Running without Road Fund Licence

[blueskies]

I'm sorry for hijacking your thread Stonelaughter.

 

I have spent the last hour researching the problem and have come up with the following answers.

 

The powers for this appear to come from the following acts

Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994

Finance Act 2002

 

The Bill of Rights Act 1689 only applies where there has been no specific act of parliament since which authorises a punishment outside of court. Both the Road Traffic Act 1991 and the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 allow for such punishments.

 

The Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1995 confers the same powers, duties and liabilities as the Commissioners of Customs and Excise and their officers on persons or bodies appointed by the secretary of state (eg the DVLA)

This means that officers of the DVLA can impose the penalties allowed in law on anyone who fails to obtain a vehicle excise license for their vehicle or fails to provide a Statutory Of Road Notice for a vehicle.

 

The £1000 penalty is in the Finance Act 2002. (level three on the standard scale)

 

I would research more but my head hurts.

[Movingon]

Thanks Blueskies! That's exactly what I was after... do the Acts SPECIFICALLY mention the Bill of Rights Act that you could see (i.e. to negate it)? Or do they simply state that the relevant bodies have the power to fine?

[blueskies]

It is a myth that it has to specifically state the bill of rights act. It just has to give a specific instruction stating who can issue the penalties. The appeals system still works via the courts (but I can't see many arguing with the computer). I Vehicle excise license is legally a duty the same as tax on beer, thus giving customs & excise powers enables enforcement.

[crusty git]

I my be wrong but I believe that not having a valid tax disc is not acriminal offence which is why the police usually refer it to the dept of transport

[blueskies]

It is a criminal offence but is dealt with leniently by the police and normally referred to the DVLA.

[Glenn UK]

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.

 

I have an aqauintance who often points out that whne the shout goes up 'everyone knows this that or the other' then usually we dont know.

 

When it vcomes to global warming i have no doubt that the climate is changing. In fact i would be more surprised if it wasnt bearing in mind that very little is ever truly stable in nature, life, space, whatever you want to call it.

 

Whether the humble vehicle is the cuase is entirley a matter for debate. I have been wondering lately how much CO2 the avergae human emits per year and how it compares with the average car doing 12,000 miles per year? One dai ill be boether to work it out.

 

Personally Im not sure that mankinds influence is as great as many seem to think whether im mad or daft remains to be seen.

 

I would just remind one and all that for many years people thought the earth was the centre of the universe, at other times the majority thought the earth was flat.

 

Oh how the mighty establishement of the times took it badly when they found out it was they who had it all wrong.

 

Glenn

[Movingon]

Glenn - there was no real evidence to support the flat earth theory. However, the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere can be readily measured and is being. The amount of CO2 being produced by each person is well known (as an average) and it needs to reduce drastically. There have been plenty of TV programs about it quite recently on mainstream channels if you bother to look for them, which have the issue well documented.

[Glenn UK]

Glenn - there was no real evidence to support the flat earth theory. However, the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere can be readily measured and is being. The amount of CO2 being produced by each person is well known (as an average) and it needs to reduce drastically. There have been plenty of TV programs about it quite recently on mainstream channels if you bother to look for them, which have the issue well documented.

 

I have to say that i disagree with you argument that there wasnt any evidence for a flat earth.

 

There was evidence that was misinterpreted as indicating a flat earth which is the point, there is a growing body of evidence that suggest CO2 emissions are not the leading cause of climate change.

 

But as one of the ealrier commentators pointed out lets go start another thread to argue about this one.

 

Glenn

[pugsley]

well my grant money hasn't come yet, so I'm putting my car in the garage and under a SORN it's an 4 x 4 and needs an mot and tax from 1st October, I'm going to put it through an mot this week to see what it needs and then put it away. So gonna miss it, but hopefully it will only be for 1 month.

[JonCris]

If you live in publicly funded housing your vehicle must still be taxed.

[reasten]

Unless your not from the uk,where i work,the polish and russians have brought over cars,none are taxed,and i assume prob no insurance/mot,they seem to get away with it,the traffic wardens ignore these foreign registered cars and check mine,im ok but struggle to pay car tax,it makes my blood boil

[reasten]

when i ask them why they have no tax they say in poland they dont need it(could be true) and i say what if you get caught?? "we just say we are here on holiday!!!!"cheeky,fortunately they are generally nice people and hard working,so i dont hate them,just envy!lol

[reasten]

when i ask them why they have no tax they say in poland they dont need it(could be true) and i say what if you get caught?? "we just say we are here on holiday!!!!"cheeky,fortunately they are generally nice people and hard working,so i dont hate them,just envy!lol

[Rob S]

If you live in publicly funded housing your vehicle must still be taxed.

 

The criteria with regards to a car needing to be taxed or not is dependent on whether or not the car is being kept on the public highway. If it is parked off the highway on a private driveway then it doesn't need to be taxed, regardless of the house being publicly funded or not. It would need to be SORN'ed of course.

[dave]

Personally I think the SORN thing is a joke.

 

They ignore half of the SORNs in any case - I sorned two cars, but they had no record, so fined me £25 on each count. I refused to pay, explaining that I had sent them a letter where I had told them that both cars were off the road.

