Hi,yes it is for an out of court settlement.

Hi to everyone on the forum i am looking for a bit of help with a letter i am writing to the dvla in response to a letter i got for them asking for an out of court settlement for failure to notify disposal of vehicle. Back in December of last year i sold a motorbike and sent of the v5c and never thought anything more of it, then about 3 months ago i got a letter stating that someone else had applied for a log book for the bike and that if i do not respond within 14 days (i think that was the time frame) the log book will be issued. i did nothing and thought that would be the end of it. Today i received another letter for the failure to notify disposal of vehicle asking that i pay an out of court settlement or they will take me to court. I have been reading through the forums about this matter and have found some great advice and fully intend to fight this ,i have found a letter written by the troublemaker (thank you and i hope you dont mind me using one of your letters as a template). I have used this as a template changing some things to make it more relevant to my case and was hoping that some of the members that have dealt with this could please have look over it and tell me what they think and if anything needs changing thanks. Here is the letter: Dear sir/madam I am writing in regards to the demand from you the DVLA that i pay an out of court settlement of £55 by the 25 of May 2014 reduced to £35 if paid by the 18 of May 2014 for the "failure to notify disposal of vehicle xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. I am informing you the DVLA that I surrendered the vehicle’s V5C document to the DVLA as required by law. The V5 was returned to the DVLA by Royal Mail First Class post. On the date of 18th of December 2013 via the post box at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx The sale was of a "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx", VRM "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" from myself to the new keeper ,xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,and the data of sale was the 17 of December 2013 as entered on the V5C that was sent to yourselves on the date of 18th of December 2013. With regards to this my responsibility ends as soon as I relinquished control of delivery to the UK Postal Service, Royal Mail as stated in Section 07 of the Interpretations Act 1978. Section 07 of the Interpretations Act 1978. References to service by post 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 would like to bring your attention to the wording 'whether the expression "serve" or the expression " give " or " send " or any other expression is used' clearly also covers 'deliver'. Therefore, by correctly addressing the envelope, affixing a stamp to cover the necessary charge (as is required), and by placing the item in a Royal Mail Mailbox, I have fulfilled my responsibility to notify the DLVA as required by statute legislation, and furthermore as the DVLA are an Executive Agency for the Department for Transport, by me sending the V5C by post to DVLA , it was therefore delivered to the Secretary of State as required by this legislation. As the DVLA place their postal address on the V5C and do not offer an alternative delivery method for this communication, nor do they request I communicate this via means other than posting I have followed the DVLA’s own instruction with regard to this matter. This is also covered within the Human Rights Act 1998, Schedule 1, Article 6, section 2 whereby it states‘Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law. ‘ I have no proof of posting the V5 document because the DVLA does not require me to obtain this. I also believe that I should not have to prove that I posted the V5C and if this matter does indeed go to court it is the requirement of the DVLA to prove that I did not. I would also like to bring your attention to FOIR 1396/09, Sent to Collins, whereby Richard Batchelor clearly states that “..if an item of mail does happen to be mislaid within the Agency, the responsible area would be unaware of the loss until notified (normally by the sender of the mail). There is no automatic process alerting the Agency to a previously received item of mail that had not been processed.” Therefore we cannot rule out the possibility that my notification was received by the DVLA at the address required, and was subsequently misplaced internally after delivery. I will now move onto more details on my responsibilities as to the V5 document. Details on the V5 state - 'Once we know about the changes, you should receive an acknowledgement letter to confirm that you are no longer responsible for the vehicle. If you do not receive the letter within 4 weeks, please phone 0300 790 6802. Can you please advise under what Statute Legislation I am lawfully obliged to contact DVLA if I do not receive any such acknowledgement or correspondence from DVLA. The question of the legislation on contacting DVLA and statute legislation has already been judged in various county courts and has been found in the defendants favour. This matter has been discussed in great lengths on BBC TV Watchdog. I should like to bring your attention to DVLA vs. Peck. Mr Peck (Claim 9BR0829 at Horsham county court. The Judge found in Mr Pecks's favour stating the DVLA has no statutory power requiring anyone to contact them should they not receive an acknowledgment letter. I must also inform you The DVLA that I am fully aware of the DVLA vs Kennedy case whereby Mr Kennedy claimed he was wrongfully convicted of the same offence I am being charged with. Mr Kennedy then appealed his case to Chelmsford Crown Court on Friday 9th September 2011. DVLA prosecutors at Swansea withdrew and offered no evidence to the crown court. No doubt this was to stop a precedence being set as case law being it was a Court of Appeal and binding on all equal and lower Courts. Considering the information contained in this letter, I hope you will see that proceeding with this prosecution is in no means justified, and the matter can now hopefully be considered closed. However, if you do continue with this prosecution then I must advise you I will be seeking my costs back from the DVLA if I am found to be not guilty on the charges. I trust this letter is explanatory in its context and reserve the right to show this letter in court if needed. Yours faithfully