Nice letter to the DVLA?
Discussion
J5 said:
Liquid Knight said:
chriscpritchard said:
Liquid Knight said:
I'm going to take a few days to calm down before I write my reply.
start adding an admin fee onto each further letter you send :P
My "DV-LA-la-la I'm not listening" plan (see the thread in general gassing) is looking all the more appealing now.
From another thread.
found this and thought it might be handy!!!
also this link too
http://www.strikeengine.com/gov/dvla_sorn.html
for all those people who have received fines from the DVLA, please feel free to adjust the Template for your own circumstances:
The DVLA has issued me with a "penalty" for allegedly not registering my vehicle as SORN.
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which Common Law may not be repealed and which Statute Law remains un-repealed -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 -
(a) the interpretation of the Treaty;
(b) the validity and interpretation of acts (entered into) by the
institutions of the Community and/or by the European Bank;
(c) the interpretation of the statutes of bodies established by an
act of the Council, where those statutes so provide.
that a decision on the question is necessary to enable it to
give judgment, request the Court of Justice to give a ruling
thereon.
ions 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 licence. 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
found this and thought it might be handy!!!
also this link too
http://www.strikeengine.com/gov/dvla_sorn.html
for all those people who have received fines from the DVLA, please feel free to adjust the Template for your own circumstances:
The DVLA has issued me with a "penalty" for allegedly not registering my vehicle as SORN.
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
(a) the interpretation of the Treaty;
(b) the validity and interpretation of acts (entered into) by the
institutions of the Community and/or by the European Bank;
(c) 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
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
ions 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 licence. 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
worsy said:
LK, you say you scrapped it two years ago and it was previously SORN. In that time have you ever had a SORN request issued as you would have had to have at least one in that time. This would prove if the DVLA ever received your notice.
The first I heard of it was when I got a fine in the post. If I had a SORN notice/reminder I would have acted on it. The basic jist of the letter above is the DVLA have acted unlawfully by being Judge, Jury and Executioner they have bypassed the court system completely in direct violation of my civil/human rights. The basic right of due process in accordance to the law they have been making up and enforcing (trying to enforce at least). So now I have two options 1/ Invite the DVLA to take me to the European Court or 2/ Pay the fine and report the DVLA to the Police/another authority for theft.
The DVLA fine system is illegal or unlawful at least so technically they are trying to steal £40 from me and every other driver who has ever recieved such a SORN notice in these circumstances.
Theft is theft weather it's a Penny or a million Pounds. If someone took £40 out of my wallet I'd nail them to a wall for it so why should the DVLA get away with it? Grrrr! Time to write another letter I think.
Theft is theft weather it's a Penny or a million Pounds. If someone took £40 out of my wallet I'd nail them to a wall for it so why should the DVLA get away with it? Grrrr! Time to write another letter I think.
Piersman2 said:
Liquid Knight said:
The DVLA fine system is illegal or unlawful at least so technically they are trying to steal £40 from me and every other driver who has ever recieved such a SORN notice in these circumstances.
Theft is theft weather it's a Penny or a million Pounds. If someone took £40 out of my wallet I'd nail them to a wall for it so why should the DVLA get away with it? Grrrr! Time to write another letter I think.
Whilst you're on one...Theft is theft weather it's a Penny or a million Pounds. If someone took £40 out of my wallet I'd nail them to a wall for it so why should the DVLA get away with it? Grrrr! Time to write another letter I think.
It's 'whether'.
HTH
Should I send this next one to the bod who send me the last letter (different person every time) or the address I mentioned before?
When I said write I actually meant copy, paste and personalise.
Mr Whoop-whoop
Continuous Registration Centre
Sidcup House
12/18 Station Road
Sidcup
Kent
DA15 7DA
Dear Mr Whoop-whoop,
I’m writing to you in reference to an ongoing issue concerning a vehicle previously registered to me Blah (your reference blah-Blah) and my refusal to pay a fine for failing declare the foresaid vehicle as SORN. This is due to the fact the car was previously scrapped and in accordance to the law I had done everything required of me to inform the DVLA of this. I did not receive an “Acknowledgement” letter from the DVLA nor have I received any SORN reminders either. If I had received any such SORN reminder I would have queried it at the time.
I refer you to the Interpretations Act 1978, Sec 7 which states “Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expression " give " or " send " or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.”
I contend that I have complied with the requirements of current legislation to notify the DVLA of the change of keeper and/or disposal of the vehicle by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting the document. Therefore I have commited no offence but have been found guilty and fined by the DVLA without any form of due process. I have made an appeal against this decision and presented evidence in my favor but this has been to no avail.
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 -
(a) the interpretation of the Treaty;
(b) the validity and interpretation of acts (entered into) by the
institutions of the Community and/or by the European Bank;
(c) 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 decis-
ions 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 licence. 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
Yours Sincerely
Me
The short letter didn't work so lets see how this one goes.
Mr Whoop-whoop
Continuous Registration Centre
Sidcup House
12/18 Station Road
Sidcup
Kent
DA15 7DA
Dear Mr Whoop-whoop,
I’m writing to you in reference to an ongoing issue concerning a vehicle previously registered to me Blah (your reference blah-Blah) and my refusal to pay a fine for failing declare the foresaid vehicle as SORN. This is due to the fact the car was previously scrapped and in accordance to the law I had done everything required of me to inform the DVLA of this. I did not receive an “Acknowledgement” letter from the DVLA nor have I received any SORN reminders either. If I had received any such SORN reminder I would have queried it at the time.
I refer you to the Interpretations Act 1978, Sec 7 which states “Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expression " give " or " send " or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.”
I contend that I have complied with the requirements of current legislation to notify the DVLA of the change of keeper and/or disposal of the vehicle by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting the document. Therefore I have commited no offence but have been found guilty and fined by the DVLA without any form of due process. I have made an appeal against this decision and presented evidence in my favor but this has been to no avail.
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 -
(a) the interpretation of the Treaty;
(b) the validity and interpretation of acts (entered into) by the
institutions of the Community and/or by the European Bank;
(c) 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 decis-
ions 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 licence. 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
Yours Sincerely
Me
The short letter didn't work so lets see how this one goes.
Mr Whoop-whoop
Continuous Registration Centre
Sidcup House
12/18 Station Road
Sidcup
Kent
DA15 7DA
Dear Mr Whoop-whoop,
I’m writing to you in reference to an ongoing issue concerning a vehicle previously registered to me Blah (your reference blah-Blah) and my refusal to pay a fine for failing declare the foresaid vehicle as SORN. This is due to the fact the car was previously scrapped and in accordance to the law I had done everything required of me to inform the DVLA of this. I did not receive an “Acknowledgement” letter from the DVLA nor have I received any SORN reminders either. If I had received any such SORN reminder I would have queried it at the time.
I refer you to the Interpretations Act 1978, Sec 7 which states “Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expression " give " or " send " or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.”
I contend that I have complied with the requirements of current legislation to notify the DVLA of the change of keeper and/or disposal of the vehicle by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting the document. Therefore that concludes my responsibility in this matter.
Yours Sincerely
Me
Pity I was going to organize a road trip to Belgium (via Nordschleife) in a few few months.
Cheers Streaky and OldSoak.
Continuous Registration Centre
Sidcup House
12/18 Station Road
Sidcup
Kent
DA15 7DA
Dear Mr Whoop-whoop,
I’m writing to you in reference to an ongoing issue concerning a vehicle previously registered to me Blah (your reference blah-Blah) and my refusal to pay a fine for failing declare the foresaid vehicle as SORN. This is due to the fact the car was previously scrapped and in accordance to the law I had done everything required of me to inform the DVLA of this. I did not receive an “Acknowledgement” letter from the DVLA nor have I received any SORN reminders either. If I had received any such SORN reminder I would have queried it at the time.
I refer you to the Interpretations Act 1978, Sec 7 which states “Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expression " give " or " send " or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.”
I contend that I have complied with the requirements of current legislation to notify the DVLA of the change of keeper and/or disposal of the vehicle by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting the document. Therefore that concludes my responsibility in this matter.
Yours Sincerely
Me
Pity I was going to organize a road trip to Belgium (via Nordschleife) in a few few months.
Cheers Streaky and OldSoak. Edited by Liquid Knight on Thursday 9th September 11:01
Martin Keene said:
Don't let the b
s grind you down! I'd like to see road tax put on fuel, and the dvla abolished and replaced with a much more streamlined service just for registrations and licences. Imagine the cost saving to go towards reducing the defecit!Have a look at the "DV-LA-la-la I'm not listening" thread if you fancy getting your own back.
If you're fed up with the DVLA why not send the boss a polite greetings card? We (about 400 so far) are sending them to arrive on Monday 20th December.
Mr. Phillip Hammond MP
Secretary of State for Transport
The Palace of Westminster
London
SW1P 3PA
Do not post anything illegal to this address. Just the polite greetings card by way of peaceful protest.
Mr Whoop-whoop
Continuous Registration Centre
Sidcup House
12/18 Station Road
Sidcup
Kent
DA15 7DA
Dear Mr Whoop-whoop,
I’m writing to you in reference to an ongoing issue concerning a vehicle previously registered to me Blah-blah (your reference 550 Blah-blah) and my refusal to pay a fine for failing declare the foresaid vehicle as SORN. This is due to the fact the car was previously scrapped and in accordance to the law I had done everything required of me to inform the DVLA of this. I did not receive an “Acknowledgement” letter from the DVLA nor have I received any SORN reminders either. If I had received any such SORN reminder I would have queried it at the time.
I refer you to the Interpretations Act 1978, Sec 7 which states “Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expression " give " or " send " or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.”
I contend that I have complied with the requirements of current legislation to notify the DVLA of the change of keeper by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting the document.
Therefore I have committed no offence but have been found guilty and fined by the DVLA without any form of due process. I have made an appeal against this decision and presented evidence that proves this but this has been to no avail. I am unflinching in my refusal to pay a fine for a crime I have not committed.
Yours Sincerely,
Me
Sent by recorded delivery today.
Continuous Registration Centre
Sidcup House
12/18 Station Road
Sidcup
Kent
DA15 7DA
Dear Mr Whoop-whoop,
I’m writing to you in reference to an ongoing issue concerning a vehicle previously registered to me Blah-blah (your reference 550 Blah-blah) and my refusal to pay a fine for failing declare the foresaid vehicle as SORN. This is due to the fact the car was previously scrapped and in accordance to the law I had done everything required of me to inform the DVLA of this. I did not receive an “Acknowledgement” letter from the DVLA nor have I received any SORN reminders either. If I had received any such SORN reminder I would have queried it at the time.
I refer you to the Interpretations Act 1978, Sec 7 which states “Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expression " give " or " send " or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.”
I contend that I have complied with the requirements of current legislation to notify the DVLA of the change of keeper by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting the document.
Therefore I have committed no offence but have been found guilty and fined by the DVLA without any form of due process. I have made an appeal against this decision and presented evidence that proves this but this has been to no avail. I am unflinching in my refusal to pay a fine for a crime I have not committed.
Yours Sincerely,
Me
Sent by recorded delivery today.
Today's reply....
"Dear Me
Thank you for your response concerning the late licencing panalty imposed upon you for failing to reliceence your vehicle as required. Your comments have been noted.
Whilst the Agency makes every effort to send reminder letters to all registered keepers, there is no statutory obligation for the DVLA to issue vehicle licence reminders. It is the keeper's responsibility to ensure that if the vehicle is used/kept on the public road,it is licenced at all times. In the absence of a reminder, a keeper may still relicence their vehicle by completing form V10. If the vehicle is kept off the public road you must complete a Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN) declaration.
It has been a legal requirement since January 1998 that the registered keeper of a vehicle must ensure that it is, at all times, either licenced or that a Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN) is made. Under Continuous Registration (CR) introduced in January 2004, the registered keeper will remain responsible for re-licencing, or the declaration of SORN until the DVLA has been formally notified of the vehicles transfer, destruction, export or theft and they have a receipt from the DVLA acknowledging their disposal notification.
In your case the disposal notification for this vehicle was not recieved at DVLA and therefore the vehicle remained registered in your name. The requirement to notify disposal of a vehicle is contained within Regulation22-24 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licencing) Regulations 2002.
The Agency issued an acknowledgement letter on reciept of disposal notifications and SORN declarations. Information on disposal of a vehicle is available on the Vehicle Registration Certificate (V5C). If a keeper cannot provide a copy of a valid ackowledgement letter issued by DVLA foe a SORN or disposal notice, dated prior to 21/07/2010 he/she has no deffence against the enforcement action. The acknowledgement letter issued after the commencement of enforcement proceedings would not be accepted as mitigation.
"Whilst the Acknowledgement Letter issued to confirm Stautory Off Road Notification (SORN) and disposal notifications is not legislation, it has been designed to remove any uncertainty that may be experienced by either the sender or intended recipient as to whether a notification of SORN or disposal has actually bee sent or recieved. The DVLA would be failing to correctly discharge its responsibilities if it disregarded the role this letter plays in Continuous Registration (CR) and the obligation placed on the individual to act in the case of non-reciept."
The mittigation you submitted is noted, but it does not materially alter the outcome of your case or constitiute a defence. Consequently you are still liable for the £80 penalty which must be recieved by this office by 14/10/2010. Failure to make this payment may result in your case being referred to a debt collection agency for further action.
The last paragraph is about how to make the payment.
Yours
Someone else
Enforcement Officer"
"Dear Me
Thank you for your response concerning the late licencing panalty imposed upon you for failing to reliceence your vehicle as required. Your comments have been noted.
Whilst the Agency makes every effort to send reminder letters to all registered keepers, there is no statutory obligation for the DVLA to issue vehicle licence reminders. It is the keeper's responsibility to ensure that if the vehicle is used/kept on the public road,it is licenced at all times. In the absence of a reminder, a keeper may still relicence their vehicle by completing form V10. If the vehicle is kept off the public road you must complete a Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN) declaration.
It has been a legal requirement since January 1998 that the registered keeper of a vehicle must ensure that it is, at all times, either licenced or that a Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN) is made. Under Continuous Registration (CR) introduced in January 2004, the registered keeper will remain responsible for re-licencing, or the declaration of SORN until the DVLA has been formally notified of the vehicles transfer, destruction, export or theft and they have a receipt from the DVLA acknowledging their disposal notification.
In your case the disposal notification for this vehicle was not recieved at DVLA and therefore the vehicle remained registered in your name. The requirement to notify disposal of a vehicle is contained within Regulation22-24 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licencing) Regulations 2002.
The Agency issued an acknowledgement letter on reciept of disposal notifications and SORN declarations. Information on disposal of a vehicle is available on the Vehicle Registration Certificate (V5C). If a keeper cannot provide a copy of a valid ackowledgement letter issued by DVLA foe a SORN or disposal notice, dated prior to 21/07/2010 he/she has no deffence against the enforcement action. The acknowledgement letter issued after the commencement of enforcement proceedings would not be accepted as mitigation.
"Whilst the Acknowledgement Letter issued to confirm Stautory Off Road Notification (SORN) and disposal notifications is not legislation, it has been designed to remove any uncertainty that may be experienced by either the sender or intended recipient as to whether a notification of SORN or disposal has actually bee sent or recieved. The DVLA would be failing to correctly discharge its responsibilities if it disregarded the role this letter plays in Continuous Registration (CR) and the obligation placed on the individual to act in the case of non-reciept."
The mittigation you submitted is noted, but it does not materially alter the outcome of your case or constitiute a defence. Consequently you are still liable for the £80 penalty which must be recieved by this office by 14/10/2010. Failure to make this payment may result in your case being referred to a debt collection agency for further action.
The last paragraph is about how to make the payment.
Yours
Someone else
Enforcement Officer"
Sentences I'm considering for the reply to the latest installment.
"If any collection agencey is sent to my property I will make a citizens arrest for criminal trespass with intent to commit agrevated theft and attempted agrivated theft then hand them over to the Police."
"I agree that you have pointed out the registered keeper of the vehicle should take responsability for Continuous Registration , but when I sent the V5C to the DVLA I fully relinquished that responsability and it is the DVLA to ensure that all post sent to them is processed correctly not mine."
"The representetive of the DVLA used terms in the last letter such as "mitigation", "evidence", "constitute a defence" and "enforcemet proceedings" I fail to reccognise the DVLA as an authority with the powers of a court and reject any suggestion of a fine and or penalty that is not issued by anyone other than a Judge or Magistrate. Not an authority who sees itself as judge, jury and executioner."
I think I'd better calm down a bit first eh?
"If any collection agencey is sent to my property I will make a citizens arrest for criminal trespass with intent to commit agrevated theft and attempted agrivated theft then hand them over to the Police."
"I agree that you have pointed out the registered keeper of the vehicle should take responsability for Continuous Registration , but when I sent the V5C to the DVLA I fully relinquished that responsability and it is the DVLA to ensure that all post sent to them is processed correctly not mine."
"The representetive of the DVLA used terms in the last letter such as "mitigation", "evidence", "constitute a defence" and "enforcemet proceedings" I fail to reccognise the DVLA as an authority with the powers of a court and reject any suggestion of a fine and or penalty that is not issued by anyone other than a Judge or Magistrate. Not an authority who sees itself as judge, jury and executioner."
I think I'd better calm down a bit first eh?
Strangely Brown said:
Liquid Knight said:
Failure to make this payment may result in your case being referred to a debt collection agency for further action.
Can they do that without taking you to court first?I don't think they can without a civil court proceedure but I will be checking on that.
Letter three; draft one.
Dear Sir/Madam (been sent replies by a different person every time so I've given up using names),
I’m writing to you in reference to an ongoing issue concerning a vehicle previously registered to me Bla (your reference Bla-Bla) and my refusal to pay a fine for failing declare the foresaid vehicle as SORN.
In my previous letter I mentioned the Interpretations Act 1978, Sec 7 which states “Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expression " give " or " send " or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.”
Your argument was that the “Acknowledgement letter” sent by the DVLA is "designed to remove any uncertainty" and would act as irrefutable proof that the DVLA has received the V5 certificate from myself. This is obviously flawed. All this letter actually proves is the DVLA have sent a letter and nothing more. If yourself or another representative of the DVLA were willing to state in a court under oath that the DVLA does not lose any of its correspondence I would be more than happy to field that question in front of Magistrates or a Judge, members of the public and/or the press. Then address their answer with over a hundred recorded instances where the DVLA has failed in the past.
An Acknowledgement letter will not prove beyond reasonable doubt the sending or not of a V5 registration document. If the DVLA either failed to receive the document or failed to process the document then it is the DVLA or Post Service who is at fault and therefore as I have committed no offence and I should not be fined.
In the last letter from Mrs Quack-quack terms such as “no defence against enforcement action”, “mitigation” and “constitute a defence” were used. I do not recognise the DVLA as an authority that has the power of a court. If the DVLA would like to deal with this matter properly in a public court then the nearest one to me is in King’s Lynn, Norfolk.
I will not pay a fine for an offence I have not committed, I will also not submit to any threats of recovery agency intervention as this is an obvious attempt to obtain monies by intimidation and contrary to the “Theft Act 1968”. If any recovery agency enters my property they will be arrested for attempted theft by myself and handed over to the Police. Should I receive a negative point on my credit rating as a result of the DVLA not processing/receiving a V5 registration document properly I will consider it a deliberate defamation of my character and instruct my solicitors to act accordingly.
Yours Sincerely,
Me.
I think I need to calm down a bit more.
Dear Sir/Madam (been sent replies by a different person every time so I've given up using names),
I’m writing to you in reference to an ongoing issue concerning a vehicle previously registered to me Bla (your reference Bla-Bla) and my refusal to pay a fine for failing declare the foresaid vehicle as SORN.
In my previous letter I mentioned the Interpretations Act 1978, Sec 7 which states “Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expression " give " or " send " or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.”
Your argument was that the “Acknowledgement letter” sent by the DVLA is "designed to remove any uncertainty" and would act as irrefutable proof that the DVLA has received the V5 certificate from myself. This is obviously flawed. All this letter actually proves is the DVLA have sent a letter and nothing more. If yourself or another representative of the DVLA were willing to state in a court under oath that the DVLA does not lose any of its correspondence I would be more than happy to field that question in front of Magistrates or a Judge, members of the public and/or the press. Then address their answer with over a hundred recorded instances where the DVLA has failed in the past.
An Acknowledgement letter will not prove beyond reasonable doubt the sending or not of a V5 registration document. If the DVLA either failed to receive the document or failed to process the document then it is the DVLA or Post Service who is at fault and therefore as I have committed no offence and I should not be fined.
In the last letter from Mrs Quack-quack terms such as “no defence against enforcement action”, “mitigation” and “constitute a defence” were used. I do not recognise the DVLA as an authority that has the power of a court. If the DVLA would like to deal with this matter properly in a public court then the nearest one to me is in King’s Lynn, Norfolk.
I will not pay a fine for an offence I have not committed, I will also not submit to any threats of recovery agency intervention as this is an obvious attempt to obtain monies by intimidation and contrary to the “Theft Act 1968”. If any recovery agency enters my property they will be arrested for attempted theft by myself and handed over to the Police. Should I receive a negative point on my credit rating as a result of the DVLA not processing/receiving a V5 registration document properly I will consider it a deliberate defamation of my character and instruct my solicitors to act accordingly.
Yours Sincerely,
Me.
I think I need to calm down a bit more.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff