Making sense of Continuous Registration Law ....

[SAE140]

In order to mount a defence against the DVLA's claimed non-receipt of a SORN, I asked to have returned to me a copy of the original fixed penalty notice (the one in which a statement is made, then returned to them).

 

On the bottom of the page, two authorities are given for their issuance of a fixed penalty notice:

1. Section 31A Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994.

2. Section 7A Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 and Regulation 9A Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002.

 

A copy of the 1994 Act can be downloaded from Public Acts of the UK Parliament 1994 , and the 2002 Regulations from: UK Statutory Instruments 2002 (2742)

 

 

Now, starting with section 7A of the 1994 Act .... There is NO section 7A !!

There is however a Section 7(1) which reads:

 

Every person applying for a vehicle license shall-

(a) make such a declaration, and

(b) furnish such particulars

(whether or not with respect to the vehicle for which the licence is to be taken out) as may be prescribed by regulations made by the Secretary of State.

 

But this applies to someone APPLYING for a vehicle license - which I hadn't done - I had declared SORN (which is being claimed wasn't received), which is different.

 

And if we look at regulation 9A .... again, there is NO regulation 9A !!

There is a regulation 9(1) and 9(2) which are concerned with applications for the surrendering of licences, but nothing whatsoever to do with a date applicable to a fixed penalty notice, as the DVLA are claiming.

 

Moving on then to Section 31A of the 1994 Act. Yet again there is NO Section 31A (this is getting silly ...), but there is a Section 31(1) which is concerned with defining the period from which an offence is deemed to have commenced, and refers back to Section 30, which is concerned with the back-duty payable, which further refers back to Section 29 which states:

29 - (1) If a person uses, or keeps, on a public road a vehicle (not being an exempt vehicle) which is unlicensed he is guilty of an offence.

 

So - there is no reference whatsoever in the authorities cited which relate to SORN, or a fixed-penalty notice served in respect of same. I simply cannot believe that a government department would make such a fundamental error - so can anyone throw any light on this ?

 

It would be nice to think that all the SORN fixed-penalty notices which have been issued have been fatally flawed (million of pounds in refunds .. !!) - but right now all I'm looking for is a reality-check.

[patdavies]

VERA s.7A

7A Supplement payable on late renewal of vehicle licence

 

(1) Regulations may make provision for a supplement of a prescribed amount to be payable in prescribed cases where—

(a) a vehicle licence taken out for a vehicle expires, and(b) no vehicle licence is issued for the vehicle—(i) before the end of such period beginning with the expiry of the expired licence as may be prescribed, and (ii) for a period beginning with that expiry.

(2) A supplement under this section—

(a) shall be payable by such person, or jointly and severally by such persons, as may be prescribed;

(b) shall become payable at such time as may be prescribed;

© may be of an amount that varies according to the length of the period between—

(i) the expiry of the licence by reason of whose non-renewal the supplement becomes payable, and

(ii) the time at which the supplement is paid or that licence is renewed.

(3) A supplement under this section that has become payable—

(a) is in addition to any vehicle excise duty charged in respect of the vehicle concerned;

(b) does not cease to be payable by reason of a vehicle licence being taken out for the vehicle after the supplement has become payable;

© may, without prejudice to section 6 or 7B(2) and (3) or any other provision of this Act, be recovered as a debt due to the Crown.

 

 

(4) In this section—

(a) references to the expiry of a vehicle licence include a reference to—

(i) its surrender, and

(ii) its being treated as no longer in force for the purposes of subsection (2) of section 31A by subsection (4) of that section;

(b) “prescribed" means prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, regulations;

© “regulations" means regulations made by the Secretary of State with the consent of the Treasury.

 

(5) No regulations to which subsection (6) applies shall be made under this section unless a draft of the regulations has been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of Parliament.

 

(6) This subsection applies to regulations under this section that—

(a) provide for a supplement to be payable in a case where one would not otherwise be payable,

(b) increase the amount of a supplement,

© provide for a supplement to become payable earlier than it would otherwise be payable, or

(d) provide for a supplement to be payable by a person by whom the supplement would not otherwise be payable.]

 

This was an amendment inserted by the Finance Act 2002. Your link goes to the original Act. If you use the statutelaw database, then you get the amendments as well.

 

I can find no reference to R.9A of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002

[Professor Lone Ranger]

Have there been any further dvelopments on this subject and / or any cases that have been dealt with in a court of law? I have seen a reference to a case 'won' by a defendent vehicle keeper at the Clerkenwell County Court on 26 October 2009. Is there a record of that case that is accessable to the public? That case was about whether a SORN was received. I am more interested in where it ia laid down that a SORN must be completed by any partivular date. Any help on that would be gratefully received.

[Raykay]

According to s.6, The Road Vehicles (Statutory Off-Road Notification) Regulations 1997, unless you are a motor trader, not later than the day the current licence expires.

 

 

"Where, on or after 31st January 1998, a vehicle licence ceases to be in force for a vehicle by reason of the expiration of the period for which the licence was granted and a further vehicle licence (or if appropriate a nil licence) for the vehicle is not taken out so as to run from the expiration of that period, the keeper of the vehicle shall make the required declaration and furnish the required particulars in relation to the vehicle -

• (a) if he is a motor trader, not later than the end of the period of three months starting with the day following the expiration of that period; or
   
  (b) in any other case, not later than that day."
  

[SAE140]

Have there been any further dvelopments on this subject

Speaking for myself - no developments that have been worth reporting on ...

