Continuous Licensing Malarky

[zoomboy]

In August I got a notification that I had failed to relicense a vehicle that I traded in as part of a trade scrappage scheme in March (the vehicle was taxed until July). So I thought, obviously a mistake, no problem I replied and sent the trade invoice as proof I no longter own the car. I thought that was the end of it.

 

Then I get the letter saying I'm still liable and must pay £80 (£40 if in 7 days) plus £20 in license fees. I swore heartily and called my self a fool. I was just about to call and pay up, but instead posted some cursing on a car forum I'm on. Some kind soul on there posted a link to this site and sugested I research more fully first.

 

Well all I can say is that I am amazed and dumbfounded at the number of people suffering the same anguish. After more reading on here and digging around other related sites for legislation etc. I have to say a

 

Big Thanks to Everyone On Here!

 

I now know I'm not in the wrong. The DVLA's requirement for me to contact them 4 weeks after sending in my V5C is not a legal requirement. So they are attempting to extort monies unfairly.

 

So I'm standing up for myself. I compiled a letter, based muchly on works of other people on here. I've clearly stated my case, I've sent the V5C the fact they claim to have not received it, misplaced it or failed to process it, is not my concern.

 

I then figured I'll escalate this further. So I've written to my MP and copied him in on my DVLA letter. It's very easy to do and I recommend anyone should do it. writetothem com makes it very easy with a form to submit.

 

For me this has been a millitant year. This is the 3rd time I've wrtten to my MP. On the previous two counts it was in regard to the DEA (Digital Economy Act) and an animal rights issue. Both occaisions I got reasoned responses in writing through the post. I'm expecting no different this time. We'll soon be on first name terms me and my mate Bob

 

I'm now a firm believer that these guys work for us. We may not have even voted for them, but they are our democratically elected representative. So when I have something to say, why not tell someone in power and authority to act? It's also very, very easy to do. I suggest everyone gives it a go. It's as simple as filling in an online form. If you type on this forum, you can type a message to your MP! (you don't even need to know who they are, it figures it out by postcode).

 

Put in your real details - that way you get a genuine reply. There are all kinds of Key Performance Indicators that pressures them to reply on time, so you *should* get something back. It may not be in agreement, but at least you know they're earning their keep.

 

I've also submitted an FOI to DVLA about their post handling and specifically asked for details on improvements made since March 2009 to remedy the losses under manual handling, which is significant as there is an existing FOI from March 2009 where they respond in regard to making improvements.

 

My next step will be another action from here. I'll complete and submit a complaint to the public service ombudsman using the form and asking my MP to complete and submit it.

 

I'm so insensed by this, I will not let it lie or roll over and kowtow to these fools. They must change their systems or expect to be challenged.

 

How easy it would have been to have paid the £40+ and move on... but why should I be penalised for something where I have done no wrong?

 

Thanks again everyone.

Edited October 8, 2010 by zoomboy

[reallymadwoman]

Good for you.

 

One person standing up to the big boys on their own may not make a huge difference, but the more people say 'enough is enough', the better the chances that things will improve.

[dom2599]

Do what i did and get my local MP involved, its funny when i did this the tone of their letters changed, then again funnliy enough, i started getting letters from people at the top rather than the monkey's at the bottom.......good luck m8, these faceless people are idiots....oh and by the way, the money they were chasing me for, i never owed!! you couldnt make it up

[Conniff]

We'll soon be on first name terms me and my mate Bob

 

 

That means you will have to buy him a wet.

[zoomboy]

That means you will have to buy him a wet.

 

If he fires off a letter in my support to the DVLA then I'll certainly buy him a drink. As he was the Shadow Defence Secreatary I guess I'll be using him appropriately in my defence

[Conniff]

Oh dear, Liarbour, they set the [problem] up to start with.

[zoomboy]

Got a letter from Bob today.

 

Thank you for your recent email regarding the problems you have experienced with the DVLA.

 

I have written to the Minister at the Department of Transport asking for his response to this issue and as soon as I receive a response I will get back to you.

 

Clock is ticking with responses trying to meet Gov't key performance indicators. Working in local Gov't I'm familiar with the "target" mentality and the goals they must meet.

[kwaks]

Glad someone else is on board zoomboy.

 

You might enjoy a read of this thread, one of the men who exposed this and has managed to have his day in court

 

http://www.bikechatforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=185543&highlight=clerkenwell

[zoomboy]

Glad someone else is on board zoomboy.

 

You might enjoy a read of this thread, one of the men who exposed this and has managed to have his day in court

 

http://www.bikechatforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=185543&highlight=clerkenwell

 

Thanks for that. I'll give it a read when I calm down a bit!

 

I just got home to find a letter from the DVLA. They want me to provide them with a copy of the Certificate of Destruction and confirm it was part of the Gov't Scrappage scheme. So it arrived today (20th) and they have said "No further action will be taken until the 22/10/2010 to enable you to reply." (Letter dated 14th)

 

Well how am I supposed to get the certificate of destruction? That would be what the party who destroyed it (the Trader) would have as I no longer owned it when it was destroyed. I also quote from my first letter "the vehicle was sold under a trade scrapage scheme"

 

So I'm a little annoyed again right now. I shall chill for a while before I compose my response.

[reallymadwoman]

So I'm a little annoyed again right now. I shall chill for a while before I compose my response.

 

Always wise in my experience.

[zoomboy]

After checking the envelope it also shows the post mark clearly as the 18.10.10. So that's what they consider a fair process.

 

Firstly you will note the date of my response as the 20th October 2010, which is the date I have received your correspondence (Postmarked 18.10.10). It is my intention to deal with this matter promptly, but feel that the deadline you state for my response, 22/10/2010, limits my ability to fairly gather information and return it as requested.

I'll get my letter off in the post tomorrow morning, 1st class - with a proof of "sending". Because since all this fiasco I've now discovered if you do your postage online with Royal Mail by printing a label. You can take it to the post office and they will stamp a receipt, which you print at the time of the label, to prove you have posted it. All for the price of a 1st class stamp.

[reallymadwoman]

If I send any large letters from the post office, I automatically get a receipt.

[zoomboy]

Well I got another response from them today. Post marked the 22nd. This was just a simple note to say that no separate response would be sent from their offices as it was being referred to my MP. So at least they're in touch at higher levels.

 

I thought it only fair to forward my MP the correspondance from last week where they effectively left me with only one day to respond. I also ensured I brought to his attention the Interpretation Act 1978, Section 7 and the Ministry of Justice's own Criminal Procedure Rules 2010 Part 4 (as in force on 5 April 2010), Section 4.4. Whilst I understand this is not a criminal case, if the MoJ believe first class post is suited to the serving of legal documents, then surely the DVLA should not expect a greater service for a lesser claim?

 

http://www.justice.gov.uk/criminal/procrules_fin/docs/crim-pr-2010-part4.pdf

 

http://www.swarb.co.uk/acts/1978InterpretationAct.shtml

[kwaks]

The Interpretation Act is the one that nails them anyway, did you read the thread I linked to? Sickpup will give you advice if you PM him through that site, he has be leading a crusade against them for years over this subject.

 

His FOI request of how they report their missing post is very enlightening.

[zoomboy]

The Interpretation Act is the one that nails them anyway, did you read the thread I linked to? Sickpup will give you advice if you PM him through that site, he has be leading a crusade against them for years over this subject.

 

His FOI request of how they report their missing post is very enlightening.

 

Yes I did thanks. I'm already familiar with the case as it's on a few forums I even read the FOI's and then submitted one of my own asking for details of what has changed since the date of his request. They claimed things were being updated/improved so I've now asked for proof of their actions.

 

They are currently overdue with the FOI I submitted on 7th October. My understanding is they have 20 days to respond. I guess that may be 20 working days, so time will tell.

 

PS: Today I got a notification acknowleging that I am no longer the registered keeper. I guess this is what I should have expected when I sent in the V5C

[zoomboy]

Got a brief response from my MP today. Just to say although he's contacted a minister over this he's now also asked the enforcement office to address my most recent correspondence.

 

I also got a duplicate letter from them today about my MP dealing with it and I would get no separate response But this time they paid 76p postage, not the normal 25p so it makes me think at least they are now escalating this and dealing with this 1st class!!!... erm, right?

[zoomboy]

My MP has a response that the matter is now with Acting CX Simon Tse and will receive immediate attention and will be sent a response in due course.

 

I'm still not holding my breath.

 

Edit: Oh, I also had a reply to my FOI that I submitted. It would still appear to be the case that "Information about the quantity of missing mail is not held."

 

They further state that "the section that should have received a missing item of mail investigates each individual report" and that the "DVLA must rely on the Royal Mail for delivery of mail to the Agency. Unfortunately, some items do fail to be delivered, causing difficulties for customers and inaccuracies in our records. This is beyond DVLA's control."

 

So whilst it is out of their control they expect us to bear the resultant loss, even though it is also "out of our control." and that somehow seems fair to them.

Edited November 6, 2010 by zoomboy

[zoomboy]

Well it looks like the DVLA are keen to have their day in court. I received correspondence through my MP today stating they were not going to alter their decision, but made a final offer to pay at the reduced rate of £40.

 

Sorry Mr DVLA that's not good enough. Either you stand up in court and ask for the money or write this off. I'm now fully prepared to contest your claim that because you either never received or misplaced my V5C that I am liable for any penalty.

 

Not only that but I shall now be seeking assistance in formalising this complaint through the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/). If they want the money then they are going to have to earn it!

 

/me goes to sit in a quiet corner for a bit whilst my blood stops boiling.

Edited November 23, 2010 by zoomboy

[zoomboy]

Today saw the arrival of two letters from my MP. The first contained the Minster of Transports response, which basically states I'm still going to be pursued fo £80 unless I settle within 21 days. The second confirmed the submission of my correspondence to the PHSO.

 

So I'm expecting a court date to begin the new year.

