Damned DVLA..........

[bobsp]

Hi,

 

Last year we kept our Peugeot 407 off the road, due to the front needing looking at, and we have another car. I declared this SORN 12 days before the current tax ran out (30/06/08). End of, or so I thought.

 

In late Aug early Sept, we received a letter from DVLA saying we had to pay £80 fine as we had not declared SORN. I immediately called them and told them that I had on 18/06/08. Then they asked me if I have received a letter from them within 4 weeks. No I said, then I asked why they have not sent me one. I was old it was MY responsibly to chase them.......about this letter. They told me they would look into this and get back to me, I left my number. Well, you gussed it, no letter, and no call............

 

Incidently I have another tax reminder here for mymotorcycle, and it says nothing on this about 4 weeks chasing DVLA atall.....this should be made clear by DVLA..

 

Then yesterday we received a letter from Philips Collection Services Ltd demanding £80, and that I tax the vehicle. Well the car was retaxed in october last year as we gor the front sorted out, and MOT'd.

 

I called them and they told me they had been instructed to collect this £80 by DVLA, they would not enter into any conversation on the matter. I called DVLA and they told me I had to pay £80. I questioned whyI had to pay £80 for their mistake of not sending me this letter, to be told that unless I have a letter from them saying they have on record that the car is (was) SORN I an liable. If I fail to pay this they will take me to court and I will be liable for all costs....

 

Government bullying this is. How can they get away with behaving like this???

 

What is my best course of action re DVLA and Philips Collection Services Ltd.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Bob

[S C O R N]

Read the many other posts with the same story. Send them both a letter demanding proof of not receiving the SORN notice or see you in court. Any further demands will invite formal complaint to the police for the criminal offence of harassment.

[Spunkymonkey]

Hi bobsp.

 

As SCORN has said - you don't have to chase them. Unfortunately, they seem to be very reluctant to allow a case like this to ever reach court.

 

According to current law you do all you have to by posting the notice, correctly addressed and prepaid. No need to use recorded delivery and no need to get proof of posting. They won't accept that, even though it's correct in law, and they'll pass it to a DCA to chase because most people will eventually pay up under the continued threats of legal action.

 

Unless you want to pay to "get it out the way", the first thing to do is to let them know clearly and concisely that you don't accept liability for the alleged penalty, because you sent notification as required by law, and you have no intention of paying unless they prove liability in court.

 

Don't go into any more detail than that, and don't waste your time trying to "reason" with them. If they then pass it to a DCA, they're chasing you for money that you've already told them you deny you owe.

 

This approach may well end up with you being summonsed but, if you don't want to pay (and manage not to cave in to the threats) then you may well end up there anyway. As far as I can find, it's not been tested yet but you should win if that happens.

 

At least this way you don't get subjected to endless threats and junk mail in the meantime. Plus they have no justification for passing your details to a DCA (who WILL keep a record that there was a "case" in your name), so you have a potential complaint under the Data Protection Act if they do.

[bobsp]

Hi,

 

Is there any kind of template letter for this? Or do I need to make my own up from scratch.

 

I take it I send this to DVLA, what do I do about the DCA (Philips) that are now chasing me.

 

Thanks

 

Bob

[Spunkymonkey]

No templates as such, but these are the ones I used which successfully got them to withdraw Moorcroft. Shouldn't be too hard to change relevent details.

 

Remember that I'd sent them the V5 for a change of keeper so don't forget to change it to SORN notice in yours. Also, you'd be denying liablility on the grounds that you had declared SORN, not that you were no longer the keeper. Also, obviously, names should be changed to whoever you're dealing with

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dvla/171156-dvla-intercredit-again.html#post1898406

[bobsp]

Ok I got a pretty standard reply, stating I must pay Philips collections, and not to contact DVLA as the matter has been passed to the DCA. They have also in the meantine sent me another letter, sating I have 7 days to pay otherwise they are starting legal proceedings.....

 

Not having the best (bot not too bad) credit rating, I dont want to damage it anymore. What can/do I do here. This to me os a form of bullying. Pay or else we will make your life hell type of thing.

 

My wife has said to pay it to get rid of them. I dont want to on a matter of principle, SORN was sent in June, nowhere on the tax reminder does it say I must chase them for a letter, we are cornered. I am getting fed up with all of this, and am unsure what to do now.

 

Please help.

Thanks in advance.

 

bobsp

[crem]

Write to the DCA informing them the debt is in dispute. By law they must therefore return the case to the principle, in this case DVLA.

 

Write to the DVLA again stating categorically you dispute the alledged debt as you notified SORN as required by law. They are not required by law to send you a confrimation letter, nor are you required by law to pursue the absence of this letter. Advice them that you are prepared to resolve this at court if necessary where you will re-state as a sworn statement that the SORN was submitted on time and correcty.

[Spunkymonkey]

Bob, bear in mind that even if it does go to court and even if you lose (that's two very big Ifs btw) then it has no effect at all on your credit rating as long as you pay it in the time the court says you must.

 

This is not a "default" that you're being threatened with court over. They say you owe this money but you don't think you do (you're right btw).

 

The reason for a court hearing is only for a judge to decide who's view is right. That is an absolute legal right that you have if you dispute an alleged debt - otherwise anyone could demand money off you without any grounds.

 

The fact that they warn about effects on your credit rating if you exercise that right is bordering on fraud - they're implying legal consequences that won't happen (unless you default on any judgement) in order to get money out of you.

 

Have a quick read here to see how one judge recently viewed the DVLA's handling of these penalties:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dvla/155894-sorn-statements-2.html#post1746566

 

I can't advise you whether or not to pay but, if it was me (well, it is me - I'm waiting for mine now), I'd wait for the summons and put in a defence of claim. Plenty of suggestions available here on what to include in it

 

I said before and I stress it again - even if you lose, as long as you pay if a judgement is made it won't have any nasty effects for you.

[bobsp]

HI,

 

Thanks for this,

 

Bob

[bobsp]

Today I got another letter from Philips saying that this was now being passed to their enforcement officers, and thi will incur additional costs.

 

I have sent letters to DVLA about this, but they have basically replied saying it is down to me to chase this letter if not received after 4 weeks, and that this fine is still valid, and for me to pay Philips £80.............

 

My concern is that this will spiral to £200, £300 +

 

How can they do this? I have sent a letter to Philips regarding harrassment, and they claim this is not harrassment, and they are alowed to keep sending me these letters.....

 

I am pulling my hair out...

[Spunkymonkey]

Without a court order it's an unproved (ie: alleged) debt. You have made it quite clear that you're not prepared to pay it unless they prve it in court first.

 

Therefore, any further attempts to collect are harassment. Also, any costs they incur trying to collect it without proving it first are their own fault because you've been quite clear that you require a court order.

 

Finally, if they are saying, as a matter of "fact" that you are liable to pay this alleged debt without a court order then that is fraud.

 

Personally, I'd switch tack a little with them about now and send them something like this:

 

 

Dear Mr Phillips Collections Person,

 

I have already written to yourselves and to DVLA explaining that I deny liability for this alleged fine and am not willing, nor have any obligation, to pay it without a court order.

 

If I am wrong in my understanding please confirm in writing that I am legally obliged to pay this money without a court ordering me to.

 

Until I receive a clear statement from you to that effect my position will remain the same and I resreve the right to ignore any further demands for payment.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

bobsp

 

 

There's a fair bet that they'll write back telling you that you do legally have to pay it. They'll then have committed a clear case of fraud.

 

Oh, and I hope they're reading this :razz:

[Spunkymonkey]

PS: their claim about being allowed to keep sending letters is only valid in the case of an undisputed debt - someone who doesn't deny they owe it but won't pay.

 

In your case, you don't agree that you owe so they are supposed to settle that (IN COURT) before making any more demands.

[bobsp]

Thanks SM, I will write to them now.

 

Bobsp

[Upsilon]

It's a disgrace that they can even try and get away with this, seeing it happen to so many people you would of thought that someone would of done something about them.

 

I hope you win Bob, and I hope they come crawling back to you begging forgiveness, good luck with it.

[Spunkymonkey]

Bob,

 

Something was niggling me about this yesterday so I had a little look back over what I've been doing so far.

 

Regarding DVLA saying that it's between you and Phillips now - I'd draw their attention to this official response by them to a Freedom of Information request I submitted:

 

Appeal of Continuous Registration Penalty Charges - WhatDoTheyKnow

 

In answer to your third request:

 

To be compatible with the Human Rights Act 1998; specifically:

 

(a)the Article 6 Right to a fair trial.

(b)the protocol 1 right to peaceful enjoyment of his possessions.

 

The Agency believes that the imposition of the supplement is lawful and

that the provisions contained in Section 7A of the Vehicle Excise and

Registration Act 1994 are not in conflict with the Human Rights Act. As

you are aware, Article 6 provides for the right to a fair trial. The

supplement payable under the legislation may be recovered as a debt due

to the Crown and therefore the DVLA can instigate legal proceedings in

the County Court for the recovery of the monies owed. It is during such

proceedings that your right to a fair trial arises as you would be able

to file a Defence to the claim issued against you and then attend Court

to put your side of the argument to the Judge hearing the claim.

 

Note that this is their official explanation of why their lack of an official appeal procedure doesn't breach your rights under the Human Rights Act.

