Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • waggers1979
    • By waggers1979 10th Jul 17, 3:13 PM
    • 4Posts
    • 0Thanks
    waggers1979
    DVLA fine from ANPR camera - wasn't me, cloned plates. Please help
    • #1
    • 10th Jul 17, 3:13 PM
    DVLA fine from ANPR camera - wasn't me, cloned plates. Please help 10th Jul 17 at 3:13 PM
    Hi - I hope someone can help as I can't seem to find anything on the internet.

    Last month I got a 'notice of enforcement' from a bailiff company called the Marston Group. I had no idea what this was and they were demanding over £450 for a fine that had been to court. I haven't had any documentation for a fine nor a court summons so naturally I became massively worried and scared. I rang them and asked what this was for. They were quite amused but were not very helpful at all - I imagine they get the innocent act quite a lot. They wouldn't tell me what this was for other than a fine from Chester Magistrates Court. Utterly confused I hung up and tried to contact the court with no avail and also emailed. I rang the bailiff company back and this time got a person that did tell me what the fine was for. It was for driving with no insurance on an old car that I owned back in April 2016. I had bought a new car in Jan that year, the vehicle that was photographed driving was parked on a private car park at the time and unable to be driven as the battery was flat and it had 2 flat tyres. I was waiting for it to be taken and scrapped (which it was later that month).
    The customer service rep at the Marston Group told me that there would be someone round my house to take my possessions if I did not pay a portion of the fine. I paid £50 to calm the situation.
    I made a police complaint the same day as it would seem that the plates have been cloned (the car is still being driven according to the DVLA website and taxed!) and they are investigating it and also there is a marker out on the car to stop and check the chassis.
    I have copied the Marston Group into all correspondence with the court and police so they are aware. I have also asked for a refund of my £50 that I was bullied into paying.
    I am needing to know if I am sorting this properly.
    I can't seem to find who to contact at the DVLA regarding the camera and fine as I need to contest this.
    Also how do i get this removed from my driving file?
    Plus how do I go through the courts to remove this conviction?
    Can i stop this horrendous Marston Group from chasing me for something I am not guilty of?
    Can I get my £50 back?

    Thanks for reading.. I understand it may be confusing (I am very dyslexic) and can answer questions

    Waggers
Page 2
    • Rover Driver
    • By Rover Driver 11th Jul 17, 9:29 AM
    • 1,303 Posts
    • 594 Thanks
    Rover Driver
    Apparently it was a roadside unmanned ANPR camera and the fine was issued for no insurance. I never received any documentation from the DVLA for it. It has been to Chester Magistrates Court without my knowledge and a conviction placed against me for no insurance.
    Originally posted by waggers1979
    Have you checked with the court the what the date of the offence was and what the actual offence was.
    If you received the acknowledgement letter from the DVLA that you were no longer the keeper, the offence may have been committed before the date of the letter.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 11th Jul 17, 10:30 AM
    • 2,391 Posts
    • 1,555 Thanks
    Car 54
    I've just re-read the whole thread, and it seems the only details of the offence have come from the bailiff. I don't believe he would have had any such information about the offence, and in any event he is hardly likely to be a reliable source.

    I suspect the offence was under the continuous insurance regs, where the OP had failed to SORN the vehicle. No ANPR necessary.
    • littlerock
    • By littlerock 11th Jul 17, 10:31 AM
    • 1,194 Posts
    • 180 Thanks
    littlerock
    This is what other posters are suggesting. OP seems to be saying it was caught on a roadside camera when, so far as he was concerned, it was parked in an undrivable condition, (flat battery and tyres) in a private car park. So either someone made it driveable and was driving it, or as he suggests, they cloned the plates. If the latter, surely it should be relatively easy to demonstrate from the camera photo, that it was not his car, unless it was an identical make year and colour, with him driving!
    • Rover Driver
    • By Rover Driver 11th Jul 17, 10:42 AM
    • 1,303 Posts
    • 594 Thanks
    Rover Driver
    That is why the OP needs to establish the actual offence and date of the offence.

