Absolutely, and remember, there is strict liability oon this, so if you fail or choose to return the S172, then the registered keeper will be the person who is summonsed.

Maybe.

The person summonsed will be the person to whom the S.172 is addressed. Whilst in this case this may be the RK, it is not always so. An S.172 can be served on anybody.

iyou will be ok for it to be on the road to take it to a machanic and then to the MOT station.

that is allowed.

dx

Not quite.

An untaxed vehicle is exempt under the regulations to travel to/from a pre-booked MoT appointment. It is also exempt for travrl to/from pre-booked repair after it has failed such a test.

Thank you so much for your reply, I feel a lot better now. Does anyone know how fast an MOT is added to the national database?

Instantly. An MoT test requires the garage to be on-line at the time of the tets

Since both of you are insured to drive this car then police will have to prove who in fact was at the wheel at the time of bump!!!!

Er, that's the point of the nip/S.172 request...

If you have had the MOT recently, its not up to date on their systems. I get this when trying to get tax after I have just insured the Car. Always says I have no insurance so I end up having to go to the post office.

Insurers have up to 14 days to update the database.

MoT is actually done on-line and should immediately show

I would whole-heartedly recommend the Kindle.

One word of warning. don't believe (as illustrated in the advert) that you can put it in your hip pocket and forget about it - you will damage it.

I had exactly the same experience.

I got toward the end of the 30 days (for various reasons) and they obligingly sent reminder emails including a link to the label to printout

op has stated he recieved a FPN not a VRM.

An FPN for a defective VRM (Vehicle Registration Mark)...

Time slip is basically irrelevant.

An FPN is merely an offer to deal with the matter without going to court. If you elect for Court, then the FPN becomes scrap paper and a summons issued - which gives them a chance to get the time right. Even if they don't correct it on the summons, the slip rule will allow them to correct it in Court

ANPR has to be able to read many formats and if it can't, then I would love to know which ones screw it up and I bet the real criminals already know! That only leaves the soft targets as ever of the generally law abiding citizens that are only trying to add a small element of personalisation to their car with no intent to deceive or disfigure.

ANPR as used by the Police is capable of reading any Schengen area plus UK and Eire VRM

as long as you dont contest the fpn it should only be £60 fine, but dont forget the 3 points aswell. and it shouldnt need to go to court

VRM defect is non-endorsable, so no points. Just the fine.

I agree entirely with Bernie on this one.

Councils have discretion enshrined in statute, so not ticketing others is not a reason not to enforce your ticket.

They have issued with a scare letter, not a summons to a Magistrates' Court.

If it were from Mags, it would have the option to plead not guilty.

Perhaps you were lucky it was only a mobile; with the current price of fuel it will be the deeds to your house next....

Sorry, but SOGA does not apply for you here.

The retailer is only obliged to deal with the purchaser and not a third party who received the goods as a gift

The law is very clear on this point, indeed as are my own insurance documents.

A vehicle may only be legally driven on a public road with an expired MOT if that vehicle is travelling to a pre-arranged, pre-booked MOT test. In this scenario ONLY is the insurance cover in force as long as no other stops were made along the way.

Wrong.

This is but one example of an exempt vehicle and there is no requirement in law for the test to be pre-arranged - only that it is pre-booked.

Case law has also held that it is permissible to stop on the way to the test - the vehicle does not have to be driven straight there

Yes, her advice can be questioned and provides grounds for the appeal.

Forget the interpretation Act for the moment, the Magistrates have made their decision based on advice that the 28 day 'checking' requirement is law rather than fantasy by the DVLA

She is definitely mistaken, but a Magistrates' Court is a court of fact, not a court of law.

Finer legal points are beyond the competency's of lay magistrates and are better dealt with by Judges at Appeal Court

The rules and regulations for a council car park will be in the traffic order setting up the car park.

If the battery has been left without charge for any length of time, then there is a good chance that it will fail to hold charge at all.

Whilst not changing the advice given, I would point out - for the sake of correctness only - that the Bill of Rights 1689 is not in the least relevant since it governs the relationship between the State and the individual and not private companies

Reply to both on grounds of procedural impropriety

An A.10 PCN must be served within 28 days of the contravention.

Thanks Pat

I agree I am the keeper but swansea said I could not do this!!!

They lie like cheap Japanese cuckoo clock

Yes.

DVLA will write to the current RK (in this case presumably the owner) and if they get no response after 28 days (it would be interesting if they did!!) they will issue a V% in your name.

Apply for a new V5 in your name - this has absolutely nothing too do with who owns a vehicle, but who is keeping it. If you have had it for 2 years, then pretty obviously you are the keeper.