Nice letter to the DVLA?
Discussion
As the DVLA have failed to provide the service I have pre-paid for (via my cars previous road fund licence) and the DVLA refer to members of the public as "customers" I've suggested that I should be entitled to a refund.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
One letter to the Trading Standards office to find out what we already know, the DVLA is above the law including the "Trades Descriptions Act" and it will be a waste of a stamp, but if the right people get to hear about it then it could prick a few ears up.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
One letter to the Trading Standards office to find out what we already know, the DVLA is above the law including the "Trades Descriptions Act" and it will be a waste of a stamp, but if the right people get to hear about it then it could prick a few ears up.
Liquid Knight said:
Still waiting for a reply or summons from the last letter.
In the mean time I'm after something Tax exempt as I now refuse to pay road tax at all!
Whether you pay or not, you've still got to get the disc from them. In the mean time I'm after something Tax exempt as I now refuse to pay road tax at all!
Edited by Strangely Brown on Friday 22 October 15:56
Strangely Brown said:
Liquid Knight said:
Still waiting for a reply or summons from the last letter.
In the mean time I'm after something Tax exempt as I now refuse to pay road tax at all!
Whether you pay or not, you've still got to get the disc from them. In the mean time I'm after something Tax exempt as I now refuse to pay road tax at all!
[quote]
You pay road tax as an advance payment for the DVLA not to mess things up so when they do you've been ripped off. I can't get a refund from the DVLA the same way you could any other organisation in the country that refers to the general public as "customers" so I refuse to give them any more money.
You wouldn't pay for food at a restaurant that had poisoned you in the past so why pay for a company to sort paperwork out who then try to charge you again for them not doing it?
^Now, I like the idea of that! However, I've never had any grief from the DVLA yet (probably luck), but I imagine there's many who will be sending one of these cards to them.
To add, in view of the poor reputation this government organisation has, whenever I have to communicate vehicle details to them, ie tax refund/SORN application, I always take a photocopy of the form with the tax disc stuck on it and get a reciept for postage from the PO. It can only help if they claim its not been received.
To add, in view of the poor reputation this government organisation has, whenever I have to communicate vehicle details to them, ie tax refund/SORN application, I always take a photocopy of the form with the tax disc stuck on it and get a reciept for postage from the PO. It can only help if they claim its not been received.
Edited by pacman1 on Saturday 23 October 23:07
With these feet said:
Still recon you'll end up paying something...... Have you worked out what its cost in time and effort so far??
my money is on he won't DVLA will just stop writing letterMy last letter to them on a similar matter I've since dug out to which I never recieved any further correspondance
F/A Mrs P WXX
Continuous Registration Centre
Swift House
18 Hoffmanns Way
Chelmsford
CM1 1GU
Subject: Your Letter Dated 01/02/08 (Late Licensing Penalty XXXX XXX)
Your Ref: 359 XXXX XXX
Dear Mrs WXX
Thanks for replying so promptly - I was expecting a reply from the person I wrote to but any contact is better than none so I'll deal with the points you raise.
I am well aware of the requirements to either SORN or continue licensing a vehicle – thank you for pointing out the legal requirements and noting my comments.
I am disappointed “that the mitigation you submitted is noted but does not materially alter the outcome of your case or constitute a defence”
I have scrapped several vehicles over the years and to date have never received any acknowledgement from the DVLA to confirm either receipt of the surrendered log book or any other form of acknowledgement.
The only communication/letters I have ever received from the DVLA are RFL reminders, confirmation of SORN declarations and newly issued/updated registration documents.
In the absence of any confirmations and no request received to renew the SORN declaration on a car that I have “scrapped” and submitted the relevant documentation to DVLA I believe I have fully complied with my responsibilities under this scheme.
I kept copies of the completed registration document that I sent to DVLA and also the bill for collection and disposal of the remains of the car in my documentation so I was glad I did when the penalty notice arrived as they support my claims that I have made every effort to comply with the legal requirements.
I note in your letter that “It is the legal responsibility of the registered keeper of a vehicle to deliver a notification of disposal to the Secretary of State for Transport forthwith when disposing of a motor vehicle”
I was under the mistaken belief that I needed to inform the “DVLA” which have done on all previous occasions but I’ve looked up who the Secretary of State for Transport is and it appears I need to write to the Rt Hon Ruth Kelly MP in order to comply with the letter of the law.
I will obviously give you time to review the points I am raising before writing to the Minster enclosing copies of all correspondence to date and asking a number of questions relating to this issue.
