DVLA wrongly fining me out of court settlement

[buzby]

In a Magistraites Court, it would be criminal - but if the County Court, it will be civil. (most likely).

[k67]

I'm afraid I wouldn't know about the court/conviction or how it would effect your immigration process! I know that when I was dealing with it I found a lot of solicitors on the Internet who offered to take the case on a no win no fee basis (I didn't take them on) who also offered quite helpful advice for free!

It would help if you could see the photos, is there anyway you can go to their offices to view them?

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

I think somebody said it was going to be a magistrates court. So if convicted of this 'offence' will that mean a criminal record???

 

That would totally ruin me if I have any such negative information about me, I'd lose my job and visa.

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

I've written to DfT and DVLA numerous times asking for the photos with no response. I've kept copies of the correspondence I've sent. However, my MP mentioned there was a process laid out on their website about how to obtain any evidence related that was easier for me to do than ask my MP to because of Data Protection. I haven't been able to find any such steps, can anybody point me in the direction of these steps?

[k67]

My hearing was at a magistrates court and so I think your's will be too, so yes, this would probably mean a criminal conviction if found guilty however i'm not completely sure on it all!

I rang the DVLA as it is much quicker than sedning letters, they will not send out a copy of the photos to you, you will have to go to them to view them, we had to go to Kent to see the photos

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

That concerns me more than anything. I feel I will now have to call them up tomorrow and much as I hate it pay it. I cannot lose my Green Card over something as ludicrous as this, even though DVLA are in the wrong, I can't risk it and I'd probably kill myself if that happened.

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

Any answers?

[honeybee13]

Hello there. I'm not one of the motoring experts, but I think it would be ridiculous to damage someone's immigration prospects for a parking offence, or speeding come to that. I forget what type of forms my OH and I have to fill in from time to time and they say ignore motoring offences.

 

I don't want to start a new debate and this could be a daft comment, but look at all the diplomats who didn't or don't pay parking tickets.

 

HB

[babybear39]

If DVLA have started court proceedings you can use CPR for disclosure of ANYTHING, including photographs, they will rely on in court.

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

Hello there. I'm not one of the motoring experts, but I think it would be ridiculous to damage someone's immigration prospects for a parking offence, or speeding come to that. I forget what type of forms my OH and I have to fill in from time to time and they say ignore motoring offences.

 

I don't want to start a new debate and this could be a daft comment, but look at all the diplomats who didn't or don't pay parking tickets.

 

HB

 

Agreed, but this is more than a parking offence, no? It is criminal proceedings by other's mention.

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

If DVLA have started court proceedings you can use CPR for disclosure of ANYTHING, including photographs, they will rely on in court.

 

What is CPR? I've contacted DVLA and DfT several times for the photos and 'evidence' but no replies. I've been told there's some way of being able to get these from their website, the MP says it's quickest if I follow these steps myself but I can't seem to find any procedure for obtaining this on the DVLA site. Any leads anyone?

[Raykay]

Patdavies explains it in post 26.

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

Right, so the MP for the Department for Transport wrote back to me and ever so kindly offered an exceptional one off extention to make payment for this false claim by 30 November (5 days time). Today I finally obtain the photographs I've been asking DVLA and DfT for for the past 2 months and - it's not my vehicle! It's the same make and model and registration, the pictures are in black and white so I can't tell if the colour is the same but it looks off. I can tell it's not mine because in their photos there is a branding on the side of the car that is not on mine, and another branding that is somewhere else on MY car is not on the one in the photographs.

 

Now, there's 3 photos - 2 showing the car and registration but not showing any clamp, or confirming the location or date, and the one that does show a clamp is just a picture of a clamp on the front wheel of a car and in this is the branding on the side of the car that I know isn't on mine.

 

Firstly, I'm going to take photos of my car when the light is better - and they will be of significantly better quality than those provided by DVLA and in colour as I have nothing to hide. I'll also report this possibility of a cloned car to the police.

 

I've already written back to my MP and the MP at DfT confirming this, but they take on average 30 days to respond. There's 5 days till DVLA come through on their repeated threats to prosecute me, what can I do? DVLA have never responded to me in 2 months. Is this significant evidence for me to prove that it's not my car or have they got enough evidence that it is? What else can I do to prove this? What else can I do to prevent this from going to court? As I say I honestly cannot afford a court case against me and the risk of a criminal record, the only thing that gets me through this is knowing that I'll live in a different country!

 

It's pretty disgraceful that DVLA's only interest has been profiting from this allegation and they've had absolutely no interest in addressing this matter and presenting to me to give me a chance to respond as opposed to just their demands of "Pay up or we'll prosecute you!"

[Tony P]

All DVLA threads infuriate me but this one really shows them for what they are.

On the face of it there has been a constructive fraud, initially perpetrated in the name of DVLA and relentlesly and perniciously continued by them.

 

I understand, but don't agree, the OP's status reasons for keeping quiet and paying up - and I fully accept he may not be in a financial position to give a robust defence (which I am sure will succeed, with costs, except they will probably back away at the last minute).

 

4606 people have visited this thread so far. If only half put in a couple of quid there would be a good fighting fund, if such a thing is feasable and someone can organise it.

 

I would put up a tenner straight away.

[buzby]

Lets face it, procecusions aimed a cars with 'cloned' plates are hardly new. What needs to be protected is the rights of the original car owner. Taking pictures etc is not 'proof' of anything, they could just as easily argue that any difference was made by the OP in an effort to thwart prosecution.

 

They would need to provide something better than a grainy B&W photo as proof positibe that the car shown was yours. Clearly it would have also had a bogus VRM (if one existed), so this will require some fancy footwork to tick all the boxes and have the case dismissed.

 

This is NOT one for standing in court and pointing at 2 sets of pictures saying the cars are different - they'll simply laugh. Professional assistance needs to be urgently considered.

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

That leaves me a bit confused buzby, thanks for your reply. I agree how is me holding up photos saying that's not mine going to be any different to them holding up photos saying it is. So, I have a whole 3 days until the option to avoid court action expires. If there's any possibility this could result in a conviction then as much as it would sicken me I would have to simply pay the out of court settlement. You've said that this is going to require some fancy footwork, but the courts will only cover costs of up to £100 - a lawyer to do this fancy footwork is going to cost a lot more than that and the out of court settlement combined. So my options are 1 - risk my job and visa abroad with a conviction 2 - Spend way more than any out of court settlement and costs that could be covered hiring a lawyer to defend this and go through the trouble of taking the time out to consult and attend court 3 - pay the £169 OCS and allow these criminals to profit from their fraudulent and threat tactics, but at least not be hundreds or thousands more out of pocket or potentially lose my job/residency abroad.

 

Since you've put cloned registrations in quotes I assume you mean that this is a catch all defence used by many who are guilty of their vehicle being involved in an offence, so they're not just going to say oh well that's that. No more plausible than suggesting that the clamping company staged it seeing as the only photo of the clamp is just a clamp on a wheel and confirms nothing of the car, while the photos of the car that don't show any clamp could have been taken anywhere anytime.

 

I don't know if there was a bogus VRM - the only other photograph provided was a close up of a tax disc showing no other part of the car - that was obviously a forged tax disc, I know it's forged because it says the make and registration but the amount is incorrect, it says the duty paid on it is £190 but it only costs £150 to tax my car. They may have taken a picture of the VIN plate that they haven't shown me, but who knows this could have been fake as well.

 

Please help.

[buzby]

The fact that it will cost you X to protect your interests whilst e cour will only pay Y, is a fact of life. If you personal circumstances don't allow for full costs, then you join a very large club where we have no other option. If you have not been to court before, this will be a confusing and daunting procedure, with much to disadvantage you if you midges or make a wrong move.

 

In view of the short date, in you shoes I would request the court for a continuance in order for you to have formal representation at the hearing. This should not normally be refused.

 

Find a credit card, friends or a campaigning motoring solicitor to fund your defence. If the supplied evidence shown to the court can be discredited, the case against you ends and everybod moves on.

 

Your residency is important to you, but a side-show to the main event, do not risk letting a mistake by a cloned plate affect you - you need to discredit their evidence as inconclusive without a confirmation of the VIN actually matching your vehicle.

 

Incidentally, if supplying your own pictures, you need someone of good sanding to be in court to confirm they are of your vehicle and not tampered with.

Edited November 27, 2010 by buzby

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

That sounds like such an arduous process that could run into the 000s to disprove this nonsense, when I already have so much else on my plate to deal with.

 

Does anybody know from other cases where people have been fined for using an unlicensed vehicle on the public road if I just pay the £169 out of court settlement, will that be the end of it? I note it's carefully worded that this fine is for keeping or using an unlicensed vehicle on a public road. If I pay that will that then count as an admission of guilt and give them green light to lash on more fines for using a vehicle while SORN in place, displaying a false tax disc, etc. There could be no end to it if they decide that's an admission of guilt and have a field day with all the more fines they can get out of me.

 

But like I say I just don't have the time for this. What I find even more disgraceful is that DVLA have kept this to themselves for 7 months, this means they've allowed a potentially cloned vehicle to be on the roads committing offences in favour of simply profiting by extorting me. This from an organisation that claims it is their goal to aid in the prevention of vehicle crime by ensuring accurate records of vehicle owners. There's not even any mention of the fact that they claim it was clamped - I never paid for any release and it obviously hasn't been impounded.

 

You've stated about the VIN plate would they have needed to/would they already have a photo of the VIN that they haven't shown me? Even so it could have been copied as well, so what does that prove?

 

Isn't the onus on them to prove I'm guilty rather than me to prove I'm innocent?

[Spunkymonkey]

Given your natural concern about a "conviction" the first thing you need to do is establish without a doubt what they're taking you to court for. If it's a criminal matter then there should have been mention of the word "PROSECUTION" in the paperwork - criminal cases are prosecuted, civil cases are not. They should also have told you exactly what they'll be taking you to court for.

 

It's likely to be "Using an unlicenced vehicle" contrary to S29 of the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994. Because this is an offence created by an Act of Parliament it is a criminal charge and would lead to a criminal conviction (but no CCJ) if you went to court and lost.

 

Because it's a criminal charge the standard of proof required to convict you is (in theory) "beyond reasonable doubt". If the photographic evidence they have cannot clearly establish that it's your car (or potentially a clone of your car) on a public road while it's un-taxed, and you maintain that it can't have been, then it's basically your word against the DVLA clamping contractor which, given the documented history of them not playing by the rules, should raise reasonable doubt.

 

There are plenty of factors that could be used in your favour - not least the unreasonable delay in providing you with the photos, leaving you with no time to consider before accepting their "out of court settlement" offer. You don't seem to mention when the alleged offence happened either? If it was some time ago there may also be Human Rights implications in terms of unreasonable delays for what should be a slam-dunk case on their behalf.

 

The problem with that is that magistrates are NOT generally legally trained in any way and many do seem to be unable to grasp the subtleties of this sort of thing.

 

Can you not check (urgently) with whoever makes decisions about your emmigration whether a conviction for this would really be a problem? A brief explanation that you didn't do it, you have evidence to back that, but risk being found guilty if you don't accept the "out-of-court settlement" might reassure you that it really wouldn't be that much of an issue.

 

If not then the only safe advice is to either:

 

1) bite the bullet and pay up (you won't be the first or last!) or

 

2) contact a solicitor urgently for an opinion - many will give one through a free introductory interview or you may have a local Law Centre which can help. If you do try to get legal advice then make sure you have as much information and evidence as possible to help them make a fair assessment!

 

Sorry I can't be more positive but no court case is ever guaranteed (even for the innocent) and it sounds like you're pretty sure a conviction would be a disaster for you. So it comes down to whether or not the £169 is worth the risk.

 

If you DO pay then make sure that payment is made without admitting liability - send the payment by recorded delivery and include a covering letter stating clearly that, even though it was not your car, you are paying because you can't risk a criminal conviction and the delays by them make it impossible for you to mount an effective defence. Copy that letter to your MP, since they're already involved, and keep a copy yourself. That will give you some protection against further penalties (false declaration of SORN, back VED etc) if they try to say that you admitted guilt by paying.

[buzby]

If you pay up that's a confirmation and acceptance of guilt. You cannot hen expect to rewind this if your worst expectations happen. ANY admission can then be used as the precursor for follow-up action. It will naturally follow that there will fines for nor complying with SORN and required to pay any VED outstanding on he basis of at admission. Although why you would even think of doing this when all you need is compelling proof or witness statements ha you did not eludes me.

 

Agreed, it is not an ideal system but for those of us tha pay dearly for the privilege to keep ou cars on he road at leas we see they are doing something to fight those who work out with the system. However, if you correctly SORNd and your plates were cloned, have you reported hat the police? This would the minimum you need to to show you've been targeted.

 

As to the VIN this can be viewed through he windscreen and rarely 'copied' If the judge accepts their evidence, and you have nothing effective t counter I with, they'll win.

 

Unless you can discredit their evidence, your innocence will not be your issue, hence a pressing need for representation.

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

Yes the word prosecution has been mentioned numerous times by DVLA and the MP for the DfT addressing my MP. As far as I can understand this is a more serious offence than a simple speeding ticket to be proecuted for and hence a Crime of Moral Turpitude - which would severely impact immigration.

 

This allegedly was clamped in April this year and the first I heard of it was a letter from DVLA in September demanding £169 for a S29 3A Offence.

 

What further fines will follow if I do pay it, so I can work out if it would cost more to hire a lawyer or cover all the false fines.

 

Is buzby saying if this does go to court, my only option is to seek representation? Because people in previous posts were saying that it's only a Magistrate's Court and so not so much.

 

As for the VIN are you saying there'd be another photo taken of that which they have not provided? The photo that shows the false tax disc only partially shows the VIN whilst the rest is obscured by the tax disc.

 

 

If the judge accepts their evidence, and you have nothing effective t counter I with, they'll win.

What effective can I have to counter with so that they don't win as you say?

[Spunkymonkey]

First off, I wouldn't be so sure that a conviction for this would count as "moral turpitude" but that's something you'd have to confirm with whoever is dealing with your visa etc.

 

Next, if this happened in April and they didn't contact you till November then you'd have a pretty good (read - almost certain with good representation) case for it being thrown out. For example, in cases of speeding you MUST be served a notice of intended prosecution within 14 days give or take a little leeway by the court). 6 months is, frankly, way too long to give you any reasonable chance of gathering evidence in your defence. For example, if you went to court and had the clamper there to question he can hide behind "I can't remember back then but this was my report. so that must be how it was." - you have no real chance of picking holes in his evidence.

 

I'll have a dig tomorrow and see if I can find any rules or guidance for time in this specific case but 6 months sounds far too long to be reasonable since they supposedly had their evidence (the photos) way back in April.

 

You can go to court and defend yourself, and you can do it successfully. But it takes a lot of preparation and, if you haven't done it before, an awful lot of research which you may well not have time for. A solicitor has already done an awful lot of the basic groundwork as part of qualifying so can put an effective defence together in a fraction of the time you'd need by fitting the facts you give into stuff they already know. Hence Busby's sensible recommendation to be represented.

 

Further fines are difficult because there may be none or they may dig out everything they can. Potentially that would include back VED for the entire time the car's been on SORN and (theoretically) criminal fraud proceedings for a false SORN declaration. That is NOT likely to happen, but they could if you're unlucky and they decide to make an example of you!

 

You mention that the VIN is partially visible in the photo of the tax disk - does the part that is visible match that part of the VIN for your car? If it does match then it's not proof that it is your car (it could just be a very close VIN) but if it doesn't match then it's pretty clear proof that it isn't yours! By match, I don't just mean matching numbers - if the photo is clear enough to show things like the quality of stamping, position of rivets compared to the edge of the plate, any damage (scratches etc) that's on the one in the photo but not on yours, and so on then these things should also match what's on your car.

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

It was in September that I first received a letter about it and immediately referred it to my MP. The photos are of such poor quality you can't tell much else about the VIN plate but the few numbers that are visible are contained in my VIN - but along with how many others? You can't see anything of the car or even tell what car it is, it's just a close up of the tax disc with a few numbers from the VIN showing.

 

Thanks for all your support. If anybody reading happens to be a lawyer or hates the DVLA and is interested in taking it to the media then do PM me.

[Spunkymonkey]

Are the photos you have in digital form, or can you scan them into your computer? A look at them if possible might give a better idea of how likely they are to be challengeable as evidence.

[DVLA Victim9541556125484]

I PM them to you if you want to have a look to give your opinion on that. For obvious reasons I don't want to post them in public. It seems odd that they make no mention of what happened regarding the clamping - obviously I didn't pay for it and it hasn't been impounded.