Running without Road Fund Licence

[Movingon]

OK, we all know that if you don't get your car taxed there's a fine coming in the post for £1000. Two questions:

 

1. Is running without RFL still a criminal offence?

2. If so, then surely the Bill Of Rights Act 1689 makes this penalty illegal and unenforceable as all fines have to be awarded by a Court of Law?

3. If it's not a criminal offence then surely (2) applies doubly as no offence has been committed and therefore there is no fine to answer?

 

What do y'all think?

[thewifeandI]

OK, we all know that if you don't get your car taxed there's a fine coming in the post for £1000. Two questions:

 

1. Is running without RFL still a criminal offence?

It says in the leaflet that came with mine - '...it is an offence to keep a vehicle on a public road which is not displaying a valid tax disc, even if you've applied for it and are waiting for it to arrive'.

The accepted 'right' to 14 days grace has no legal basis either.

[Leo1]

I thought the automatic fine was £80? My car tax ran out at the end of May and I could not renew it until I got paid on 16 June. I never received a fine (but I did make sure I parked it out of sight for that two weeks!)

[Movingon]

OK, so it's a criminal offence which means that to be punished for it I MUST be sent to court. You cannot be convicted of a criminal offence in a summary way by some computer kicking out a piece of paper; it has to be presided over by a Magistrate or Judge and presumably in senior courts a Jury.

 

**UNLESS**

 

Someone can point me to the Road Fund Licencing law which *specifically* excludes the Bill of Rights Act 1689?

 

Not sure of the amount but TBH it's immaterial... it's the fact that you're being fined for a criminal offence without conviction.

[mechs]

very true Stoney m8, but as iits the government there must be a get out clause somewhere

[jonny round boy]

I bought a new (secondhand) vehicle near the end of May, without any tax. The post office WOULD NOT accept a fax of a covernote as proof of insurance - so therefore it was impossible for me to tax it until the insurance cert arrived in the post, which didn't come until 1st June.

 

So they lost out on 1 month's tax. It's rediculous - they insist that you pay tax, but then do everything they can to make it difficult to comply!!!

 

The sooner they do away with it & instead put extra duty on fuel, the better (and then we can all complain about the price of petrol again!!!!).

[Seminole]

Alternatively they could scrap the road fund licence, reduce petrol duty and stop wasting £80billion a year.

[blueskies]

The best way would be to scrap the RFL, and INCREASE duty on petrol to cover the shortfall.

This would mean those using the roads (and the other services who have costs related to road use such as the NHS (for treatment of accident vitims), DVLA, DSA etc) would pay proportionately to the amount they use the roads (also bigger vehicles, who cause more wear and tear to the roads, pay more). People couldn't then avoid paying into the pot by avoiding car tax

[JonCris]

OK, we all know that if you don't get your car taxed there's a fine coming in the post for £1000. Two questions:

 

1. Is running without RFL still a criminal offence?

2. If so, then surely the Bill Of Rights Act 1689 makes this penalty illegal and unenforceable as all fines have to be awarded by a Court of Law?

3. If it's not a criminal offence then surely (2) applies doubly as no offence has been committed and therefore there is no fine to answer?

 

What do y'all think?

 

Even if you have road tax it is still an offence to "fail to display a current/valid excise licence" & thats what you would be fined for. As has been stated there is no such thing as 14 days grace

 

All Fixed Penalty notices can be disputed & you can elect to go to court. If you voluntary pay up then the "Bill of Rights" is not brought into play. Since decriminalisation of parking, councils should not use the terms "Penalty Notices" or "Fines" as these can only be administered after due process by a properly constituted court of law as per the "Bill of Rights". A fact they are just waking upto

 

Iv'e mentioned this before & it's important to note that if you live in publicly funded housing (Council or HA) & are parked even in your driveway you are still required to have valid road tax. You can't even SORN your vehicle. The council in such circumstances can & do have untaxed vehicles removed & crushed & you will be hit with a demand to pay at least £80 & it could be upto £1,000 plus all unpaid road tax

[Rich44]

To be fair though not all 4x4 are gas guzzlers some saloons are worse it doesnt help when people constantly pick ono 4x4 drivers (not having a go and I dont own one) in fact a freelander for example takes up less room on the road than a mondeo.

 

Its definately the way to go get shot of the bloody road tax and add to fuel the high road users do more damage and thus pay more brilliant, not to mention they stop wasting police time and other admin/printing costs on it

[hagenuk]

Well said Rich.

