DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

[Openlaw15]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

@Openlaw15 Just so we can put this to bed once and for all.



Schedule 3 makes no reference to a failure to insure a vehicle, only driving without insurance.







There seems to be a recurring theme here, that the fixed penalty notice needs to be fixed to a vehicle. The DVLA do not affix penalty notices to vehicles. They sent out penalties in the post in accordance with another Act and regulations as specified.

The Stat Dec is made under 73(2) of the RTAO so all of the above applies and the fact that the name of the section makes reference to invalid notices fixed to vehicles cannot make it any clearer. Unless you find anything else which contravenes this I think we can safely say that the Stat Dec is of no use in this situation.

My quotes are off because I don't the standard text font for posting lol.

Rob

A fixed penalty is a criminal offence but the law permits someone saying guess what I have done nothing wrong as I was not the owner so how can you convict me, ie a statutory declaration. Facts: "I have no intention of paying a fine on a vehicle that I no longer own.." The facts were that Gavin never had ownership at the material time, so he can say in court, 'guess what, i was not the owner so I am using the legal (statutory) declaration that the law permits me to have under section 73 (2), Road Traffic Offenders' Act 1988 ,in that I was either not the owner of the vehicle at the material time or I ask for a hearing to declare that I was not the owner at the time.It matters not whether it was a insurance or tax issue the law accommodates all situations which relates to ownership.

[R0b]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

Rob

A fixed penalty is a criminal offence but the law permits someone saying guess what I have done nothing wrong as I was not the owner so how can you convict me, ie a statutory declaration. Facts: "I have no intention of paying a fine on a vehicle that I no longer own.." The facts were that Gavin never had ownership at the material time, so he can say in court, 'guess what, i was not the owner so I am using the legal (statutory) declaration that the law permits me to have under section 73 (2), Road Traffic Offenders' Act 1988 ,in that I was either not the owner of the vehicle at the material time or I ask for a hearing to declare that I was not the owner at the time.It matters not whether it was a insurance or tax issue the law accommodates all situations which relates to ownership.

It is not a fixed penalty notice, it is a late licensing penalty the two penalties are completely different. You have still failed to show me where in the RTOA that it states all penalties are fixed notice penalties including a failure to insure your vehicle.

S.51 quite explicitly states that certain offences set out in Schedule 3 are deemed to be a fixed penalty and failing to insure a vehicle is not one of them.

Your statement in saying that a Stat Dec applies to all situations but in fact the legislation doesn't actually say that, so could you qualify that statement?

[Amethyst]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

The Registered Keeper continues to be liable for insuring the vehicle or making a SORN until the DVLA is notification of disposal and an Acknowledgment Letter has been received in confirmation. .

Could you potentially look at whether this is the legal position or not.

[Openlaw15]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

It is not a fixed penalty notice, it is a late licensing penalty the two penalties are completely different. You have still failed to show me where in the RTOA that it states all penalties are fixed notice penalties including a failure to insure your vehicle.

S.51 quite explicitly states that certain offences set out in Schedule 3 are deemed to be a fixed penalty and failing to insure a vehicle is not one of them.

Your statement in saying that a Stat Dec applies to all situations but in fact the legislation doesn't actually say that, so could you qualify that statement?

Rob, stick at what you're good at...consumer issues....and leave the criminal law stuff to educated people. You simply do not know what you're talking about with this issue except a very coarse attempt at trying to understand criminal law and procedure from a layman's view, but you are in fact misrepresenting criminal law and criminal procedure. I don't know what else to add really except hope that the Gavin has some more common sense than you.

[R0b]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

Could you potentially look at whether this is the legal position or not.

Yes that is correct. If you fail to notify the DVLA of the change of Registered Keeper then the previous keeper is still liable and subject to the LLP.

[Openlaw15]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

Could you potentially look at whether this is the legal position or not.

