URGENT Housing Association, threaten to remove my car from residents car park

paddedjohn

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

Maybe the vehicle was at a different address, than that declared on the SORN.

Where on the sorn do you have to declare where the vehicle is kept?

rxbren

lets face it this new law is probably not going to last as there will always be cases like this or people just parking on random drives with the land owners being powerless to do anything

paddedjohn

OP, apart from telling them to !!!! off and learn the law what would happen if you just moved your car into a different space every couple of days? It won't look abandoned then.

rxbren

sorn is registered to keepers address

mikey72

rxbren wrote: »

lets face it this new law is probably not going to last as there will always be cases like this or people just parking on random drives with the land owners being powerless to do anything

It shouldn't affect cases like that.

The act specifically states it applies if the clamper (or other) is

"intending to prevent or inhibit the removal of the vehicle by a person otherwise entitled to remove it."

by for example either clamping it and immobilising where it is, or taking it back to an impound yard and refusing to return it, and peventing the owner taking it.
No one has said that will happen here.
There isn't anything in the act specificlly to simply stop anyone moving it.
In fact the next section extends powers under Section 99 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to include private land, as well as the public highway. Subject to it still being legal to carry out there obviously.

paddedjohn

rxbren wrote: »

sorn is registered to keepers address

The sorn maybe but there is no requirement to keep the car there.

demonted

Parked in carpark without road tax = a nuisance

Parked in same position in car park but WITH
road tax = not a nuisance ?

I can't see it !

rxbren

if its not taxed it cant be used so could be dumped hence nuisance

demonted

rxbren wrote: »

if its not taxed it cant be used so could be dumped hence nuisance

Don't be so silly !

It's my car.
I have informed the HA it is my car.
It's not been abandoned, I still own it.
I'm the registered keeper.

The HA know I own the car, HA management have seen me using it for the last 3 years. Also, other members of HA staff and residents informed the HA management it is my car.

To be an abandoned car, all avenues to trace the owner and or the register keeper have to be exhausted with no one coming forward to take responsibility or claim ownership.

Within days of sticking a Tort Notice on my car, I made the HA aware that I own the car and the registered keeper.

The Tort Notice did not request for prove of ownership, it stated Tax or remove otherwise the HA will remove it"

My post on this forum is not to look for justification for the HA stance but to justify what right the HA have to insist I tax my car and threaten to remove it if I do not.

As stated earlier, I have the right to use the car park as a resident, there are no terms or conditions attached to such use, other than not block entrance and exits or footpaths.

My car is not blocking any entrances, exits or footpaths.

demonted

rxbren wrote: »

could they go through vosa? who do have power to remove vehicles by saying its an unroadworthy vehicle dumped on their land
so in theory once the mot runs out and its still not taxed all they will have to say to vosa is its an abandoned car and they dont give permission for it to be there

My car has current MOT and insurance, both due to expire next year.

I don't plan to leave my car untaxed forever but just like a Tv licence, what right and or authority does the HA have to insist I tax my car ?

My car not been dumped on their land, I'm a resident with permission to park my car in the car park, I pay rent and the use of car park and communal areas is include in the service charge.

However, if there was an old wreck parked in the car park, without road tax, which transpired not to have a current MOT, I would be the first to complain, purely due to the cars appearance rather than failing to display road tax or have a MOT certificate.

However, to have no road tax or Mot, yes that could be viewed in a different light but it still raises the question; what grounds or authority does the HA have to insist that the car owner displays valid road tax and threaten to remove and or remove it, if it doesn't ?