attracts a criminal record, or probably not the sort that carries credence as far as insurance or employment decisions go.

 

If you don't pay and and attend court, you can ask to have the charge dismissed on the grounds the DVLA did not give you an opportunity to mitigate when your disclaimed your car.

 

Its a risk, and you need to decide whether £75 is worth it, or there is a opportunity to claim for the financial loss of replacing your car and your time in preparing cases for court.

 

The rules are the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994. If a magistrate follows these rules verbatim then you will be convicted. You are relying on the magistrate believing the DVLA interpreted the law inappropriately, or you are charged with same offence by another name and common law prohibits Double Jeopardy. Remember also, that a magistrate does not have an authority to rebuke an Act of Parilament, if you win, the DVLA will probably appeal.

 

From a magistrates perspective, the case is likely to result in a conviction but with null penalty, no fine and give the prosecutor an informal ticking off for not allowing the defendant to mitigate.

[tifo]

The DVLA is asking you to mitigate by paying £75, I dont think this attracts a criminal record, or probably not the sort that carries credence as far as insurance or employment decisions go.

 

If you don't pay and and attend court, you can ask to have the charge dismissed on the grounds the DVLA did not give you an opportunity to mitigate when your disclaimed your car.

 

Its a risk, and you need to decide whether £75 is worth it, or there is a opportunity to claim for the financial loss of replacing your car and your time in preparing cases for court.

 

The rules are the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994. If a magistrate follows these rules verbatim then you will be convicted. You are relying on the magistrate believing the DVLA interpreted the law inappropriately, or you are charged with same offence by another name and common law prohibits Double Jeopardy. Remember also, that a magistrate does not have an authority to rebuke an Act of Parilament, if you win, the DVLA will probably appeal.

 

From a magistrates perspective, the case is likely to result in a conviction but with null penalty, no fine and give the prosecutor an informal ticking off for not allowing the defendant to mitigate.

 

Thanks for the advice. I don't mind the £75 as long as i don't get a record of any kind but don't want to pay it if i don't have to as they seem underhanded.

[advisee]

Send a letter back, stating that you have already provided them with 'consideration' that is at least equal to that value, and therefore you consider the matter closed.