(Alleged) Theft of my vehicle by the government

[sfarmer]

I am hoping that someone here will be able to guide me in to a successfull sueing of the ministry of transport but I don't know how.

On the 26th october my ford fiesta was parked in fernbank road without tax waiting to be privately parked on the private drive as it was before. By the 26th october my car had been towed away to a compound.

My points are that no warning was given and no contact details were left. There were only two days in which I could have acted which is just not enough time I suggest.

I am on incapacity benefit and I do not have the £180.00 they are asking for and the further fee of £25.00 per day in compound charges.

What this all amounts to is surely the legalised theft of my vehicle by the British government as if I had recieved a warning I would have transferred the vehicle to being privately parked immediately. The car was registered to myself, it would not have been difficult to inform me giving me time to act.Surely there must be a law somewhere disallowing this practice. Does anyone know of this practice being tested in court? I have lost £450.00 of my property, and I can ill afford to do so. This is grossly unfair and absolutely outrageous. Someone please help.

[barracad]

Your car was not stolen, it was taken away because you hadn't paid the relevant taxes so it shouldn't have been on the public highway in the first place.

 

You have the option of collecting your car so it is not theft, and they are not keeping it.

 

By accusing them of theft, your post is potentially libelous. Please refrain from these type of comments.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

[sfarmer]

It is true I have the option of collecting my car if I had enough to pay thier extortionate fees for doing so! My point is that I was not given enough time to do anything to stop it being taken. It cannot be moved whilst clamped and no warning was given prior to clamping, infact no contact details were left either. I will never see my car again and that is why I refer to the action as theft (legal theft) What else would you call it. Rightfull removal of untaxed vehicle? No warning was given in which I could have acted prior to clamping.

[barracad]

You would have had warning - You would have had notification from the DVLA that your tax needed renewing. This would also have informed you that it is an offence to have a vehicle on the road without tax - that is your warning.

 

How can it be theft if nobody has stolen your car? It is not theft, if you really believe your car has been stolen then report it to the police.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

[Rob S]

You get plenty of notice of the need to renew your road tax prior to it expiring and you can actually renew it in advance up to 15 days before it expires. I'm afraid you are on very thin ice with your protestations. You can even renew your road tax online nowadays in certain circumstances.

[buzby]

The problem you have, is that very quickly the cost of regaining control of the vehicle (storage charges and fines) it becomes more cost-effective to buy another. Car ownership is a minefield these days, and having it on a public road at all (whether it is waiting to be stored) is tempting fate - irrespective if a notice of impending action was affixed to it or not. Like others on this thread, any potential action is bound to fail, as you had no right to leave the vehicle where it was. You might want to write to your local councillor or MP as a possible way of moving this forward, but it will be an outside chance that anything positive will come from it.

[sfarmer]

I had no warning, postal or otherwise and no contact details were left.If there had been warning it would have been moved- hence the charge of legal theft which the banks also try to get away with. I have experience (recent of that too, along the lines of it never rains but it pours). I would love to attend the rally but am too broke to do so. I bought the car two months ago. It was kept on the drive.

[sfarmer]

Rights are determined by laws. I am saying this law is a grossly unfair one, especially to those of us without huge pockets.

[MrShed]

Don't want the fine, don't do the crime!

[barracad]

I had no warning, postal or otherwise

 

Everybody gets notification that their car tax is due for renewal. It is sent automatically.

 

Even if you hadn't received it, you would know when your tax expired - it is printed on your tax disc.

 

If you didn't receive your renewal notice it is your responsibility to arrange tax before it expires, it isn't an invitation to leave your car on the road untaxed.

 

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

[martdj]

Anyone who does not pay tax and keeps their vehicle on a public road deserves to have their car taken. If your insuramce company knew they would probably invalidate the insurance

[buzby]

The warning I was referring to was the notice that would be affixed to the vehicle 24-48hours before removal. As I understand it, vehicles are clamped and stickered, so whilst you may not have received a written warining of ite removal, it sohuld have been evident by looking at the windscreen - all this is in addition to the usual Road Tax renewal forms, but from what you said you weren't planning to put it on the road, just back into 'storage'. Had you declared a SORN for the vehicle?

[sfarmer]

I had no warning period, stickered or otherwise. In my opinion any car owner should recieve a warning before thier car is towed away. There was a huge sticker saying please do not remove this notice which I did remove looking for the missing contact details.I was only given 48hrs in which to act from clamp to tow !!! They have my property valued at £450.00 which I cannot afford to recover. You would have to be a brain dead idiot not to see that this is unfair treatrment by a long chalk.

[gizmo111]

I had no warning period, stickered or otherwise. In my opinion any car owner should recieve a warning before thier car is towed away. There was a huge sticker saying please do not remove this notice which I did remove looking for the missing contact details.I was only given 48hrs in which to act from clamp to tow !!! They have my property valued at £450.00 which I cannot afford to recover. You would have to be a brain dead idiot not to see that this is unfair treatrment by a long chalk.

 

You knew it had no tax - you had a sticker with 48 hours notice from clamp to tow - you could have rang local council or police or pound for details. What exactly are you rying to acheive here?

[MrShed]

And to be fair, if it was the 26th of October, then your car must have been without tax for 26 days at LEAST. So this means you either had 26 days to move your car onto the drive, not 2....or you have been driving it without tax. Either way I have no sympathy for you whatsoever. You have broken the law, deal with it.

[Guest Battleaxe]

Sorry mate, you are in wrong, untaxed equals violation. Untaxed means insurance invalid, which begs the question, is it insured at all?

 

No sympathy for you whatsoever. You might not be able to £450.00 for another vehicle, so you should thought about this before parking it on the road at all.

 

Our old car broke down, got a big yellow sticky label slapped on it, we had 48 hours notice that it would be towed if it wasn't removed, actually sticky label slapped on car as we were returning to get it towed back home. At least it was taxed and insured. We also got a call from Mr Plod telling us what was happening and checking that car was ours, so we had fair warning.

 

That sticky yellow label took time remove. Our biggest worry was that the car would be stripped before we could back to it.

 

No sympathy mate and we are generally a caring lot.

[buzby]

I had no warning period, stickered or otherwise. In my opinion any car owner should recieve a warning before thier car is towed away. There was a huge sticker saying please do not remove this notice which I did remove looking for the missing contact details.I was only given 48hrs in which to act from clamp to tow !!! They have my property valued at £450.00 which I cannot afford to recover. You would have to be a brain dead idiot not to see that this is unfair treatrment by a long chalk.

 

As much as I'd like to help you - you're not being consistent - you answer my query saying there was no sticker, then go on to say there was one which you removed, and 48hrs later the car was gone. I do think that was warning enough of the serious trouble ahead.

 

I also asked if you had declared a SORN for the vehicle, but you didn't reply. The Statuatory Off-Road Notification allows you to state your intentions, that the vehicle isn't just untaxed, but that it is off-road until you formally arrange otherwise. If you HAD declared a SORN, there's little leeway, but the possibility that you might be treated with a little sympathy for the situation you found yourself in. IF you did NOT declare a SORN, then clearly the next stage - even if your car hadn't been taken, would have been an automatic fine. You lose either way. The answer, sadly, is we all have to play by the rules - and in your case, unfortunately, you'll have to pay the price.

[dave]

Sadly, there is nothing you can do in this case.

 

Personally, I agree that it's 'legalised theft'. The only reason they have the right to take someone elses private property if the vehicle is unlicenced is because they gave it to themselves.

 

They could make road tax 10k a year, and then tow everyones' car - yet, this would be seen as 'legalised theft' by everyone. Be it 10k, or 50 quid, if you can't afford it, then you can't afford it.

 

It wouldn't be so bad if there were a public transport alternative to use if you can't afford to run car, but alas - this is England. I work 12 miles from my house, and if I didn't have a car I would have to cycle (I have no bike) or walk (which I have no objection to, but in the summer, it might get a bit smelly in the office).

