DVLA threatening to fine me.

Lum

Section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies here

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/30/section/7

7 References to service by post.
Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

(My emphasis)

The DVLA are required to prove that you did not post it. Failure to receive it is not sufficient proof.

Inform them that you sent off the V5 in accordance with Section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 and that it is not your problem that they lost it.

anotherbaldrick

Lum wrote: »

Section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies here

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/30/section/7

(My emphasis)

The DVLA are required to prove that you did not post it. Failure to receive it is not sufficient proof.

Inform them that you sent off the V5 in accordance with Section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 and that it is not your problem that they lost it.

And if that isn't clear enough for you just send them wads of money !

Johnny_Barnes10

I know this thread is old but I’m in the same boat.

Sold a car in September last year, sent off the small slip (I photocopied this for my records) and heard nothing else.

They said I owe a £80 (reduced to £40 if paid by 3/3/13), even after I sent them a copy of the V5C/3.

Just in process of writing to them again, I don’t feel I should have to pay a fine when I done everything I was supposed to do!


Ps - can someone point out what that link means, in English?

Lum

Plain English interpretation. Note: I am not a lawyer.

"Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used)"...

Where the law requires (or allows) you to send a document by post (e.g. your logbook)...

..."then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and"...

...you can comply with this law by sticking this document in an envelope, putting a stamp on it (of the correct value) and posting it...

..."and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post."

...and unless they can prove that you didn't post it. The document is legally considered to have arrived a few days after you posted it*.

So basically unless the DVLA can prove that you never visited a post office or post box at all during the time period you claim to have posted it. The law states that the new keeper details were notified to the DVLA, even if they never actually got it.

Since is it pretty much impossible to prove that you have never visited a postbox, they would have to have CCTV on your house showing that you never left the building. The law basically states that you have notified the DVLA of the new keeper.

*There is case law where if you post it during a postal strike or similar unusual circumstances, then rather than a couple of days it might be 10 days or something like that.

Johnny_Barnes10

Ok thanks for clearing that up for me. I spoke to some woman yesterday on the phone, telling me I had to write in AGAIN! :mad: Thing is I've now moved address and not yet told them, so might just leave it until I get a letter to my new address.

Joe_Horner

Lum wrote: »

..."and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post."

...and unless they can prove that you didn't post it. The document is legally considered to have arrived a few days after you posted it*.

Not quite on that one. Lum. They have 2 options:

(1) They can try to prove that you didn't post it (impossible in practice)

or

(2) They can try to prove that it never arrived (also impossible in practice). Note that "arriving" in this context means reaching their buildings - the fact it was never logged onto their systems doesn't count because the post room guy with a hangover might have thrown it in the bin by mistake.




Option (2) is there as a safeguard for the ordinary person who is suppose to have received, say, a summons. If it never turned up and the first thing you know about it is the bailiffs calling for an unpaid fine, you can "prove" that you never received the original by making a sworn statement to that effect.

The courts accept that we all tell the truth when under oath (!!!) and that the ordinary person gets little enough post that something like a summons would stick in their mind if it had arrived.

The DVLA, on the other hand, get buckets full of post every day and a lot of it is change of keeper or SORN notices. So it's completely impossible for anyone there to say (with any credibility) that a particular one definitely never turned up.

Paradigm

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Not quite on that one. Lum. They have 2 options:

(1) They can try to prove that you didn't post it (impossible in practice)

or

(2) They can try to prove that it never arrived (also impossible in practice). Note that "arriving" in this context means reaching their buildings - the fact it was never logged onto their systems doesn't count because the post room guy with a hangover might have thrown it in the bin by mistake.

So, given what you say above & when we boil it down, to make any kind of case they have to try & prove it was never posted..... also pretty much impossible.

Joe_Horner

Paradigm wrote: »

So, given what you say above & when we boil it down, to make any kind of case they have to try & prove it was never posted..... also pretty much impossible.

As things stand, yes. But they do have the possibility of implementing internal systems that are rigorous enough to prove (to a reasonable standard) non-receipt.

The fact they haven't done so is probably down to the fact that it would be absurdly expensive and why bother when they can always scare most people into paying anyway

Lum

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Not quite on that one. Lum. They have 2 options:

(1) They can try to prove that you didn't post it (impossible in practice)

This is the problem with trying to simplify things.

Ultimately the result is the same. they can't prove that they never received it.

I can't actually think of any system that could prove beyond reasonable doubt that they didn't receive something. Even if you just open the post bag dump the contents into a sorting machine that never goes wrong (no such machine exists) then there is still the possibility that one got stuck to the bottom of the post bag and ignored.

Shezz

I had the same happen to me

I ended up paying a fine for not taxing it then another fine for not letting DVLA know that I had sold the car

They send out letters to say that you are no longer the registered keeper, and that when i never got the letter I should of contacted them