Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

DVLA fine for breaking down on way to MOT


scb66
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2645 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

In September this year I was driving my SORNED 29 year old car to an MOT in Penge as there is a classic Citroen specialist who looks after said cars.

 

I broke down at the traffic lights in Crystal Palace causing untold mayhem during the beginnings of the Friday rush hour.

 

The police passed by, but didn't stop to help.

Two young men helped me push the car to safety and allowed the traffic to flow.

 

I waited for the breakdown recovery people to arrive for two hours and when they did, the journey continued to Penge

- a mere two or three miles down the road.

 

It was there that we found out the car could not fit on the ramp in the garage

on Friday evening the car was left safely off the road but on the pavement where people park, causing no trouble whatsoever.

 

I left a note in the windscreen window with my phone number if there was a problem, clear to see.

 

On the following Monday I started ringing around the garages I knew who could handle the problem of the clutch.

 

On this model, the engine has to come out so the clutch can be accessed to be fixed so it's not a quick one

- it is a two day job and the complexity means that most will not touch it.

 

The garages were busy and no one could take in the car

- one quote was for November

- a few weeks off at this point

 

On the Tuesday I was referred to a service in Erith that specialised in clutches but he could not take the car in till Friday.

 

imagine my surprise when mid week I learn that the DVLA has clamped my car.

I asked the DVLA to reconsider by phone

only to find that it required the car to have road tax and MOT within 14 days.

 

Funny, but that had been the original idea.

 

However the unpleasant unhelpful voice at the other end of the line informed me that in any refund I would only get about a third back.

 

I waited till the Friday as the car clearly wasn't going anywhere until that day and called the DVLA to de-clamp the car.

 

The money was paid and a young lady arrived to remove the clamp.

I engaged her with conversation whereupon the following was confirmed:

 

1) The DVLA looks out for cars that are clearly owned to penalise heavily.

This includes cars that have broken down and cars which have not updated their road tax.

 

2) The DVLA ignores dumped cars and leaves those to the local authorities (as there is no money to be made in fines so the cost of dumping is borne by the taxpayer).

 

3) Effectively the DVLA has no problem leaving people who are already stranded through no fault of their own in an even more vulnerable position and uses its right to clamp, irrespective of notes left clearly in the car.

 

In fact a note left in the car seems to indicate to a clamper that the fine would definitely be paid - hence money to be made.

 

I then waited for several hours until the RAC arrived,

and by the time they did,

the garage in Erith was closing for the weekend.

 

The car was trailered back to its garage and pushed into place .

It was a disastrous week just trying to get an MOT,

and the end result left me very angry, extremely stressed, substantially out of pocket, and exhausted.

 

The car will stay in its garage for either the duration of the Turpinesque fine or until the fine is returned in full and I can get the car mot'd with a working clutch

 

whereupon I will buy road tax,

without conditions of any sort attached.

 

I believe that this fine has been wrongly applied.

 

I wanted the car on the road to be used,

not sitting in a garage,

just keeping dry,

 

but clearly the odds of having a trouble-free effort to get the car on the road again were stacked against me as much by circumstance as the authorities looking to cash in on an individual's unfortunate situation.

 

If this is the way that they intentionally treat those who are attempting to do the right thing, then it is inevitable that there must be a subsequent spike in illegality regarding un-taxed road use, and frankly on the basis of my experience, the DVLA would completely deserve it - such is the price for random advocacy for highway robbery in the first place.

 

I am now at the point of issuing proceedings against the DVLA and the named recipient will be its Chief Exec Morley.

 

Has anyone else incurred a problem like this

H - where the have taken a SORNed car to the mot station and broken down and been clamped.

 

I shall be requesting an FOI on such from the DVLA,

but to date their obfuscation means that this is likely to take months.

 

if anyone has any such information about equally unjust fines and clamping on this subject and how they dealt with the matter I would be very grateful to hear from them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You parked on the pavement

That's part of the public highway

 

For all you ranting and 'its unfair' bully boy state comments...

 

Bottom lines is you left an untaxed car on the public highway

 

Not a lot you can say or do about it being clamped sadly

 

Dx

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

Thankyou for your response. I take it that despite it being untaxed (as without an MOT it cannot be taxed -it was due to be taxed after MOT) it is something that is believed to be a fair judgement by the DVLA? That is considered acceptable by you? Is it a case of Rules is Rules?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Its a case of you parked an untaxed vehicle on the public highway. There's no grey area. You either did or you didn't.

 

Simple as that.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

So if anyone breaks down on their way to an MOT (in order to comply with the road laws), including taking it off SORN and taxing it, in such conditions they should just accept the fine? This sounds incredibly defeatist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you left it there for a week ..!!

 

it was possible passed over for a few days

but a week is taking the mickey IMHO.

 

even if the police had of helped you instead of driving by

..it would still have been there for a week.

 

even if the DVLA weren't so bolshie on the phone, or committed highway robbery..IYHO

it was still there for a week.

 

shame you didn't put your hazard warning lights on as well..

as they're supposed to be some kind of magic immunity for people that park like tits round here.

then winge when they get a ticket. I had my haxard lights on..