 

 

 

If you think about the situation, it's little better than a protection racket. You pay through the nose for a poor service (roads, traffic jams etc...) or else we'll nick your car.

 

Protection racket: You pay through the nose for little or no service, or we'll smash your place up.

 

Very little difference in my opinion.

 

Incidently, if the vehicle is untaxed, I'm pretty sure this does not mean that your insurance is invalid - contrary to what insurance companies etc... would have you believe. I seem to remember something about this from my CIP days. It was in the same chapter as the bit about the insurance being valid for a full year even if you pay by installments and then cancel after paying just one. The policy, by law, has to stay in force for the full term.

 

....just my 2p.

[patdavies]

Incidently, if the vehicle is untaxed, I'm pretty sure this does not mean that your insurance is invalid - contrary to what insurance companies etc... would have you believe.

 

 

The insurance is not invalidated by not having MoT or tax. Remember that in UK, it is the driver who is insured, not the vehicle.

 

How else do you get to/from an MoT test station for a test appointment when you have neither?

[buzby]

Protection racket: You pay through the nose for little or no service, or we'll smash your place up.

 

You're not buying a service - your are purchasing a right-to-use. Of course, the fact the government spend Road Tax on anything other than road planning, building and maintenance is a scandal - but the answer is not to elect them next time. Since I pay my Road Tax, I fail to see why I should be charged at Dartford, Hull, M6 (Toll) etc because that bit of road goes over or under some river, so I don't. Road pricing, by paying for what you use will be the way forward - so those that use the roads the most, pay the most.

 

As to our fried with the impouinded vehicle, it's hard to have repect for someone who does not pay the appropriate tax, then complains about the sanctions imposed after his actions.

[Movingon]

The insurance is not invalidated by not having MoT or tax. Remember that in UK, it is the driver who is insured, not the vehicle.

 

How else do you get to/from an MoT test station for a test appointment when you have neither?

 

That's a specific exemption in the Law.

 

What the insurance company CAN do (and often do) is to state in their terms and conditions that they will withdraw cover in respect of any vehicle which has failed to maintain a legally road-going status; in other words, if it ain't taxed or MOT'd we ain't paying.

 

You will also recall that ANPR checks against vehicle registrations will reveal whether there is an insurance policy in force against a particular vehicle - nothing about the driver. Because yes, it's the driver and his/her spouse who are insured, but the insurance policy relates to a VEHICLE. You can buy a policy for "any vehicle" but it costs a FORTUNE. And most policies, despite stating "any vehicle the property of the insured, or loaned to him/her under a hire/purchase agreement", will also have a registration number listed on them.

 

We can squirm all we like; but in order for a car to exist on a public road it must be taxed and insured. In order to drive on a public road it must also have an MOT.

[MrShed]

You do not have to have a car insured to have it EXIST, just to drive it.

[Movingon]

You do not have to have a car insured to have it EXIST, just to drive it.

 

Incorrect. If it's on a public road it must be insured at least third party. If the handbrake cable spontaneously snaps and the resulting motion causes damage to council property you will find out very rapidly that insurance for vehicles is MANDATORY if they are on public roads.

[carinas]

Surely what his saying is that he "wasn't given fair notice of the car being removed" ??

 

Heck... doesn't everyone know that untaxed cars are removed? PLUS... If his saying he never recieved a reminder then its pretty obvious to me the cars not registered in his name! As the DVla automatically send out reminders as soon as the cars registered in your name, if it has no tax.

 

Sorry but if you cant afford the car dont have it in the first place, it's bound to be an idiot like you that drives into ME!

[dave]

Sorry but if you cant afford the car dont have it in the first place, it's bound to be an idiot like you that drives into ME!

 

That's a bit strong. Just because someone can't afford to run a car doesn't mean they are stupid.

 

Also, there may well be no choice but to have a car - there is certainly no realistic public transport near me, and I'm sandwiched in between two large towns, with a city less than 15 miles away.