DVLA court summons for SORN on highway for 30 minutes!

[jm2k]

Hi, My oap neighbour has asked me fot help and i dont know what to say?

 

Their old car tax run out on 31/10/12 so it was parked at the rear of our property - off road and sorn sent off a few days later.

 

On 07/11/12 the car was put on a wide pavement layby at the front of the property for it to be collected and moved to a different storage area for longer term.

 

The lane at the back is very narrow, inaccessible and dead end, and the side street a total nightmare with double parking, dead end and awkward shaped so you cant tow a vehicle out or get a lorry down it to have towed their car out so had to be brought to main road to be collected.

It was not on the main road for 30 minutes maximum, while waiting for the tow truck. However, typically a PCSO passed and booked it, literally 3 minutes after it was to be picked up.

 

My neighbour is not used to dealing with things like this, suffers depression and had no idea what to do so left the paperwork that she had from dvla about the fine. Now this court case papers arrived this morning, and the court date is on 5 June and she has a medical appointment which she has been waiting for a few months to arrive.

 

i have scanned and uploaded to photobucket so will try to upload them here.

 

now, she is guilty of the fact the vehicle was on the road for the 30mins, but was doing it as an emergency and very temporary basis to allow it to be removed for storage and had no way of getting it moved any other way, and certainly not from where it was.

however, can these be classed as mitigating circumstances? if so, how can she plead, guilty or not?

 

really lost with this

 

1.

 

2.

 

3.

 

4.

 

5.

 

6.

[sgtbush]

you have broken the terms of a SORN, it states not to be used or kept on a public highway. the defence for DVLA is that the car was observed on a public highway. the PCSO would not of known it was their temp.

you can try your defence of 30 mins, but i cannot see how this would be accepted.

 

i would of kept the car on private property until the tow truck arrived and then moved the car, as the tow truck driver would have paperwork stating the car is going into storage, if he was challanged

[Kiki1]

i would of kept the car on private property until the tow truck arrived and then moved the car, as the tow truck driver would have paperwork stating the car is going into storage, if he was challanged

 

Since the tow truck was ordered (and presumably enroute), that paperwork exists and can be used in court.

[jm2k]

Since the tow truck was ordered (and presumably enroute), that paperwork exists and can be used in court.

 

paperwork would be able to be provided, was due to be collected approx half past, give or take 10 minutes. will get them to make a copy of it.

 

should the plea go in as Guilty or Not guilty at first?

[Kiki1]

paperwork would be able to be provided, was due to be collected approx half past, give or take 10 minutes. will get them to make a copy of it.

 

should the plea go in as Guilty or Not guilty at first?

 

If the vehile was supposed to be collected at 9.30, and (from what I can see the 'offence' was committed at 9.33) then a 'not guilty' plea should be entered.

 

Hopefully the judge will see beyond the petty reasoning for non-compliance of SORN legislation well before that, owing to the booking (and expected arrival)of the tow truck to move from one place of off-road security to another.

 

If your neighbour does get their wasted day in court upheld then put in as many expenses allowed, advise the court the SORN system has been flawed from the inception, and let everyone know.

[jm2k]

If the vehile was supposed to be collected at 9.30, and (from what I can see the 'offence' was committed at 9.33) then a 'not guilty' plea should be entered.

 

Hopefully the judge will see beyond the petty reasoning for non-compliance of SORN legislation well before that, owing to the booking (and expected arrival)of the tow truck to move from one place of off-road security to another.

 

If your neighbour does get their wasted day in court upheld then put in as many expenses allowed, advise the court the SORN system has been flawed from the inception, and let everyone know.

 

excellent, thank you. i will get this written up for them and posted tomorrow.

no doubt i will go with them to add some support and help as well so i will update you all - also need to change the court date as they

have the hospital appointment on the same day.

 

fingers crossed for them

[Raykay]

If the vehile was supposed to be collected at 9.30, and (from what I can see the 'offence' was committed at 9.33) then a 'not guilty' plea should be entered.

 

Be careful, the length of time the vehicle was on the road is irrelevant as far as the offence is concerned - it was either on the public road at that time (9.33) or it wasn't.

