Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • dx100uk   do you think it might help if the OP went back to the dealer and argued the point about the dealer having to pay the vehicle recovery costs (in the event of a cancellation and no pre-contract info) by quoting to them the Motor Trade Ombudsman's view on the question from post #25?   I mean, the motor trade ombudsman is not generally well-known for being on the consumer's side, and yet there they are spelling out the OP's argument for her!   This could be backed up by (1) reiterating that the advertised mileage does not agree with the MOT history - at least I think that's the case; I haven't quite got my head round it yet, and (2) pointing out that the "sold for spares" bit is simply untrue.  She could wind up by suggesting that she thinks any ADR or court would find in her favour on all three of these points and ask if he wants to reconsider his position.   See if that shifts the dealer any further.   Assuming he won't move, then either go for ADR (is this binding and who does it?) as a first step or continue with legal claim.   Only contra-indications I see:  (1) I think the distance selling/extended cancellation argument is very unusual with a used car purchase and have no idea if it's likely to be successful.  BUT Advice Direct Scotland and Aberdeen TS seem to think it's possible(?) and so does the Motor Trade Ombudsman - so who knows.   (2) BankFodder did suggest several pages back that if the OP got the purchase price back that might be a result, but that would mean either writing off two sets of transportation fees or arguing separately about them.    
    • Hi. I posted on the facebook group about Hermes queries re: a parcel that Hermes said delivered but i didnt receive. It was a private sale of a mobile phone from a seller in Wales to me in Edinburgh.   The seller has stopped contact with me now so I cant get any help from them. Hermes are saying it was delivered but it wasn't.   I have got all copies of emails to and from the seller and to and from Hermes. A photo of the actual parcel that the seller sent me prior to posting.   There also seems to be a some confusion on the Hermes tracking info about which day it was actually delivered but either way I was in my house both prior and after the delivery.   There was no photo but it stated the driver got a signature. Not true cos it was a covid thing not to get signatures. No calling card to say it was left somewhere else or in a safe place. It just simply wasn't delivered.   I've been told to ask for GPS info in order to trace the delivery or driver. I cant even talk to a human or get a valid address to write to.   I sent an email to the CEO guy and still no reply. I've not reported anything to the police but I'm getting all sorts of contrasting advice to do this and not do that etc that im totally lost now.   If you read this David, please get back to me please. Much appreciated.   This happened in June/july so hope im not too late to still do something about it. It's just took this long to only get to this stage. 
    • PAC code   https://tinyurl.com/yxhxcsxf   ...
    • Noted! Hopefully there won't have to be another time though!     I did respond to the email, I just said that he cannot deduct any costs incurred for collecting / picking up the vehicle and if it heads down the route of ADR which is a total new concept of me having any involvement with, that he would have to pay a refund/the cost of the car and the cost associated with the collection of the vehicle.    Upon further checking the legislation because he gave me no cancellation rights prior to the contract starting he is indeed guilty of an offence, which is the likelihood of what trading standards are dealing with in regards to his local TS contacting him.     
    • hi,     Just asking for some experience or knowledge.     I purchased a puppy on the 30th of august. On numerous occasions I was in contact with breeder and asked if the puppy showed signs of entropion.    I was told no.   On the 26th of August puppy had first jabs. And apparently their vets said none of the litter showed sign of entropion.    On collection of puppy I noticed he was covered in green mucus. The pen had dog muck spread in there so assumed it was just from pups playing and maybe getting it in each others eyes (poor hygeine on breeders part)   Anyways,   Asked breeder to wipe pup and we left       With in 3 hours we realised that the puppy wasn't well. He physically couldn't open his eyes and when we attempted to clean them his eyeballs weren't visible.    We phoned an out of hour vets and contacted the breeders immediately.     The pup was taken to the vets and we were informed he had a severe eye infection which was a result to entropion.    The vet bill came to around 900 after tacking and meds etc. I asked the breeder to cover the costs. They said no because their vets said their was no issues.     The state on this puppy my vets think he's suffered from birth.     And most certainly not 5 minutes before I turned up.      I've filed a small claims for the cost of the vets and the cost of the puppy.      Where do you think ill stand?    What type of evidence will the judge want to see. Thanks
  • Our picks

    • Ahmed Alwaheeb's firms sold cars riddled with faults – and which sometimes had government recall notices. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427369-ahmed-alwaheebs-firms-sold-cars-riddled-with-faults-%E2%80%93-and-which-sometimes-had-government-recall-notices/&do=findComment&comment=5071860
      • 3 replies
    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 8 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .

DVLA court summons letter for no insurance after SORN date


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1775 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hope someone can help with a SORN question.

 

To cut a very long story short

 

my son's car became undriveable so bought another.

Phoned DVLA after getting a fine

 

what he needed to do to SORN it as he hadn't received the log book from the DVLA and couldn't do it online.

He was told to send in a letter which he did.

 

After a couple of months he got a summons from Stevenage Court for not having insurance.

He wrote to them and explained he'd sent a letter and lo and behold,

notification and tax refund was received the next day and dated back to the receipt by them of the letter.

 

He has now just received a further letter saying that as the SORN was backdated

the offence of no insurance still stands albeit well after the date that the vehicle has been SORN'd.

 

He has an acknowledgment from them stating "Your SORN starts on 11/09/2015"

Summons states that he had no insurance on the 6/10/2015??

 

Is this legal??

Surely if the vehicle has an official SORN date and the tax refunded back to the 11th,

how then can they say it was uninsured after that time?

 

 

Any help would be gratefully received.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like I have posted this in the wrong forum so am posting here as well as the General Motoring Forum. Hope this doesn't mess things up too much.

 

 

Hope someone can help with a SORN question. To cut a very long story short my son's car became undriveable so bought another. Phoned DVLA after getting a fine what he needed to do to SORN it as he hadn't received the log book from the DVLA and couldn't do it online. He was told to send in a letter which he did. After a couple of months he got a summons from Stevenage Court for not having insurance. He wrote to them and explained he'd sent a letter and lo and behold, notification and tax refund was received the next day and dated back to the receipt by them of the letter.

 

 

He has now just received a further letter saying that as the SORN was backdated the offence of no insurance still stands albeit well after the date that the vehicle has been SORN'd. He has an acknowledgment from them stating "Your SORN starts on 11/09/2015" Summons states that he had no insurance on the 6/10/2015??

 

 

Is this legal?? Surely if the vehicle has an official SORN date and the tax refunded back to the 11th, how then can they say it was uninsured after that time?

 

 

Any help would be gratefully received.

Link to post
Share on other sites

did he have valid insurance upto the date the car was eventually SORN?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

 

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

 

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Afraid not, that's why he got a fine but the case file states that he did not have insurance on the 6th October. The SORN acknowledgement states that the vehicle was SORN'd on the 11th September.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but he has not got a fine yet?

 

 

or is this two things?

 

 

he was fined for xxxx offence

 

 

now he has an additional summons for no insurance for a date passed sorn date?

 

 

your posts are a bit confusing

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

 

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

 

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My apologies, tried to cut to the chase but left out a ton of history.

 

 

Original fine was failure to Insure because it hadn't been SORN'd dated 22nd June.

 

 

He paid this and wrote a letter as advised by the DVLA stating he wished to SORN it on the 11th Sept.

after much correspondence because they had never sent him a log book.

 

 

It is the same offence but the summons is for an offence which is indeed past the SORN date.

 

 

Having written to them again they maintain that the vehicle was declared SORN on the 27th October and was backdated as requested, which is probably when they processed it as opposed to when they received the letter.

 

 

request to backdate was made asking for it to be backdated to the date of receipt of the letter.

Edited by ABONE
Link to post
Share on other sites

I may be missing something but it seems to me that if you are being summonsed for no insurance on a specific date (6 October) you plead Not Guilty on the basis that on that date insurance was not required as the vehicle was under SORN.

 

 

And as evidence, produce to the Court the DVLA letter stating the SORN commenced from 11 September

(take several photocopies for the Clerk and each of the Magistrates),

adding it's status remained unchanged on 6 October.

 

The fact the letter confirming the SORN commenced 11 September was itself dated after 6 October should be an irrelevant distraction. Irrespective of the letter's date, it is confirming DVLA's acceptance it was SORN from 11 September. End of matter!

 

It is difficult to get DVLA to understand or accept they made an error, so trying to explain to them at this stage is generally useless. They may be interested in settling at the Court room door if they see/hear your defence (not that you are obliged to do this).

 

If you plead Not Guilty and the Magistrates accept this, don't forget to ask for your own costs - and let us know!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many Thanks Tony P.

 

 

From their letter these are the phrases which I think are pertinent

 

 

" When declaring a SORN the DVLA will send you an acknowledgement within 28 days confirming receipt

and subsequent update of your SORN application, (Didn't happen, more like 60)

 

 

it also states that you should contact the DVLA if you are not in receipt an acknowledgement letter.

(Don't see where this is a requirement in law)

 

"Until such time as an acknowledgement of SORN letter is received the registered keeper

cannot assume their vehicle has been SORN"

 

" Your have stated in your correspondence that you vehicle was SORN at the time of the offence.

This is not the case, your declared SORN on the 27/10/2015,

(Not true, this is when they printed it out which was 4 weeks after the declaration n was sent to them)

and you requested that it be backdated to the 11/9/2015.

(Again not true, the request was to refund the tax from the date the letter was received by them)

 

"Your legal responsibility did not end until you received confirmation of your SORN from the DVLA."

 

So if their database and acknowledgement state that is was SORN on the 11/9/2015

how can it not be effective after that date??

 

I'm confused with their logic and would be very grateful of some clarity.

You make more sense to me Tony but then its the DVLA.

I'm just still unsure of the legal position.

 

Any further help gratefully received.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...