 

As much as they bluster on, as yet they have not come up with any argument against the Interpretation Act and continue to state my responsibility in regard to informing them of the new owner through following their procedure. They have not accepted that I have followed their procedure so far as the law requires.

 

Maybe I should include a footer on all of my mail that states "Unless you receive a written response from the intended recipient within 4 weeks in reply to your correspondence you should consider your mail undelivered. You must then follow it up with a telephone call to confirm that I have received and processed your mail. If after 4 weeks you have not done so there will be an administration fee of £80 for failure to comply with the terms of this correspondence. By accepting and reading this mail you agree to these terms and conditions of use."

 

Surely that's about as legal as they seem to think it is?

[Dragons Dennis]

I haven't read the whole thread fully, but can I just clarify one thing. Did YOU send the yellow portion of the V5c to DVLA? If you did, there is no case to answer. Your legal obligation is to send that upon sale by post. If you posted it then you have 100% fulfilled your legal duty (Asuming it was filled out too of course). There is no requirement for you to contact them in 4 weeks and indeed there never was. They did state on the V5 that you will receive confirmation AFTER 4 weeks and if you don't receive it you should contact them. But there is no legal duty to do so and in any event, after 4 weeks could mean 4 weeks and a day or 412 years. They are both AFTER 4 weeks.

 

Bottom line, if you sent the appropriat portion of teh V5c in yourself, upon trading the car in then you have done what is legally required. They will lose in court.

[Surfer01]

Thing is you never scrapped the car, the dealer scrapped the car. Obviously they got the part of the V5 stating that the vehicle had been sold to another party in thsi case a trader. What morons! They seem to shoot themselves in the foot every day.

[Tony P]

Assuming the DVLA either loose in Court or withdraw at the last minute, the follow up response of the Minister of Transports would be interesting to hear!

 

And the outcome should be forwarded to PHSO to add to what has already been referred to them to consider.

[zoomboy]

I haven't read the whole thread fully, but can I just clarify one thing. Did YOU send the yellow portion of the V5c to DVLA?

 

Yes *I* did. And yes I keep telling them I did. And yes I keep telling them they have no legal right to expect me to confirm they have received it... but it all falls on deaf ears.

 

Assuming the DVLA either loose in Court or withdraw at the last minute, the follow up response of the Minister of Transports would be interesting to hear!

 

And the outcome should be forwarded to PHSO to add to what has already been referred to them to consider.

 

I have since received the reply from the Secretary of State for Transport, Mr Philip Hammond, who states I am still liable for the fee and admits that there is no legislation requiring me to contact them in acknowledgment of the receipt of my V5C. He has kindly allowed me 21 days to pay at the lower rate of £40 - so kind.

 

So I have escalated this to the PHSO via my MP and have received an acknowledgment from them.

 

I honestly believe that they have not fully read my correspondence. They have made no effort to argue against the Interpretation Act, but continue to repeat that it is my responsibility to inform them. Which I quite plainly have stated I have done.

 

Ultimately this is going to require them to prove that I did not post the V5C, or demonstrate the probability of me NOT mailing before a Magistrate. Given that the probability is very low. It is not in my interest to keep myself as the registered keeper of a vehicle I don't own. It would leave me liable to any related claims in regard of its use.

 

So, see you in court Mr. DVLA man.

 

But here's how I expect it to go.

 

First they will attempt to claim the £80 by handing it over to a debt collector.

 

I will reject the debt collector as I acknowledge no such debt and he doesn't have a court order.

 

They'll then pass it to a Solicitor, who will send me a snotty letter trying to claim the £80 plus recovery fees and will point out I will be liable for their costs if it goes to Court. They'll be told to "jog on" and I shall remind them that I will be claiming MY costs in court.

 

Then it *MAY* go to court and then we'll see the colour of their money.

[zoomboy]

Letter from the PHSO today. "Sorry, but we're not going to investigate this case." I figured as much. It seems that unless your gripe is with your specific treatment no one wants to know. If it is about policy then they just ignore it and move on.

 

One last throw of the dice to the ICA, which I expect a rebuff from. Then it's over to court, I guess.

[Irate driver]

You're certainly not alone in this - I traded in my vehicle several months ago and DVLA were holding me accountable for the tax on it due after the sale, and now for a late licensing penalty. The trader kept the V5C document, but I wrote to DVLA with the transfer information and they claim not to have received it. The enclosure they send with the V5C says to write if the trader has kept the V5C and to send this letter to DVLA, so I have abided by what they asked for.

 

I have quoted the Interpretation Act and DVLA responded that the Act clearly states that it is my duty to ensure delivery, not to send items to them - surely this means that whenever anyone contacts DVLA we either have to do it in person or send everything recorded delivery!

 

After seeking legal assistance with this matter it has been referred to my MP to be passed to PHSO, but I've heard today that DVLA are getting the baliffs to step up their action - I had notified them of the referral to the MP and requested a delay on any action.

 

Can anyone advise re the Interpretation Act and DVLA's take on it? I've been up for a fight on this one but DVLA have really ground me down and I'd appreciate some support to keep going.