SORN'd Vehicle Removed & Crushed Despite Being Parked on Private Land !! ***WON***

[Brassed off]

Our old car was SORN’d and parked on private land behind our property, NSL towed it away and crushed it. We never received a one day letter, the first we knew of it was a letter from the DVLA asking for £77 to settle out of court.

 

I checked with our local council who said that the land wasn't adopted by them and they couldn't tell me whether it was private land or not. So I rang the Highways Agency and they confirmed over the 'phone that it was definitely private land and that NSL were having a laugh. However, they wanted £40 to provide the relevant info in writing to confirm this. Naturally, I declined.

 

Basically, DVLA dropped the case after I gave them a good roasting over the ‘phone and all I got “in writing” was a one line letter saying that they’d dropped it. I rang them and told them we wanted compensation and was told I’d have to write to NSL.

 

Wrote to NSL who sent a standard letter saying they’d investigate it with their Blackburn pound and got a reply from their head office saying that their insurers would be in touch

 

Received a letter from their insurers saying that their enquiries were ongoing and to progress the matter, could we give them copies of the vehicle's V5 and the most recent MOT certificate and to confirm to them that we had received a "one day" letter advising us of the fact that the car had been impounded and recommending collection.

 

Saw red, and e-mailed them asking why they needed the documents and got the following reply:-

 

"We acknowledge receipt of the attached. A copy of the V5 will confirm proof of ownership to us and will be required by the Motor Engineer if we request a valuation of the vehicle. The most current MOT will be necessary again for valuation purposes and it will be necessary for you to confirm that you received the “one day” letter which advised where the vehicle was and it also recommended collection from the pound.

 

We await sight of these documents."

 

 

I can't find the V5 or the last MOT and I suspect it was probably in the glove compartment of the car!

 

They're obviously digging their heels on this as they know they will have to "cough up" eventually.

 

Does anyone have any advice on how I can bring this to a speedy conclusion?

 

TIA

 

Bo

 

 

 

 

[JimmySpangle]

As this car was illegally taken, bring the police in. Theft is NOT a civil matter and they need to be taught a valuable lesson.

[Helford]

A V5 is not proof of ownership, nor is the existance of an MOT a major factor in valuation e.g. A car's value doesn't 'evaporate' when it needs an MOT at 3 years old pending an MOT being put in place.

 

Stalling tactics it would appear!

[noodles71]

They recently tried this on with me but they didn't clamp or take my car away as much as I wished they did. I'm not sure how to speed things up but what they have done is outside the law and I would be putting the court action threats towards them that they normally dump on us.

 

A SORN'ed vehicle on private land with no other evidence that the vehicle has not been used on the road is untouchable. There are issues where the private land has public access but if it is attached to dwellings they are absolutely not allowed to do what they did. The caveats are where the car had no right to be parked on private land and the landlord took all reasonable steps to contact the owner before having it removed. This is to stop a SORN'ed car being parked somewhere like Tescos and still being used on the road. It doesn't look like they feel this is the case with you as they seem like they are resigned to paying out.

 

I'd threaten them with court action and a criminal damage/theft complaint unless they pay you the market value of your last insurance policy. This is probably a higher figure than your car was actually worth.

 

If you can afford not to rush then you have them by the short and curlies

[noodles71]

I meant other evidence it has still been used on the road. If you are/have been complying with the SORN acknowledgement they sent you then take them to the cleaners. That notice makes no mention of the relationship with the landlord of the private parking area and yourself. It clearly states private land is sufficient.

 

I can't see how this isn't criminal damage and theft.

[Brassed off]

Thanks for all the excellent replies.

 

I did initially think that this was theft but never contemplated getting the police in. I will ring them at the weekend and make enquiries.

 

I will certainly threaten their insurers with court action but will be asking for far more than what the car was worth. All this has caused me so much stress and hassle especially as I've had to ring round in my lunchbreak at work.

[hungrybear]

A V5 is not proof of ownership, nor is the existance of an MOT a major factor in valuation e.g. A car's value doesn't 'evaporate' when it needs an MOT at 3 years old pending an MOT being put in place.

 

Stalling tactics it would appear!

 

 

to be fair, These are equivalent to the standard documents insurers require to value a car. A car with an MOT - which can be verified online you dont need the certificate - is worth more than one without. Also, a car with a service history is worth more. And for the purposes of an insurance payout a V5C is proof that the person who says they own the vehicle actually does - they will ONLY issue a cheque in the exact name on the V5C as an anti fraud measure.

