DVLA wrongly fining me out of court settlement

[patdavies]

Only if they're using as evidence - in which case, a copy should have been included with the summons. If they've decided not to take the photo near court, or refer to it in any way, then they don't have to disclose. But that really begs the question of why isn't it used?.

 

 

Not so.

 

Primary disclosure is of the evidence that they intend to use (and this is usually included with the summons, as you say)

 

Secondary disclosure is a legal requirement under the CIPA 1996 (Criminal Procedures and Investigations Act)

 

CIPA 1996 s.7

 

7 Secondary disclosure by prosecutor

 

(1) This section applies where the accused gives a defence statement under section 5 or 6.

(2) The prosecutor must—

(a) disclose to the accused any prosecution material which has not previously been disclosed to the accused and which might be reasonably expected to assist the accused’s defence as disclosed by the defence statement given under section 5 or 6, or

(b) give to the accused a written statement that there is no material of a description mentioned in paragraph (a).

 

Admittedly, you have to submit a defence statement ( s.7(1)), but that is required for a not guilty plea anyway if there is a case management hearing.

 

CIPA applies as much to the DVLA as a prosecuting authority as it does the CPS.

[sickpup]

Does this apply in a Small claims court?

[patdavies]

Does this apply in a Small claims court?

 

 

No. Only to criminal courts.

 

Small claims is covered separately under CPR

[Spunkymonkey]

Thanks, Pat - I stand corrected. That said, since the burden is firmly on them to prove the offence, I would still think that the deliberate omission of what should be clear evidence by them raises more than reasonable doubt anyway.

[sickpup]

No. Only to criminal courts.

 

Small claims is covered separately under CPR

 

What is CPR?

[Spunkymonkey]

Civil Procedure Rules. Available here:

 

Civil Procedure Rules Homepage

 

if you're bored one evening

[k67]

Sorry K69 I just happened to see your post, as I now have to appear in court next week so was checking back my post.

I don't believe it YES it from Mitcham DVLA depot, the guy who statement is being used as evidence is Jamie B.

It really unbelievable I have sent a few appeal letters, spoke to the prosecutor, legal advice and nothing stopping it from being cancelled.

At the end of the day they have a photo of a Nissan micra car with my number plate with a clamp on it(photo is black and white, so can not tell colour).

The only evidence been used in the court is a statement from this Jamie from Mitcham DVLA. Any advice on what to do on my court date will be very much appreciated. How did your court case go, did you win.

 

I cannot beleive this!!!! It is a disgrace and something needs to be done about this guy!!!

 

I am going to check if the MP holds open sessions and go along to see her with print outs from this forum to show I am not the only victim and this guy must loose his job over this!!!

 

Is this your 1st court appearance?

 

If so I would suggest doing as I did and not showing any evidence but saying that you will present this at a later date once all parties are present - including Mr. Jamie Bunter!!!

 

I have spoken to Natalie Bushell since my case has been dropped and she was not at all surprised by what I said about it being a fradulent claim on Mr. Bunter's behalf.

 

Try not to worry about the photo that they have of your car! I can hazard a guess that Jamie Bunter has done exactly the same to you as he did to me! They will have a photo of your car but it will more than likely be a photo of the car where it is with the clamp on! The photo that they had of my car was on the off street car park where it has been sat for nearly 2 years! He put the clamp on, took the photos and then took the clamp off!! And that is what he is calling evidence!! We actually showed the Sidcup DVLA office the photos and matched the trees in the background, the paving style in the car park, the cars parked oneither side of the car (which obvioulsy doesn't happen on a public road!!) Take photos of your car to use as evidence!

 

Where is he saying that the car was seen? You never know, it could be the same road that he said my car was parked in!!

 

Any other questions - ask away!

 

Any more help I can give I will!!

 

I am now more determined than ever to make sure this guy does not get away with it!! They simply play on the fact that some people will be scared into paying the fine rather than go to court!

[ibzyuk]

Hello everyone,

Wanted to update you all on my case. Well in one word its over! finally .

I was summoned to go to court and my case did not get dropped. I was hoping that as the court date got close the DVLA would drop the case but that did not happen. I went to court last Wednesday 22nd April. Was very shocked to see the enforcement agent actually turning up to be a witness. Made me nervous. Then was told my case was being placed last as it is a hearing and will take some time.

I had with all my papers and statement I wanted to say. I wanted to challenge their photographic evidence they had and I had with me photos of where my car was and where they said it was. Had a letter from my neighbour saying my car did not move. Even had my passport to say I was out the country at the time. Also thanks to member K67 had their case papers showing that the same enforcement officer did the same fraud. Was ready to really give them ago, even though it felt really scary. I had to fill in an expense form, so the Judge can fine you fairly if you lose the case.

The DVLA prosecutor came out in the waiting area to speak to the enforcement agent and I could hear what they were saying . He was asking him about the photos and if he took the photos on the same day. One of the photos was just the number plate and the other was a zoom out of the car showing it on a driveway. The DVLA prosecutor could easily see that the photos show that the car is on a driveway and would not be good as evidence. He gave the enforcement a copy of the ticket the enforcement officer wrote on the day and told him ok don’t worry about the photos just read out the ticket in the court.

I was then finally called in the court and the DVLA prosecutor started by saying what I was being accused of ( ...car on public road when declared SORN..) Then was asked by the Judge if I am guilty or not guilty.(not guilty). Then was explained how it works the Prosecutor goes first , asks the witness then I can ask the witness questions then finally I can give say anything else that can be used as my defence.

The DVLA prosecutor started, called in the enforcement agent as a witness. He asked him a serious of question who does he work for what is his role, where was he on that day, did he see a car that day and clamp it...

The answers the enforcement agent was giving were mainly was I cant remember, I don't know. The prosecutor told him to read out the notes he got with him but the enforcement agent said he didn’t have any. He clearly did not want to help J After this the Judge asked the DVLA prosecutor if he has any other evidence, he replied no (he refused to use the photos). The judge then said no point carrying on as they have no real evidence against me.

I didn't get to say anything . I asked about compensation. Judge said court only can pay travel expenses and legal expenses. I would have to make a case against DVLA if I wanted anything else. I regretted not getting a lawyer to defend me as, the court would have paid their fees and maybe they could have got me some compensation from the DVLA.

At the end of it you can see how devious the DVLA are, just after the money and know they are in the wrong. It was obvious the photos they had were not evidence and was hoping the enforcement agent would give a good statement. But he was not cooperating with the DVLA as he knew he committed fraud. I happy that the judge is fair and would recommend everyone who is wrongly accused to fight it and take it to court and don’t be pushed into paying a fine for something you did not do.

 

So no more DVLA hassle, yippee. But really would like to take action against them especially that K67 was told by the MP that the enforcement agent no longer works for DVLA and yet he still does.

Lastly a big thank you to K67 for the help and support in getting my case ready.

[crem]

Well done.

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

The exact same thing is happening to me, I know this is an old thread but the situation is identical only DVLA are asking for £169 out of court settlement. Same story they claim to have photos of my car parked on a public road while SORN and when the clamping agency returned the car was gone along with the clamp. Of course my car hasn't left my private property. I wrote to my MP and someone from the Department for Transport wrote back to me in one of the most unhelpful letters basically stating that the DVLA is correct, has photographic evidence and this is how to make payment, they are after all only the DVLA's interloper there to keep them acting without regulation. I wrote back to my MP still disputing and they said they'd write to the DFT again.

 

Now the letter from the DFT said unless payment is received by 31 October then they will proceed to court, I've asked my MP if they can do anything to halt proceedings while we attempt to resolve this and I can be of any assistance and look at any photos, but I haven't heard anything back. My problem is I'm going through a job and immigration process and I CANNOT afford to have a CCJ against me. I've never been to court before and I'm extremely worried. I'd begrudge it more than anything but if I just pay the £169 out of court settlement, will that be the end of it? What happens if I just don't turn up to the court? I suffer from serious anxiety. DVLA won't respond and can only take payment. While they sound a bit more sure of the photographic evidence, the only explanation therefore is that it was a cloned car - how does that stand up as a defence? I can't prove it is or isn't.

[Spunkymonkey]

Assuming from the start that you're absolutely sure that any photos they have are not of your car, the first thing to do is write, stating clearly that it can't be your car and request copies of the photographs. Do this in writing, and keep a copy of your letter in case they don't reply.

 

The fact that they "seem confident" of the photos doesn't actually mean a thing - they're hardly likely to admit to you at this stage that "we've got some photos but we don't think they're very good" are they?

 

As for a CCJ - don't worry about that at this stage. Even if it goes to court and the court rules in your favour, you do NOT get a CCJ recorded against you for that. That only happens if you still don't pay after the court tells you to.

 

As far as a court hearing is concerned (again, if it goes that far), all that happens is the judge hears the evidence and decides who's most likely telling the truth. If he thinks that's you, he tells them to take a walk. If he thinks it's them then he tells you to pay up.

 

The whole idea in a civil case is simply for someone from "outside" the dispurte to look at the available facts and decide what they mean when the two people involved can't agree about them. There's no come-back for sticking to your guns when someone SAYS you owe them money and you don't think you do. The only come-back comes if the JUDGE decides you owe it and you still don't pay!

 

Otherwise I could be filing court cases left right and centre and getting people to pay me for fear of getting a black mark for going to court! People like DVLA rely on that fear in a lot of their letters but the courts simply don't work like that.

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

Thanks in my response to the DFT I asked for the photos and it's unlikely that they're going to respond in the next 7 days. They said that DVLA note what I've said on the back of my statement and refute this but not received any reply from them either. I don't see any way that it was my car. I realise it's only a balance of probabilities so could go either way, how much is this likely to spiral to if a judge goes in their favour? Do we know how judges tend to view these cases? I'm not getting much response from anyone, is there any way MP could halt proceedings while we attempt to resolve this fairly as opposed to just the DVLA intent on extorting money? I'd likely be a trembling wreck in court.

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

Should I also get a lawyer on this, is there anything I can get with no up front fees?

[buzby]

As long as you are clear in your own mind that your vehicle wasn't where they said it was, a lawyer will not be much help, as his costs will be far more than you will be able to claim back (around £100) or so. You should also be provided with any evidence they plan to use against you BEFORE court, so if this does not happen, tell the judge and seek a postponement to give you time to review this 'evidence'. It cannot be 'sprung' upon you.

 

It would be useful to also take to court pictures of your own vehicle - not as evidence - but for information in case there is doubt that the vehicle pictured is actually yours. Also where your car was (and presumably is) still parked, showing that the location forms no part of the public road.

 

If the person who placed the clamp on your car isn't there in person, complain to the judge, as you need to confront your accuser, and if they are not there (presumably clamping other vehicles). You would want to ask him in ADDITION to any photographs, his other observations, an notes taken at the time of the clamping procedure.

 

If none of these are available as evidence to support their case, tell the judge that you require these as their communications in relation to these matters has been far from satisfactory.

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

Wow thanks buzby. What kind of a success rate does DVLA have in these cases? Again is there any way to deal with this out of court, get to halt proceedings until we can resolve it? Based on so far, is it likely I will only end up more out of pocket or have I got a good chance?

Edited October 24, 2010 by DVLA Victim9541556125484

[buzby]

DVLA don't publish statistics so you can discover how many they win or lose. Howver a few years ago, I was in court to see DVLAs solicitor dealing with each case on-the-hoof. 4 cases were scheduled, 3 were challenged and were vacated (abandoned). Nobody appeared, leaving the solicitor to clan matters had been resolved. Because the defender didn't appear and ask for costs, the DVLA were not made to pay for their bullying.

 

There is nothing to be afraid of. Do not be intimidated, and don't accept any offer to discontinue. uNLESS they agree to your costs. They rely on inexperience and a wish not to be involved further. The judge will be sympathetic to you anyway, look to him for assistance if you don't understand anything.

[Spunkymonkey]

Not only do they not publish statistics, about 18 months ago I attempted to get information out of them using an FOI request concerning (a) how many cases they took to court each year and (b) how many of those were successful. They refused the request on the basis that providing the information would "prejudice the collection of taxes" (in the form of road tax) and, on appeal, the Information Commissioner accepted their refusal.

 

The only sensible conclusion from that is that the answers to my questions were "some" and "a lot less than some". If they were routinely successful in the cases they took to court then making that success public would surely improve the collection rates?

[buzby]

They would also boast about them. This has a parallel with TV licences. The number of actual court cases instigated is now far less than ever before, but this is only the impression I get reviewing the court rolls.

[angryweasel]

I wonder if this is the "possibly dishonest" chappy? May give some satisfaction to a couple of posters.

 

http://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news/local/streathamnews/4875519.Armed_mugger_was_shot_with_his_own_gun_in_Mitcham/

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

Is there any way to deal with this out of court, get to halt proceedings until we can resolve it? Based on so far, is it likely I will only end up more out of pocket or have I got a good chance?

 

I've written to DFT and DVLA again requesting and stating all of the above and sent copies to my MP.

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

But now there's like 5 days until they say they're going to proceed to court unless I pay.

[angryweasel]

You seem to be falling for their bullying - stand fast and don't worry about appearing in court It's no more scary than a job interview in all honesty.

[madsam]

I wonder if this is the "possibly dishonest" chappy? May give some satisfaction to a couple of posters.

 

http://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news/local/streathamnews/4875519.Armed_mugger_was_shot_with_his_own_gun_in_Mitcham/

 

Do we know that this is the same guy responsible for the fraudulent DVLA clampings earlier in this thread? Shows the kind of people they hire.

[k67]

I'm sorry that it has taken me so long to reply to you!!

I was the same - confident that they did not/could not have photos of my car as it didn't even work so couldn't have been parked where they said!!

Turned out that they did have photos of my car, in a PRIVATE car park outside my house and they were saying it was somewhere else! So they may have photos of your vehicle but may be saying it was somewhere else!

Your situation is made even worse by the immigration/job application process but I really would advise against paying the fine just to get them off of your backs! Remember at the end of the day they have to prove that your car was illegally parked, but do prepare yourself to prove otherwise!

In the end I was taken to court and was very worried about the whole thing!! When I told them I was pleading not guilty and they asked if I had evidence to back up my plea I told them I did but wanted to present this evidence with their witness - the employee who claimed to have clamped my car - present!

They did drop the case against me before the next court date arrived and I would advise you to fight this! It is terrible that they seem to be getting away with this all to often!!

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

It could be either that or a cloned car. My problem is I don't really have anything to prove it and since this is just a balance of probabilites I'm sure there's plenty of people who have been presumed guilty when they weren't.

 

My biggest concern is the immigration - any conviction or court case could go completely against me, and the DVLA really would have the last laugh then they'd probably enjoy it. I'm not sure what they're accusing me of but is this a criminal court or if convicted of this 'offence' will there be a record of it - criminal record or court case against me?