 

The next thing I heard was two summons' for court through my door.

 

Apparently, they hadn't received my letter refusing to pay either.

 

I was due to start a new job on the day of the court case, so pleaded guitly by post (as I was guilty of the offence of not paying the 2x£25), but sent a letter explaining that the 2x£25 fines should not have been imposed in the first place as I had informed the DVLA of the fact that the cars were off of the road.

 

Apparently, the courts hire similar people to handle their incoming snail mail, as they claimed (eventually) to not have received this letter either - despite it being in the same letter as my plea.

 

They fined me £520 x 2.

 

I refused to pay.

 

They had me arrested, which I managed to get overturned (the warrant) there and then.

 

They arrested me the next day.

 

I paid a tenner so I could go home.

 

I then wrote to my MP, who wrote to the DVLA who had the fines 'waived' despite the fact that he then wrote me a letter calling me a liar.

 

I said "That's not good enough" - as I had still been convicted for a crime that I had committed (then went off to join the A-Team ;-) ). This dragged on for bloody ages.

 

The court was still chasing me for unpaid fines - despite them being waived - and I had a God-awful time with coppers coming round to arrest me etc... (what a complete waste of time and money - all they had to do was to talk to each other and they could have saved a lot of agro, and a lot of police-deisal running me back and forth to the police station every time they wrongfully arrested me - 12 miles away!).

 

Anyway, to cut a long story even longer, I eventually got my tenner back from the court and a 4 page letter of apology from the DVLA (although it was more like a letter that begrudgingly said "sorry" really quickly like a child, and then 4 pages calling me a liar).

 

All because a private govt. appointed firm are useless with post, and for some reason have the right to demand that you tell them something when you are not using it. Next I suppose they'll have 17 year olds having to write to them to say "Oh, by the way, I have no intention of driving a car and therefore I don't need a licence", in much the same way as NOT owning a TV set (but don't get me started on that one - how the hell can they demand that you tell them that you HAVEN'T got a particualr possession!! Maybe I should tell them that I don't have a dog too!, in fact, I think I will, just to highlight the whole ridiculousness of it).

 

Anyway, sorry to highjack, perhaps understandably, I have a problem with the DVLA.

[pugsley]

I did sorn my car before, but as I couldn't fit it in the garage I decided to tax it again, I had trouble taxing it because it was on a sorn and had to do make lots of phone calls etc to sort it out. the police did pull me over but they said because the tax was within the 14 days (which isn't even any law) I was ok.

 

Putting it on a sorn seems to have caused more problems than it solved.

[Rob S]

Shouldn't be a problem taxing a vehicle after it has been sorned. All you need to do is get the relevent form from the post office, fill it out, take it to the counter with a current MOT and insurance certificate and pay them. I've done it a few times over the years with no hassle at all.

[pugsley]

well you were lucky then, I did the forms correctly but the computer wouldn't let them process it.

[noopin]

OK, then - deep breath... I bought a car in mid-June, tax had expired end of May. Seller (who I knew) said she was still waiting for registration doc from her purchase in March. Long and short of it is, she's heard nothing, though we did both sign a letter to DVLA in July giving both our addresses and explaining when I bought it, and that I couldn't use it until the reg. was sorted out.

So - I'm continuing to use a car with a May disc in the windscreen, and expecting avery morning to see it clamped, ready for crushing. I'm careful not to park it in town etc. and I'M PANICKING. I can't tax it without the V5 and if I use a V62 and pay £19 to register it, I'll then get the fine for the last 4 months without RFL. I don't even know who it's registered to at the moment.

Time to take head out of sand and deal with this - any advice, please...

[ukaviator]

You need to write or call the DVLA. Using a vehicle without a road fund licence will also mean your car is not covered by the insurance. There are cameras in most towns now which can scan every windscreen and number plate,which has a direct feed to the DVLA.If your caught it could be a heavy fine.I would recommend that you do not use the vehicle anymore until this is sorted out.

 

Uk...

[noopin]

But surely by now someone who's registered as the owner will have had communication from DVLA re. unlicensed vehicle, and it's not my friend. Does a straightforward letter to DVLA (rather than a V-whatever) carry any weight? I'm tempted to use a V62 and claim to have just now bought the car; they had my address from the letter, and nothing's happened to date. I don't think the V62 requires you to say who it was acquired from.

[barracad]

What you are suggesting amounts to fraud.

 

You need to contact the DVLA and explain the situation to them.

[noopin]

Put like that, Barracad, it does seem easier (not to say feel better) to sort it out directly with DVLA.

I respond positively to having things spelt out bluntly! Thanks

[patdavies]

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

 

Just how would this work? In UK we insure the driver, not the vehicle.

[patdavies]

You need to write or call the DVLA. Using a vehicle without a road fund licence will also mean your car is not covered by the insurance.

 

Not having (or displaying) valid VED has no affect whatsoever on the insurance.

 

If you drive and untaxed and unMoT'd car to an MoT appointment (which you may legally do) are you automtically uninsured - I think not.