BREAKING NEWS – DVLA Loses In Court

[Big Bill]

They may have lost in court but they certtainly won on watchdog. the interview was as useless the interviewer. The poison dwarf was only interested in making one useless point about a woman who fell foul of Boris's empire.

Where was the ambush on the criminal activites of the DVLA?

 

Are the DVLA the masters of the universe? Possibly.

[avante]

Agreed, they got away scot free on that one. A pathetic interview which was easy for Tse to work his way around. This was a serious issue affecting maybe tens of thousands of innocent people, yet it was left to a washed up old journo to ask simple questions, and not even follow up on the answers given, which were woolly (Pat Woolley) at best.

 

Why didnt she ask why the DVLA treats innocent people like criminals? Or why the DVLA considers itself to be the law? Or why they say they do not lose any post, yet the FOI reply shows that in truth they do not actually know what the percentage of lost post is? Or how about Why don't the DVLA accept documented proof such as photocopied originals, yet the courts do?

 

I liked it when Tse was talking about the tiny percentage of people who complain about SORN reminders etc. Well thats because the DVLA have been able to bully and harangue people into believing that their process is not only lawful, but it is indeed the law! "You MUST pay a fine of £80.00 or else we will send debt collectors round to recover your DEBT!!!" Thats why people just pay up, it sounds quite threatening and official. Well Mr Tse, lets hope that the level of complaints rises significantly now, and that a proper investigation into the DVLA takes place, by someone far more proficient in investigative reporting than Anne Robinson!!

[Conniff]

Obviously it - Simon Tse - went to the same school as Gordon Brown, did not answer a single question and lied.

If you should be at home now Simon Tse and having a look here to see how you did, you showed yourself to be a complete arsehole, running a department that has no more scruples than drug runners or people smugglers.

There is one difference though, you probably make more money than they do.

Edited May 27, 2010 by Conniff

[avante]

It wasnt Noel Shanahan, it wasn't the Chief Executive, it was the ACTING Chief Executive Simon Tse. Shanahan appears to have been moved sideways indefinitely to a role within the Department of Transport.

I don't think he made an arse of himself either, he didnt have much to defend, after all, the stories presented by Watchdog were mainly about the woman who's car was towed away and sold by a Local Authority, which for some reason Anne robinson kept harping on about. The real story was Duncan Pecks story, which unfortunately was glossed over by Watchdog. He proved that the DVLA lies to innocent people, and is prepared to lie to them up to the point that it goes to court. And whatsmore, the independent complaints procedure actually is a totally dependent complaints procedure (if a procedure at all) whereby the Chief Executive decides the outcome!

I hope my dispute with the DVLA does go to court, they deserve every lost case they get!

[Conniff]

Tks, edited.

 

I agree, this has been said over and over, Watchdog is crap at changing anything, they have too many articles, time for only a couple of questions which are not forced and they never chase up a given reply, all in all, very poor interviewing. Why isn't Jeremy Paxman doing the interview.

 

There are lots of threads that advise 'send it to Watchdog', but watchdog never actually makes any difference at all, so it would seem a waste of time to send them anything.

 

If I hadn't seen the extent of the problems with the DVLA with my own eyes, but only knew what I had seen tonight, I would be thinking 'a couple of whingers out of millions, not a bad record, I can't see what the problem it'.

Edited May 27, 2010 by Conniff

[JonCris]

Oh dear told you so or at least I suspected how it would go & I wasn't disappointed .......................... apparently

 

I'm afraid that WD even after the reintroduction of Ann Robinson is only a shadow of it's former self. Its' all about image & personalties rather than content

[buzby]

Agree with all the preceedong. Watchdog is an ENTERTAINMENT show (the most obvious it the double-act comedy team 'Mad Bikers'), no expense spared in generating belly laughs (which rarely come off).

 

Faced with Tse, the ability to drill down to the unlawful pursuit of those who have complied with SORN, yet through no fault of their own are beaten into submission by the weight of Debt Collection activity. Watchdog would have far better served viewers by revealing how to challenge and lift the DVLAs threats, rather than simply seek apologies.

 

I DID like Tse's contention that after Council's have paid for and recieved the relevant Registered Keeper's details, it remains the Council's responsibility to ensure that the data they provided was 'accurate'.

 

I'm sorry - if I pay for a service, I expect it to be fit for purpose. DVLA is saying that they have no responsibility, and any information they provide has no guarantee of accuracy.

 

Yet nobody thought this was worthwhile pursuing.

 

DVLA and Watchdog should hang their heads in shame.

[lonerider]

Hi everyone.

 

I would like to say a big thanks to everyone who has supported us, in my quest to expose the DVLA from acting unlawfully with the view of changing the rules that that the DVLA inflict on innocent motorists. How many years has this been happening and what have we / you done about it?

 

It does not end there, this is going to be an ongoing train. The show is what I expected, but having watched it about 10 times it did make some valid points. Yes it could of been better. We all now know the DVLA is not fit for purpose in its current state. Week Mangement is often lead by an attitude that they were not willing to commit to improve anything anytime soon.

 

So what can we do now?

Papers are a good start. If you are going to contact them, you need to do 20 min for starters. If any of you are either recieving wrong information, wrong details we need to take advantage. This could be wrong names, wrong addresses, anything that is wrong. Keep it, record it and use it.

 

Has anyone put the show on youtube yet?

Can someone do that for me please?

 

Everytime you email the DVLA insert at least 5 links that are directed to websites where the DVLA has messed up. Keep it fresh. If anyone wants any good links just let me know. Not sure how to link just ask.

 

When submitting Freedom of information requests, make sure you dont forget about your links. They are bound to click on them and be reminded how bad the DVLA is. Keep your links consistant.

 

Get your MP involved - mine kept hounding them with letters. It does work.

 

There is much more work to do, but let me tell you something. I was dragged to the courts for something I did not do. I was innocent. I will never allow the DVLA to walk over me again. If I can help you I will.

 

Remember all letters, all emails, dont forget your links, dont forget your MP, dont forget your papers, dont forget to keep submitting Freedon of Information Requests. It cost them more then £80. If everyone did that it would not be worthwhile for the DVLA to go down the County Court route.

 

I can not stress enough, how important it is for you to get your MP involved. Please get them involved. MP's make the law, so it makes sense to change how the DVLA work..

 

I have attached a PDF, but only use this form when you have your MP involved. Reason is they will need to sign it. This form is called a PHSO The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman who investigate complaints about government departments and agencies in the UK and the NHS in England

 

 

I am also looking for suggestions and ideas please. Please contact me if you would be willing to help!

New Parli Form 102009 PHSO-0066 ver 5 - mailandweb.pdf

Edited June 1, 2010 by lonerider

[avante]

One thing I have noticed from writing letters back and forth to the DVLA is that the erroneous statements they make in their replies simply help the final cause, should it come to court.

I am reading a letter from the Head of Compliance at the moment, and in response to my concerns re Interpretations Act, it reads "It is the Agency's position that it is not sufficient for a person issued with a Late Licencing Penalty, who is the registered keeper, to simply advise that a disposal notification has been posted to the DVLA."

I'm sorry but the law states that that is exactly what is sufficient. There is no requirement to do any more than to advise that a disposal notification has been posted to the DVLA! All the DVLA require is that the notification is completed and posted via post.

[lonerider]

Would that be S Alexander?

[avante]

A man who appears to be extremely non-compliant.

 

I like the link ideas, all emails now contain links I am also propogating motoring forums.

 

I have just read one of the V5c's I have for one of my vehicles, and the more I read it the less clear it becomes. This bit about them sending an acknowledgment letter AFTER four weeks, yet they say if you havent recieved an acknowledgment letter WITHIN four weeks then you should contact them. But that just doesnt make any sense at all, it is utter gibberish! You WON'T have recieved the letter within four weeks as they don't send it out till AFTER four weeks. But how long after four weeks? It doesnt say!

[slick132]

I find this v interesting and will have to dig out my paperwork from 2008 when I was fined by DVLA for not SORNing my vehicle, despite protests from myself and the intervention of my MP.

 

Perhaps give them the opportunity to refund the fine I had to pay, or take them to court for it.

 

[buzby]

Do remember, that having paid, you have a mountain to climb to get your money back. It is not that you are chasing something owed, but that DVLA misrepresented its claim and you paid under duress. This is more difficult than you think, because the action of paying is what DVLA see as your admission and discharge of the claim against you. Trying to wind the clock back because you've thought better of it later won't be easy, and would (probably) require a solicitor to represent you, which would completely remove the benefit of getting the amount repaid.

 

I'm not saying it cannot be done, but the chances of succes if you hadn't paid would be a magnitude higher, than if you made payment then tried to reclaim. Of course if you lose, you'll be hit with the DVLAs (capped) costs too, so its best not being in this disadvantaged position before you start.

[slick132]

Thanks Raymond - your comments are appreciated.

 

I paid the reduced fine of £40 pounds on the advice of my MP, to avoid the fine being doubled. I think, at the time of payment, I said it was being paid under duress. And my letters to the DVLA before, and when, the fine was paid made it very clear that I did not accept their assertions.

 

I'll see how things develop before deciding ...........

[avante]

I agree with Buzby, its going to be extremely difficult to turn back time on this one.

Isn't it amazing though how the DVLA get so many people to pay their "discounted" invoice, an invoice for a payment that is in many cases totally unwarranted!

They invoice you to pay for their mistakes and offer an early payment 50% discount

[buzby]

It is a very effective practice, as so many outfits follow the 'parking ticket' route to somehow make a 'saving' by settling early. The Parking Appeal Tribunal is clear - if you have paid (even under duress) the door is closed - it is an either/or.

 

It may seem reasonable to give them what they want and then seek redress when your neck isn't in the noose. But this remains a bad move. Back in the old days when you used to get decent interest, I'd appeal and not pay, putting the money into a savings account that provided interest. In the odd occasion that I lost - my loss was mitigated by the interest (it often took up to 6-9 months before a hearing). When I won, I was really 'in the money'!

[avante]

Yep, it is a very effective practice, and cloaking your letters with official looking terminology, emboldening words like Failure to Pay, Demand, Enforcement Action etc. means that most people will do the easiest thing to get it off their back - pay, and justify it by feeling that they've saved themselves the extra £40!

I've made my decision on this one, I'm not paying what I don't owe, I have no debt with the DVLA.

I'm thinking that this is worth setting up a seperate website and forum, so I'm going to try and put something together tonight.

[buzby]

Why not join one of the many anti-DVLA sites, there are a good many out there akready, a quick search will bring them up. (I think they first appeared in 1997...!).

[avante]

Because I can't find one despite loads of googling Most are posts on more generic forums such as this one. If you know of one

[buzby]

They all appear as threads in Forums - apart from here there is MSE, and even The Register (DVLA off-road system seriously off-message ? The Register Forums

 

Solus websites may be fun to build, but forums have a greater hit rate.

[avante]

You can merge the two. Informational website with facts about the DVLA and how they bully and harrass people, and an open forum which wuold get all the hits (and increase the page rank!). Anything that gets this lot in the public eye is needed

[JIMBO5444]

I have more good news. I won against the DVLA in Portsmouth County Court. I relied on several points and half way through I knew I was going to win. I must thanks BBC Watchdog who gave details of case history. HORSHAM COUNTY COURT PEEK V SEC OF STATE FOR TRANSPORT CASE 9BR08279. I am happy to confirm my case when the court papers arrive but it bolis down to " The DVLA do not have statutary power to require anyone to contact them if they do not receive a receipt."

[lonerider]

Jimbo - its PECK! lol.

 

WELL done

.............................................................................................................................................................................................

 

We have over 5000 hits on this subject alone and how proud I am to be part of a great forum with great people on board excluding the DVLA who read this. Again it was proved that the DVLA lost because they are not abiding by the law in general and when it come to the Acknowledgement Letter system. I have been very busy in getting support from many organiastions.

 

I would like to make a suggestion.

When you go to county court you can refer to test cases like JIMBO did and it worked. In order for it to work we need trial details where people have won:

 

I think this can be used as a very powerful tool. Should this be a sub folder under DVLA or be part of this thread? I think if its part of this thread it will get to long. We could put the info in a PDF and keep it updated and I would be happy to do that or as i said start a sub folder?

 

Claim No: 9BR0829

 

Court: Horsham County Court

 

Date: 30 March 2010

 

Reason: No statutary power to require anyone to contact them if they do not receive a receipt."

 

Result: Win

Edited June 2, 2010 by lonerider

[avante]

Thats why I was thinking of a seperate website and forum, just for this particular subject.

I think it should go into a sperate thread really, so people can keep themselves up to date as to what cases have been won, what evidence should be used, how a defence should be put together etc.

[avante]

The DVLA seem to have stopped corresponding with me ! No acknowledgement of the emails sent in the last week at all. Good innit?