Yours Sincerely
Ian
Now I'll share with PH what I do with vehicles I have since stripped & scrapped - I send the docs to Swansea - not recorded just normal post then follow up with a fax as shown below
F/A Team VC12 01792 384040
Mr XXX XXXXXX
Registered keepers address
12th August 2009
Dear DVLA
This fax is to confirm that vehicle registration BXXX XXX Opel Monza GSE owned by myself has been scrapped.
The vehicle registration document was posted approx 20 days ago but I have received no acknowledgement so this fax is to cover myself with regard to SORN rules as I have not renewed the SORN related to this vehicle which expired end of July 2009
I will be keeping a copy of this fax along with the successfully sent report as well as photocopies of the relevant documents posted 20 days ago - just in case they get lost in your system and you need to refer to my copies for clarification.
Regards
Ian
Edited by B'stard Child on Tuesday 26th October 21:30
ds. Sure its the principle of the fine but all this arse-ache over £40...oldsoak said:
Dear DVLA,
Vehicle reg xxx123xxx scrapped on (date) V5 sent to DVLA via Royal Mail as I was required to do advising of this.
That is the end of my liability for that vehicle.
Should you disagree, feel free to waste more money by beginning a court action against me.
Luv and kisses
You.
Vehicle reg xxx123xxx scrapped on (date) V5 sent to DVLA via Royal Mail as I was required to do advising of this.
That is the end of my liability for that vehicle.
Should you disagree, feel free to waste more money by beginning a court action against me.
Luv and kisses
You.
Dear me
I have recieved your further reply concerning the late licencing penalty imposed upon you for failing to relicence your vehicle as required. I have again noted the comments in your letter in which you challenge this penalty and the requirement to notify the DVLA of the vehicles disposal.
The Agency issues an acknowledgement letter on reciept of disposal notifications and SORN declarations. Information on disposal of a vehicle is available on the Vehicle Registration (V5C). If a keeper cannot provide a copy of a valid acknowledgement letter issued by the DVLA for a SORN or disposal notice, dated prior to 21st July 2010 he/she has no deffence against the enforcement action. An acknowledgement letter iissued after the commencement of enforcement proceedings would not be accepted as mittigation.
I acknowledge that you may no longer be the owner of this vehicle but the law regarding vehicle registration and licencing is drawn very tightly and quite deliberately so. Under Regulation 21/22 od the Road Vehicles (registration and licencing) Regulations 2002 the registered keeper of a vehicle is obligated when disposing of the vehicle to deliver a notification of the change of keeper to the Secretaryof State for Transport immediately. In order to assist the registered keeper to fulfil their obligations, when disposal notification is recieved at the Agency's offices an acknowledgement letter is included on both the V5 registration document and the leaflet INS160 that accompanies the registration document.
Clearly when sending any documents to the Agency's offices it is only the person sending them that can know they have been sent. It is for this reason it is imperative they make sure they recieve an acknowledgement letter within four weeks and, if they do not, then they must contact DVLA Swansea to find out why.
Under section 7A of the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 (VERA) if a vehicle remains unlicenced and not declared off road for a period of one month then the registered keeper becomes liable to a supplement of £80.00. While this may be regarded as a penalty no criminal offfence has been commited and the penalty is regarded as a debt owed to the DVLA. As this is, therefore, a civil matter it does not come under the juristiction of the Magistrates court.
As previously stated, the mittigation you submitted is noted, but it does not materially alter the outcome of your case or constitute a defence. Consequently you are still liable for the £80 Failure to make this payment may resultin your case being referred to a collection agency for further action.
So just a re-cap the DVLA have just admitted I have not broken the law and it is in their opinion a civil matter.
The DVLA have also admitted that it is not a fine that has been imposed but a "penalty".
So they are quoting various Acts, "the law", "legal" and "legally" without grounds to properly do so due to this "penalty" being little more than a glorified administration fee. An administration fee for a service the DVLA have failed to provide dispite being pre-payed to provide such a service via my and everyone elses road fund licence (Tax). Interesting.
If it's agaist the law for parking enforcement companies to impose "penalty notices" that are similar to the "fixed penalty notices" issued by the Police for civil action (impersonating a Police officer) why are the DVLA allowed to do so?
I think the chap who wrote the last letter will be recieving an interesting reply.
