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

Car_54

Honey_Badger wrote: »

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.

The Highways Act is irrelevant. The act which governs VED and SORN is not the Highways Act but the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act. Section 62 defines public roads, for the purpose of the Act, as those maintainable at the public expense. The OP has now confirmed (again) that this particular road is not.

The definition dates from the days when we had a Road Fund Licence.

Honey_Badger

Car_54 wrote: »

The Highways Act is irrelevant. The act which governs VED and SORN is not the Highways Act but the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act. Section 62 defines public roads, for the purpose of the Act, as those maintainable at the public expense. The OP has now confirmed (again) that this particular road is not.

The definition dates from the days when we had a Road Fund Licence.

The OP has checked that the road is unadopted. However in a freedom of information request answer the Government replied.

In instances when the road is not adopted or the land is commonly owned with public access, it is for the keeper to check on the status of that road or piece of land with the Local Authority and or Highways Agency. In view of this you should contact these authorities for further assistance.

The very situation the OP is in.

Car_54

Honey_Badger wrote: »

The OP has checked that the road is unadopted. However in a freedom of information request answer the Government replied.



The very situation the OP is in.

What do you imagine ‘unadopted’ means? It means that the council have NOT accepted responsibility for its upkeep. I would guess that the OP and his neighbours would be delighted if they did.

Rover_Driver

As in posts 45 and 52, the definition of highways and public access are irrelevant in respect of vehicle licensing matters. The criteria for a licensing offence is that the vehicle is unlicensed, it is on a road, and that road is repairable at public expense.

Shaun_of_the_Dead

Honey_Badger wrote: »

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.

You're wrong and in a hole, so stop digging.