Sharon, liable means including criminally liable as though he were still owner. The state (the court) can only punish someone if he or she does wrong. So in this eventuality the court steps in by providing of sorts a quasi defence by way of a statutory declaration. Normally, in criminal law, to be criminally liable the guilty act (actus) and guilty mind (mens rea) must be proven. However, in strict liability crimes it just requires the actus reus in that the state can only punish a citizen, ie Gavin if were guilty of that offence. However, a defence normally applies when there is a plea of guilt as there would not need to be a defence if the actus reus and mens rea were not satisfied. In terms of a strict liability offence of which being viewed by the courts as having no insurance carries an automatic punishment, ie fixed penalty and dealt with at the Magistrates under their powers. As a person who does not have ownership of the property (the car) he does not have to plead guilty as he is guilty of no thing, so instead the courts permit a quasi defence of a statutory declaration. This is what I am trying to get Rob to understand but seemingly, he is focussing on the 'insurance' or tax' whereas the law looks at ownership.

[Amethyst]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

Yes, but is it the legal position that it doesn't count you notifying them until

an Acknowledgment Letter has been received in confirmation. .

( is what I meant )

[Openlaw15]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

Yes, but is it the legal position that it doesn't count you notifying them until

( is what I meant )

In short, if Gavin were not to make a statutory declaration as per the aforementioned there is no doubt in my mind he will be subject to £100 fine at the least, as well as court costs and possibly points on his licence. It really is that simple. Not only that the bailiffs could get involved too. He will then have to make a statutory declaration at the county courts to alleviate his circumstance. I have quoted the law, quoted criminal procedure, made an informed opinion overall, a perfect remedy in fact...so there is nothing else I can do.

[R0b]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

Yes, but is it the legal position that it doesn't count you notifying them until

( is what I meant )

There is no obligation for someone to receive a acknowledgement letter before liability is extinguished, the courts have already ruled on it (see my earlier post with other links to threads on case law) and the DVLA have acknowledged publicly there is not requirement to receive a letter or contact them after 2 weeks. The obligation is to simply notify them whether online or via post.

@Openlaw15 - I'm afraid you can argue your point as much as you like but as you say continuously throughout this forum, the law is the law and you can't adjust legislation to suit your liking. The Stat Dec is made specifically under s.73(2) of the RTAO and I've set out the relevant provisions but I can't see any references that a Late Licensing Penalty is deemed to be a Fixed Penalty Notice under the Act and you have still failed to tell me under the act that a fixed penalty applies to a failure to insure a vehicle and can rely on the Stat Dec

I didn't think we would still be going on about this but the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 explains that it is an offence and penalty to be the registered keeper of an unlicensed vehicle - it is not deemed to be a road traffic offence which is what the Stat Dec applies to. Neither Act says that the offence committed is one of a fixed penalty or fall under that definition.

[Openlaw15]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

There is no obligation for someone to receive a acknowledgement letter before liability is extinguished, the courts have already ruled on it (see my earlier post with other links to threads on case law) and the DVLA have acknowledged publicly there is not requirement to receive a letter or contact them after 2 weeks. The obligation is to simply notify them whether online or via post.

DVLA is a government agency of the Executive, the Court are a form of government of the judiciary. Under constitution rules, and the doctrine of separation of powers the courts interpret the law whilst the legislator (including the Executive makes it), whereas common law (binding ratio) is the law that judges make when conducting statutory interpretation roles so as to make the law consistent for similar situations.

@Openlaw15 - I'm afraid you can argue your point as much as you like but as you say continuously throughout this forum, the law is the law and you can't adjust legislation to suit your liking. The Stat Dec is made specifically under s.73(2) of the RTAO and I've set out the relevant provisions but I can't see any references that a Late Licensing Penalty is deemed to be a Fixed Penalty Notice under the Act and you have still failed to tell me under the act that a fixed penalty applies to a failure to insure a vehicle and can rely on the Stat Dec

I didn't think we would still be going on about this but the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 explains that it is an offence and penalty to be the registered keeper of an unlicensed vehicle - it is not deemed to be a road traffic offence which is what the Stat Dec applies to. Neither Act says that the offence committed is one of a fixed penalty or fall under that definition.

There are two ways fixed penalties are issued: by police and automatically by the car's registration number which goes to DVLA. Facts: not aware of fixed penalty or get too late. Step one: contact police and explain the situation before it gets to court, or use a statutory declaration in court. 2 Automatic registration number fixed penalty, no police so deal with DVLA, and if DVLA registered the fixed penalty it has accelerated to the Traffic Enforcement Centre, which requires a statutory declaration.

It is ownership issue, as the driver is punished by a criminal law strict liability offence, the facts are that Gavin was not in ownership of the vehicle at the material times, so as I quoted the law above, having no insurance is a criminal offence under RTOA 1988 but a statutory declaration is quasi defence to have the fixed penalty revoked. Here's a civil matter: private car park fine. Facts: do not know who the driver is, so can't prove a claim in contract. Criminal works the same, ie it needs the owner of the vehicle to make someone criminally liable. If there is no owner driver, they can't fine the car for not being insured or not taxed.

[Amethyst]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

There is no obligation for someone to receive a acknowledgement letter before liability is extinguished, the courts have already ruled on it (see my earlier post with other links to threads on case law) and the DVLA have acknowledged publicly there is not requirement to receive a letter or contact them after 2 weeks. The obligation is to simply notify them whether online or via post.

Perfect, thank you.

[R0b]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

so as I quoted the law above, having no insurance is a criminal offence under RTOA 1988

What section are you referring to because I've looked at the Act several times and there is not one section stating that it is a criminal offence for a failure to insure your vehicle. You also keep going about it being a fixed penalty notice but again I've yet to see any proof that a failure to insure the vehicle as a registered keeper is deemed to be one of a fixed penalty notice. You are giving me examples of things but I'm afraid your examples don't count for **** unless you can back it up with the relevant legislation.

Rather than give examples of how the DVLA might apply the alleged fixed penalty notice, can you provide me with the relevant sections relating to the above - you are still avoiding my questions like a politician which makes me think you are way out of your depth on this one.

Finally, can you please stop banging on about constitutional law and separation of powers and all that ********, it is completely irrelevant and not applicable. I've done my law degree I don't need lectured again on it.

[Openlaw15]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

What section are you referring to because I've looked at the Act several times and there is not one section stating that it is a criminal offence for a failure to insure your vehicle. You also keep going about it being a fixed penalty notice but again I've yet to see any proof that a failure to insure the vehicle as a registered keeper is deemed to be one of a fixed penalty notice. You are giving me examples of things but I'm afraid your examples don't count for **** unless you can back it up with the relevant legislation.

Rather than give examples of how the DVLA might apply the alleged fixed penalty notice, can you provide me with the relevant sections relating to the above - you are still avoiding my questions like a politician which makes me think you are way out of your depth on this one.

Finally, can you please stop banging on about constitutional law and separation of powers and all that ********, it is completely irrelevant and not applicable. I've done my law degree I don't need lectured again on it.

I never once said 'fixed penalty notice' ..i said 'fixed penalty', they're two different things. In criminal law for strict liability the only loophole is that you're not the person who's been accused, ie stat decl to that effect. I think you are way out of your depth, not me. If you've studied criminal law, in which case you would have were to have completed a law degree, you ought to know this your self. You're mentioning SORN and this is just entirely irrelevant. SORN is not a legal defence in court because it's not common law or statute, except a right for DVLA to use Regulations via an Act in which case is what SORN is based on, a statutory instrument. It is not however a criminal law defence but a statutory declaration is indeed such a defence. There is no way I can think of for a person to avoid a strict liability offence, including fixed penalties except through the most basic concept that actus reus cannot be proved where the person being blamed is not responsible for the act, is why RTOA 1988 used the not owner as a statutory declaration.

[Nibbler]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

vehicles must have continuous registration and falls under the Vehicle Excise Registration Act 1994 and the Road Vehicle (Registration and Licencing) Regulations 2002.

@rob.

Is this still the up to date one?

[Openlaw15]

Re: DVLA 'Failure to Insure' penalty on VT'd car...

What section are you referring to because I've looked at the Act several times and there is not one section stating that it is a criminal offence for a failure to insure your vehicle. You also keep going about it being a fixed penalty notice but again I've yet to see any proof that a failure to insure the vehicle as a registered keeper is deemed to be one of a fixed penalty notice. You are giving me examples of things but I'm afraid your examples don't count for **** unless you can back it up with the relevant legislation.

Rather than give examples of how the DVLA might apply the alleged fixed penalty notice, can you provide me with the relevant sections relating to the above - you are still avoiding my questions like a politician which makes me think you are way out of your depth on this one.

Finally, can you please stop banging on about constitutional law and separation of powers and all that ********, it is completely irrelevant and not applicable. I've done my law degree I don't need lectured again on it.

Are you saying that a statutory declaration will not apply in general, let's establish this first?