I have recieved your further reply concerning the late licencing penalty imposed upon you for failing to relicence your vehicle as required. I have again noted the comments in your letter in which you challenge this penalty and the requirement to notify the DVLA of the vehicles disposal.
The Agency issues an acknowledgement letter on reciept of disposal notifications and SORN declarations. Information on disposal of a vehicle is available on the Vehicle Registration (V5C). If a keeper cannot provide a copy of a valid acknowledgement letter issued by the DVLA for a SORN or disposal notice, dated prior to 21st July 2010 he/she has no deffence against the enforcement action. An acknowledgement letter iissued after the commencement of enforcement proceedings would not be accepted as mittigation.
I acknowledge that you may no longer be the owner of this vehicle but the law regarding vehicle registration and licencing is drawn very tightly and quite deliberately so. Under Regulation 21/22 od the Road Vehicles (registration and licencing) Regulations 2002 the registered keeper of a vehicle is obligated when disposing of the vehicle to deliver a notification of the change of keeper to the Secretaryof State for Transport immediately. In order to assist the registered keeper to fulfil their obligations, when disposal notification is recieved at the Agency's offices an acknowledgement letter is included on both the V5 registration document and the leaflet INS160 that accompanies the registration document.
Clearly when sending any documents to the Agency's offices it is only the person sending them that can know they have been sent. It is for this reason it is imperative they make sure they recieve an acknowledgement letter within four weeks and, if they do not, then they must contact DVLA Swansea to find out why.
Under section 7A of the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 (VERA) if a vehicle remains unlicenced and not declared off road for a period of one month then the registered keeper becomes liable to a supplement of £80.00. While this may be regarded as a penalty no criminal offfence has been commited and the penalty is regarded as a debt owed to the DVLA. As this is, therefore, a civil matter it does not come under the juristiction of the Magistrates court.
As previously stated, the mittigation you submitted is noted, but it does not materially alter the outcome of your case or constitute a defence. Consequently you are still liable for the £80 Failure to make this payment may resultin your case being referred to a collection agency for further action.
So just a re-cap the DVLA have just admitted I have not broken the law and it is in their opinion a civil matter.
The DVLA have also admitted that it is not a fine that has been imposed but a "penalty".
So they are quoting various Acts, "the law", "legal" and "legally" without grounds to properly do so due to this "penalty" being little more than a glorified administration fee. An administration fee for a service the DVLA have failed to provide dispite being pre-payed to provide such a service via my and everyone elses road fund licence (Tax). Interesting.
If it's agaist the law for parking enforcement companies to impose "penalty notices" that are similar to the "fixed penalty notices" issued by the Police for civil action (impersonating a Police officer) why are the DVLA allowed to do so?
I think the chap who wrote the last letter will be recieving an interesting reply.
Liquid Knight said:
Dear me
I have recieved your further reply concerning the late licencing penalty imposed upon you for failing to relicence your vehicle as required. I have again noted the comments in your letter in which you challenge this penalty and the requirement to notify the DVLA of the vehicles disposal.
The Agency issues an acknowledgement letter on reciept of disposal notifications and SORN declarations. Information on disposal of a vehicle is available on the Vehicle Registration (V5C). If a keeper cannot provide a copy of a valid acknowledgement letter issued by the DVLA for a SORN or disposal notice, dated prior to 21st July 2010 he/she has no deffence against the enforcement action. An acknowledgement letter iissued after the commencement of enforcement proceedings would not be accepted as mittigation.
I acknowledge that you may no longer be the owner of this vehicle but the law regarding vehicle registration and licencing is drawn very tightly and quite deliberately so. Under Regulation 21/22 od the Road Vehicles (registration and licencing) Regulations 2002 the registered keeper of a vehicle is obligated when disposing of the vehicle to deliver a notification of the change of keeper to the Secretaryof State for Transport immediately. In order to assist the registered keeper to fulfil their obligations, when disposal notification is recieved at the Agency's offices an acknowledgement letter is included on both the V5 registration document and the leaflet INS160 that accompanies the registration document.
Clearly when sending any documents to the Agency's offices it is only the person sending them that can know they have been sent. It is for this reason it is imperative they make sure they recieve an acknowledgement letter within four weeks and, if they do not, then they must contact DVLA Swansea to find out why.
Under section 7A of the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 (VERA) if a vehicle remains unlicenced and not declared off road for a period of one month then the registered keeper becomes liable to a supplement of £80.00. While this may be regarded as a penalty no criminal offfence has been commited and the penalty is regarded as a debt owed to the DVLA. As this is, therefore, a civil matter it does not come under the juristiction of the Magistrates court.