 

Yes they're a bunch of twonks but cut them a little slack - LOL.

 

I've discussed this with noodles I think. It seems that dvla are 'accidentally' confusing SORN and unlicensed. An unlicensed vehicle - no tax or SORN can be removed from any private land other than the curtlidge of a dwelling. A SORN'd vehicle can only be removed from public land.

 

Far be it for me to say that this new revenue drive from DVLA is anything but purely accidental!

[hungrybear]

 

I will certainly threaten their insurers with court action but will be asking for far more than what the car was worth. All this has caused me so much stress and hassle especially as I've had to ring round in my lunchbreak at work.

 

 

You are entitled to claim for inconvenience, loss of enjoyment - life in general (anxiety, depression, insomnia-a trip to the GP would help this:rolleyes:) and out of pocket expenses - work out a number you would be happy with then add at least 50% to give yourself some negotiation space and still get want you want. This is a seperate negotiation to that for the vehicle and you may wish to consider talking to a personal injury solicitor, at least for info.

[Brassed off]

Think I'd better get DH to get a copy of the V5C then. We think we can remember where we last had it MOT'd but I think it's about £10 for a copy - more hassle and money!

 

As the car was over ten years old, if we had decided to trade it in for a newer car, then we would've got £2K part-ex for it scrappage allowance.

 

Just had a giggle at your post hungrybear - I like the loss of enjoyment bit the best

 

Thanks though, I do have a figure in mind now.

[crem]

As the car was over ten years old, if we had decided to trade it in for a newer car, then we would've got £2K part-ex for it scrappage allowance.

 

Not for a NEWER car you wouldn't, only if you bought a NEW car

[Brassed off]

I have spoken to a couple of police friends who have said that as NSL believed the land to be public at the time, then it is not classed as theft.

 

I sent the insurance company a copy of the V5 and advised them that we hadn't received a one day letter and after chasing them a few times and threatening court action, I received the following reply:-

 

 

"We refer to the above and to the attached e-mails and would advise that we are now in receipt of the Independent Motor Engineer's report / valuation in respect of this matter and we would advise that we are prepared to make you an offer of £XXX.XX in full an final settlement of this matter.

 

The last MOT on the vehicle expired in XXX 2008 and the vehicle was not insured at the time of its removal.

 

We await acceptance of this offer in writing at which point, we will be able to issue a cheque on behalf of our client."

 

 

It makes me laugh that they can tell me when the last MOT was and also that it wasn't insured but still wanted to see copies of all the documentation we had as they obviously do have access to all these - so definite stalling tactics. They really don't like paying out do they?

 

I would like to see a copy of the Motor Engineer's report as there wasn't one attached. The figure they are offering is nowhere near what we would want in compensation and they are obviously testing the water to see how little they can get away with offering.

 

I've e-mailed back and advised that this offer is unacceptable and asking for a copy of the Motor Engineer's report and as usual, am having to chase constantly for an answer.

 

I am considering going through the DVLA's complaints procedure at the moment.

 

 

[Britainsworstdriver]

Don't deal with this any further. They have now admitted liability and you shoul get a solicitor to do the rest for you. They will be paid on top of your settlement. Make sure you emphasise to your solicitor how upsetting this has been for you. You didn't have a copy of Susan Boyle's original CD in the car by any chance did you? Thats another £750 on top.

 

Let the people who are experts at dragging money out of these people do it for you.

[Brassed off]

I can't really see the point in getting a solicitor in tbh, we can wait - we've waited long enough !

 

I'm going to give them a ring next week and do a bit of negotiating over the 'phone as they are just ignoring me, obviously I'll make sure I get confirmation in writing before agreeing to a settlement figure

 

No BWD, I didn't have a Susan Boyle CD in the car but they don't know that do they?

[Brassed off]

Not had time to ring them on this I'm afraid it's difficult for me to ring from work. So I wrote back to them yet again, refusing their paltry offer and again, asking for sight of the Engineer's report. I got the following reply:-

 

Your e-mail of the XXXX (date) stated that the offer of £XXX.XX was not accepted, but it did not proffer any further information or documentary evidence to warrant a change to this amount.

 

The onus is on you to prove your claim. Please provide evidence to show that the amount should be increased or decreased to reflect the correct value of the vehicle.This should be in the form of advertisements in Motor Trade magazines etc. showing the equivalent vehicle with exactly the same specification, in the same condition as your own and without current MoT or Insurance.

The valuation for your vehicle was compiled by experts in their field.

 

We await your documentary evidence.

 

Yours faithfully,

So they are basically saying that I have to provide evidence to prove that the car was worth more than they have valued it at. I know for a fact that when it was insured, it was for at least double the amount they are offering and obviously they are just giving me the current price for a car in the same condition.

 

Somewhere back in this thread, someone said that the compensation side of this would have to be claimed separately. They are obviously only dealing with the amount for the car at the moment and there is no mention of compensation for all the time and grief this has caused me.

 

BWD, I'm going to take your advice (thank you) and get a solicitor friend of ours to deal with this as I've really had enough now

 

Will keep you updated on how it goes

 

Bo

[Surfer01]

Good for you. Nail them and just maybe they will check the status of the land before hauling off a vehicle. How did they know the vehicle was there in the first place unless the council had notified them?

[kwaks]

They really do have a nerve, they steal your car and crush it then expect you to do all the work to value it.

[Brassed off]

Good for you. Nail them and just maybe they will check the status of the land before hauling off a vehicle. How did they know the vehicle was there in the first place unless the council had notified them?

 

I wonder whether someone had reported the car as it didn't have a tax disc on?? No, I don't think it was the Council as I'm sure they'd have told me when I rang them so no idea really.

 

 

Tell me about it Kwaks!! As if I haven't had enough hassle already. They are just taking the mick

[LUMPEY CUSTARD]

Some friends of mine were left a flat and a car when there father died some years ago. The flat has needed some work done on it so has been empty and the car has been standing on the parking space that goes with the flat on private ground. My friends do not live in the flat infact they live several hundred miles away. As I have a computer I have raised a Sorn on the car for the last few years. My friends were contacted by the local council where the car is because one of there street officers had seen some dumped items (old washing manchines etc) around the area and saw the car which they also thought was abandoned. When they checked the rates for the property they wrote to my friends and were told that the car was on sorn and was not abandoned. The council wrote back and removed the items but left the car. That was last Jan 2009. I tried to do a sorn two week ago as the latest would run out on the 1st March 2010 but could not. DVLA said they had info but we would have to write on for it which we have just done. The police said they had no record of the car being stolen but confirmed that it was not parked at the private location of the flat so raise a crime report

The council after a week of phone calls said at last that some people complained about the car that they believed had been dumped the council checked with DVLA WHO TOLD THEM THE SORN HAD RUN OUT IN FEB 2009. But I have in writing from the DVLA a Sorn letter dated 11 Feb 2009 stating a valid sorn till 2010. So the council towed the car away and had it crushed and were about to send out a bill of £230 pounds which now they agreed they would not. Who should my friends chase for compo the council or DVLA ???

[JimmySpangle]

You shouldn have started your own thread.

 

How did you declare SORN? Are you the registered keeper?

[locutus]

Subbing

 

I know I could have used the thread tools but I'm also bumping as I belive there may be an update comming soon (within 10 days)

Edited July 13, 2010 by locutus

[Brassed off]

Well I was going to say "can't you sub quieter"

 

But thanks for the bump up - I would've done it sooner or later I suppose.

 

Cutting a long story short, made claim, they are going to defend in full

Can't wait - it's going to be better than the Beano

 

It's about ten days I think but would need to dig out the paperwork to check though - swamped in paperwork these days!

 

More as/if/when !

[locutus]

Well I was going to say "can't you sub quieter"

 

But thanks for the bump up - I would've done it sooner or later I suppose.

 

Cutting a long story short, made claim, they are going to defend in full

Can't wait - it's going to be better than the Beano

 

It's about ten days I think but would need to dig out the paperwork to check though - swamped in paperwork these days!

 

More as/if/when !

I'm sure you'll take them to task. Some interesting points / litigation here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dvla/254049-breaking-news-dvla-loses.html (long read... punishment for staying away from CAG for so long )

[lexis200]

Unbelievable:eek:

[Brassed off]

I'm sure you'll take them to task. Some interesting points / litigation here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dvla/254049-breaking-news-dvla-loses.html (long read... punishment for staying away from CAG for so long )

 

You bet i will Loco Who has time to read all that???? Will give you a tickle instead and get round to reading it at some point

 

Unbelievable:eek:

 

Believe it baby

[babybear39]

Hey BO Just dropping in to have a nose. I've read the other thread and done some of my own digging and when my business with DVLA is concluded I will 'spill my guts' on here