 

The reason it was there and the short time it was there may be a good reason in mitigation, but it makes no difference to having committed the offence.

[jm2k]

Be careful, the length of time the vehicle was on the road is irrelevant as far as the offence is concerned - it was either on the public road at that time (9.33) or it wasn't.

 

The reason it was there and the short time it was there may be a good reason in mitigation, but it makes no difference to having committed the offence.

 

 

so should they plead guilty with mitigating circumstances?

[sgtbush]

guilty with mitigating circumstances

[Kiki1]

Be careful, the length of time the vehicle was on the road is irrelevant as far as the offence is concerned - it was either on the public road at that time (9.33) or it wasn't.

 

The reason it was there and the short time it was there may be a good reason in mitigation, but it makes no difference to having committed the offence.

 

In order to get from offroad point 1 to offroad point 2 in this case means at some point the vehicle would always have to be pushed/pulled or lifted, none of which are covered by the SORN legislation.

 

Pleading guilty would be foolish when the neighbour has a valid reason for getting the vehicle into place for a predetermined and paid for collection.

[crem]

While looking for some government info for this thread I came across the following re: SORN for the future. Looks like the government have finally woken up to common sense that we have all been saying for years..... that is, once a car is on SORN it should stay on SORN until the owner tells DVLA otherwise.

 

Department for Transport

Red Tape Challenge: Reform of Road Transport Regulations

The Secretary of State for Transport (Justine Greening):

In May, my Department launched the Road Transportation theme of the Red Tape Challenge – part of the Cabinet Office’s project to review all of the outstanding regulations currently on the statute book.

Following a detailed process of challenge, stakeholder discussion and public feedback, I amnow pleased to announce the results.

Within the Road Transport Red Tape Challenge, my department put forward every secondary regulation relating to road transportation for public discussion– 415 in total. 376 of these are judged still to be live, and of

these I propose to scrap, merge, simplify, amend or improve 142 – well over a third. The detailed breakdown I propose is:

Amongst the measures we are pursuing, we will be: 

Scrapping the regulation requiring motorists to hold a paper counterpart to their driving licence by 2015 – saving drivers up to £8m;

 

Improving the regulation surrounding the notification process for vehicles that are not in use on the road (Statutory Off Road Notification or SORN). Once drivers have notified the DVLA that their vehicle is SORN, they will no longer have the burden of annual SORN

[Raykay]

In order to get from offroad point 1 to offroad point 2 in this case means at some point the vehicle would always have to be pushed/pulled or lifted, none of which are covered by the SORN legislation.

 

Pleading guilty would be foolish when the neighbour has a valid reason for getting the vehicle into place for a predetermined and paid for collection.

 

The question is 'was the vehicle on a public road at the time' (yes/no). If it was, the reason is irrelevant, the offence is complete if a vehicle that is subject of a SORN declaration is, at any time, is used or kept on a public road - there are no exceptions for it being pushed, pulled, awaiting pre-arranged collection etc.

 

Which is why the advice is to plead guilty with mitigation.

[Tony P]

Agreeing (as usual) with RayKay I do wonder about the viability of what is a "vehicle" for these purposes.

 

I recall a case from many years ago where someone was pedaling a moped without a license, insurance etc. The case revolved around the fact that the 50cc engine was mostly not present. and certainly incapable of operating.

The Defendant was acquitted because as there as was no functioning engine it could not be considered to be a motor vehicle but should be treated as a bicycle, albeit still carrying number plates (yes, plural - I said it was long ago!).

 

No doubt 50+years of burocracy and increasing legislation has changed this. To say nothing of Governments being bad losers.

But, I wonder.

[Kiki1]

The question is 'was the vehicle on a public road at the time' (yes/no). If it was, the reason is irrelevant, the offence is complete if a vehicle that is subject of a SORN declaration is, at any time, is used or kept on a public road - there are no exceptions for it being pushed, pulled, awaiting pre-arranged collection etc.

 

Which is why the advice is to plead guilty with mitigation.

 

I would have to disagree with the above (once again). I believe you can tow a SORNed vehicle with a towbar (not a rope) on the public highway without committing an offence, and so there are gaps in the legislation.