As previously stated, the mittigation you submitted is noted, but it does not materially alter the outcome of your case or constitute a defence. Consequently you are still liable for the £80 Failure to make this payment may resultin your case being referred to a collection agency for further action.
So just a re-cap the DVLA have just admitted I have not broken the law and it is in their opinion a civil matter.
The DVLA have also admitted that it is not a fine that has been imposed but a "penalty".
So they are quoting various Acts, "the law", "legal" and "legally" without grounds to properly do so due to this "penalty" being little more than a glorified administration fee. An administration fee for a service the DVLA have failed to provide dispite being pre-payed to provide such a service via my and everyone elses road fund licence (Tax). Interesting.
If it's agaist the law for parking enforcement companies to impose "penalty notices" that are similar to the "fixed penalty notices" issued by the Police for civil action (impersonating a Police officer) why are the DVLA allowed to do so?
I think the chap who wrote the last letter will be recieving an interesting reply.
Statute trumps common law in respect of penalty charges. i.e. The govt can and have overridden case law.I have recieved your further reply concerning the late licencing penalty imposed upon you for failing to relicence your vehicle as required. I have again noted the comments in your letter in which you challenge this penalty and the requirement to notify the DVLA of the vehicles disposal.
The Agency issues an acknowledgement letter on reciept of disposal notifications and SORN declarations. Information on disposal of a vehicle is available on the Vehicle Registration (V5C). If a keeper cannot provide a copy of a valid acknowledgement letter issued by the DVLA for a SORN or disposal notice, dated prior to 21st July 2010 he/she has no deffence against the enforcement action. An acknowledgement letter iissued after the commencement of enforcement proceedings would not be accepted as mittigation.
I acknowledge that you may no longer be the owner of this vehicle but the law regarding vehicle registration and licencing is drawn very tightly and quite deliberately so. Under Regulation 21/22 od the Road Vehicles (registration and licencing) Regulations 2002 the registered keeper of a vehicle is obligated when disposing of the vehicle to deliver a notification of the change of keeper to the Secretaryof State for Transport immediately. In order to assist the registered keeper to fulfil their obligations, when disposal notification is recieved at the Agency's offices an acknowledgement letter is included on both the V5 registration document and the leaflet INS160 that accompanies the registration document.
Clearly when sending any documents to the Agency's offices it is only the person sending them that can know they have been sent. It is for this reason it is imperative they make sure they recieve an acknowledgement letter within four weeks and, if they do not, then they must contact DVLA Swansea to find out why.
Under section 7A of the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 (VERA) if a vehicle remains unlicenced and not declared off road for a period of one month then the registered keeper becomes liable to a supplement of £80.00. While this may be regarded as a penalty no criminal offfence has been commited and the penalty is regarded as a debt owed to the DVLA. As this is, therefore, a civil matter it does not come under the juristiction of the Magistrates court.
As previously stated, the mittigation you submitted is noted, but it does not materially alter the outcome of your case or constitute a defence. Consequently you are still liable for the £80 Failure to make this payment may resultin your case being referred to a collection agency for further action.
So just a re-cap the DVLA have just admitted I have not broken the law and it is in their opinion a civil matter.
The DVLA have also admitted that it is not a fine that has been imposed but a "penalty".
So they are quoting various Acts, "the law", "legal" and "legally" without grounds to properly do so due to this "penalty" being little more than a glorified administration fee. An administration fee for a service the DVLA have failed to provide dispite being pre-payed to provide such a service via my and everyone elses road fund licence (Tax). Interesting.
If it's agaist the law for parking enforcement companies to impose "penalty notices" that are similar to the "fixed penalty notices" issued by the Police for civil action (impersonating a Police officer) why are the DVLA allowed to do so?
I think the chap who wrote the last letter will be recieving an interesting reply.
I still think the interpretation act is your best way forward here. You sent docs, ergo you complied with your obligations. Full stop - no fine owing.
As I said earlier and on the other thread, Interpretations Act is the way to go. I'm thinking you have either really pissed them off, or they are enjoying your letters so much they are provoking you.
Your letter really needs to say nothing more than relying on Interpretations Act, see you in court if you feel lucky.
Your letter really needs to say nothing more than relying on Interpretations Act, see you in court if you feel lucky.