 

By passing it to a private company without the court case you're entitled to, I'd suggest that they're deliberately attempting to deny your right to a fair trial, according to their own explanation, after you've made it clear that you want to exercise that right .

 

If it was my case, I'd be politely drawing that to their attention and to my MP - with a link to the FOI request and their answer above.

[bobsp]

Right, I had a letter from Michael Catlin today, sending another copy of the letter that he sent in Jan, stating that their legal position was clear, and then goes onto explain thr background of continuous registration. Half way doew and in bold type, it states "once you have made a SORN, you will be sent an acknowledgement etter within 4 weeks confirmong thse details. If the acknowledgement letter is not received after 4 weeks you must contact Customer Enquirirs Group on 0870 240 0010 innediatey"

 

I have a copy of a tax reminder form,V11 (which is what I used to declare the SORN in June 08) from my wifes car, and it does not state anything on it about chasing for a letter after 4 weeks. I have read it dozens of times.

 

The letter is missing the second page, so I dont know howit ends, but it seems to be pointing to tough, pay up......

 

This was a second letter I received exactly the same as the first, however I send an email the second time to Carol Evans the second time. She had simply sent it back to Michael Catlin who resent the letter I received in Jan.

 

Where now? I cant believe they are getting away with carrying on like this, I am spending so much unnecessary time on this. Who should I write to this time. Just goto my MP?

 

Thanks

 

Bob

[Spunkymonkey]

Ok, just to recap:

 

Have you sent them a letter as I suggested in post 3 telling them clearly that you disputed the charge and wouldn't pay without a court order?

 

If you did, any chance of posting a copy (or cut & paste) here so we can see exactly how clear you were?

[bobsp]

What I sent was below.

 

 

 

DVLA

Carole Evans

Customer Services Manager

DVLA

Swansea

SA7 0EE

20th January 2009

DVLA Reference xxxxxxxxxxx

Dear Sir /Madam,

 

I have now been sent a threatening ‘enforcement’ letters from Philips Collection Services. I politely ask that this is stopped, and that no further action be taken as I am absolutely not guilty of any charge that you wish to level against me. I informed you that VRN XXX XXXX was SORN on 18th June 2008.

I duly sent off the necessary paperwork to DVLA Swansea. Nowhere did it say this correspondence had to be sent recorded delivery, and it is not my fault if you claim this correspondence has not reached you. Section 7 of the Interpretation Act, 1978 says: “Unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document…” The Universal Postal Act also states that post becomes the recipient’s property as soon as it enters the post-box. This applies whether it is sent recorded delivery or not. On instigating a quick search of the Internet, it is obvious that the DVLA is losing a tremendous amount of data and correspondence, and I suggest that you concentrate on improving this situation, to avoid annoying honest citizens. Currently claims could be made against you for being involved in a massive money-making scheme whereby you claim correspondence has been lost in the post, and then fine the innocent person £80! Why should I be held responsible for your inefficiency and disorder? I have always correctly paid any vehicle excise duty due, on any car that I have owned. That is why I deeply resent the fact I am now being hounded for £80.

As I understand, the purpose of SORN is to identify vehicle excise duty evaders, and to assist police and the authorities in combating vehicle crime, and you stipulate that you do not intend to persecute honest motorists by your use of the SORN system. In that case, are you inferring that I am a tax evader or criminal? I would like you to specifically answer this question, in your reply.

 

I will not be paying the £80 fine as this would be an admittance of guilt, and as I have said before, I am wholly innocent. If you intend to pursue this matter further then you should know that I will be contesting this every step of the way, and will also be seeking compensation for the time and effort expended on dealing with this unwelcome matter. Already I have had to spend time on the telephone calling your various offices, that’s Philips and DVLA Swansea, also I have had to write a letter to your office in September 2008,

Please also be aware that I deem this letter to be step one in your ‘four step’ complaints process. If I do not hear from you within ten days, then I shall be contacting the Customer Service Manager at Swansea, which is step two. Ultimately, I will be contacting my MP if I do not receive a satisfactory conclusion to this situation.

Yours Sincerely

Bobsp

CC: DVLA Eastgate,Leeds,

[Spunkymonkey]

Ok, the first sentence in your para 4 seem pretty clear to me. You've stated that you won't pay and stated your innocence. It would have been a tiny bit better if you'd specifically said "take me to court if you want me to pay", but for any reasonable reader it comes to the same thing.

 

Your MP sounds like a good next step. Apart from the basic facts that you sent the form, as required, but they're trying to make you pay a penalty, the big one to raise with your MP is this:

 

In your letter you have protested your innocence and refused to pay based on that. You have a right under the Human Rights Act Article 6 to a fair trial before the State imposes a punishment on you (this penalty charge is a punishment). Every Government department has to respect that right.

 

The DVLA have stated in their answer to a Freedom of Information request (available at Appeal of Continuous Registration Penalty Charges - WhatDoTheyKnow ) that these penalties are consistent with the HRA because you have a chance to defend yourself in court.

 

You have made it clear that you want to excercise that right to prove your innocence, but they have continued to harass you for payment, using a private Debt Collection Agency, without giving you the court hearing that they say is what makes the penalties compatible with the HRA. They are therefore deliberately denying you your rights under the Human Rights Act, even after you've clearly stated that you want to excercise those rights.

I don't know what party your MP is but: if they're Labour then they'll kind of have to respond firmly to an allegation like that ("their" government denying rights under an act they passed), if they're opposition and got anything about them then they could have a field day........

[bobsp]

Hi,

 

Unsure what I should to here.

 

I sold my car on 6th March 2013. I was in the process of getting the private plate removed, so I did not have the log book at the time of sale.

 

Car sold, and buyer came to pick it up on the 6th March. The tax was due to expire on the 31st March.

 

I received the log book back from DVLA, on the 18th March (with the mow old VRN on) and sent it the same day to the new keeper with details filled in and signed. He asked me to send the logbook so he could tax it, where the PO will take the logbook off him and send to get the vehicle registered in his name. I called DVLA the following morning to let them know I had sold it, and was asked to put it in writing, which I duly did.

 

4-5 weeks later I received a tax reminder letter. I called DVLA and told them I had sold it and informed them in writing. I was again asked to write in. This time I wrote in, and filled out the back of the tax reminder, sending a copy of the bill of sale detailing the new keepers detials again. I received an acknowledgement in June saying they had updated theor records. Ok finally!!!!

 

Today I have received a letter from "Collectica" saying I have to pay £80??? I called them to say that the vehicle was sold on 6th March, to be rudely told that I must pay them and they will keep sending letters and calling until paid. This will increase, and will result in bailiffs. My partner is furious at this whole situation, and DVLA.

 

I have just called DVLA to ask what is going on, their failure to update their records is not my issue, I dont key in the details, why did they not do it when I tild them in March? To be told to "Please put your concerns in writing" ARGGGGGGGG.....

 

What should I do here?

 

Thanks in advance....

[crem]

For future reference, the new keeper green slip section 10 V5C/2 is all the buyer would have needed to tax the vehicle and you should have sent the remainder of the V5C to Swansea yourself. Never trust the new keeper to send anything for you when he has no vested interest in doing it correctly.

[bobsp]

The new keeper had to sign it though. Hence sending it to him to sign and Tax. When I got the replacement vehicle I was given the whole V5 to fill my part in and send off. I got the replacement the week before.

[crem]

In my view, the most important aspect of notifying DVLA is that the current RK is responsible for sending in the V5C. Whether or not the new RK had signed it is fairly irrelavent and I have definately sent V5's in without their signature with no adverse consequence. As a current RK, it remains paramount that you must ensure the DVLA gets you removed from any liability for the "old" vehicle.

[Kiki1]

In my view, the most important aspect of notifying DVLA is that the current RK is responsible for sending in the V5C. Whether or not the new RK had signed it is fairly irrelavent and I have definately sent V5's in without their signature with no adverse consequence. As a current RK, it remains paramount that you must ensure the DVLA gets you removed from any liability for the "old" vehicle.

 

It does strike me as odd that the DVLA will accept the tear off slip as proof the vehicle ownership has changed, but ignore written correspondence - even one which has been signed before a solicitor - from the same person. Much the same with SORN renewals

 

It can't be anything to do with making some easy money could it ?

[DaveyBT]

It does strike me as odd that the DVLA will accept the tear off slip as proof the vehicle ownership has changed, but ignore written correspondence - even one which has been signed before a solicitor - from the same person. Much the same with SORN renewals

 

It can't be anything to do with making some easy money could it ?

More likely because that's the way bureacracy works - the V5C slip is recognised by the monkey opening the post and put into an appropriate bin for processing. A letter goes into a different bin to go to a different dept that can read - but gets lost or delayed along the way, or just sits in a backlog indefinitely. Monkeys that can read are more expensive - and if you need one who can write a response as well that blows the budget. Because the letter never made it into the right processing bin the computer automatically spits out whichever ticket it's been programmed to spit out. DVLA is just a big building full of computers and drones - plus well paid managers / executives to watch the computers and drones.

it's the same if you phone them. If your question doesn't fit their standard list of questions they just keep repeating their standard answer to the nearest standard question, eventually becoming exasperated because YOU don't understand their answer (not because they haven't understood your question).