 

no seriously..

 

they gave you until mid week before clamping your car

so it wasn't anything draconian or state sponsored

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

They gave two working days before they clamped.

 

As I have already stated,

getting the car in anywhere was not happening,

despite endless phoning around.

 

A note was left visible in the car with my phone number if there had been a problem.

 

It is interesting that despite the ensuing difficulties of the situation that followed my intent to get the car road legal there is a belief that I was mickey taking.

 

The stress dealing with this problem was horrific.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes but p'haps it might have been better to atleast move the car.

 

you had by your own admission 2 days notice.

 

its not the DVLA's problem you didn't move it.

 

dx

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

They don't need tax. You're right. But you still have to declare it and get it registered along with a valid mot. It works exactly like any other vehicle. Just the DVLA registers it as exempt when you file the form.

 

 

If you think you're above the law or you think you've been treated harshly, feel free to appeal and stand in front of a judge and explain what happened.

 

You left it there for an entire week despite them telling you about it and despite the law saying you cannot park on a pavement. Plus there's the whole thing about an untaxed and no mot vehicle on the public road. Not to mention uninsured.

 

You were told.about it via highway code and doing driving lessons and passing your test plus everything you've learned since. A silly letter on the windshield doesn't absolve you from breaking the law. But the DVLA gave you a chance to move it, you didn't, so they considered you to be evading the law or be ignorant of it

 

 

 

Bite the bullet, admit you're wrong and pay the fine. Otherwise it's about to get a whole lot worse.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that cars over a certain age (Historic Vehicle) didn't need an MOT or tax...

They don't need tax. You're right...

 

To be considerd a 'Historic' vehicle, it has to be at least 40 years old, so currently registered before 1st Jan 1976.

 

...Not to mention uninsured...

 

Who said the vehicle wasn't insured ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If its sorn, its likely not to be. If it was then i apologise. But it makes no difference. No tax, no mot, parked on public highway, given a warning, ignored the warning then clamped.

 

As for the tax comment, i replied to his question. I didnt say the car was exempt. I replied to his question. The above statement still stands, as does dx's remarks.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree the car shouldn't have been left on the public highway, it could have been taken to any garage, not just a Citroen specialist.

 

I am surprised the Police passed him by, as ANPR would have flagged the lack of MOT, VED (and possibly insurance), and would have been easy pickings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

exactly. But thats int he past now. He has to deal with the consequences. He parked illegally, he was given time to remove the vehicle. He didnt, and it got clamped. DVLA wont care about excuses now.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some interesting statements here.

 

In order to comply with the law I was getting the car MOT'd. I was attempting to get the car to a mechanic who understood the complexity but they were all busy. At least those that could deal with the car. It has a complicated system for repair because it is an old Citroen.

 

Someone mentioned I should have taken it to any garage. Any garage would not accept it. Most garages are short of space and will not take in cars they cannot repair just to get it off the road.

 

I was trying to get the car from breakdown to repair facility and information was left on the dash with my contact details to verify.

 

The fine was paid at the time.

 

I left it after it had been clamped till the Friday because the DVLA informed me it would be re-clamped if they removed it and I hadn't got a repair facility for it to go into. Fine cost £260.00 so leaving it another couple of days after clamping saved repeat situation.

 

The car is 29 years old and not part of the Historic Vehicles set as yet.

 

"You left it there for an entire week despite them telling you about it (despite them telling me about it? What did they tell me about it?) and despite the law saying you cannot park on a pavement." (This is wrong. See later)

 

"If its sorn, its likely not to be. If it was then I apologise" The car was sorn as outlined in the first line of the account.

 

"A silly letter on the windshield doesn't absolve you from breaking the law." Jeeez.....anyone was thinking from your response that I was setting out to break the law.

 

"Bite the bullet, admit you're wrong and pay the fine. Otherwise it's about to get a whole lot worse." That sounds threatening but actually I paid the fine at the time. I broke down with a complicated car and did my best to get it sorted as quickly as possible. Biting bullets and admitting wrong as though I intentionally defied the DVLA/ Highway Rules is missing the point completely.

 

"Plus there's the whole thing about an untaxed and no mot vehicle on the public road. Not to mention uninsured. " Wrong. The car is insured. Laws like this exist to stop illegality; not those trying to comply with the law who, through no fault of their own, get stuck.

 

The pavement was used by other motorists to park their cars. The pavement was very wide and I could have parked another car alongside so no actual pedestrian obstruction was caused. The road was left free for all traffic including pick up trucks. In fact when the pick up truck parked on the pavement there was still room for pedestrians with prams. Some pavements are used legitimately for parking particularly in urban areas, including outside my own house. It isn't a case of 'you must never park on a pavement' because there are exceptions, and quite a few of them.

 

I don't like dumped cars any more than the next person. My car was clearly not dumped. Incidentally in case you are unaware, the DVLA doesn't fine/clamp cars that have no obvious ownership. That is, if an old heap lies in your street -untaxed, uninsured etc they won't do anything about it. You know why? Well according to the DVLA official who unlocked the clamp "there's no money in it so we leave that to the local authorities". The local authorities pay for that and that means the taxpayer foots the bill.