B'stard Child said:
davidjpowell said:
As I said earlier and on the other thread, Interpretations Act is the way to go. I'm thinking you have either really pissed them off, or they are enjoying your letters so much they are provoking you.
^ ThisI wouldn't send another letter.
Howabout joining in and sending a greetings card. 
http://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/event.php?eid=...
Copy and paste to other motoring forums and your own facebook profile.
http://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/event.php?eid=...
Copy and paste to other motoring forums and your own facebook profile.
Reply six draft 1
Dear Mr Whoop-whoop,
I write with reference to the continuing issue concerning a vehicle previously registered to me and my refusal to pay a “fine” for failing declare the foresaid vehicle as SORN.
In my last letter I invited the DVLA to take me to my local Magistrates court to deal with this situation through the correct channels. You declined due to the fact I have committed no criminal offence. So the use of the terms “Penalty” and “Notice” in relation to the non-declaration of a SORN is completely inappropriate considering the DVLA “SORN Penalty Notice” is legally nothing more than an administration fee and in your own words “a supplement of £80.00” allegedly “owed to the DVLA”.
I and every other member of public who the DVLA refer to as “customers” have pre-paid for all the administration and services the DVLA are supposed to provide when we pay our “Road Tax” or “Road Fund Licence”. We do not however pre-pay for the DVLA to lose our documents in its shambolic internal mail system and then charge us for the privilege.
“The off-road notification system of the DVLA is in disarray due to administrative chaos and the fact that is not legally enforceable. The DVLA may be unlawfully acting against cars parked off-road, and does not really have any power over motorists, at least not in the way it thinks that it has”.
If the DVLA are willing to use terms like “Penalty Notice” and in correspondence enquiring about this use terms like “he/she has no defence”, “evidence”, “mitigation”, “enforcement action”, “in accordance to the law”, “legally”, “constitute a defence” and quote various Acts of law (VERA for one) it is a deliberate attempt to mislead and intimidate its customers into paying an unenforceable “supplement” or administration fee by making it appear to be a fine. I question the legality of this and am more than willing to discuss this in an open court.
Yours sincerely,
Dear Mr Whoop-whoop,
I write with reference to the continuing issue concerning a vehicle previously registered to me and my refusal to pay a “fine” for failing declare the foresaid vehicle as SORN.
In my last letter I invited the DVLA to take me to my local Magistrates court to deal with this situation through the correct channels. You declined due to the fact I have committed no criminal offence. So the use of the terms “Penalty” and “Notice” in relation to the non-declaration of a SORN is completely inappropriate considering the DVLA “SORN Penalty Notice” is legally nothing more than an administration fee and in your own words “a supplement of £80.00” allegedly “owed to the DVLA”.
I and every other member of public who the DVLA refer to as “customers” have pre-paid for all the administration and services the DVLA are supposed to provide when we pay our “Road Tax” or “Road Fund Licence”. We do not however pre-pay for the DVLA to lose our documents in its shambolic internal mail system and then charge us for the privilege.
“The off-road notification system of the DVLA is in disarray due to administrative chaos and the fact that is not legally enforceable. The DVLA may be unlawfully acting against cars parked off-road, and does not really have any power over motorists, at least not in the way it thinks that it has”.
If the DVLA are willing to use terms like “Penalty Notice” and in correspondence enquiring about this use terms like “he/she has no defence”, “evidence”, “mitigation”, “enforcement action”, “in accordance to the law”, “legally”, “constitute a defence” and quote various Acts of law (VERA for one) it is a deliberate attempt to mislead and intimidate its customers into paying an unenforceable “supplement” or administration fee by making it appear to be a fine. I question the legality of this and am more than willing to discuss this in an open court.
Yours sincerely,
DVLA letter said:
If a keeper cannot provide a copy of a valid acknowledgement letter issued by the DVLA for a SORN or disposal notice, dated prior to 21st July 2010 he/she has no deffence against the enforcement action.
[ ... ]
... it is imperative [the RK makes] sure they recieve an acknowledgement letter within four weeks and, if they do not, then they must contact DVLA Swansea to find out why.
Stuff and nonsense.[ ... ]
... it is imperative [the RK makes] sure they recieve an acknowledgement letter within four weeks and, if they do not, then they must contact DVLA Swansea to find out why.
DVLA letter said:
In order to assist the registered keeper to fulfil their obligations, when disposal notification is recieved at the Agency's offices an acknowledgement letter is included on both the V5 registration document and the leaflet INS160 that accompanies the registration document.
