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

BooJewels

My guess would be that you might need to retrieve your vehicle as one action, then pursue the inappropriate removal, as a secondary one - purely because you don't have the luxury of time to do otherwise.

Just looking at the legislation, a right of way is possible even on privately owned land (as per my own garden) - so even if residents have the right to pass over the land, it doesn't necessarily change the status of the private nature of it - that, as Car 54 stated, is down to who pays for the upkeep of it. A public road is "maintainable at the public expense".

The Government definition of taking a vehicle off the road with a SORN is:
"Your vehicle is off the road if you don’t keep or use it on a public road, for example if it’s in a garage, on a drive or on private land."

Honey_Badger

The ownership of the land isn’t particularly relevant as to the status of a highway. As you can see from the extract below from a solicitor’s website, in many cases the Highway Authority only has the right to maintain the surface of a highway whilst the ownership of the land resides with others.

To determine if this is a highway you’ll need to ask your local highway authorities.

Ownership and Highways

All the Highways Authority owns in most cases is the right to surface and re-surface the highway – and perhaps to install drains below it. They own “the top two spits" - that is, the top two spadedepths – or however deep they need to dig down, to lay a reasonable running surface. In some highways the Authority also owns the land underneath the tarmac. If they bought the land in order to build a road on it, they probably still own the subsoil. In other highways (think of farmers’ fields with footpaths across them), it is perfectly clear that the owner of the land on each side of the highway also owns the land beneath it. In urban areas, the people who own the properties on each side often also own the land underneath the highway - from their fence out to the middle of the road. It is in every case a question of fact. Somebody needs to look at the evidence and draw a correct conclusion.

Whoever owns the subsoil will usually find that gas companies, electricity companies, cable TV companies etc. all have rights to put their pipes and wires into that subsoil.

From https://www.nicholashancox.co.uk/highway_who_owns.htm

bluebrix

Shaun_of_the_Dead wrote: »

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

The leaflet with the letter details that they require proof of ID, either a passport or driving licence. the V5C, and a recent utility bill. There is a blank section on the front of the leaflet stating "pound contact details" and "DN Number", neither of which has any information. It looks like an area where a stamp might be printed. The leaflet reference is "INF32"

The letter references the leaflet as containing the charges I will receive, and states that they are separate to any other penalties I may receive. There is no information as to what these other penalties might be, or why I might receive them.

There is an asterix at the end of the sentence in which they state that the vehicle has been impounded. The note at the bottom of the page states *The vehicle excise duty (immobilization, removal and disposal of vehicles) regulations 1997 as amended".

The letter is signed by "Enforcement officer on behalf of the secretary of state for transportation".

Car_54

Honey_Badger wrote: »

The ownership of the land isn’t particularly relevant as to the status of a highway. As you can see from the extract below from a solicitor’s website, in many cases the Highway Authority only has the right to maintain the surface of a highway whilst the ownership of the land resides with others.

To determine if this is a highway you’ll need to ask your local highway authorities.



From https://www.nicholashancox.co.uk/highway_who_owns.htm

Again, irrelevant. The only thing that matters for VED and SORN purpose is who maintains the road. And, again, the car wasn’t on the road anyway!

Honey_Badger

Car_54 wrote: »

Again, irrelevant. The only thing that matters for VED and SORN purpose is who maintains the road. And, again, the car wasn’t on the road anyway!

Of course it isn’t irrelevant, if at anytime in the past it was recognised as a highway it still is a highway unless closed under section 117 of the Highways Act 1980. Highways normally consist of the pavement and verges up to the boundary.

born_again

I would guess they also want a valid insurance certificate to release it as well.

bluebrix

born_again wrote: »

I would guess they also want a valid insurance certificate to release it as well.

The letter and supplied leaflet makes no reference to insurance, however my fully comprehensive policy continues to be in place with the same insurer since late 2017, before which it was with a different insurer for the previous 6 years. I've 22+ years of continuous insurance without any claims or convictions since passing my driving test as a teen. I've owned the car from new.

Car_54

Honey_Badger wrote: »

Of course it isn’t irrelevant, if at anytime in the past it was recognised as a highway it still is a highway unless closed under section 117 of the Highways Act 1980. Highways normally consist of the pavement and verges up to the boundary.

But the Act doesn’t refer to ‘highways’, but to ‘roads’, and specifically those maintainable at the public expense. The OP assures us that this doesn’t apply as the road is unadopted.

In any event, it seems the car was parked on land that the OP owns.

bluebrix

Car_54 wrote: »

But the Act doesn’t refer to ‘highways’, but to ‘roads’, and specifically those maintainable at the public expense. The OP assures us that this doesn’t apply as the road is unadopted.

In any event, it seems the car was parked on land that the OP owns.

I've reconfirmed this evening via the Council's downloadable spreadsheets for peace of mind that the road is indeed unadopted.

Honey_Badger

Car_54 wrote: »

But the Act doesn’t refer to ‘highways’, but to ‘roads’, and specifically those maintainable at the public expense. The OP assures us that this doesn’t apply as the road is unadopted.

In any event, it seems the car was parked on land that the OP owns.

1) Roads maintainable at public expense are termed “highways” hence we have publications such as the “Highway Code.”

2) The act refers to public roads, which it defines as roads which the public has access to. No reference to being maintained at public expense. So if you kept a SORNed vehicle on Sainsbury’s access road verge (not a road maintained at public expense) do you think it wouldn’t be lifted?

3) In my first post I explained ownership of land doesn’t preclude Highway rights existing over the land. Perhaps you should re-read the quote I supplied from a Solicitor’s website I thought it was quite self explanatory.