Philips demanding payment

[Abed]

Hi

 

I part exchanged my car on 9 October 2008 for another car. I claimed and received tax refund on my old car. On 20 January I received a penlty form demading £80 for failing to relicence my old car. I sent the V5 slip and received an acknowledgement on 30 January 2009 from the DVLA saying "Thank you for telling us that you are no longer the keeper of or have scrapped the vehicle with the above mention registration mark. I can confirm that we have udpated our records.

 

If you receive an application form for renewing your vechicle lices for this vehicle, please ignore it. You do not need to contact us as we print these forms (V11 or V85/1) up to 6 weeks before the licence comes to an end"

 

Well, I was under the impression that the matter is closed and that DVLA have updated their database according. However, I received a letter for the DVLA demanding payment of 80£ as final notification and failure to pay could result in various actions taken. I did not respond to their letter thinking it was overlooked and perhaps the database was not yet updated.

 

Two later I received a Demad for Payment letter from Philips requesting payment. I explained to them the situation but said that even the record are updated I had received the penalty form before. What they say does not make sense and looks to me as a type of embazelment. I understand that simple business ethos that DVLA should have followed by sending a gentle reminder for the V5 slip.

 

I am now in dispute with Philips and wonder if you can guide me on how to register a dispute so no additional cost is incurred by the debt collector.

 

Can you help

 

Thanks

Edited June 8, 2009 by Abed

[Big Boss Man]

Hi

 

I part exchanged my car on 9 October 2008 for another car. I claimed and received tax refund on my old car. On 20 January I received a penlty form demading £80 for failing to relicence my old car. I sent the V5 slip and received an acknowledgement on 30 January 2009 from the DVLA saying "Thank you for telling us that you are no longer the keeper of or have scrapped the vehicle with the above mention registration mark. I can confirm that we have udpated our records.

 

If you receive an application form for renewing your vechicle lices for this vehicle, please ignore it. You do not need to contact us as we print these forms (V11 or V85/1) up to 6 weeks before the licence comes to an end"

 

Well, I was under the impression that the matter is closed and that DVLA have updated their database according. However, I received a letter for the DVLA demanding payment of 80£ as final notification and failure to pay could result in various actions taken. I did not respond to their letter thinking it was overlooked and perhaps the database was not yet updated.

 

Two later I received a Demad for Payment letter from Philips requesting payment. I explained to them the situation but said that even the record are updated I had received the penalty form before. What they say does not make sense and looks to me as a type of embazelment. I understand that simple business ethos that DVLA should have followed by sending a gentle reminder for the V5 slip.

 

I am now in dispute with Philips and wonder if you can guide me on how to register a dispute so no additional cost is incurred by the debt collector.

 

Can you help

 

Thanks

 

Sorry to hear about your problems, its becoming a regular problem with Philips demanding payments.

 

I would contact the DVLA first in an attempt to sort the matter out, request a complaint form from Philips, exaust both of these routes, if you feel Philips are harrasing you complain to the OFT.

 

Ive listed some contact details below, that you may feel helpfull;

Philips Collection Services Ltd

 

PO Box 152

Darlington

DL3 9WT

 

Contact: Mr N Bradley

 

Phone: 01325 387 400

Fax: 01325 383 887

 

Email: [email protected]

 

Link: www.philips.org.uk

 

 

Office of Fair Trading contact details:

 

Philips Collection Services Limited - Licence Number 0491286

 

[email protected]

 

 

Keep us informend !

[crem]

Dealing with Philips in the first instance is easy; as an officially appointed DCA, you only have to write to them and inform them that the debt is in dispute, and as such they are legally required to return the debt to the principle (DVLA) and they may take no further action against you for the debt.

 

Dealing with the DVLA will no doubt be a much bigger pain in the arse. I would send them one letter only stating that you informed them correctly and you are in receipt of their acknowledgement. Should they wish to pursue the matter further, tell them you will not enter into any further communication with them unless this takes place in court.

[Britainsworstdriver]

Is it just me? You sold the car in October, but didn't send the V5 in until 20 January 2009? That makes you liable for the car if it isn't taxed.

[kiptower]

if you read it again he had tax refunded , and received "an acknowledgement on 30 January 2009 from the DVLA saying" > "Thank you for telling us that you are no longer the keeper of or have scrapped the vehicle with the above mention registration mark. I can confirm that we have udpated our records."

[Abed]

Thank you guys for the help you providing me in this case. I contacted the DLVA and were reluctant to discuss the matter and referred me to Philips. I e-mailed Philips asking for a complaint form.

 

I would like to add further information to the case is that when I part exchange the car I kept the tax disc which I posted to DVLA with a letter stating that I longer the keeper of the car and was refunded £90.50.

 

It looks to me given the fact the I no longer the keeper of the car and an acknowledgement from the DVLA Philips still demanding payment by saying.

 

"We are in receipt of your acknowledgement receipt from the DVLA, however, the date of the receipt is after the date of the

Late Licensing Penalty, therefore, your licensing activity was late and you are still liable to pay the outstanding amount of

£80.00."

[crem]

Thank you guys for the help you providing me in this case. I contacted the DLVA and were reluctant to discuss the matter and referred me to Philips. I e-mailed Philips asking for a complaint form.

 

You don't need a Philips "complaint form". A simple letter to them as I outlined above will surfice. i.e. Tell the debt is in dispute and as such they are legally required to return the file to the DVLA. State that any further communication from them, bar an acknowledgement that the file is back with the DVLA, will be deemed to be harrassment and reported to the authorities accordingly.

 

I would like to add further information to the case is that when I part exchange the car I kept the tax disc which I posted to DVLA with a letter stating that I longer the keeper of the car and was refunded £90.50.

 

There is no legal requirement to use one type of form or another to notify the DVLA that you are no longer the keeper (although the garage should have given you back the yellow portion of the V5 to send to the DVLA). Clearly the car was correctly taxed right up to the day the DVLA generated the VED refund, otherwise the refund couldn't exist! Keep that acknowledgement safe and when you write to the DVLA keep it short and simple along the lines of;

 

I am in receipt of your demand for an LLP regarding vehicle xxxx xxx. I dispute this is a valid charge as I notified you at the time I disposed of the vehicle. I require you to notify me that your records have been corrected and you are not pursuing this invalid charge.

 

Should this not be the case, I will not enter into any further corrospondance with you on this matter, and therefore require you to lodge a court claim immediately so that this matter can be resolved within a legal court.

Edited June 9, 2009 by crem

[Britainsworstdriver]

if you read it again he had tax refunded , and received "an acknowledgement on 30 January 2009 from the DVLA saying" > "Thank you for telling us that you are no longer the keeper of or have scrapped the vehicle with the above mention registration mark. I can confirm that we have udpated our records."

 

And if you read it again you will see that he sold the car on 9th october and sent the tax disc in for a refund, which he duly received although he doesn't say when. He then received a penalty charge on 20 January for not renewing his tax. He THEN sent in the V5 which was duly acknowledged on 30 January 2009.

 

My point is that although he wrote in and asked for a refund, it was still his duty to notify the DVLA he had disposed of the car correctly. This would be done by sending the yellow portion of the V5 in as mentioned above. He didn't do that, so when the tax became due and the car hadn't been taxed or SORN'd he is liable as the registered keeper.

 

He did tell them in his letter, but that was for a refund of the tax. IIRC he has to inform DVLA of disposoal of the car by returning the correct portion of the V5.

 

I agree it is ridiculous, I am just saying what i think DVLA view this as. Why did the OP not just send in the V5c and fill out the correct form for a refund?

Edited June 9, 2009 by Britainsworstdriver

[Britainsworstdriver]

I would add that the fine was for the period BEFORE you officially notified them with the V5, however I agree that the OP has notified them by letter and I agree that AFAIK there is no legal requirement to use a particular form for notifying them. He can prove they received that letter because they processed the refund and thus he can prove they knew he disposed of the car.

 

I think the OP has a good strong case and would win in court. The fine with philips is because the DVLA have not been paid to tax the car or had the car SORN, so start the process of chasing the automatic fine. This would normally eb correct, but as they HAD been told of the disposal and that can be proved, they have no case.

[crem]

And if you read it again you will see that he sold the car on 9th october and sent the tax disc in for a refund, which he duly received although he doesn't say when.

 

It doesn't matter when he sent it. Until he asked for a refund the car was still fully taxed up till the day the claim for refund was accepted.

 

He then received a penalty charge on 20 January for not renewing his tax. He THEN sent in the V5 which was duly acknowledged on 30 January 2009.

 

He may have sent the portion of the V5 in then, but this is the SECOND notification that he no longer had the vehicle. As they had already acknowledged the first notification, the date of this second notification is irrelevant.

 

My point is that although he wrote in and asked for a refund, it was still his duty to notify the DVLA he had disposed of the car correctly. This would be done by sending the yellow portion of the V5 in as mentioned above. He didn't do that, so when the tax became due and the car hadn't been taxed or SORN'd he is liable as the registered keeper.

He DID notify them when he asked for his refund. You are suggesting this can ONLY be done by using the yellow portion of the V5 which is incorrect. He is not therefore "liable as the registered keeper" because he was no longer the registered keeper.

 

He did tell them in his letter, but that was for a refund of the tax. IIRC he has to inform DVLA of disposoal of the car by returning the correct portion of the V5.

Not true. See above

 

I agree it is ridiculous, I am just saying what i think DVLA view this as. Why did the OP not just send in the V5c and fill out the correct form for a refund?

It's more than ridiculous, it's invalid. The OP clearly thought sending a letter at the time he asked for the refund provided better/more information to the DVLA. Who are we to disagree?

[Britainsworstdriver]

The reason I stopped posting on this forum before was you Crem. Everytime I post, you have to break down and analyse every word as in the above post of yours.

 

Is this the 'Crem forum'? No. I am entitled to voice my opinion whether you like it or not. Everything I said is quiet valid and doesn't need you to correct me every step of the way.

 

What exactly is the idea of breaking down every sentence of mine into mini quotes? Is it some power trip of yours to prove me worng? Get a life pal.

[patdavies]

Is this the 'Crem forum'? No. I am entitled to voice my opinion whether you like it or not. Everything I said is quiet valid and doesn't need you to correct me every step of the way.

 

Nobody is denying your right to post your opinion.

 

Others are equally entitled to post to point out where your opinion is wrong.

 

In this case, you are wrong

 

What exactly is the idea of breaking down every sentence of mine into mini quotes? Is it some power trip of yours to prove me worng? Get a life pal.

To make it easier, in the absence of face-to-face conversation to make sure that the parts of any post that are being discussed/corrected are easily separated out from the rest.

 

It is not a power trip - it just makes it easier to read.

 

(and I would guess that Crem is quite happy with his life, thanks)

[Abed]

I wonder guys if I have a leg to stand on in court and what are the proper procedures. I e-mail a long letter (thanks to #2 permalink) to [email protected] and also sent a letter to DVLA where the Acknowledgement was originated. It seems to me that there are more department within the DVLA (One for LLP and one for updating the records) with no communication between the two.

[gwc1000]

Hi, Abed. I assume when you claimed the refund for the road tax that you used the correct DVLA form?

[Big Boss Man]

People - lets try and keep on the thread subject, reading the bickering between users is not good for everyone.

[Abed]

Hi, Abed. I assume when you claimed the refund for the road tax that you used the correct DVLA form?

 

Hi

 

I sent the tax disc with a cover letter stating that I no longer the keeper of the car. I did not fill a form.

 

Thanks

[gwc1000]

Hi

 

I sent the tax disc with a cover letter stating that I no longer the keeper of the car. I did not fill a form.

 

Thanks

 

That could be the problem. If you use the correct form for a refund there is a box to tick to declare SORN at the same time. It seems that you have claimed a refund, but not declared SORN.

[Big Boss Man]

I wonder guys if I have a leg to stand on in court and what are the proper procedures. I e-mail a long letter (thanks to #2 permalink) to [email protected] and also sent a letter to DVLA where the Acknowledgement was originated. It seems to me that there are more department within the DVLA (One for LLP and one for updating the records) with no communication between the two.

 

No probs, exaust all the complaint channels, hope you get the matter sorted.

[crem]

That could be the problem. If you use the correct form for a refund there is a box to tick to declare SORN at the same time. It seems that you have claimed a refund, but not declared SORN.

 

AFAIK this wouldn't work for the OP gwc1000. My understanding is that that the SORN can only be used by the RK, so even if you sell a car that is currently on SORN, the new keeper must immediately tax it, or declare a new SORN in his name. i.e. SORN is not transferable like VED is.

 

The reason I think it perhaps works for you (correct me if I'm wrong) is that you are usually the recipient of the vehicle coming into your garage, and it is you that therefore sometimes claims the refund on the VED, not the (now ex) RK.

[Abed]

Sorry to hear about your problems, its becoming a regular problem with Philips demanding payments.

 

I would contact the DVLA first in an attempt to sort the matter out, request a complaint form from Philips, exaust both of these routes, if you feel Philips are harrasing you complain to the OFT.

 

Ive listed some contact details below, that you may feel helpfull;

 

Philips Collection Services Ltd

 

PO Box 152

Darlington

DL3 9WT

 

Contact: Mr N Bradley

 

Phone: 01325 387 400

Fax: 01325 383 887

 

Email: [email protected]

 

Link: www.philips.org.uk

 

 

Office of Fair Trading contact details:

 

Philips Collection Services Limited - Licence Number 0491286

 

[email protected]

 

 

Keep us informend !

 

Received today a complaint form from Philips any tips or suggestions on filling the form are welcome.

 

There are three facts to this case:

 

1- Car was part exchanged at a Ford dealer

2- Tax disc returned with a cover letter telling DVLA that I no longer the keeper of the car and received a £90.50 tax refund

3- Acknowledgement letter from DVLA that records were updated

 

 

Thanks in advance for all you contributions guys.

[Abed]

Received today a complaint form from Philips any tips or suggestions on filling the form are welcome.

 

There are three facts to this case:

 

1- Car was part exchanged at a Ford dealer

2- Tax disc returned with a cover letter telling DVLA that I no longer the keeper of the car and received a £90.50 tax refund

3- Acknowledgement letter from DVLA that records were updated

 

 

Thanks in advance for all you contributions guys.

[Lifesontheup]

Ok:

 

Vehicle part ex'd October and refund sent with letter. You received your refund but not your acknowledgement letter at that time?

 

You were sent a fine on 20 January 2009 and their confirmation of disposal was 30 January. I'm afraid then that the confirmation of disposal you received was after the fine was issued and very likely as a result of you telling them in response to the fine that you no longer have the vehicle.

 

Using the acknowledgement letter will not work - its after the fine was issued.

[Lifesontheup]

I don't want to add fuel to the fire but Britainsworstdriver has given good advice.

 

Been there done this and the letter is after the fine.

[Abed]

I don't want to add fuel to the fire but Britainsworstdriver has given good advice.

 

Been there done this and the letter is after the fine.

 

My understanding is that DVLA continous registration to stop offenders. There are three facts which runs against their mission.

 

1- Car was part exchanged at a registered Ford Dealer

2- Tax refund was received after letter sent to DVLA that I no longer the keeper of the car.

3- Acknowledgement received from DVLA that there records have been updated.

 

Adding to this information:

 

Contacted Consumer Direct and they believe I have got a good case and advice me to take the matter with MP.

 

Another important issue is that the Notice of Instruction regarding Late Licensing Penalty states in every letter that Date of Offence: Oct 10, 2008. On that I date I was still licensed and still had the tax disc which I sent two weeks later. That is to say the Offence date predates the late licensing office.

 

I will keep you updated.

[wheelergeezer]

1. Vehicle sold to dealer in October 2008. your duty to notify DVLA of this using Yellow portion of V5c - you didn't, however you did notify them in any event by way of a letter in which you also requested a refund of VED, which you then received. the fact that you received the refund confirms they MUST have received notification then that you had disposed of the vehicle.

 

2. You received a late payment notice for VED in January which you then responded to with the V5c and received confirmation on 30 January of disposal of vehicle.

 

The problem seems to revolve around what seems to be that the DVLA received a letter from the Op in which he/she informs the DVLA that the vehicle had been sold and request of a VED refund. It would seem they complied with the second part even though it wasn't on their official refund form, thus setting an example that official forms are not needed to notify DVLA of changes. They cannot in my opinion now pursue the OP for not notifying them as he/she clearly did. The very fact that they did not confirm it is simply an administration problem within DVLA and not the OP's concern.

 

No doubt this will go to court and I suspect the judge will throw DVLA out. Their only possible case could have revolved around them claiming not to have received the letter, but because they responded to part of the letter there is concrete proof that the letter was indeed received.

 

Their next possible effort could be to claim that the OP requested a VED refund but did not mention the disposal. If that is their claim they would need to prove their claim by producing said letter as evidence.

 

The problem with this ridiculous system is that it is now around the wrong way. The OP has sold the car and has obtained the VED refund. The onus on taxation and registration SHOULD fall with the new keeper, in this case the garage, but it doesn't.

 

Good luck with this.

 

Now watch as two regular numptys come and rip my post to shreds.