Is this correct? It isn't logical as written.Draft letter in reply
Dear DVLA
I note your comments. I rest my case on the fact that I served the documents upon yourselves as set out in the Interpretation Act 1978.
I shall not enter into any further correspondence in this matter. Should you wish to continue your attempt to unlawfully obtain monies, you must bring charges in court.
Yours in exhausted faith,
Liquid Knight
Edited by streaky on Wednesday 17th November 06:09
As writen in the last reply.
Letter six draft two (half way through a crap day at work).
I write with reference to the continuing issue concerning a vehicle previously registered to me and my refusal to pay a “fine” for failing declare the foresaid vehicle as SORN over a year after the vehicle was disposed of.
In all five of my previous letters I have consistently referred to the “SORN Penalty Notice” as a “fine”. This was compounded by the language used in replies sent to me and references to various laws. My last letter I invited the DVLA to take me to my local Magistrates court to deal with this situation through the correct and proper channels. You declined due to the fact; and freely admitted I have committed no criminal offence. So the use of the term “Penalty Notice” in relation to the non-declaration of a SORN is completely inappropriate considering the DVLA “SORN Penalty Notice” is in actual fact; nothing more than an administration fee. In your own words “a supplement of £80.00” allegedly “owed to the DVLA” and a not legally binding “Penalty Notice” or “fine” at all. The fact it took five letters for you to reveal this demonstrates a deliberate act on the part of the DVLA to withhold this information and not an accidental misuse of language.
I and every other member of public who the DVLA refer to as “customers” have pre-paid for all the administration and services the DVLA are supposed to provide whenever we pay our “Road Tax” or “Road Fund Licence”. We do not however pre-pay for the DVLA to lose our documents within its shambolic internal mail system and then attempt to charge their customers for their own incompetents.
“The off-road notification system of the DVLA is in disarray due to administrative chaos and the fact that is not legally enforceable. The DVLA may be unlawfully acting against cars parked off-road, and does not really have any power over motorists”.
If the DVLA are willing to use terms like “Penalty Notice” and in correspondence enquiring about this use terms like “he/she has no defence”, “evidence”, “mitigation”, “enforcement action”, “in accordance to the law”, “legally”, “constitute a defence” and quote various Acts of law (VERA for one) it is a deliberate attempt to mislead and intimidate its customers into paying an unenforceable “supplement” or administration fee by making it appear to be a fine. This is a gross misrepresentation and I question the legality of using such methods.
Yours sincerely,
Letter six draft two (half way through a crap day at work).
I write with reference to the continuing issue concerning a vehicle previously registered to me and my refusal to pay a “fine” for failing declare the foresaid vehicle as SORN over a year after the vehicle was disposed of.
In all five of my previous letters I have consistently referred to the “SORN Penalty Notice” as a “fine”. This was compounded by the language used in replies sent to me and references to various laws. My last letter I invited the DVLA to take me to my local Magistrates court to deal with this situation through the correct and proper channels. You declined due to the fact; and freely admitted I have committed no criminal offence. So the use of the term “Penalty Notice” in relation to the non-declaration of a SORN is completely inappropriate considering the DVLA “SORN Penalty Notice” is in actual fact; nothing more than an administration fee. In your own words “a supplement of £80.00” allegedly “owed to the DVLA” and a not legally binding “Penalty Notice” or “fine” at all. The fact it took five letters for you to reveal this demonstrates a deliberate act on the part of the DVLA to withhold this information and not an accidental misuse of language.
I and every other member of public who the DVLA refer to as “customers” have pre-paid for all the administration and services the DVLA are supposed to provide whenever we pay our “Road Tax” or “Road Fund Licence”. We do not however pre-pay for the DVLA to lose our documents within its shambolic internal mail system and then attempt to charge their customers for their own incompetents.
“The off-road notification system of the DVLA is in disarray due to administrative chaos and the fact that is not legally enforceable. The DVLA may be unlawfully acting against cars parked off-road, and does not really have any power over motorists”.
If the DVLA are willing to use terms like “Penalty Notice” and in correspondence enquiring about this use terms like “he/she has no defence”, “evidence”, “mitigation”, “enforcement action”, “in accordance to the law”, “legally”, “constitute a defence” and quote various Acts of law (VERA for one) it is a deliberate attempt to mislead and intimidate its customers into paying an unenforceable “supplement” or administration fee by making it appear to be a fine. This is a gross misrepresentation and I question the legality of using such methods.
Yours sincerely,
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff