Professor Lone Ranger / DVLA fines.

[Professor Lone Ranger]

I read the Register's report, but I do believe it is making much out of nothing - the problem for the DVLA is NOT that they are misrepresenting the dates on their communications, but not posting them out when they are prepared/printed. A very different issue indeed.

 

What the Register seems to expect its readers to believe, is that the notice letter should be given a date 'when it is recieved' - which is laughable! The DVLA is really no different from Bills from BT and Virgin Media, the day shoing as the billing date now invariably ISN;T the date of posting, (which can be up to a week to 10 days later). Now, to my mind this issue is one for them to resolve with their postal services provider - and be held accountible for same. (If a letter is dated 1st Month, then the letter should be posted on that date). If it isn;t, then the letters need to be reissued - not allowed to pile up till they've got enought to send to achieve their mailing discount.

 

As for PLR's assertion the it is somehow against HRA of being found guilty of an offence without a right of reply. How so? You can reply, and they can accept or reject your representation - but then we've all been told of what will happen if the SORN is not declared, so the smart guys make sure it is done (and it shuts them up) - lets not forget it was the KLAbour Government that came up with this great idea and passed it into law, A bit late to complain about the unfairness of the process when your democratically elected representative probably not only accepted, but voted for it too.

 

I suggest there is another angle here. If DVLA were seriously engaged in ensuring prompt payment of VED it would issue a demand for payment as soon as the 14 day period of grace expired, if not before, (after all it issues renewal notices well in advance) but; if it did that, it would run the risk of not benefiting from the Late Licensing Penalty (LLP) it can claim, after 30 days, beyond the expiry date of the VEL, have passed. That would explain would it not, why LLPs were being printed, but not dispatched, until the 30 day trigger point passed? If so, it seems, there has been some muddled thinking. On the one hand; delay until 30 days passed generates a LLP, on the other, early payment removes that, so all that happened, is, DVLA causes an artificial delay, by holding back on demanding payment, thereby collecting VED one month later than it could, and, should have done. If its true aim were to collect monies due, rather than victimise, the perceived lawless motorists, who wilfully keep, and, use untaxed vehicles on public roads prompt action to recover what is due would be the right course of action but that risks having a DVLA, that is much more efficient, needing less workers, for the taxpayers to employ, in a Quango with delegated powers, to write its own laws. Such delegation surely amounts to a dereliction of duty, by the Secretary of State? When I wrote, and complained, it was referred back to the organisation I was complaining about.

 

How can that result in justice?

Edited November 17, 2009 by Professor Lone Ranger
clarity

[buzby]

I don't take issue with much of what you say - but are you aware it is NOT the DVLA that process the Continuous Registration issues? DVLA got no extra staff, the work was farmed out to a back-office system fron the same company that provides TFL's Congestion Charging - Capita. So, like the PPC's the benefits are well hidden, it is the fines that are paying for the enforcement administration.

[Professor Lone Ranger]

Thank you. I wonder what bonuses the bully boys receive for harassing motorists?

[outelligent]

I am have received a penalty from the DVLA I am about to write to them to 'appeal'.

 

Should I ask for a original copy of the LLP or has this change and is no longer useful to me?

[Professor Lone Ranger]

It depends what your appeal is about.

 

I recently asked for a copy of the notice and was sent the latest version which is much more friendly and polite but fortunately I have found the nasty version on my computer today.

 

On the question of an appeal, for it to be right, it needs to be to an impartial court established by law. The DVLA has a complaints procedure but I think that is just aimed at delay.

[outelligent]

Thanks for the advice, I will ask them to send me the a copy of the LLP.

 

I am more likely to get a friendly verson of LLP because my "offence" is recent. Do you expect the dates on the LLP will be still be inccorrect or have they since picked up on this?

[hungrybear]

You are probably not aware that in a court case at the Central London County Court 18/07/09 Secretary of state for transport~V~E.T.A. DVLA's old LLP notices were ruled to be Non-compliant with the law. If your original LLP has only 28 days between the letter date and the final date to pay the reduced amount it is non-compliant. DVLA have since changed their SORN LLP's in an attempt to make them compliant.

 

AS DVLA's haven't followed the rules to the letter the penalty as it stands is in theory unenforcable. Following the case of Secretary of state for transport~V~James Collins held at the Clerkenwell County Court on the 26/10/09 District Judge Armon-Jones held that DVLA DO have to follow the law to the letter.

 

 

Remember that county court DOES NOT create case law president. At best it can be introduced at a similar level court as a note for guidance.

[outelligent]

I Have asked for a copy of the LLP.

The dvla have said they do not send copys of legislation.

 

How did everyone else get a copy?

[buzby]

LLP is not 'Legislation' - it is a notice sent to the RK. If you mean you wanted to bone up one actual legislation, an Internet search will bring it up.

[outelligent]

thanks bubzy, they did not read my letter propperly so I have asked them again for a copy of thr llp. will wait to see what they say.

[outelligent]

The dvla have still not sent me the LLP.

They dont seem to know what one is has anyone got a copy they can show me?

[Professor Lone Ranger]

LLP simply means 'Late Licensing Penalty' DVLA notifies its enforcement agencies details of those who they allege to have failed to 're-license their vehicles', even though they have no legal obligation to do so. They then send demands for payment accompanied with what I claim to be harassment of the public, because there is no requirement to re-license a vehicle that is neither on the road nor in use. The LLP is a supplement for failing to pay within 30 days after a licence expires, but that is waived if the amount due is paid within 28 days of receiving the claim. Where DVLA seems to have erred is by delaying the issue of penalty notices to ensure that 30 days have expired after the VEL runs out, thereby not giving RKs the 28 days they are due for time to pay. It seems DVLA is the judge and jury in its own case, making it possible for it to interpret laws as it sees fit. There is not a lot of point of appealing to lawbreakers for the application of the Human Rights Act in their case if normally law abiding citizens are being harassed by them and their agencies. As for the suggestion the laws have been written and passed by our democratically elected representatives, so we have no grounds for complaint, what do those like me who have an MP who has shown no ability to do anything that is not in their own interests do? I tried to make a copy for you but failed. I do not think it would be of any help.