Tweet
Received a letter that car was seen or kept on a public road whilst on a SORN. Car in Housing Association car park and on SORN since January 2024 and has not left the car park since then. The street in the letter is the street about 25 meters from the car park and the car park has no direct access to that road. I am aware that the DVLA use GPS data to justify their letters and of course GPS locators do not have pinpoint accuracy as anyone who has ever used the system has encountered this. This is an interesting case as the Council initially contacted us via letter as the car was classified as abandoned and after some correspondence the local council sent a reply that further action would not be taken as the car is on private land. Now the DVLA have stated that the car has been used or kept on a public road but it has not been on that road since on SORN. The car park is owned by the Housing Association of which we have been a tenant for over ten years. We do not have a designated spot in the car park but it is as mentioned by the Council in their letter it is private land. As far as I am aware the DVLA have no jurisdiction or authority on private land. If the private land owner (in this case the Housing Association) have any problems, they would have to sort that out as a private manner. We do not live in a communist, socialist, dictatorship or fascist state (I could be mistaken) as I find it very worrying that a government body would take such illegal measures for financial gain. I wonder if this is what our forefathers and foremothers fought for in countless wars for their descendants to be disrespected in such an insulting and demeaning manner. I realise that this matter will eventually probably end up in Magistrates Court but would like to know what steps I should take before that in the slight chance that an appeal to the DVLA will be successful. Any advice would be appreciated as I have less than ten days to reply or pay a fine of over £300 at the end of July. Many thanks for reading this.
Loading...
-
Tags: None
-
May I suggest that you do not make this your principal argument to the magistrates. Concentrate on proving the facts you have outlined.We do not live in a communist, socialist, dictatorship or fascist state (I could be mistaken) as I find it very worrying that a government body would take such illegal measures for financial gain. I wonder if this is what our forefathers and foremothers fought for in countless wars for their descendants to be disrespected in such an insulting and demeaning manner.Lawyer (solicitor) - retired from practice, now supervising solicitor in a university law clinic. I do not advise by private message.
Litigants in Person should download and read the Judiciary's handbook for litigants in person: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/..._in_Person.pdf -
Simply respond by telling them their allegation is unfounded and explain the facts as you have on here.
If they prosecute you in court the burden will be on them to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt. From what you say they may have difficulty doing that.
As above, leave out the comments about fascist states, forefathers, etc.Comment
-
-
-
-
Among the most entertaining of all is when a "Freeman on the Land" pitches up.
I've always wondered why they bother answering the call to court at all. If they are going to simply claim immunity on the basis of some pseudolegal philosophy they suggest applies to them, I don't know why they don't simply wait until they are arrested and brought to court in custody. I can only think they enjoy the argument (which invariably, they lose). Either that or they don't relish the thought of getting picked up on a Saturday afternoon and being kept in custody until Monday morning. There doesn't seem to be so many of them about as there were a few years back. Perhaps they're all inside!
However, we digress.Comment
-
Many thanks for the many replies. I will write a very polite letter stating just the facts.Comment
-
As expected, the DVLA have stated that the car was seen on this road at this time and the fine needs to be paid. They have suggested I send in a letter from the council to support that the vehicle is on private land. I don't really see how that will negate their false allegations. However, I have contacted the council but no reply has been received and I have only been given a limited amount of time to respond to the DVLA letter. Should I send a response that reaffirms once again that the vehicle was not on that road at that time and the fine should be quashed, along with the fact that I have contacted the council and am awaiting a response but have not received one as of yet? The only way to correspond with the DVLA in regards to this matter is by post. There is no way to send any correspondence to them by any other means. In the end they will not be able to prove that the vehicle was where they said it was, unless the number plate was cloned, which may have happened, but how could I find out? I was wondering if I can request what images they have or how they came to the erroneous conclusion that the vehicle was in that location. They must have some images I imagine and am not sure why these haven't been shared with me. It seems a bit odd that they haven't provided any images. Many thanks for any responses and for taking the time to read this.Comment
-
Why must they? It might seem incredible, but offences such as these were successfully prosecuted before cameras came into regular use and certainly before digital photography became widespread. They were based on personal testimony.They must have some images....
That said, they probably do have photographs. However, it seems unlikely they will share them with you unless the matter goes to court. In that case they will be obliged to provide you with whatever evidence they intend to rely on to convict you.
I don't know how the council can help further. You already have confirmation from them that your car is on private land. If I have got his right, the place where your car was allegedly seen was a public road, not the council's car park. So whilst the council can confirm that the place you say your car has not left is not a public road, they cannot say that your car had never moved from that place.
It seems the DVLA is determined to continue, despite you saying they have it wrong. That being the case, if you decline to pay the DVLA's out of court settlement, the next you will hear will be in the form of a "Single Justice Procedure Notice". Along with this should be the evidence the DVLA intend to rely on to convict you. If, having examined hat evidence, you are still convinced you have committed no offence, you should respond to the SJPN by pleading not guilty. You will then face a trial in the Magistrates' Court.
Comment
-
Thanks for your reply. I agree that in the past there were convictions based on verbal testimony. I would like to see the actual evidence they have in their possession. I will write a polite reply and then await the single justice procedure notice. I will ask for an extension to allow time for the council to respond as the DVLA should allow that.
Comment
Comment