It does not help the o/p unfortunately, as the 'offence being complete' as usual has little to do with the warranting of a ticket.

 

It might be worth getting a letter of confirmation from the tow company or driver to use in court though, confirmation of a time when the vehicle shoud have been in their charge may give the court reason not to prosecute.

[Raykay]

I would have to disagree with the above (once again). I believe you can tow a SORNed vehicle with a towbar (not a rope) on the public highway without committing an offence, and so there are gaps in the legislation.

 

The offence is using or keeping an unlicensed vehicle (unless an exempt vehicle) on a public road, contrary to s.29, Vehicles Excise & Registration Act 1994. Schedule 2 of the same act lists exempt vehicles, non of the exemptions is for a vehicle awaiting collection - nor anything about vehicles being towed - towbar or rope.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Raykay

[Tony P]

A vehicle being towed by a fixed mechanical link (bar, A-bracket, jockey,etc) becomes part of the towing vehicle for RTA and VERA purposes. A trailer in fact. A tow rope does not meet this.

Trailers do not require MOT, Tax etc though they must be 'roadworthy' as part of the enlarged vehicle (ie. tyres, lights, braking systems if appropriate for weights, etc).

Edited June 3, 2013 by Tony P

[Kiki1]

The offence is using or keeping an unlicensed vehicle (unless an exempt vehicle) on a public road, contrary to s.29, Vehicles Excise & Registration Act 1994. Schedule 2 of the same act lists exempt vehicles, non of the exemptions is for a vehicle awaiting collection - nor anything about vehicles being towed - towbar or rope.

 

You wouldn't seriously expect the DVLA to post information to aid a bypass of SORN legislation in the Excise area would you ?

 

Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulation 1986, available on a number of caravan and other sites, paraphrased as follows

 

VOSA

When a car is being towed by a solid tow bar / A-Frame the car being towed becomes a trailer, and does does not have to be taxed, tested or insured as it is covered by the towing cars insurance.

 

Of course other regulations (licence of person in towed car/max NAM weight , lights and brakes etc) have to be adhered to, but in a nutshell no offence is being committed

[Raykay]

Although a vehicle being towed on an A-Frame, dolly, solid bar or a rope is treated as a trailer, the difference is that if it is on a A-Frame, dolly, towing bracket etc., control of it - steering etc. is by the towing vehicle and so it may be considered to be part of it. If it is being towed by a bar or rope, it needs a 'driver' to control it, so it may not be considered to be part of the towing vehicle and so needs to be road legal in its own right.

Edited June 4, 2013 by Raykay

[Kiki1]

The rigid towing bar requires a driver since the four wheels are still on the ground, however it is still classed as a trailer owing to it being firmly attached to the one in front, and at a constant distance, unlike the use of a rope or cable..

 

There were some changes to the regulations a couple of years back, apparently to bring them into line with the EU (if you believe that you will believe anything) but the rigid tow bar is still sold with the same covering rules by shops such as Halfords.

[crem]

 

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~pattle/nacc/arc0496.htm

 

 

... and the DVLA replies

 

Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN) was introduced on 31 January 1998 and affects vehicles licenced on, or after that date. The scheme aimed to ensure enhanced accuracy of the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) records, by requiring vehicle keepers to contact DVLA at least once a year. This information can then be used to identify vehicle excise duty (VED) evaders and assist police and authorities with combating vehicle crime.

DVLA tries to ensure that all vehicle keepers receive a reminder form (V11), which enables them to renew the vehicle licence, or declare SORN, if the vehicle is to be kept off-road. These documents must be printed eight weeks in advance of distribution, in order to ensure timely receipt. There is, however, no statutory obligation for the Agency to produce V11s, the full responsibility for ensuring that the vehicle is correctly licenced, or subject to SORN, rests with the keeper.

In order to assist customers to comply with regulations, information booklets are available from Post Offices, DVLA local offices and DVLA's Customer Services Department. Copies are also sent with each Registration Certificate and V11 reminder form, to ensure that keepers are aware of their statutory obligations. Advertising campaigns to raise awareness ran prior to the launch of the SORN scheme and subsequently at periodic intervals to reiterate the information. DVLA's website is constantly updated to review any changes in legislation.