 

Yes the police drove on at the traffic lights in one of their vans with a couple of burly policemen in the back that could have pushed me out of the way. But they ignored that predicament so thankfully a couple of members of the public came to my help.

 

Everything I was doing was an attempt to get the car legalised. People have been quick to jump down my throat about leaving my car for a week (which wasn't the case - I was doing my damnedest to get it in for repair) - explanations already given.

 

Most of the comments here have been along the lines of 'that's the law get on with it'. The law is made but should allow for instances where this kind of incident occurs. Intent on legality should be taken into account.

 

I sincerely hope none of you get caught in such an unpleasant circumstance, and find that the best response from a consumer group, apart from being inaccurate and insulting (e.g." Not to mention uninsured", "silly letter on the windshield") is people saying 'rules is rules'. We should all be able to do better than that. This isn't consumer action; it is consumer defeatism.

 

They don't need tax. You're right. But you still have to declare it and get it registered along with a valid mot. It works exactly like any other vehicle. Just the DVLA registers it as exempt when you file the form

 

If you think you're above the law or you think you've been treated harshly, feel free to appeal and stand in front of a judge and explain what happened.

 

You left it there for an entire week despite them telling you about it and despite the law saying you cannot park on a pavement. Plus there's the whole thing about an untaxed and no mot vehicle on the public road. Not to mention uninsured.

 

You were told.about it via highway code and doing driving lessons and passing your test plus everything you've learned since. A silly letter on the windshield doesn't absolve you from breaking the law. But the DVLA gave you a chance to move it, you didn't, so they considered you to be evading the law or be ignorant of it

 

Bite the bullet, admit you're wrong and pay the fine. Otherwise it's about to get a whole lot worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

there is nothing for us to sadly 'action'.

 

 

you parked a car with no tax on the pavement which is part of the highway for a whole week

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

You're looking for excuses. There isn't any. The law is clear. You broke it and thing you can evade it. If you honestly think you have a case, appeal it and have your day in court.

 

You never know you may get lucky and escape prosecution for all of it. However you also have to be aware that if found guilty the penalty will be much higher than it is right now if you pay up and follow the law.

 

 

We're trying to help you here. You seem to be adamant you didn't break the law. If you were trying to get the car repaired then you should have put the car on private land. Not on the public highway.

 

Otherwise everyone else would be doing it and escaping the penalties. The laws there for a reason. Follow it.

 

I'm sorry if I come across as harsh but you're in no different circumstances to anyone else.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

As others have noted, the fine wasn't for breaking down.

It was for having a SORN'd vehicle on the public highway.

 

If you had had it moved (once broken down) to private land until the garage could deal with it, and had it taken to the garage at that point : would you have been fined?.

 

That is not a consumer issue. It is an "understanding of SORN and its implications" issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like dumped cars any more than the next person. My car was clearly not dumped. Incidentally in case you are unaware, the DVLA doesn't fine/clamp cars that have no obvious ownership. That is, if an old heap lies in your street -untaxed, uninsured etc they won't do anything about it. You know why? Well according to the DVLA official who unlocked the clamp "there's no money in it so we leave that to the local authorities". The local authorities pay for that and that means the taxpayer foots the bill.

 

 

Not quite, there may be 'no money in it' for the DVLA contractor (not a DVLA official) for clamping abandoned vehicles, but it is the DVLA who prosecute for the offence of keeping an unlicensed vehicle, abandoned or not, which is the same offence that you have committed - contrary to s.29, Vehicles Excise & Registration Act 1994.

The 14 days you mentioned is a time limit for a partial refund of the clamping fee if the vehicle is licensed within those 14 days.

 

 

As your car was the subject of an off road notification it is only exempt from the requirement to be licensed if it is not on a public road, or being taken for an MOT test.

 

 

What you should have done is had your car moved off the public road while you tried to arrange for it to be repaired, rather than leaving it unlicensed on a public road, which is what has caused the problem for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that cars over a certain age (Historic Vehicle) didn't need an MOT or tax...

 

 

Historic vehicles are required to be licensed in the same way as other vehicles, it is just that no excise duty is payable. They do not need an MOT.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vehicle registered prior to 1960 no longer require an mot cert, I understand, but have to be roadworthy if on a public road.

 

I have two motorcycles that come under this legislation.

 

Insurance is still required, of course.

 

Sam

All of these are on behalf of a friend.. Cabot - [There's no CCA!]

CapQuest - [There's no CCA!]

Barclays - Zinc, [There's no CCA!]

Robinson Way - Written off!

NatWest - Written off!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have broken the law if you parked on the pavement and you have also broken the law if you parked on any public highway without insurance, tax or an MOT, (or it's equivalent), even if you have broken down whilst en route to the MOT station.

 

Also, if you are on your way to get the car MOT'd, you need proof that it is officially booked in, because you can't even drive to the MOT station if it hasn't been booked in.

You can't leave your car for a week on the public highway...it is not a free car park for unroadworthy or SORN(ed) vehicles.

You'd be wasting your time appealing, to be honest. TB

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...