    Although the OP disposed of the car as scrap, it may well have been repaired and legally back on the road, and the offence was when he was still the keeper.
    • AndyMc.....
    • By AndyMc..... 11th Jul 17, 11:12 AM
    • 730 Posts
    • 558 Thanks
    AndyMc.....
    That is why the OP needs to establish the actual offence and date of the offence.

    Although the OP disposed of the car as scrap, it may well have been repaired and legally back on the road, and the offence was when he was still the keeper.
    Originally posted by Rover Driver
    It's got to be under the continuous insurance rules or else how have they got the OP named as the driver?
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 11th Jul 17, 12:11 PM
    • 2,391 Posts
    • 1,555 Thanks
    Car 54
    It's got to be under the continuous insurance rules or else how have they got the OP named as the driver?
    Originally posted by AndyMc.....
    Exactly. ANPR is a red herring. It came come from the bailiff, who couldn't possibly know.

    It seems the idea that the DVLA initiated the prosecution came from the bailiff as well ....
    Last edited by Car 54; 11-07-2017 at 12:14 PM.
    • AndyMc.....
    • By AndyMc..... 11th Jul 17, 12:29 PM
    • 730 Posts
    • 558 Thanks
    AndyMc.....
    Exactly. ANPR is a red herring. It came come from the bailiff, who couldn't possibly know.

    It seems the idea that the DVLA initiated the prosecution came from the bailiff as well ....
    Originally posted by Car 54
    Given the op knew nothing about it then that parts probably true.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 11th Jul 17, 12:59 PM
    • 2,391 Posts
    • 1,555 Thanks
    Car 54
    Given the op knew nothing about it then that parts probably true.
    Originally posted by AndyMc.....
    True that it came from the bailiff!

    The only firm facts seem to be the conviction date, the court, and the amount of the fine.

    Everything else is speculation based on what the bailiff said, and their reputation is not one of a scrupulous regard for the truth.
    • AndyMc.....
    • By AndyMc..... 11th Jul 17, 1:14 PM
    • 730 Posts
    • 558 Thanks
    AndyMc.....
    True that it came from the bailiff!

    The only firm facts seem to be the conviction date, the court, and the amount of the fine.

    Everything else is speculation based on what the bailiff said, and their reputation is not one of a scrupulous regard for the truth.
    Originally posted by Car 54
    Well as it's wasn't a police prosecution who else other than the DVLA would it be?
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 11th Jul 17, 1:55 PM
    • 2,391 Posts
    • 1,555 Thanks
    Car 54
    Well as it's wasn't a police prosecution who else other than the DVLA would it be?
    Originally posted by AndyMc.....
    The OP said "The police say its nothing to do with them as its a straight fine from the DVLA and said this has happened a lot with these cameras. They also said its a civil matter and could be a long drawn out one."

    How confident are you that the police person knew what he was talking about?

    From the info we have so far, it coud be the RSPCA!
    • AndyMc.....
    • By AndyMc..... 11th Jul 17, 1:59 PM
    • 730 Posts
    • 558 Thanks
    AndyMc.....
    The OP said "The police say its nothing to do with them as its a straight fine from the DVLA and said this has happened a lot with these cameras. They also said its a civil matter and could be a long drawn out one."

    How confident are you that the police person knew what he was talking about?

    From the info we have so far, it coud be the RSPCA!
    Originally posted by Car 54
    Well if they did a #DL on the PNC and the OP has no convictions it's not a police generated conviction.
    • littlerock
    • By littlerock 12th Jul 17, 1:32 AM
    • 1,194 Posts
    • 180 Thanks
    littlerock
    ok so view seems to be that ANPR is a red herring and was said as off the cuff expkanation by debt collectors as that is usually the reason for the fine. Police comments about cloned plates also off the cuff. In this case is all a misunderstanding. So are we saying that the OP has been fined by DVLA for owning an uninsured car, normally parked on the road which had not been SORNed. Compounded by his moving house. I can see this would make sense. Only query, .are DVLA usually this proactive and quick off the mark on failing to insure car?
    Last edited by littlerock; 12-07-2017 at 1:36 AM.
    • angrycrow
    • By angrycrow 12th Jul 17, 8:42 AM
    • 387 Posts
    • 298 Thanks
    angrycrow
    As has been hinted at by a couple of others my money is on this being a fine under the continuous enforcement rules if it was not SORN or for keeping a SORN car on the public road if it was declared SORN.

