Vehicle on French plates that has been in UK for ages
Discussion
Finlandia said:
FiF said:
He asked a civil question and has been polite in trying to find out the situation and how it's enforced.
True, but then there are the likes of me, with a UK registered and taxed car that doesn't wear the UK roads out. I would say, as long as there is no proof of he foreign car being part of any seriously illegal action, leave it be. There are people who live or stay in more than one country for family or other reasons, and lawfully so, their car will have to be registered in one country, sometimes that country is the UK and sometimes it's not.
Secondly, the whole situation is a dog's breakfast frankly. It's not unusual for people, EU or not, to have residences in more than one state, and of course you need transportation. So what's with all these different definitions of resident, and the requirement to "immediately re-register" which is just impractical. What happened in the days when people used to self import vehicles from Denmark and Belgium etc, brought in on temporary plates. Didn't you used to get a definite time to get it sorted after the declaration at port of entry? Maybe it's still the same. Don't know tbh. Wasn't that just a Revenue arrangement and nothing to do with the useless DVLA.
Regarding the OP question to report or not, then if it looks OK and the vehicle appears cared for, well why get involved. If it's clearly an example of taking the piss and vehicle looks dangerous then why not. It's clear some people are taking the piss, eg my earlier example, intinerant metal trader driving a RHD drop side Transit on battered French plates. Maybe it's genuine, but worth a look, but then others would accuse me of being anything from racist, through prejudiced, through having an unconscious bias to just showing plain common sense.
It comes back to the point of if the EU is all about freedom of movement, then why make life so difficult for this modern situation. Again anecdotally I encountered this scenario with place in UK and Sweden. If I brought a Swedish registered car always made a point of bringing a company or rental vehicle, because to bring my own would have been an offence, still resident in UK according tax laws and the UK/Sweden double taxation treaty article 4.
article 4 said:
Article 4
Residence
(1) For the purpose of this Convention, the term "resident of a Contracting State"
means any person who, under the laws of that State, is liable to tax therein by reason of
his domicile, residence, place of management or any other criterion of a similar nature.
But this term does not include any person who is liable to tax in that State in respect
only of income from sources in that State or capital situated therein.
(2) Where by reason of the provisions of paragraph (1) of this Article an individual is a
resident of both Contracting States, then his status shall be determined as follows:
(a) he shall be deemed to be a resident of the State in which he has a
permanent home available to him; if he has a permanent home available to him
in both States, he shall be deemed to be a resident of the State with which his
personal and economic relations are closer (centre of vital interests);
(b) if the State in which he has his centre of vital interests cannot be determined,
or if he has not a permanent home available to him in either State, he shall be
deemed to be a resident of the State in which he has an habitual abode;
(c) if he has an habitual abode in both States or in neither of them, he shall be
deemed to be a resident of the State of which he is a national;
(d) if he is a national of both States or of neither of them, the competent
authorities of the Contracting States shall settle the question by mutual
agreement.
(3) Where by reason of the provisions of paragraph (1) of this Article a person other
than an individual is a resident of both Contracting States, then it shall be deemed to be
a resident of the State in which its place of effective management is situated.
Try arguing that at 4am on the M6 hard shoulder. Residence
(1) For the purpose of this Convention, the term "resident of a Contracting State"
means any person who, under the laws of that State, is liable to tax therein by reason of
his domicile, residence, place of management or any other criterion of a similar nature.
But this term does not include any person who is liable to tax in that State in respect
only of income from sources in that State or capital situated therein.
(2) Where by reason of the provisions of paragraph (1) of this Article an individual is a
resident of both Contracting States, then his status shall be determined as follows:
(a) he shall be deemed to be a resident of the State in which he has a
permanent home available to him; if he has a permanent home available to him
in both States, he shall be deemed to be a resident of the State with which his
personal and economic relations are closer (centre of vital interests);
(b) if the State in which he has his centre of vital interests cannot be determined,
or if he has not a permanent home available to him in either State, he shall be
deemed to be a resident of the State in which he has an habitual abode;
(c) if he has an habitual abode in both States or in neither of them, he shall be
deemed to be a resident of the State of which he is a national;
(d) if he is a national of both States or of neither of them, the competent
authorities of the Contracting States shall settle the question by mutual
agreement.
(3) Where by reason of the provisions of paragraph (1) of this Article a person other
than an individual is a resident of both Contracting States, then it shall be deemed to be
a resident of the State in which its place of effective management is situated.
The whole thing is a shambles really. The requirements go against the free movement of labour and free trading within the EU.
My son is a good example. He lives in France with his wife and their 2 children. The children go to French schools and they are in the French social system.
However, he works through his own limited company and is working in the UK for a continuous period of between 5 & 8 months each year. The rest of the time he is in France.
His car is registered in England at my home address and his wife's car is registered in France, but is RH drive.
So when his wife comes to England with our grandkids he is technically not allowed to drive it because he earns his living in England, but pays tax in both countries.
His wife drives his car in France, but one wonders whether this is legal.
The requirements, if followed to the letter, would require him to re-register his car sometimes in France and then, when here for more than 6 months, back in England, then back in France again if there for more than 6 months.
Basically he simply ignores this nonsense and says that if he gets into any bother he will simply contact his Euro MP and challenge it, but that would be less than ideal.
The only other thing is that with so little actual roads-policing it is unlikely ever to be an issue. The vehicles are both fully insured and the UK reg one is taxed and MoT'd.
My son is a good example. He lives in France with his wife and their 2 children. The children go to French schools and they are in the French social system.
However, he works through his own limited company and is working in the UK for a continuous period of between 5 & 8 months each year. The rest of the time he is in France.
His car is registered in England at my home address and his wife's car is registered in France, but is RH drive.
So when his wife comes to England with our grandkids he is technically not allowed to drive it because he earns his living in England, but pays tax in both countries.
His wife drives his car in France, but one wonders whether this is legal.
The requirements, if followed to the letter, would require him to re-register his car sometimes in France and then, when here for more than 6 months, back in England, then back in France again if there for more than 6 months.
Basically he simply ignores this nonsense and says that if he gets into any bother he will simply contact his Euro MP and challenge it, but that would be less than ideal.
The only other thing is that with so little actual roads-policing it is unlikely ever to be an issue. The vehicles are both fully insured and the UK reg one is taxed and MoT'd.
The requirements are that the vehicle must be registered here if it has been here for more than six months (I believe it's 6).
The problem is that if you nip over the channel for a day, an hour or even a minute, the clock restarts.
Because the authorities can't prove when a vehicle was last brought across our border the whole situation is totally un-enforcable and because they know this, the police, HMRC and the local council aren't interested in enforcement action against cars with foreign registrations.
Yes, this does mean that you can escape VED and (I think) insurance checks by driving a foreign registered vehicle and I'm sure that this is exactly what many are doing.
So to actually answer the OP. Yes, it's not legal, yes, you're perfectly within your rights to report it. Abandonned vehicles get reported to the council, VED dodgers to HMRC, traffic offences to the police. However, I'd be very surprised if any of them will be inclined to do any more than scratch their respective Municipal/Service/Departmental arses.
The problem is that if you nip over the channel for a day, an hour or even a minute, the clock restarts.
Because the authorities can't prove when a vehicle was last brought across our border the whole situation is totally un-enforcable and because they know this, the police, HMRC and the local council aren't interested in enforcement action against cars with foreign registrations.
Yes, this does mean that you can escape VED and (I think) insurance checks by driving a foreign registered vehicle and I'm sure that this is exactly what many are doing.
So to actually answer the OP. Yes, it's not legal, yes, you're perfectly within your rights to report it. Abandonned vehicles get reported to the council, VED dodgers to HMRC, traffic offences to the police. However, I'd be very surprised if any of them will be inclined to do any more than scratch their respective Municipal/Service/Departmental arses.
mikeveal said:
The requirements are that the vehicle must be registered here if it has been here for more than six months (I believe it's 6).
The problem is that if you nip over the channel for a day, an hour or even a minute, the clock restarts.
Because the authorities can't prove when a vehicle was last brought across our border the whole situation is totally un-enforcable and because they know this, the police, HMRC and the local council aren't interested in enforcement action against cars with foreign registrations.
Yes, this does mean that you can escape VED and (I think) insurance checks by driving a foreign registered vehicle and I'm sure that this is exactly what many are doing.
So to actually answer the OP. Yes, it's not legal, yes, you're perfectly within your rights to report it. Abandonned vehicles get reported to the council, VED dodgers to HMRC, traffic offences to the police. However, I'd be very surprised if any of them will be inclined to do any more than scratch their respective Municipal/Service/Departmental arses.
This is my understanding to having been crashed into by a Polish bloke who has been in the UK for over a year using a Polish registered car with no UK tax, no UK MOT & no insurance yet somehow escaped prosecution so I had to go through small claims court. The problem is that if you nip over the channel for a day, an hour or even a minute, the clock restarts.
Because the authorities can't prove when a vehicle was last brought across our border the whole situation is totally un-enforcable and because they know this, the police, HMRC and the local council aren't interested in enforcement action against cars with foreign registrations.
Yes, this does mean that you can escape VED and (I think) insurance checks by driving a foreign registered vehicle and I'm sure that this is exactly what many are doing.
So to actually answer the OP. Yes, it's not legal, yes, you're perfectly within your rights to report it. Abandonned vehicles get reported to the council, VED dodgers to HMRC, traffic offences to the police. However, I'd be very surprised if any of them will be inclined to do any more than scratch their respective Municipal/Service/Departmental arses.
That process took months, the whole time this chap was still driving around but that wasn't deemed sufficient evidence even when he couldn't prove he had been back/forth to Poland.
FiF said:
article 4 said:
Article 4
Residence
(1) For the purpose of this Convention, the term "resident of a Contracting State"
means any person who, under the laws of that State, is liable to tax therein by reason of
his domicile, residence, place of management or any other criterion of a similar nature.
But this term does not include any person who is liable to tax in that State in respect
only of income from sources in that State or capital situated therein.
(2) Where by reason of the provisions of paragraph (1) of this Article an individual is a
resident of both Contracting States, then his status shall be determined as follows:
(a) he shall be deemed to be a resident of the State in which he has a
permanent home available to him; if he has a permanent home available to him
in both States, he shall be deemed to be a resident of the State with which his
personal and economic relations are closer (centre of vital interests);
(b) if the State in which he has his centre of vital interests cannot be determined,
or if he has not a permanent home available to him in either State, he shall be
deemed to be a resident of the State in which he has an habitual abode;
(c) if he has an habitual abode in both States or in neither of them, he shall be
deemed to be a resident of the State of which he is a national;
(d) if he is a national of both States or of neither of them, the competent
authorities of the Contracting States shall settle the question by mutual
agreement.
(3) Where by reason of the provisions of paragraph (1) of this Article a person other
than an individual is a resident of both Contracting States, then it shall be deemed to be
a resident of the State in which its place of effective management is situated.
Try arguing that at 4am on the M6 hard shoulder. Residence
(1) For the purpose of this Convention, the term "resident of a Contracting State"
means any person who, under the laws of that State, is liable to tax therein by reason of
his domicile, residence, place of management or any other criterion of a similar nature.
But this term does not include any person who is liable to tax in that State in respect
only of income from sources in that State or capital situated therein.
(2) Where by reason of the provisions of paragraph (1) of this Article an individual is a
resident of both Contracting States, then his status shall be determined as follows:
(a) he shall be deemed to be a resident of the State in which he has a
permanent home available to him; if he has a permanent home available to him
in both States, he shall be deemed to be a resident of the State with which his
personal and economic relations are closer (centre of vital interests);
(b) if the State in which he has his centre of vital interests cannot be determined,
or if he has not a permanent home available to him in either State, he shall be
deemed to be a resident of the State in which he has an habitual abode;
(c) if he has an habitual abode in both States or in neither of them, he shall be
deemed to be a resident of the State of which he is a national;
(d) if he is a national of both States or of neither of them, the competent
authorities of the Contracting States shall settle the question by mutual
agreement.
(3) Where by reason of the provisions of paragraph (1) of this Article a person other
than an individual is a resident of both Contracting States, then it shall be deemed to be
a resident of the State in which its place of effective management is situated.
Btw, as I'm sure you know, residence and domicile are not the same thing.
The latter is, for some, a fascinating subject - http://uk.practicallaw.com/books/9781847667670/cha...
It tends to be of far more importance in matters other than motoring offences though.
FiF said:
Please excuse me while I have a bit of a minor rant.
There is too much of this about.
Not referring to the subject of the thread but people being just plain funking objectionable on PH for the sake of what exactly?
Now it may well be that the comments about the OP's wife, for example, may be a jokey carryover from some stupid thread in the Lounge, but I suspect not.
So why?
He asked a civil question and has been polite in trying to find out the situation and how it's enforced.
All he gets is childish t
tty comments back from some who btw also don't add anything to the sensible part of the discussion.
Some of you need to sort yourselves out and if you can't do that then GTFO to another forum.
Out
My apologies. I clearly overstepped the line with the last 2 posts on this. However I think when someone comes on here asking for advice about how to cause one of his neighbours grief it will rub people up the wrong way. This topic really did hit a nerve with me because the advice I have asked for here was around the best way to resolve an issue with neighbours behaving in a similar way to the OP.There is too much of this about.
Not referring to the subject of the thread but people being just plain funking objectionable on PH for the sake of what exactly?
Now it may well be that the comments about the OP's wife, for example, may be a jokey carryover from some stupid thread in the Lounge, but I suspect not.
So why?
He asked a civil question and has been polite in trying to find out the situation and how it's enforced.
All he gets is childish t
tty comments back from some who btw also don't add anything to the sensible part of the discussion. Some of you need to sort yourselves out and if you can't do that then GTFO to another forum.
Out
I'd suggest that a community like PH is more likely to be welcoming to people who go about their life without deliberately trying to cause problems for others. It really doesn't help that the first person to drag the topic onto insults about others education was the OP. Had the initial question been along the lines of ''My neighbour has a foreign car and needs help working out the best way to stay legal in the UK'' my view would be completely different.
If you have any interest in where the childish wife type comments get dragged into this - Any reasonable person would have to have a fairly serious motive for wanting to investigate their neighbour with the desire of finding a reason to report them to the police. If you really sympathise with the OP just wait until you end up living near someone with his mentality.
Anyway I've dragged this completely off topic, have no intention of helping the OP with his cause and I don't want to get into an argument with people who are clearly trying to be constructive... Again my apologies and thanks for the kick into line
.Edited by Black_S3 on Wednesday 26th November 02:35
Thanks for posting that and appreciate a nerve was touched. I can't speak for others who expressed concern but for the record, whilst there was a pointed reference to your posts in my comments, and I apologise for singling you out, but my net was being cast far wider than your posts or even just this thread.
It's increasingly a problem on PH. Not above criticism of myself either for being a bit snarky, although in my defence it's often because of people not reading and understanding what has actually been written, sometimes in haste but on occasions appears quite deliberate.
Anyway whinge over we will all move on.
It's increasingly a problem on PH. Not above criticism of myself either for being a bit snarky, although in my defence it's often because of people not reading and understanding what has actually been written, sometimes in haste but on occasions appears quite deliberate.
Anyway whinge over we will all move on.
FiF said:
Well that's one interpretation one supposes.
Yes, it's based on the pain of trying to get my local council to remove an abandoned foreign car. The local council guys are extremely adept at using legislation to avoid having to take any action. So my interpretation isn't exactly groundless.I also live in an area with a large immigrant population. I know and am fairly friendly with a few of the guys in living my road and yes, avoid VED is exactly what they're doing.
FiF said:
Mikeveal Please read the full thread and then maybe review your post in light of the correct information provided by others.
FiF, I'm sure you don't intend to, but you really do come across as a condescending twunt at times. I've read the thread and I do stand by my comments.Well apologies if it appears like that but look at your post. Police etc are not interested is pretty much what you said. Yet higher up the thread we've just been discussing Operation Jessica. 127 vehicles seized recently. Don't know the most up to date figure, another one gone in the last hour near West Bromwich.
We will have to disagree but I stand by my post that your comments are not accurate, though they may appear to be so from your experience.
We will have to disagree but I stand by my post that your comments are not accurate, though they may appear to be so from your experience.
Yes I saw the post about Jessica. Sadly my local plod don't seem to share West Brom's enthusiasm. I'd love to be wrong, but I think Jessica may be an exceptional enterprise. I'll accept that my post wasn't 100% accurate.
Sadly? Yeah, I don't subscribe to the principal that people should dodge taxation. Being tax efficient within the law is one thing, deliberately shirking your responsibilities is another.
Sadly? Yeah, I don't subscribe to the principal that people should dodge taxation. Being tax efficient within the law is one thing, deliberately shirking your responsibilities is another.
Finlandia said:
Looks like I could be a resident of many countries, how that works I'm not sure. I was under the impression that EU rules allowed you to bring your car to another EU country and keep it there for up to 6 months, only after that the car must be registered in the country.
I don't think you could. Unless other countries' rules on residency are different to the UK185 days plus is the majority of the year so if you hit that in the UK.....
Yep seen comments from other forces like "wonder if we can use/tag onto the Jessica handle" so others are interested / possibly active in theirnown way. Tispol (aka EU traffic plod - ducks to avoid wrath from UKIP thread) are sort of involved / watching.
Anyway once again apologies if input doesn't come across well, completely unintentional. Yorkshire born and bred, blunt plain speaking call a spade an f-ing shovel and all that.
Anyway once again apologies if input doesn't come across well, completely unintentional. Yorkshire born and bred, blunt plain speaking call a spade an f-ing shovel and all that.
aka_kerrly said:
This is my understanding to having been crashed into by a Polish bloke who has been in the UK for over a year using a Polish registered car with no UK tax, no UK MOT & no insurance yet somehow escaped prosecution so I had to go through small claims court.
That process took months, the whole time this chap was still driving around but that wasn't deemed sufficient evidence even when he couldn't prove he had been back/forth to Poland.
For me this has to be the reason for reporting the car although I agree if they seem like 'good' people and keep the car in good condition then I may let it pass. So many people seem to be on the make and scamming that this or that it does become a little irritating sometimes. That process took months, the whole time this chap was still driving around but that wasn't deemed sufficient evidence even when he couldn't prove he had been back/forth to Poland.
It is all very well the Polish et al being net contributors (apparently) to the economy but clearly they need to 'contribute' a little more if they are driving around without tax/insurance.
Finally, well done FiF and BlackS3's subsequent apology. There is no need for it.
Pip
Hackney said:
Finlandia said:
Looks like I could be a resident of many countries, how that works I'm not sure. I was under the impression that EU rules allowed you to bring your car to another EU country and keep it there for up to 6 months, only after that the car must be registered in the country.
I don't think you could. Unless other countries' rules on residency are different to the UK185 days plus is the majority of the year so if you hit that in the UK.....
For the last couple of years I have not spent 185 days in the UK, 100 perhaps and about the same in Finland, and the rest in Sweden.
At least I'm safe from operation Jessica in the UK, in Sweden nobody seems to care about foreign registered cars and in Finland the police won't stop a foreign car for fear of having to speak anything else but Finnish.
FiF said:
Please excuse me while I have a bit of a minor rant.
Totally agree with you and have experienced this myself. People seem to want to drag others down on here just because. It does often appear that people go out of their way to try and make themselves look "superior" to other posters etc.
It's pretty pathetic, has gotten worse in the last six months and is a detriment to an otherwise fantastic forum.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff