Criminal record for failure to tax car?

Criminal record for failure to tax car?

Author
Discussion

Magog

2,652 posts

190 months

Friday 26th December 2014
quotequote all
shep1001 said:
Yep got to court start December & the DVLA folded. A different representative turned up this time and basically said had it been his case from the beginning he would have binned it months ago as it was a non starter
Sounds like a good result, the DVLA should probably leave it to the local authority to enforce planning law.

Red Devil

13,069 posts

209 months

Friday 26th December 2014
quotequote all
Magog said:
shep1001 said:
Yep got to court start December & the DVLA folded. A different representative turned up this time and basically said had it been his case from the beginning he would have binned it months ago as it was a non starter
Sounds like a good result, the DVLA should probably leave it to the local authority to enforce planning law.
And stop wasting time and public money in desperate attempts to obtain money and/or convictions. It is impossible to obtain compensation for costs if a case isn't put before a court. There needs to be some mechanism in place to deter the DVLA from this game of official brinkmanship. It uses the fear factor to intimidate people into submission so most cough up 'to make it go away'.

C. Grimsley

1,364 posts

196 months

Friday 26th December 2014
quotequote all
Glad to hear it went well, always nice to see the big man or business can be put into shape when they are wrong.

Carl

ging84

8,918 posts

147 months

Saturday 27th December 2014
quotequote all
What is to stop you recovering costs for this? There must have been a trespass involved at some point that someone could sue over

photosnob

1,339 posts

119 months

Saturday 27th December 2014
quotequote all
Looks like I was correct - about how the DVLA would act, and how they knew the law would be interpreted. I'm pretty sure the likely lads with the big mouths won't be coming back to apologise.

shep1001

Original Poster:

4,600 posts

190 months

Saturday 27th December 2014
quotequote all
ging84 said:
What is to stop you recovering costs for this? There must have been a trespass involved at some point that someone could sue over
Had they gone in front of the beak a second time, yes costs attributable to the prosecution could have been claimed as I interpreted it. They pulled the plug about 10 minutes before the case was to be heard. Have been able to get the £300 odd quid back for the recovery of the car from the pound after they took it

Edited by shep1001 on Saturday 27th December 23:20

shep1001

Original Poster:

4,600 posts

190 months

Saturday 27th December 2014
quotequote all
Magog said:
Sounds like a good result, the DVLA should probably leave it to the local authority to enforce planning law.
The problem was the DVLA changed their mind mid way through prosecution. Initially they were prosecuting for an untaxed car on public land, it's was successfully proven the land was private belonging to the property owned by my friend, as the location they claimed the car was removed from was somewhere completely different.

They then changed their mind deciding instead they could prosecute as the private land the car was on was not registered for business use therefore registering 'in trade' was not applicable. The council seem not to be interested either as they were not there to support the DVLA nor provide a written statement as claimed


Edited by shep1001 on Saturday 27th December 23:18

anonymous-user

55 months

Saturday 27th December 2014
quotequote all
98elise said:
PS Even speeding is a criminal offence, so yes he is likely to have a "criminal record", but its not quite the same as being a murderer!




Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 21st September 04:33
Awesome, and exactly why the solicitors and lawyers are not sleeping at night so long as you can come to PH for the expert view on all things legal.
A gift that keeps giving, this man has serious knowledge, no ability to supply case history when asked to back it up, but knowledge none the less.
All for free too, we are all blessed.......................

wildcat45

8,076 posts

190 months

Sunday 28th December 2014
quotequote all
The DVLA are tosses.

We had an abandoned untaxed uninsured and Un-MOTd car abandoned in a parking bay in a modern development I used to live in.

The car was taxed etc when it was left by the owner (a neighbours Ex who did a flit)

Ince it was out of tax we told the council, police and DVLA. The thing was there so long it ended up on 2 Googoe Earth updates!

DVLA said it was on private land and not their prob, despite the council who did fk all insisting it was public land -their land.

In the end I got our directly elected Mayor involved. It just so happened to be election year. Then it was sorted within days.

DVLA clearly make it up as they go along.

An over large top heavy and cumbersome QANGO.

Red Devil

13,069 posts

209 months

Sunday 28th December 2014
quotequote all
wildcat45 said:
The DVLA are tosses.

We had an abandoned untaxed uninsured and Un-MOTd car abandoned in a parking bay in a modern development I used to live in.

DVLA said it was on private land and not their prob, despite the council who did fk all insisting it was public land -their land.
Well it can't be both, so one of them was talking out if their a**e.

Egad: for once the DVLA may be right! See - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/9/schedul... - Section 5(3).

Also this
DVLA said:
The exceptions to the expanded enforcement powers state that vehicles parked on land associated with a house or a block of flats cannot be wheel clamped or impounded. This applies for example, to private driveways, garages and allocated parking bays. Also vehicles kept by a motor trader or vehicle tester at a business premise cannot be wheelclamped or impounded.
.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wheel_clamp...

The Council might be able to invoke the open air provision.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/3 Section 2(1)(a)
It might well depend on the specifics of the case though.
If they got it wrong then it could be wrongful interference with goods.