    OP suggests the car was parked in a private car park with a flat battery at the time of the offence. It is quite likely that what the OP describes as a private car park is actually considered to be an extension of the road. As an example parking a car in a block of garages outside the garage is not off the road but inside the garage is. On your drive is off road but rolling even the front wheels onto the pavement puts the car onto the road.

    Can the OP come back and confirm the following.

    Was the car declared SORN.
    Was the car insured.
    Where was the car parked.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 12th Jul 17, 9:13 AM
    • 2,391 Posts
    • 1,555 Thanks
    Car 54
    Only query, .are DVLA usually this proactive and quick off the mark on failing to insure car?
    Originally posted by littlerock
    The implication from the OP is that the car had been parked uninsured for 3 months, so not very quick.
    • peter_the_piper
    • By peter_the_piper 12th Jul 17, 10:49 AM
    • 26,086 Posts
    • 33,069 Thanks
    peter_the_piper
    Until the OP comes back and clarifies matters its all speculation.
    I'd rather be an Optimist and be proved wrong than a Pessimist and be proved right.
    • Geoff1963
    • By Geoff1963 12th Jul 17, 9:59 PM
    • 1,056 Posts
    • 677 Thanks
    Geoff1963
    I know of people being ticketed for bad parking on private land, because the police believed was a public road. If the ANPR "fact" is wrong, and the car was properly SORN'd, then the fine would be invalid. The DVLA often clamp untaxed cars on the road ; but maybe didn't bother clamping something that looked undriveable.
    I think the OP is reasonably entitled to see the evidence presented to the court ; the Clerk or the Court Manager should be able to help.

    The "scrapped" car being driven around, could well be legit ; some people have a lot of free time to do repairs with "pre-owned" parts. The police will be interested in case it's a ringer.
    • AndyMc.....
    • By AndyMc..... 12th Jul 17, 10:42 PM
    • 730 Posts
    • 558 Thanks
    AndyMc.....
    I know of people being ticketed for bad parking on private land, because the police believed was a public road. If the ANPR "fact" is wrong, and the car was properly SORN'd, then the fine would be invalid. The DVLA often clamp untaxed cars on the road ; but maybe didn't bother clamping something that looked undriveable.
    I think the OP is reasonably entitled to see the evidence presented to the court ; the Clerk or the Court Manager should be able to help.

    The "scrapped" car being driven around, could well be legit ; some people have a lot of free time to do repairs with "pre-owned" parts. The police will be interested in case it's a ringer.
    Originally posted by Geoff1963
    Since nobody's doing identity checks at the moment it doesn't appear they are.
    • unholyangel
    • By unholyangel 12th Jul 17, 11:12 PM
    • 11,532 Posts
    • 8,667 Thanks
    unholyangel
    As said, we need OP to clarify a few things but its a possibility OP didn't sorn. They make no mention of the car being sorn'd - only that it was unable to be driven due to battery & 2 tyres (rather surprised anyone would scrap a car due to needing those tbh!).

    It sounds as if the car was sitting from January until late April. Thats a period of at least 3 months. Not sure how often the MID is crosschecked with DVLA but I'd say they probably do it at least once every 3 months.
    Money doesn't solve poverty.....it creates it.
    • Geoff1963
    • By Geoff1963 13th Jul 17, 10:18 PM
    • 1,056 Posts
    • 677 Thanks
    Geoff1963
    Should the thread title be :
    "DVLA fine from MID check on non-SORN'd car. Hard lesson learned."
    • wolvoman
    • By wolvoman 14th Jul 17, 10:24 AM
    • 991 Posts
    • 1,086 Thanks
    wolvoman
    Should the thread title be :
    "DVLA fine from MID check on non-SORN'd car. Hard lesson learned."
    Originally posted by Geoff1963
    Still doesn't explain why the first the OP hears of it is via a bailiff though.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,307Posts Today

6,623Users online

Martin's Twitter