council stole vehicle

[sajeel]

Hi,

 

Yesterday a london council stole my vehicle,

 

 

the vehicle was broken down in a resident permit,

 

 

the vehicle had a car cover strapped to it

 

 

they have removed the strap and exposed number plate for pictures and

 

 

then put parking ticket onto cover and taken vehicle to pound.

 

 

They are asking for £265 + £50 every day

 

 

i am looking to prosecute for excessive levy,

trespass and criminal damage for removing car cover ?

 

 

any clarification on point of law would be helpful

 

 

i have pictures from council to prove ticket was not affixed to windscreen and just placed on car cover.

 

Regards,

 

Saj

[Michael Browne]

Criminal damage? Don't be ridiculous.

 

I'd concentrate on getting the car back and then following the appeals procedure

[dx100uk]

was it taxed and insured if it was not on private property?

 

 

dx

[sajeel]

the vehicle was sorn,

 

 

the garage is on the same road where cars are parked

are without tax or insurance on single yellow and they did not tow those,

 

 

the car had parts on order and was put under cover so council are aware the car is broken down

 

 

but they pulled up cover and towed away pictures show cover still on car.

 

 

Must be Christmas BONUS.

[SabreSheep]

Does not matter about other cars.

 

You can only appeal on the facts in YOUR case.

 

Car was on a road as you admitted. You have admitted it was SORN

 

Thus they had the right to TOW your vehicle.

 

What is the grounds for appeal in relation to your car. Remember, other peoples law breaking is not a defense for your situation

[sajeel]

they have taken vehicle on ground that it was in resident bay, but my argument is vehicle was covered as the vehicle needed repair, and they acted unlawful my removal instead of just a pcn.

[ashmk]

Did you have permit for residents bay. (not that it makes a jot of difference)

[sajeel]

no i did not that's why car cover was placed over you cannot win with these money wrenching monkeys

[Jamberson]

To park in a resident bay you need to display a valid permit - not a cover. You just aren't allowed to be there without a permit because you're blocking someone's space. Your case for appeal will be the breakdown, but the idea that you can prosecute (you mean sue) them is silly. If the vehicle was in contravention (it was) then they can remove it.

 

Get the car back, get all the paperwork you can to prove it was broken down, and appeal to try and get your money back.

[sajeel]

there is no valid permit its all virtual permit the bays are always empty and never full. once i pay they never return as payment is deemed as you accept liability.

[dx100uk]

if it was on the public highway or maintained by the council land

 

 

the sorn is useless it must be taxed

[SabreSheep]

OK so

Car was removed. Im assuming it was removed by the council as private clamping and removals on private property is now banned.

 

Therefore if it was on private land they would not be involved.

 

SO car was parked on "Public Land" untaxed and uninsured and without a valid Permit for a residents bay.

 

This scenario doesn't add up in my eyes and even if it did, I still see no reasonable grounds for appeal

[Jamberson]

there is no valid permit its all virtual permit .

 

What do you mean by virtual permit?

[green_and_mean]

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2008/3/section/9/enacted

 

 

An authorised officer of a London Authority or a parking attendant acting in the course of his duties as such may remove anything which obscures a registration mark or any part of a registration mark fixed on a vehicle

[ashmk]

I think this guy is on a wind up

[Conniff]

Definately a wind up or if not then an attempt to bypass the law of the land by parking a Sorn car on the highway, covering it up so hoping they will do nothing.

 

 

If your genuine, then just pay up like a good little taxpayer and obey the law in future.

[Jamberson]

If your genuine, then just pay up like a good little taxpayer and obey the law in future.

 

I thought the forum was to help people?

[Conniff]

Any driver knows that it is unlawful to keep a SORN vehicle on the highway but to cover it in the hope no one will notice makes it even worse, it's deliberately flouting the law.

[SabreSheep]

I thought the forum was to help people?

 

yes this is a forum to help people.

 

it would be unhelpful to offer advice which we know to be bad.

 

If someones case appears helpless what would be gained by sending them on wild goose chases that end up costing them more?

 

Other self help sites might promote that but this site tends to be more realistic.

[Jamberson]

The vehicle was apparently broken down, and he was quite possibly unable to move it

- which could well succeed as a defence in an appeal.

 

 

There is also a question mark over the permit system and how it works - what's a virtual permit, anyone?

 

 

And the SORN issue appears to be irrelevant

- I understand the contravention was parking in a permit bay without a permit (post 6),

so we at least need to keep in mind what he is being charged for,

and how and when the vehicle came to be there,

before accusing him of flouting the law.

 

Right at the start,

he asked for clarification of where he stands.

 

 

Phrases like "pay up" and "obey the law" are hardly constructive.

 

 

At least get the facts out in the open before declaring the situation hopeless.

[Conniff]

SORN is not irrelevant, all vehicles on the public highway are required to be taxed and insured at 'all' times.

When they had the numberplate they had the details.

[SabreSheep]

You do not brake down and then SORN. In an appeal they would look at how long the sorn has been in place and ask why was it not recovered?

[SabreSheep]

The other implication is that it broke down WHILST sorned which again is another contravention unless on its way to and from a booked appointment However that may still not be a defense. I think thats MOT only.

[dx100uk]

defence not defense.......

 

 

yes I suppose if the sorn is not being punished [at this stage? - might dvla be latterly informed?]

 

 

so its a parking matter

 

 

dx

[green_and_mean]

The vehicle was apparently broken down, and he was quite possibly unable to move it

- which could well succeed as a defence in an appeal.

 

 

He 'broke down' and instead of paying to get the car recovered by a garage

he purchased a car cover to try and conceal the vehicles identity,

yeah that's really going to win an appeal!

 

 

Get real he couldn't be bothered to buy a permit and mistakenly thought hiding it under a car cover would escape a penalty.

 

 

The only realistic advice would be to pay up and learn from your mistake,

dragging it out is only costing £50 a day which he will still be liable for if he never bothers to collect the car.