When a vehicle changes hands, the SORN declaration is not transferred; a declaration is required from the new keeper. This is to ensure that DVLA are aware of changes to the vehicle record and have an accurate update of the new keeper's details.

Vehicles manufactured or registered before 1 January 1973 are classed as historic vehicles and attract a nil rate of duty. However, to ensure that the vehicles are roadworthy and documentation such as MoT and insurance are current, a nil rate tax disc must be displayed in the vehicle. If the vehicle is kept off-road and has not had a licence since 31 January 1998, there is no requirement to declare SORN. However, if the vehicle has held a licence since this date, it is essential that an annual SORN declaration be made.

From January 2004, a new system of continuous registration (CR) has been introduced. The first stage of this scheme ensures that all vehicle keepers receive an acknowledgement letter when contacting DVLA to declare SORN or vehicle disposal. Detailed instructions are provided to ensure that if an acknowledgement letter is not received, the vehicle keeper contacts DVLA to confirm that the record has been updated.

Consultations have been held with trade organisations and relevant industry contacts, offering a forum for the expression of views regarding the implementation of measures to increase adherence to VED policy and to reduce vehicle crime. These consultations, one held in 2001 and a subsequent, more detailed proposal in 2003, received confirmed support, recognising that the Agency does not intend to persecute honest motorists, but to crack down on offenders who repeatedly abuse the system.

An official appeals procedure has not been established, however, DVLA will treat each case on merit and will view genuine cases with sympathy. Whilst the legislation allows all unlicenced keepers to be pursued, DVLA retains the right to withdraw cases in certain circumstances.

SORN declarations may be made on form V890, which is available from all licence issuing Post Offices and DVLA local offices. The customer services department will issue a form for those that wish to post notification, or they can accept telephone declarations from the registered keeper (tel: 0870 240 0010). The form can also be downloaded from the DVLA website www.dvla.gov.uk

really!!! the say they don't intend to prosecute honest motorists with this SORN legislation. It would seem to me that the OP is exactly this type of "honest motorist" who had no intention of dodging his road tax.!!

[Kiki1]

really!!! the say they don't intend to prosecute honest motorists with this SORN legislation. It would seem to me that the OP is exactly this type of "honest motorist" who had no intention of dodging his road tax.!!

 

It says persecute, there's nothing within the consultation confirming the DVLA wouldn't screw the honest motorist financially

[Tony P]

It says persecute,

 

It also said 'repeatedly'.

Which is not what happened here.

[jm2k]

Well its not good news! Despite stating we were unable to attend due to an existing medical appointment AND letter to appeal under mitigating circumstances, the court went ahead and made the judgement without us being present or re-arranging the date.

£20 fine, £18.34 back duty, £90 costs = £128.34 to pay within 7 days (being on less that that state pension is impossible for my neighbour to pay in this period of time, especially when they are already in arrears with gas/elec/water) so need to contact them to ask for much longer time to pay. Or is there anything else we can do - What do you think?

 

Mitigating letter a:

 

Mitigating letter b:

 

COURT DECISION:

[Kiki1]

Regardless of the mitigating circumstances, medical conditions and so on

your colleague pleaded guilty

they did not attend, and

(I assume) they did not enclose the paperwork from the recovery company .

 

Put yourself in the mindset of the magistrates for a minute and you will see they have no reason to find you innocent of the charge.

[Raykay]

Well its not good news! Despite stating we were unable to attend due to an existing medical appointment AND letter to appeal under mitigating circumstances, the court went ahead and made the judgement without us being present or re-arranging the date.

£20 fine, £18.34 back duty, £90 costs = £128.34 to pay within 7 days (being on less that that state pension is impossible for my neighbour to pay in this period of time, especially when they are already in arrears with gas/elec/water) so need to contact them to ask for much longer time to pay. Or is there anything else we can do - What dyou think?

 

]

 

As a guilty plea was entered, the matter was dealt with on the day as unfortunately, although the court was informed that you would not be able to attend on the day, you did not ask for an adjournment so that you could attend.

 

Contact the court to ask for a longer time to pay.