DVLA, SORN and Court

CadmannUK

Hi,

I have received a request to attend court, No ASN Required, (Form 293SMK) to answer a charge that I kept a vehicle on a public road for which a licence was not in force whilst a SORN declaration was in force.

Summary of events.

Start of November 2013, my Renault's aux drive belt snapped/melted and wrapped itself around the drive shaft. Was advised that under no circumstances should car be started or moved as I could have caused the cam belt to jump and I would damage the engine irreversibly. It could cost between £1000-£7000 for a replacement engine if I did.

The car was parked in a parking bay opposite my flat. I couldn't afford to have this repaired at that time as I had no access to such a large amount.
Come the end of December, battery was dead and the road fund licence ran out so as the vehicle was unable to be driven, I SORN'd the vehicle in Jan 2014. The car had insurance all this time and was left there until it was 'removed' by the DVLA and taken to a compound 70 miles away on the 5/6/15.

I was then set a letter to inform me where the vehicle was and how much it would cost to recover.

I paid the £200 release fee, £168 storage fee, £160 Surtry fee all to DVLA, but also had to buy a new battery and arrange transportation from Erith back down to Dover at another cost of £200.

DVLA wrote to me to ask for a signed form to say I was the owner or I had sold the vehicle, which I sent off.

I have now received a 'request' to attend court next month.

I was under the impression that I had met the requirement of the SORN.

From the DVLA Website it states:-

You can make a SORN if you don’t use or keep your vehicle on a public road.

When I read this, the key part of that sentence being, if you don’t use or keep your vehicle on a public road.

As the car was in a state where it could not be started, let alone driven, I therefore couldn’t use it, and because of the ‘or’ in that part of the sentence, I read that as an ‘either or’ term. It doesn’t actually say that you ‘don’t keep your vehicle on a public road’. My vehicle was actually parked in a car parking bay.

I therefore argue that I had made a valid SORN declaration because it meets one of the following conditions:-

1. I do not use my vehicle on a public road and I do not keep it on a public road.
2. I do not use my vehicle on a public road and but I do keep it on a public road.

Both of those statements are technically correct because of the way the English is used on the webpage is quite vague.

On the webpage it does not say that:-

You can make a SORN if you don’t use your vehicle on a public road or you don’t keep your vehicle on a public road.

I have written to them explaining what had happened and have not had a reply. I have tried about 6 different number to speak to someone and only today did I actually speak to a human who said to plead guilty and send the documents to the court.

The DVLA will not settle out of court as the vehicle had been untaxed for over a year, even though I had a SORN document for it.

They are making me go to court 120+ miles away from where I live.

They DVLA want another £403.34 to cover the unpaid tax and minimum contribution of £90 towards the court cost, let alone the fine. What will this realistically end up costing me?

What are my options please?

TonyMMM

When you say a "parking bay" presumably you mean a parking space on a public road, and not on private land ??

Looks fairly straightforward - you were keeping the vehicle on a public road so the SORN was not valid.

Any half-decent garage would have been able to collect the car without damaging the engine.

dogshome

The key is "Public Road" - To be a public road the, the road and the bay must be maintained by the Local Athourity or the Highways Agency.

If this road and bay is maintained by the management company of the flats or some other private organisation, the DVLA have no juristiction over it so far as Sorned vehicles are concerned

I had a the same problem when my D/inlaws newly acquired was car parked un-taxed awaiting insurance, in an Estate Cul de Sac of garages
The DVLA got out of their pram about the lack of tax, but backed off when I proved that the Cul de Sac was still owned by the estate builder and the estate residents were responsible it's maintenace.
Check who owns what

wiltsguy_2

the parking space in question maybe the answer as above? was it private or public parking? in accordance with

https://www.gov.uk/sorn-statutory-off-road-notification


if on a public road, you have committed an offence, a bit harsh IMO...but

bigjl

Biggest issue is the over zealous nature of those that remove the vehicles.

They drive round with ANPR cameras on their private bailiff vans.

Did anybody actually think the dodgy characters would disappear when they stopped them clamping cars on private land?

They have just invested in technology and are now taking the mickey whenever they can.

In hindsight it might have been better to leave the car taxed as usually a vehicle needs to be insured to be in a residents car park, at least in my experience.

OP needs to go to court with all the info then need to prove the car park was not a public road if it exists.

I am sure I read about a case where the DVLA clappers have done the same and it ended up the vehicle was parked off the public highway as the car park was not a public right of way and only led to the flats.

Unfortunately the DVLA are quite aggressive at fighting things in court and the Magistrates appear to side with them so you end up paying a fine and then have to appeal to a higher court where a proper Judge is in charge of proceedings.

CadmannUK

unfortunately it was on highway, but a parking bay perpendicular to the road, so naively I thought that would be OK.

So what will be the expected outcome what size of fine would this be? Also why is the court so far away from where I live?

facade

CadmannUK wrote: »

I was under the impression that I had met the requirement of the SORN.

From the DVLA Website it states:-

You can make a SORN if you don’t use or keep your vehicle on a public road.

I can see your argument, in that the sentence would be better written as

You can make a SORN if you don’t use nor keep your vehicle on a public road.

However, the DVLA webpage is not The Law, ( and the DVLA have a habit of making up Laws as they go along.) You would need to find the relevant statutes to get the correct wording.

I think fighting it over a missing letter is going to prove expensive, but if you win and set a precident, there will be a lot of people who would be able to declare an unused car parked on the road as SORN.

ChumLee

facade wrote: »

I can see your argument, in that the sentence would be better written as



However, the DVLA webpage is not The Law, ( and the DVLA have a habit of making up Laws as they go along.) You would need to find the relevant statutes to get the correct wording.

I think fighting it over a missing letter is going to prove expensive, but if you win and set a precident, there will be a lot of people who would be able to declare an unused car parked on the road as SORN.

I can't see anything wrong in the way they've written that sentence. He was keeping the vehicle on a public road.

facade

ChumLee wrote: »

I can't see anything wrong in the way they've written that sentence. He was keeping the vehicle on a public road.

Depends on how you read it out

It is obvious to us what it means but

You can make a SORN
IF you don’t use OR keep your vehicle on a public road.

A logical OR statement is true if either OR the conditions (or both) are true, so by the rules of logic you can make a SORN if only one of the conditions is true

In other words the OP interpreted it as

IF (you don’t use OR keep your vehicle on a public road) THEN you can make a sorn (ELSE you can't)

Gloomendoom

ChumLee wrote: »

I can't see anything wrong in the way they've written that sentence. He was keeping the vehicle on a public road.

Me neither.

Good luck with court case OP.

Gloomendoom

facade wrote: »

Depends on how you read it out

It is obvious to us what it means but



A logical OR statement is true if either OR the conditions (or both) are true, so by the rules of logic you can make a SORN if only one of the conditions is true

In other words the OP interpreted it as

IF (you don’t use OR keep your vehicle on a public road) THEN you can make a sorn (ELSE you can't)

This might be useful in mitigation.