fined £548 for not having road tax, !!!!!!? Need advice

matttye

gik wrote: »

aquilerian you do realise you have provided more than enough detail on here to identify yourself to the Court should someone/anyone draw this thread to SW Devon Mag Crts attention ie:-

Post #1

Just received a letter from South West Devon Magistrates Court Code 1302 telling me I have 2 weeks to pay £548.34 (£400 fine, £58.34 back duty and £90 'costs') and the offence says "1 / Keep a vehicle without a valid vehicle license"

I have a peugeot 106 and was stopped last year in November by police who found I had no tax disc since June.


Post #16

I am not trying to say i didn't get a tax reminder so its not my fault i got caught with no tax, i just simply didn't pay it as the vehicle in question was used so infrequently that we could not be bothered. tax reminders have nothing to do with anything here.

I just rang the court which distributed the letter and they have told me to make a statutory declaration with my local Magistrates which will lower the fine.

Post #22

Thanks for all the feedback, most appreciated. I've just arranged a statutory declaration at my local Magistrates which I will be attending at 9.30 the coming Friday. I was told this will re-schedule the court date as I have arranged an SD within 21 days of the court hearing (Which was on the 11th)

I was also told I am liable to go to prison for 7 years if it is found I am lying.

Do you really still want to go through with your appeal/SD?

Just a thought.

Yes he should, because people who don't attend court get stuffed with harsher sentences when they don't put forward any mitigation on their behalf. Also, costs would have been higher if multiple hearings were listed when the matter could have been dealt with in a single hearing.

So even though he will be pleading guilty, it's worth it.

AdrianC

matttye wrote: »

Yes he should, because people who don't attend court get stuffed with harsher sentences when they don't put forward any mitigation on their behalf.

TBH, given his "mitigation" ("I didn't think it worth buying"), I'm not sure that it'd help much.

Also, costs would have been higher if multiple hearings were listed when the matter could have been dealt with in a single hearing.

So having more paperwork and another hearing (for what? "I forgot"?) will help him reduce the costs?

ado

matttye wrote: »

Yes he should, because people who don't attend court get stuffed with harsher sentences when they don't put forward any mitigation on their behalf. Also, costs would have been higher if multiple hearings were listed when the matter could have been dealt with in a single hearing.

So even though he will be pleading guilty, it's worth it.

If the OP tells the truth then he or she deserves a harsh fine because they have lied about receiving the summons and have stated that they had no intention of taxing their vehicle because they hardly ever used it. If on the other hand they go to court and lie about the circumstances they initially probably will get a lower fine, however I hope they get caught out and get investigated for perjury which as a certain former MP has found might lead to a prison sentence.

matttye

Quentin wrote: »

The OP did receive the summons!


See George Michael # 65

AdrianC wrote: »

TBH, given his "mitigation" ("I didn't think it worth buying"), I'm not sure that it'd help much.



So having more paperwork and another hearing (for what? "I forgot"?) will help him reduce the costs?

ado wrote: »

If the OP tells the truth then he or she deserves a harsh fine because they have lied about receiving the summons and have stated that they had no intention of taxing their vehicle because they hardly ever used it. If on the other hand they go to court and lie about the circumstances they initially probably will get a lower fine, however I hope they get caught out and get investigated for perjury which as a certain former MP has found might lead to a prison sentence.

I've just seen that somebody has found other posts by the OP in which he admits to having received the summons and then forgotten about it.

If the OP lies on here then any advice given is worthless. A statutory declaration would be sensible if, as he said in the OP, he had not received a summons.

Mitigation would be no previous convictions, taxed car the following day, et al...

Iceweasel

The OP posted his sob story on half a dozen forums and must think we are soft in the head.

He has shown a blatant disregard for the law - " .. the car was infrequently used so couldn't be bothered to tax it .. " - or words to that effect.

I for one have no sympathy with his predicament at all.

londonTiger

Iceweasel wrote: »

The OP posted his sob story on half a dozen forums and must think we are soft in the head.

He has shown a blatant disregard for the law - " .. the car was infrequently used so couldn't be bothered to tax it .. " - or words to that effect.

I for one have no sympathy with his predicament at all.

lol posted on 4chan. Has to be a troll post.

https://archive.4plebs.org/o/thread/10494421/

(original post deleted from 4chan, plebs seems to archive 4chan posts)

Love the first response.

UsernameAlreadyExists

londonTiger wrote: »

lol posted on 4chan.

I posted that yesterday with a "seems to be going viral" comment and the link. I guess people marked it as spam without even following the link. Ho hum.


And I agree, it's all over the place so I expect it's just a farce.

custardy

Johno100 wrote: »

I've no idea I'm sure you can tell us?

But I do know that nationally the government takes three times as much in motoring taxes as it spends on the roads.

http://www.iam-bristol.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=538&Itemid=1

Suppose by that logic I'm part owner on a Trident sub

IamNotAllowedToUseMyName

When originally advised to get a statutory declaration that was on the principle that he genuinely had not received any notices from the court. When he makes this declaration and it is found he did get the post, that's a lovely maximum of 7 years in prison for perjury.

Still, worth it for saving that £100 or so for a car he doesn't drive much.

Is there a Darwin Award for MSE?

matttye

IanMSpencer wrote: »

When originally advised to get a statutory declaration that was on the principle that he genuinely had not received any notices from the court. When he makes this declaration and it is found he did get the post, that's a lovely maximum of 7 years in prison for perjury.

Still, worth it for saving that £100 or so for a car he doesn't drive much.

He wouldn't get 7 years for this.

The sort of perjury you'd get 7 years for would be more like "No, he couldn't possibly have been involved in the terrorist bombing because he was with me."

I know you said "maximum" and not that he actually would get that - I'm just elaborating on that