Vehicle Incorrectly Seized

DUTR

CCPECP wrote: »

12/10/19 - same date as my logbook

Dear Mr Asim Tahraf

This is a courtesy email to inform you that we have received confirmation from the DVLA that your transfer has now been approved.

You will receive your new updated V5C Log book direct to the registered keepers address normally in 3-10 working days, but you should now legally display your new registration once you contact your insurance company to advise them of the change. The DVLA details for your vehicle (MOT and Tax) will update within 2 working days here.

If ordered, your number plates have already been despatched to you. If you haven't you will need to wait for the new log book to arrive in order to use as proof of entitlement to get your new plates made.

So hence the delay (and not nit picking but do the plates not have to have who created them?)
You usually go the plate maker with the relevant documents and then they can issue the plates.

Manxman_in_exile

If the OP can produce a letter from his insurers stating unequivocally that he was insured at the time, is he realistically going to be convicted? On the balance of this thread it seems "No"? The prosecution may even be dropped?


If he's not convicted, or the charges dropped, complain to the CC and Police and Crime Commissioner that the car was wrongfully seized. Say that he should have been given a reasonable opportunity to produce his documents and also draw attention to the known delay in updating the police database. List his financial losses as a result of the "wrongful" seizure and ask for recompense. So long as doesn't mention compensation for distress (he doesn't sound particularly susceptible to stress to me) and so long as it's cheaper to pay up than defend a possible court claim, I wouldn't be surprised if they made him an offer.


If still not happy, escalate the complaint to IOPC or sue them. (The OP doesn't seem to be a shrinking violet and might be up for a fight. Might be an interesting experience for a young graduate).


I'm not saying the police were wrong or that the OP would win a claim. But if I were him I'd consider it.


EDIT: Does an illegal numberplate (if that's what it is) have any insurance complications?

Scrapit

CCPECP wrote: »

Kanye*

what are you doing in the motorist forum then? isn’t there an engineering shoe forum you can waste your time in? you’re a chartered engineer (supposedly) and you have so much time to annoy people on forums. i’m here because i need to be here, why are you here talking about shoes you weirdo

No supposedly about it, we only have a number plate that needs explaining from yourself as evidence, the sort that means the owner isn't in a position to correct anyone's spelling. And what am I doing here? Talking to you. I don't need to ask you, I've made my own conclusions. O have plenty of time on my hands, work smarter not harder. It's a shame I'm annoying you, you brought up the yeezies (remember I reminded you of this), I'm not sure of any engineering show forums but I do have purchase foot wear for my work force so I've probably got a decent base knowledge for it.

Supersonos

Sea_Shell wrote: »

Maybe he works for Great Northern Rail

Nah. He's got some job low-paid job with the RAC. Looks like he's putting that degree to good use...

George333

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

If the OP can produce a letter from his insurers stating unequivocally that he was insured at the time, is he realistically going to be convicted? On the balance of this thread it seems "No"? The prosecution may even be dropped?


If he's not convicted, or the charges dropped, complain to the CC and Police and Crime Commissioner that the car was wrongfully seized. Say that he should have been given a reasonable opportunity to produce his documents and also draw attention to the known delay in updating the police database. List his financial losses as a result of the "wrongful" seizure and ask for recompense. So long as doesn't mention compensation for distress (he doesn't sound particularly susceptible to stress to me) and so long as it's cheaper to pay up than defend a possible court claim, I wouldn't be surprised if they made him an offer.


If still not happy, escalate the complaint to IOPC or sue them. (The OP doesn't seem to be a shrinking violet and might be up for a fight. Might be an interesting experience for a young graduate).


I'm not saying the police were wrong or that the OP would win a claim. But if I were him I'd consider it.


EDIT: Does an illegal numberplate (if that's what it is) have any insurance complications?No.

Reasonable opportunity to produce insurance to prevent seizure is at the time. So the body worn footage should easily sort that one.

George333

CCPECP wrote: »

If there’s a delay for the police database then the law should take it into account. Not throw around seizures. The police officer will have to take a day off work and show up at court now :(

I'll say it again for you, it's a database the police can access. It's not created or maintained by them. It's a motor insurance bureau problem and parliament problem.

The police wont be taking a day off for court given it's part of their job.

George333

DUTR wrote: »

With these things there is always more to the story than meets the eye, when I swapped my plates there was a time window for changeover (that was in the days of tax discs) .

I don't believe the Officer and sergeant just went ahead and produced the charges.
They have to operate within the law and rules too.
Perhaps you went ahead with the changeover too early by a day?

I read it as he hasn't been charged and has had a conditional offer of a fixed penalty notice.

waamo

George333 wrote: »

I read it as he hasn't been charged and has had a conditional offer of a fixed penalty notice.

Who knows? I thought he had been convicted from the early posts. Unfortunately the language is so vague and impricise it's difficult to know exactly what the op has had.

CCPECP

Do you know how graduate schemes work? In application for 2020 ones with loads of successful firms. Low paid job? My job pays £28/hr overtime lol and i’m there part time. Not that it has anything to do with you? Do you even have a degree like Chemical Engineering? or did you graduate in business management 😂

Supersonos wrote: »

Nah. He's got some job low-paid job with the RAC. Looks like he's putting that degree to good use...

Potbellypig

CCPECP wrote: »

DVLA approved and transferred it through to their system on the Saturday and I got pulled over on the Monday.

If it wasn’t 11pm and the police had the ability to call up DVLA it would’ve been resolved as DVLA had done everything on their side. This has been investigated like i stated initially. The police follow their national computer database which had an admin error of not updating as likely as it should have.

Regardless, it hardly isn’t my fault is it? I should have had the opportunity to have 7 days to go into the police station and provide documents. If i have the option to take the points or take the police to court then i’m taking the police to court.

It’s funny because everyone assumes the police are always right. I’m not saying it because the police weren’t asian, but i don’t see white people getting their vehicles seized without having the ability to show some documents. Why wasn’t i allowed? Sometimes it is racism and if i feel a certain way about the way me and the passenger was treated then i will pursue it because i was there and i went through it mate.

This bit explains the whole story really. You're a young lad driving at 11pm at night with no insurance (police database says that). Mate, doesn't matter if you're black, white or purple, you're getting your car seized every time.