 

My dispute revolved around DVLA (Poole)'s claim that I didn't send DVLA (Swansea) a SORN, and my attempt to email them via their website, which was ignored.

 

The last communication I had from Poole was to the effect that a search of their email database had failed to show any communication from me - and could I confirm the email address which I had used ?

 

But I had used the pro-forma on their webpage - which does not (or did not) have any place to insert an email address or other contact information (it might have since changed) ...

How on earth could I reply to that ? What would I say to someone claiming to be 'The Manager' - "that you, sweetheart, are so incompetent that you don't even know what the content of your own webpage consists of" ?

Even I couldn't be that rude - so I chose not to reply.

 

Throughout, I have adopted the 'well, take me to court then' approach (thanks in part to the encouragement received here), but 12 months on I have heard nothing further from them, and am assuming that the matter is now dead.

 

Sorry that none of this relates to dates etc., and is therefore presumably of no help.

[Professor Lone Ranger]

Speaking for myself - no developments that have been worth reporting on ...

 

My dispute revolved around DVLA (Poole)'s claim that I didn't send DVLA (Swansea) a SORN, and my attempt to email them via their website, which was ignored.

 

The last communication I had from Poole was to the effect that a search of their email database had failed to show any communication from me - and could I confirm the email address which I had used ?

 

But I had used the pro-forma on their webpage - which does not (or did not) have any place to insert an email address or other contact information (it might have since changed) ...

How on earth could I reply to that ? What would I say to someone claiming to be 'The Manager' - "that you, sweetheart, are so incompetent that you don't even know what the content of your own webpage consists of" ?

Even I couldn't be that rude - so I chose not to reply.

 

Throughout, I have adopted the 'well, take me to court then' approach (thanks in part to the encouragement received here), but 12 months on I have heard nothing further from them, and am assuming that the matter is now dead.

 

Sorry that none of this relates to dates etc., and is therefore presumably of no help.

 

I do not believe the vehicle keepers need to prove they are not guilty.

 

It is for DVLA to prove they are, which means a claim in a county court which is costly and time consuming. The pattern appears to be; even if DVLA makes a claim they do not attend the hearing. I believe it is enough the keeper states the SORN has been posted. A sworn statement made by a person is accepted as the truth. It is up to the DVLA to show it is not. How can they do that?

 

I my case I argue the claim is out of time on this basis.

s 50 Time-limit for recovery of underpayments and overpayments

1 No proceedings shall be brought—

a. by the Secretary of State for the recovery of any underpayment of duty on a vehicle licence, or

b. by any person for the recovery of any overpayment of duty on a vehicle licence taken out by him, after the end of the period of twelve months beginning with the end of the period in respect of which the licence was taken out’

 

• You have passed the 12 month point so I think DVLA has rune out of time.
  

I am going in to bat on 12 May and I will report on what happens.

 

I freely admitted I made the mistake of not immediately completing a SORN but I am accused of not re licensing, not failing to declare SORN, which appears not to be a specified offence per se. I am however looking for other pitfalls that I may have discovered yet. I have trouble understanding how or why failing to re license a vehicle can be an offence when no licence is required to keep a vehicle out of use in a private garage.

[Raykay]

It is not a case if being guilty or not guilty, it is treated as non payment of a debt which is why it is heard in the County Court and not Magistrates Court.

 

I can see one problem with your reference to s.50 (b), that is a time limit for under or overpayment of V.E.D. paid on a licence that has been taken out, not a general time limit for under or over any other payment.

 

The other problem is that if the last vehicle licence expired after January 1998, the vehicle has to be continuously licensed - which means that it does need to be licensed even if it is out of use in a private garage.

 

However, if the vehicle is not kept or used on a public road (ie. out of use in a private garage) a SORN declaration may be made in place of the licence - it must be one or the other. If there is not a current SORN declaration for the vehicle, it must be licensed - which is why DVLA are chasing you for not re licensing your vehicle.

Edited April 1, 2010 by Raykay

[Spartacusian]

The answer is simple!

 

In the event we do not wish to continue to licence our vehicles for use on the road, we are under an obligation in law to 'Notify' DVLA of this fact by the use of SORN. . . . . END OF!

 

As far as I am aware, we are NOT under obligation of law to chase them or notify them if we do not receive confirmation of our SORN within 20 working days. This is just advice NOT Law.

 

Look at form V11.

Left hand side under the heading 'You can apply for a tax disc or make a SORN:

 

4 asterixed options exist. The fourth one say's:

 

*by filling in this form and sending it to:

 

The next line should be the address of your local MVL Centre (Motor Vehicle Licencing).

 

Therefore If you do this, you have complied with the law! You have done Exactly what the form tells you to do!!

 

Now turn the V11 over.

Look at 1st Paragraph of Section A, headed: " What it means to you"

It basically says that if you don't receive a letter of confirmation of your sorn from DVLA within 20 days, then contact customer services to let them know.

 

As far as I'm aware this is NOT a legal requirement.

 

So in short:

Before you post your SORN, make a photocopy of it, write on it the date and time and location you posted it, and file it in safe place ready to defend your corner should they fail to receive your SORN Statement!

 

In my case after pointing out these facts, I never heard another thing from them.

They didn't even have the courtesy to put my mind at rest by letting me know they had dropped the case. However after nearly 2 years, I'm sure they have.

Edited August 28, 2010 by Spartacusian
Spelling & Grammar corrections.