 

I however, do own and drive a 4x4 and those who attack them are somewhat short-sighted. Why should we pay more karnevil?

 

What happens if those who oppose 4x4's actually win? Do you really think they will simply go away? They will turn their attention then to another type of car they don't like, sports cars perhaps, then people carriers, then estate cars, then soft tops and then when they have done that they attack every other type of car they can find, or maybe they'll go after motorbikes next and you wont be able to ride your bike, with or without tax.

 

And as for people who drive 4x4's and those who drive hundreds of miles a week paying more, don't they already pay more?

 

In a free and democratic society surely we are able to choose the type of cars we drive without fear of demonisation or victimisation.

 

Finally, I would like to point out that I probably pay less per mile for my car as I have converted it to LPG which I currently purchase at around 43p per litre. Furthermore it is much cleaner and kinder environmentally than both petrol and diesel in a number of ways.

[younganfree]

In a free and democratic society surely we are able to choose the type of cars we drive without fear of demonisation or victimisation.

 

Well said, dude.

Why should it always be 'the other guy' who should pay up?

We all have good reasons why we shouldn't be punished for our particular road use, whatever we drive - I work over 300 miles from home, why should I have to pay more to be able to visit my family?

The 'Holier than thou' cr#p or 'I'm alright Jack' routine is not helpful.

[blueskies]

My arguement has two prongs. Why should those of us that don't cause very much wear and tear to the roads pay as much as those that do. Also with ever increasing levels of CO2 in the air there has got to be an incentive to drive less environmentally damaging vehicles, or, where possible, public transport.

 

It is now widely accepted that we have to drastically reduce our CO2 output. Taxing via fuel usage encourages people and companies to reduce consumption and the resulting co2 output.

[JonCris]

My arguement has two prongs. Why should those of us that don't cause very much wear and tear to the roads pay as much as those that do. Also with ever increasing levels of CO2 in the air there has got to be an incentive to drive less environmentally damaging vehicles, or, where possible, public transport.

 

It is now widely accepted that we have to drastically reduce our CO2 output. Taxing via fuel usage encourages people and companies to reduce consumption and the resulting co2 output.

 

What it actually does by increasing R/T & petrol duty is penalise most those who live in rural areas on low wages who rely on the private transport & have no public transport to fall back on

 

Anyone who has the facilty & access to a bus or a tram or train fine use it but don't assume everyone can.

 

Tell you what I suggest that all able bodied car owning townies should be singled out for extra taxation

[Ihatebanks]

I too own one of these horrible gas guzzling 4X4s and also live in a semi rural location I would be prepared to pay say an extra 5p litre if they abolished RFL

I also think that an insurance certificate in the windscreen would be a great idea

In days of old by taxing your car at the PO it enabled them to keep a check on your insurance and MOT without both of these you could not get RFL (unless car was newer than 36 mths for MOT)nowdays most details are stored on databases and can be checked in seconds

 

I know people complain about goverment making money out of fines but surely

if the RFL fund was abolished and incorporated into the price we pay at the pumps this would save £0000s in resourses taking these people to court in the first place,and think of all the court time this would save prehaps they could then increase the capicity of the CC to deal with our claims sooner;-)

[JMio]

they insist that you pay tax, but then do everything they can to make it difficult to comply

 

So true...

 

In answer to the 4x4 / Upping Fuel duty etc, IF anything like the revenue that is collected by the Government each year via Fuel/Road tax was re-spent back into the Roads / Transport systems, then this arguement would cease to exist immediately.

 

Free / heavily subsidised, efficient & reliable public transport would be the option for many, yet seeing as Blair, Brown & co are more bothered about spening money on their own expenses, and bombing the life out of Arab Nations that'll be that idea down the pan.

 

Rant over - carry on!

[blueskies]

 

Free / heavily subsidised, efficient & reliable public transport would be the option for many, yet seeing as Blair, Brown & co are more bothered about spening money on their own expenses, and bombing the life out of Arab Nations that'll be that idea down the pan.

 

Rant over - carry on!

 

Good point. I also agree with the " Tell you what I suggest that all able bodied car owning townies should be singled out for extra taxation" comment too but only if they don't car-share.

[JonCris]

I too own one of these horrible gas guzzling 4X4s and also live in a semi rural location I would be prepared to pay say an extra 5p litre if they abolished RFL

I also think that an insurance certificate in the windscreen would be a great idea

In days of old by taxing your car at the PO it enabled them to keep a check on your insurance and MOT without both of these you could not get RFL (unless car was newer than 36 mths for MOT)nowdays most details are stored on databases and can be checked in seconds

 

I know people complain about goverment making money out of fines but surely

if the RFL fund was abolished and incorporated into the price we pay at the pumps this would save £0000s in resourses taking these people to court in the first place,and think of all the court time this would save prehaps they could then increase the capicity of the CC to deal with our claims sooner;-)

 

The data bases are linked & can identify an uninsured, non MOT, untaxed vehicle in the blink of an eye. In other words you can't tax ,even on line, without these being valid. If you visit the PO to obtain tax your insurance must be valid for at least another month. Also the PO clerk has a bar reader which confirms to him her that you have with you a valid insurance & MOT certificate with you

[thewifeandI]

For the last two years I've tried to pay online, but I get rejected because my insurance runs out a couple of days before the RFL, even though it has been renewed at least 14 days earlier. Means a trip to the PO instead of the joys of online payment - and this year the online site was down for three days before I then got rejected!

[JonCris]

For the last two years I've tried to pay online, but I get rejected because my insurance runs out a couple of days before the RFL, even though it has been renewed at least 14 days earlier. Means a trip to the PO instead of the joys of online payment - and this year the online site was down for three days before I then got rejected!

 

Like I said it's my understanding the insurance has to show up as being valid for at least a month from date of RF renewal. You can renew your RF before (I think it's 15 days) it expires. The new licence will commence at the expiry of your existing one (the 1st day of the month)

[Ihatebanks]

Originally Posted by thewifeandI

For the last two years I've tried to pay online, but I get rejected because my insurance runs out a couple of days before the RFL, even though it has been renewed at least 14 days earlier. Means a trip to the PO instead of the joys of online payment - and this year the online site was down for three days before I then got rejected!

 

I had this as well but managed to break the cycle:) taxed car for 6 months next time round isnt a problem does cost a little more but beat the hour wait at the post office

[hagenuk]

My arguement has two prongs. Why should those of us that don't cause very much wear and tear to the roads pay as much as those that do. Also with ever increasing levels of CO2 in the air there has got to be an incentive to drive less environmentally damaging vehicles, or, where possible, public transport.

 

It is now widely accepted that we have to drastically reduce our CO2 output. Taxing via fuel usage encourages people and companies to reduce consumption and the resulting co2 output.

 

Being "widely accepted" does not make it true or right, bank charges for example are still widely accepted...

 

Over the last 5 years a significant body of scientific research has concluded that atmospheric carbon dioxide is not the climate criminal it is made out to be by self-proclaimed 'environmentalist' groups and opportunist politicians.

 

Furthermore, a recent study has shown that "public transport consumes 60% more energy per person transported than private transport, such as cars and motorcycles, and takes up 200% more public space."

 

We do pay per mile to use the roads, therefore those of us who, apparently, cause wear and tear to the roads do pay more. We pay through our punishingly high fuel taxes, the more you drive the more you pay.

[Movingon]

Guys, if you want to discuss the ins and outs, pros and cons of road tax and fuel tax, would you please be so kind as to start your own thread?

 

On Topic, I'm still waiting to hear someone who knows' point of view as to the legality of the postal fines levied by the DVLA Enforcement Division; does anyone have a view on that? Can the Bill of Rights Defence be used against it?

[hagenuk]

You could try but I am not aware of anyone who has successfully used this defence yet.

 

On Thursday 6th July a senior High Court judge demolished the belief that the 1689 Bill of Rights outlaws parking charges because they have not been imposed by a court of law. Mr Justice Collins said the belief was "baseless" and "a nonsense".

 

I would suspect that the same ruling would not be limited to parking fines.

[Movingon]

You could try but I am not aware of anyone who has successfully used this defence yet.

 

On Thursday 6th July a senior High Court judge demolished the belief that the 1689 Bill of Rights outlaws parking charges because they have not been imposed by a court of law. Mr Justice Collins said the belief was "baseless" and "a nonsense".

 

I would suspect that the same ruling would not be limited to parking fines.

 

Well, it depends you see. Parking "Fines" are quite, quite different. The reason is that parking is DECRIMINALISED; i.e. it is not an offence to park in contravention of local regulations. THAT is why Mr Justice Collins ruled as he did; these are not fines, he said. Quite so. However, driving without RFL **IS** an offence. And therefore any penalty for this offence must by definition be a fine. And therefore must be awarded by a court... see my thinking?