My car has been seized from private land with a valid SORN.

[Deleted User]

I'd be knocking on every neighbours house to see if they have a copy of the deeds if they're hard to get off the land registry. Someone may have them.

Car_54

DUTR wrote: »

Sorry, that looks like a right of way and hence does not carry the status that you hope for .

Whether there is a right of way is irrelevant. What matters for VED (and hence SORN) purposes is whether the road is "repairable at the public expense".
In any event, the OP is clear that the car wasn't parked on the road, but on land he owns.

bluebrix

BooJewels wrote: »

Is the squiggle where at was parked? Maybe your private bit is only adjacent to the property and the rest if the road is a right of way, as DUTR says. I lived on an unadopted road years ago and we only owned 6' from the front wall of the house and the rest was a right of way. Similarly, where I live now, I own the path around my property and the gardens, but I can't fence them off as my neighbours have a right of way over a designated area of them.

The squiggle is the streetview label of the private road name. Each freeholder owns 50% of the land between our property and the boundary wall on the other side of the land. Strictly speaking there should be no vehicles parked along the boundary stone wall as that is the easement of access, but in any case it's all privately owned land running behind our properties with a public highway at each end. One end is impassable due to the condition of the land, so we effectively have only one way in and the same way back out.

In an ideal world the road would have been properly surfaced jointly by freeholders when motor vehicles became popular and a gate placed at each end to prevent non-freeholders accessing it.

cubegame

I note there is street-lighting. I think this brings some relevance to it's status as a road even if unadopted.

bluebrix

cubegame wrote: »

I note there is street-lighting. I think this brings some relevance to it's status as a road even if unadopted.

Unknown how and why they came about, but they haven't worked in the 17 years I've lived here.

Car_54

cubegame wrote: »

I note there is street-lighting. I think this brings some relevance to it's status as a road even if unadopted.

No, the only thing that defines the road's status for tax purposes is who maintains it. See Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994, sections 1 and 62.

Shaun_of_the_Dead

bluebrix wrote: »

The squiggle is the streetview label of the private road name. Each freeholder owns 50% of the land between our property and the boundary wall on the other side of the land. Strictly speaking there should be no vehicles parked along the boundary stone wall as that is the easement of access, but in any case it's all privately owned land running behind our properties with a public highway at each end. One end is impassable due to the condition of the land, so we effectively have only one way in and the same way back out.

In an ideal world the road would have been properly surfaced jointly by freeholders when motor vehicles became popular and a gate placed at each end to prevent non-freeholders accessing it.

Who owns the other 50%?

bluebrix

Shaun_of_the_Dead wrote: »

Who owns the other 50%?

We all do, jointly, however the easement maintains that the 50% closest to the boundary stone wall must be kept free of obstruction, while the 50% closest to our properties is for the exclusive use of each freeholder.

bluebrix

Car_54 wrote: »

No, the only thing that defines the road's status for tax purposes is who maintains it. See Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994, sections 1 and 62.

Thank you, I believe this to be the most pertinent factor here. I will present this to the pound when I collect my vehicle. I doubt whoever deals with me will accept this, but I will make a formal request for a refund of fees, and costs (such as the MOT retest fee and taxi to the pound) at a later date.

I do wonder how many other locals might find themselves in a similar position with this contractor. It is highly reminiscent of problematic private clamping companies, yet this seems to be endorsed and run by both the local authority under DVLA letter headed noticies.

Remove now with incorrectly applied legislative powers, deal with disputes later.

Shaun_of_the_Dead

bluebrix wrote: »

Thank you, I believe this to be the most pertinent factor here. I will present this to the pound when I collect my vehicle. I doubt whoever deals with me will accept this, but I will make a formal request for a refund of fees, and costs (such as the MOT retest fee and taxi to the pound) at a later date.

I do wonder how many other locals might find themselves in a similar position with this contractor. It is highly reminiscent of problematic private clamping companies, yet this seems to be endorsed and run by both the local authority under DVLA letter headed noticies.

Remove now with incorrectly applied legislative powers, deal with disputes later.

What conditions need to be met for you to recover the car?