SORN fines

[rob8066]

Hi.

 

Following from a conversation from another thread.

 

Has anyone been fined for not having SORN and then not paid it?

 

What happened?

 

Your input & guidance would be appreciated.

 

Cheers.

 

Rob

[Grumpy]

SORN fines are illegal; there is case law to back this up. The most important thing to do if you receive a fine notification is to dispute it, while the matter is in dispute it is illegal for the DVLA to pass collection onto any third parties such as debt collectors.

To dispute the fine send something along the lines of;

By virtue of the fact that the DVLA method of trial is a computer database and the postal system, I consider that the DVLA is acting Ultra Vires by attempting to extort monies from me without due legal process, as is my right under article 6 of the human rights convention and under the Bill of rights 1689. The DVLA is not a Court of Law nor is it a competent authority for the following reasons:

 

Article 6 of the given European Convention on Human Rights provides that "In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interests of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice."

 

The said appeals service offered by the said DVLA is not established in accordance with law, as required by the said Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights -

 

in that:

 

The basic laws of the United Kingdom as provided within the Common Law of the Kingdom of England with the Principality of Wales and the province of Northern Ireland, and as further enacted by the Crown and Parliament of the United Kingdom to the purpose of establishing and preserving the Civil Liberties of all people living within the territories of the United Kingdom which Common Law may not be repealed and which Statute Law remains un-repealed have been and are now being violated by the provisions of such enactment as now claims to provide lawful authority for the existence and conduct of the DVLA, but which fails to provide any such lawful authority, because of the given violations to Constitutional Laws and Provisions which retain the force of law.

In evidence of the submission given, a full reference is made to the text of the Common Law Charter of King Henry III, dated 1225 (the existence of which Charter is now evidenced by the text of the 1297 enactment of King Edward I and his parliament), and a further full reference is made to the several texts of the Declaration & Bill of Rights (variously dated February & December of 1689) which latter documents now serve to define and restrict the powers of the Crown in Parliament, to the purpose of preserving Peaceful Government under the Rule of Law,

 

Article 234 (formerly Article 177), of the Treaty establishing the legal entity that is now known as the European Union now provides that the European Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction to give preliminary rulings concerning the interpretation of the Treaty; the validity and interpretation of acts (entered into) by the institutions of the Community and/or by the European Bank; the interpretation of the statutes of bodies established by an act of the Council, where those statutes so provide.

 

Where such a question is raised before any court or tribunal of a Member State, that court or tribunal may, if it considers that a decision on the question is necessary to enable it to give judgment, request the Court of Justice to give a ruling thereon.

 

Where any such question is raised in a case pending before a court or tribunal of a Member State against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law, that court or tribunal shall bring the matter before the Court of Justice.

 

 

Magna Carta of 1225, confirmed by the Statute of 1297.

"We will not pass upon him, nor [condemn him], but by lawful judgment of his peers, or by the Law of the Land."

 

I contend that the clear option as to method of trial is an option that belongs to me as my property, and that title to this property is confirmed by the Confirmation of Liberties given in Magna Carta-

 

"We have granted also, and given to all the Freemen of our Realm, for Us and our Heirs for ever, these Liberties underwritten, to have and to hold to them and their Heirs, of Us and our Heirs for ever"

 

I also contend that the substantive law relevant to this hearing is further declared by the provisions of the Declaration of Rights and further secured by the Bill of Rights subsequently enacted -

 

"That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void"

 

As such, I do not recognise the DVLA’s authority to issue penalties/fines nor have I had a trial within a competent criminal Court to find guilt under a section 31A offence of not procuring a vehicle license. Should the DVLA insist on pursuing this unlawful course of action, then I request that you refer the matter to the European Court of Justice under article 234

Just fill in the gaps with your details :-D

[croc]

Hi.

 

Following from a conversation from another thread.

 

Has anyone been fined for not having SORN and then not paid it?

 

What happened?

 

Your input & guidance would be appreciated.

 

Cheers.

 

Rob

 

I went through a stage of getting regular SORN fines as I have several things not on the road, I just treated them as reminders, didn't pay anything, renewed the SORN and had no further problems. When they made it possible to SORN online I renewed everything at once, all my SORN reminders now arrive in the same envelope and it takes 10 minutes online to renew them.

Edited January 26, 2011 by croc

[Grumpy]

Did you pay the fines?

[rob8066]

Yes, well I Sorned all of mine on line.

 

Then received a fine and as I never had the reminding letter, was told I could not prove I had renewed it, despite the automated reply by e mail.

 

Therefore I had no evidence to prove I Sorned it so I had to pay.

 

The long letter back to them is alright, but I cannot see how that works.

 

It is clear that it is a requirement to Sorn & if you don't you can be fined.

 

Good thread, lets keep it going, would like to see what other's have done.

[rob8066]

Yes.

 

I paid the fine as they told me I could not prove I had Sorned the vehicle.

 

I was told if I did not pay they would / could take action against me.

[rob8066]

It is not a fine, it is a Late Licensing Penalty, s.7A, Vehicle Excise & Registration Act. It is treated a civil debt due to the crown and can eventually end up in the county court, although DVLA and their debt collectors try very hard before court action - where they can lose.

 

Found this from the 'Consumer action group' website.

 

They are saying if is NOT a fine but is covered under s.7A Vehicle excise & registration act.

 

It is NOT a human rights issue either so you cannot use that.

 

Anyone actually done this?

[blue red blue]

ive had loads of problems with these clowns, 2 different sorns went back via the post, now either the post or the dvla office lost these and they attempted to fine me, after many phone calls to them i said how can you fine me , once i put the sorn in the post box then thats my end of the process complete.not my fault if gpo or you have lost paper work, if you want to take me to court then i will see you there.they backed down and all i got was a snoty letter saying that i should keep calling dvla to check the paper work has gone through

[tim gray]

Yes, well I Sorned all of mine on line.

 

Then received a fine and as I never had the reminding letter, was told I could not prove I had renewed it, despite the automated reply by e mail.

 

Therefore I had no evidence to prove I Sorned it so I had to pay.

 

The long letter back to them is alright, but I cannot see how that works.

 

It is clear that it is a requirement to Sorn & if you don't you can be fined.

 

Good thread, lets keep it going, would like to see what other's have done.

 

Double standards to say the least, you have sorned the item on thier system and recieved a confirmatory e mail from thier system. They issue automated letters via thier system. AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PROVE YOU SORNED IT. How is thier system suitable and sufficient to fine you automatically but not sufficient proof that you have sorned??????

 

As far as i was aware the burden of proof in our legal system is for the authority to PROVE you are in the wrong, not for you to PROVE you are right. Basically as per previous posts you are guilty before instead of innocent until proved!!

 

These buggers need a kick up the arse.

[rob8066]

Yep.

 

It states it is up to us to ensure we get the 'Confirmation letter' within 4 weeks.

 

If we don't then it's not 'Sorn'

 

Yet to hear anyone that hasn't paid or has got their fine back.

[croc]

Yep.

 

It states it is up to us to ensure we get the 'Confirmation letter' within 4 weeks.

 

If we don't then it's not 'Sorn'

 

Yet to hear anyone that hasn't paid or has got their fine back.

 

I never paid any of them, and never had a problem.

[blue red blue]

same here refused to pay and offerd to go to court over it,might be different if you didnt bother to sorn it full stop

[rob8066]

Cheers guys.

 

Exactly what I wanted to hear.

 

Just another government cash extraction then.

 

I paid up, but if it happens again I might reconsider.

[Grumpy]

Cheers guys.

 

Exactly what I wanted to hear.

 

Just another government cash extraction then.

 

I paid up, but if it happens again I might reconsider.

 

No it’s a DVLA cash extraction.

The ones that have gone to court where the DVLA have lost, the judge has stated it’s not lawful for the DVLA to impose the owner to check if the SORN was received or not. The onus is on the DVLA to contact you if they haven’t received your SORN.

The penalty can be imposed if you do not SORN, however if the DVLA lose the paperwork or their database is incorrect it’s their problem.

I have had lots of problems in the past with DVLA, SORN and fines, never paid a fine and since I SORN my vehicles directly with the Secretary of State have never received anything from the DVLA regarding these fines.

 

They are banking on bullying people into paying these penalties, as I have stated elsewhere there is existing case law that shows the DVLA are acting unlawfully regarding these penalties.

You need a court of law to enforce any penalty, as this is a civil matter it would be the county court.

[N.O.S.]

....It seems to me that once again we are being clobbered by an ill-conceived and inoperative "solution" to a problem - the real problem is the huge number of uninsured motorists on the road and I cannot see how this will help at all! It will just make life more difficult for the law-abiding community.

 

Stop the world, I want to get off!

 

Some years ago I met a guy who worked for a company which had developed a recognotion system such that if it was positioned one side of anything bigger than a double track railway bridge, it could tell a policeman standing at the other side if a vehicle had insurance by the time it emerged.

 

They came up with a proposal to position these at strategic places around London, and reckoned that within something like 9 months, 80% of uninsured cars could be caught and put off the roads permanently.

 

The scheme was rejected by the London authorities and police on the basis it would cost too much to operate (manpower).

 

Well of course, much better to get the rest of us to cover the cost of uninsured motoring by paying through the nose for our insurance instead.

 

Surely all it needed was for a small percentage from our premiums to fund it nationwide and we could all be paying lower insurance by now. Why are we so incapable of helping ourselves in this country?

[airportable]

Must admit I did not know what to do when I bought my Airportable project in Nov. 2010.

Sent off my slip of log book, read what was on line regards SORN. Still a little confused so down loaded the SORN form and sent as well as the slip. Had my new log book but nothing to confirm at all any thing regards SORN. May be I did not need to as the Landi. had been off the road for 16years. But I did in case.

Andy.

[Grumpy]

Must admit I did not know what to do when I bought my Airportable project in Nov. 2010.

Sent off my slip of log book, read what was on line regards SORN. Still a little confused so down loaded the SORN form and sent as well as the slip. Had my new log book but nothing to confirm at all any thing regards SORN. May be I did not need to as the Landi. had been off the road for 16years. But I did in case.

Andy.

 

You cannot SORN it until the log book has been issued in your name, you have to wait until the logbook arrives then you can SORN it.

Even if it was taken off the road before SORN came in, when there is a change of keeper you have to SORN it. Same applies if you acquire a vehicle that is part way through the twelve month SORN period, when the new log book is issued the existing SORN is canceled and you have to re SORN. Just because the previous keeper signed and agreed to keep the vehicle off the road, he has no control once the vehicle has been sold on.

[airportable]

Oh right, thanks. Now I am not sure weather I need to down load another form and send again, or weather they would have done that after they changed the log book details?

Thanks again for putting me wise.

Andy.

[Grumpy]

Oh right, thanks. Now I am not sure weather I need to down load another form and send again, or weather they would have done that after they changed the log book details?

Thanks again for putting me wise.

Andy.

 

No they wont have SORN it for you, another money spinning scam. :undecided:

 

You can SORN it on line here:

 

http://www.taxdisc.direct.gov.uk/EvlPortalApp/

 

Just click on declare SORN, you will need to document reference number off your logbook.

[airportable]

No they wont have SORN it for you, another money spinning scam. :undecided:

 

You can SORN it on line here:

 

http://www.taxdisc.direct.gov.uk/EvlPortalApp/

 

Just click on declare SORN, you will need to document reference number off your logbook.

Thank you VERY much.

Andy.

[Tony B]

SORN'ed the LWB 2A I've just aquired . Got a letter back from DVLA saying it hadn't been on the road for about ten years and I didn't need to SORN it! :???

[ruxy]

You cannot SORN it until the log book has been issued in your name, you have to wait until the logbook arrives then you can SORN it.

Even if it was taken off the road before SORN came in, when there is a change of keeper you have to SORN it. Same applies if you acquire a vehicle that is part way through the twelve month SORN period, when the new log book is issued the existing SORN is canceled and you have to re SORN. Just because the previous keeper signed and agreed to keep the vehicle off the road, he has no control once the vehicle has been sold on.

 

======================================

 

Something wrong with this post :-

Quote this sentence.

Even if it was taken off the road before SORN came in, when there is a change of keeper you have to SORN it.

----------

 

You had me running for a file to check - this is a comment that keeps getting re-cycled and is wrong...

 

Regarding a vehicle purchased by self 1996 , that had been laid up off the road since 1984..

 

I queried this point with the DVLA and have correspondence from J. Punchard Customer Enquiries Group.

 

States.

 

The scheme only applies to vehicles where a tax disc expired on or after 31 January 1998. As your vehicle was untaxed on this date, it does not fall into the SORN scheme. It will only become liable to SORN if it is re-taxed and then subsequently taken off the road.

 

regards

Edited January 26, 2011 by ruxy
corrected date

[croc]

It seems to me that the vast majority of people have no problems when dealing with the likes of VOSA and DVLA but a few people have endless issues. I can't help but wonder why this small minority are unfortunate enough to have a problem every time they buy a vehicle or renew a tax disk.

[Grumpy]

======================================

 

Something wrong with this post :-

Quote this sentence.

Even if it was taken off the road before SORN came in, when there is a change of keeper you have to SORN it.

----------

 

You had me running for a file to check - this is a comment that keeps getting re-cycled and is wrong...

 

Regarding a vehicle purchased by self 1996 , that had been laid up off the road since 1984..

 

I queried this point with the DVLA and have correspondence from J. Punchard Customer Enquiries Group.

 

States.

 

The scheme only applies to vehicles where a tax disc expired on or after 31 January 1998. As your vehicle was untaxed on this date, it does not fall into the SORN scheme. It will only become liable to SORN if it is re-taxed and then subsequently taken off the road.

 

regards

 

That’s the opposite of what I was told by Birmingham DVLA. Just to complicate things further the different answer might be because the vehicle I had purchased was on the old V5 log book not a V5C.

Its not unusual getting different answers from different offices in DVLA, in fact you can get different answers from the same office, even in writing.

 

 

It seems to me that the vast majority of people have no problems when dealing with the likes of VOSA and DVLA but a few people have endless issues. I can't help but wonder why this small minority are unfortunate enough to have a problem every time they buy a vehicle or renew a tax disk.

 

There are probably several reasons such as

Some local offices are better than others

Giving too much information

Giving too little information

Knowing less than the person you are dealing with

Above all its all about attitude and how you treat people, if I take some happy pills before I deal with them I don’t have a problem. Dealing with fools can be difficult at times.:nut:

[ruxy]

QUOTE Grumpy

 

That’s the opposite of what I was told by Birmingham DVLA. Just to complicate things further the different answer might be because the vehicle I had purchased was on the old V5 log book not a V5C.

 

Its not unusual getting different answers from different offices in DVLA, in fact you can get different answers from the same office, even in writing.

 

============

 

I don't doubt what you state is correct regarding differing answers , because if all the SORNing info. was written in plain English then I would understand as well as those earning their crust administering the system..

 

I have several vehicles on SORN , what you have stated alarms me because the reply came by email. I think I will send a letter to Swansea by recorded delivery asking for "further clarification" as I have no wish for a hefty fine in the future.

 

Last night - I tried to SORN this particular vehicle on-line , however the software would not permit. The fact that SORNing is being blocked indicates their answer to me was in fact correct , in the alternative their software systems are crap. The 2011 Mk.2 SORN - well , they are just going to see how it goes (as are the police)

 

http://www.polfed.org/roads_policing_newsletter_January2011_low_res.pdf

Edited January 27, 2011 by ruxy
spelling