cgksheff Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 I know I am right. It is not just opinion, past court cases support this. To help explain: The contract of transfer of a car .... sale, gift or whatever .... is not dependent on the DVLA updating their records. Their is no statute that says ownership or liability for fines etc. is dependent on the DVLA records. The courts know that and are happy to accept positive proof that shows that the person no longer had possession of the vehicle at the time of the offence ... and had taken reasonable steps to correct the mistake with the DVLA and to inform the Council. I don't think that the OP did this ... a simple refusal to pay and a phone call was not sufficient. I think that if he doesn't have sufficient proof, he is better off paying up as it could prove more expensive in trying to prove his innocence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 I'm with cgksheff on this one. Registered keeper does not mean ownership. It doesn't need to. The registered keeper is responsible for the fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 I know I am right. It is not just opinion, past court cases support this. To help explain: The contract of transfer of a car .... sale, gift or whatever .... is not dependent on the DVLA updating their records. Their is no statute that says ownership or liability for fines etc. is dependent on the DVLA records. The courts know that and are happy to accept positive proof that shows that the person no longer had possession of the vehicle at the time of the offence ... and had taken reasonable steps to correct the mistake with the DVLA and to inform the Council. I don't think that the OP did this ... a simple refusal to pay and a phone call was not sufficient. I think that if he doesn't have sufficient proof, he is better off paying up as it could prove more expensive in trying to prove his innocence. Agree 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgksheff Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 It doesn't need to. The registered keeper is responsible for the fine. Why do you persist? The Registered Keeper is only ultimately responsible. The Council is at liberty to charge whoever they believe to be the owner/keeper at the time of the offence. This is not the same as "the law says the Registered Keeper must pay the fine". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigjoker Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 I know I am right. It is not just opinion, past court cases support this. To help explain: The contract of transfer of a car .... sale, gift or whatever .... is not dependent on the DVLA updating their records. Their is no statute that says ownership or liability for fines etc. is dependent on the DVLA records. The courts know that and are happy to accept positive proof that shows that the person no longer had possession of the vehicle at the time of the offence ... and had taken reasonable steps to correct the mistake with the DVLA and to inform the Council. I don't think that the OP did this ... a simple refusal to pay and a phone call was not sufficient. I think that if he doesn't have sufficient proof, he is better off paying up as it could prove more expensive in trying to prove his innocence. Bet ya dont wear a hat, they dont make em big enough. Know all.:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xt500 Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 Bit of a long one, sorry. Bought a car over a year ago, which turned out to be a lemon. Dealers knowingly sold me a lemon. After a few weeks of ownership and much arguing, they agreed to refund my money and I returned the car and all papers so they could apply for ownership again (stupid I know, I should have sent reg documents to DVLA myself but I just wanted shot of the whole thing.), not forseeing just how crooked these guys would turn out to be. Car was bought from Leicester. Couple months or so later I received a parking fine for same car. Contravention occurred in Leicester. I phoned the DVLA and informed them I was not the owner. They said they had not received this information prior to this and requested it in writing, which I sent. Recently received an Order for Recovery of unpaid PCN. I phoned them up and explained the above. The woman said that the DVLA still have me as registered owner! She said I need to inform the DVLA etc., I told her I have already done this. She said she needs proof from DVLA that I was not owner at time of contravention. To which I replied that, even if I phone the DVLA NOW, if they STILL have me as owner then the date the DVLA will give her will be from today! So I will still, in their view, be liable to pay! She agreed this was so. I told her I would not be paying the fine. She said they will send the bailiffs out. I asked to speak to a supervisor, she said I would be told the exact same thing. I asked if it could be taken to court, she said no, they just send it straight to the bailiffs. I am not paying this fine on principal. I don't understand why the DVLA has not updated info... maybe they never received my letter/ didn't log the call... I don't frigging know! Can bailiffs hired by council force you to pay? The best advice is to go to http://www.pepipoo.com and open a thread there for accurate advice.Having a gung ho attitude isnt going to win your case.Going to pepipoo and using the free advice and your head will. There are proper procedures if you dont follow them properly you will end up paying the choice is yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgksheff Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 Bet ya dont wear a hat, they dont make em big enough. Know all.:hihi: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/myl/llog/duty_calls.png Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dongle Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 a family member owned a car which was parked up for a long period as they were working abroad, it had no tax etc as it was sorn,his brother found the keys and took it for a drive parked it up on a road and it was taken by the dvla and eventually crushed, it was only when he came back from working away did he find the car missing and then find out its fate. he also had a fine for no tax and other issues regarding insurance etc, he was taken to court by SYP where he provided evidence of his working away and all charges where dropped. i would get some advice from citizens advice on the way forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigjoker Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/myl/llog/duty_calls.png Only jesting/:thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vResistance Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 But why should the OP be punished for a crime They didn't commit? Surely that would be unlawful to do that without evidence proving he did commit it. Just don't comply refuse to sign anything/enter a contract and they can't do a thing Watch this vid http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCIQtwIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DywYkx0i67ls&ei=5D2AT9zmDJD78QOCw42dBg&usg=AFQjCNGCfvZ6rHvsxHdEpNhin0Q3F3VhBQ And read the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.