DVLA clamping

[Spacewagon52]

1 minute ago, Linas.P said:

Whatever... I already said it is moot point, because it turned out that car was parked dangerously, not merely without tax.

There are separate definition of abandoned car, and they can be reported and towed. 

If a car has no road tax, no MOT or no insurance OR any one of those is it classed as abandoned? I did put abandoned in parenthesis, meaning they just appear abandoned. How would you differentiate ?

[Spacewagon52]

4 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

Here I am afraid you are wrong, Steve said it was on private land. Number plates, tax, insurance, roadworthiness etc. are concepts which only exists on the public road.

Sorry Linas - I await your apology - I am NOT wrong. You either TAX a vehicle or you SORN it. If you do neither you will be fined.

[Linas.P]

9 minutes ago, Spacewagon52 said:

If a car has no road tax, no MOT or no insurance OR any one of those is it classed as abandoned? I did put abandoned in parenthesis, meaning they just appear abandoned. How would you differentiate ?

I think the definition is - the owner could not be found. So if there is car which "appears" to be abandoned on the public road DVLA will first try to contact the owner, failing to do that they will tow the car.

7 minutes ago, Spacewagon52 said:

Sorry Linas - I await your apology - I am NOT wrong. You either TAX a vehicle or you SORN it. If you do neither you will be fined.

How exactly you suggest to do that if car has no number plate? Which would be legal as well, because number plate does not need to be fitted on private land (or to be honest anything - doors, lights etc).

[Spacewagon52]

2 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

I think the definition is - the owner could not be found. So if there is car which "appears" to be abandoned on the public road DVLA will first try to contact the owner, failing to do that they will tow the car.

How exactly you suggest to do that if car has no number plate? Which as well would be legal as well, because number plate does not need to be fitted on private land (or to be honest anything - doors, lights etc).

I don't think you understand how the DVLA system works. You MUST have Road Tax OR you MUST SORN the car if it is registered to you! You do not have a choice of doing nothing. Does this make it clearer?

[Sundance]

Colin is of course quite right, the DVLA do not clamp for parking misdemeanours. 🤓

But returning to the OP, I think he was genuinely surprised to see a DVLA wheel clamp.  The way this thread has since snowballed into the whys and wherefores of zig-zag lines, pavements, private land, registration plates and how to define an abandoned vehicle is indeed a great credit to the heterogeneity of certain Forum dwellers. 😁

Given such inexhaustible scrutiny I'm amazed that it's not been picked up as to whether or not the Transit can legitimately claim to warrant an amber roof light under Rule 225 in the Highway Code ... !?! 🤔

And then there's the houses behind ... have they got planning permission to erect 4x TV roof aerials and do they all have TV licences  ...or even TVs!? 🤫

Perhaps just light the blue touch paper and wait for our resident firework to do the rest! 🤭😂

[markeyszoo]

4 hours ago, steve2006 said:

Stealth approach mode given whoever fitted it didn’t want to be seen doing so. Obviously risk accessed that it would be safer crouching in a live traffic lane than rather than fitting it from the other side on the pavement!

Just wondering if there are any warning notices visible to the driver or if they didn’t notice the clamp before trying to drive off.

 

 

big sticker on windscreen

[Spacewagon52]

23 hours ago, Linas.P said:

I think the definition is - the owner could not be found. So if there is car which "appears" to be abandoned on the public road DVLA will first try to contact the owner, failing to do that they will tow the car.

How exactly you suggest to do that if car has no number plate? Which would be legal as well, because number plate does not need to be fitted on private land (or to be honest anything - doors, lights etc).

You must insure and tax your vehicle if you do not have a SORN. If you do not, you’ll automatically be fined £80 for not having a SORN. There’s also a fine for having an uninsured vehicle.

From the Government Website

 

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

 

[royoftherovers]

6 minutes ago, Spacewagon52 said:

You must insure and tax your vehicle if you do not have a SORN. If you do not, you’ll automatically be fined £80 for not having a SORN. There’s also a fine for having an uninsured vehicle.

From the Government Website

 

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

 

All in respect of a vehicle to be used on UK roads Davey.

[rich1068]

On 5/14/2021 at 10:12 PM, markeyszoo said:

Not seen this before. Is it a new thing?

See it round our way occasionally. Transit van with roof mounted cameras on each corner driving steadily up and down scanning the reg plates. They even clamped a neighbour's Prius the other day. £0 tax but untaxed if you know what I mean.

[Spacewagon52]

8 minutes ago, rich1068 said:

See it round our way occasionally. Transit van with roof mounted cameras on each corner driving steadily up and down scanning the reg plates. They even clamped a neighbour's Prius the other day. £0 tax but untaxed if you know what I mean.

Yes, even if you do not have to "pay" road tax i.e. £0 - you still have to make the application!

[Spacewagon52]

13 minutes ago, royoftherovers said:

All in respect of a vehicle to be used on UK roads Davey.

I agree John, if you tax a vehicle then it must have an MOT and Insurance at the time you tax it. When the period of the tax runs out you MUST make a declaration.

Choices - Tax it, SORN it, Sell it, Scrap it - but you MUST do one of these or you get fined like Steve did. Number plates missing or even if the vehicle is parked on the Moon makes no difference!

 

I feel better for that! Cathartic! All I needed instead was a straight apology! That is life!

[Malc]

just out of interest ..........anyone know what the position is with registered cars for sale on a garage forecourt ?

Malc

[Linas.P]

@Spacewagon52Are you working for DVLA? Not sure why you are so hell-bent to collect that tax even where it is clear that vehicle is not used for the purpose for which tax is even needed? 

If anything you just proven that there are many gaps in road tax system which means tax is often unnecessarily collected and motorists are unnecessary fined, perfect example of £0 Prius tax. What did it achieve? It costed tax payers money to issue the fine and it costed owner time and money to pay it, for what is a £0 effectively.

Nobody said that collecting tax on vehicles is wrong or that people should be allowed to drive with untaxed vehicles (although I still think motorists get's raw deal). It is just that DVLA system is not perfect and it has flaws which need fixing. Like for example - if car really is £0 tax, then it would be logical to remove formality of applying. The only reason it exists is probably because DVLA system is obsolete and such car can't be automatically exempt.  

[Spacewagon52]

56 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

@Spacewagon52Are you working for DVLA? Not sure why you are so hell-bent to collect that tax even where it is clear that vehicle is not used for the purpose for which tax is even needed? 

If anything you just proven that there are many gaps in road tax system which means tax is often unnecessarily collected and motorists are unnecessary fined, perfect example of £0 Prius tax. What did it achieve? It costed tax payers money to issue the fine and it costed owner time and money to pay it, for what is a £0 effectively.

Nobody said that collecting tax on vehicles is wrong or that people should be allowed to drive with untaxed vehicles (although I still think motorists get's raw deal). It is just that DVLA system is not perfect and it has flaws which need fixing. Like for example - if car really is £0 tax, then it would be logical to remove formality of applying. The only reason it exists is probably because DVLA system is obsolete and such car can't be automatically exempt.  

I accept Linas that you will not apologise for being wrong. You are very knowledgeable about cars and have contributed positively to many debates. Sadly you do not understand or see how you come across on a forum. You have rubbed-up more than me, particularly when you state opinion as fact. I am always prepared to hold my hands up if I have made a mistake - which I have in the past on this forum. It has already been mentioned that your posts can be blocked by members who do not wish to read your posts. The sad part, I feel Linas, is that people will begin to ignore your posts and comments. That would be a shame as I feel you have much to contribute to the website. Regarding what you say above - The system for ensuring cars are taxed, Mot'd and insured has become more robust, particularly with the use of ANPR cameras. The days when people could insure their car for a day, get the tax (without an MOT) and then cancel the insurance and run around, is becoming harder and so it should. Your gripe over taxation is you opinion, which many people will agree with. However, I do not. I am more than happy to pay my fair share of tax considering the excellent NHS healthcare I and my family have received in the past 10 years. The system, which has changed, is there for the benefit of the whole community. 

I will be blunt with you, this is an open forum so what I am saying is public, you are doing yourself no favours being so dogmatic and blatantly wrong without admitting to it. You must decide how you wish to respond in an open forum. I have no personal animosity towards you, I just felt you should have had the decency to apologise for your mistake.

I think it needs to end here, as far as I am concerned. I do hope to read your comments on other matters of which your are knowledgeable. 

[Linas.P]

I think before we even started this debate I have already stated that the discussion and the point I made was moot, because it was proven that van in questions was parked dangerously in front of pedestrian crossing, so I am not even inclined to debate it further. However, I found comment saying - "simply park it on private land" insensitive and detached from reality, majority of people simply have no such luxury of parking cars on private land. And to scrap the car just because of temporary financial issue (no work during covid) makes no sense. This is my opinion.

I have stated that the way taxations works is indifferent and inconsiderate to people circumstances and sometimes it could damage public more than it helps. This is clearly an opinion as well.

Then regarding overall fairness of where tax goes and how it is distributed - again clearly my option and we can agree to disagree. I don't see funding NHS as necessarily linked to that - everyone uses NHS, but why in particular car drivers have to pay twice for it? Why not for example tax international mega corps like amazon? I mean I don't want to make this into another massive topic about how "unfair" everything is, but the reality is that drivers (some of whom are poor) pay hefty price, whilst goverment keeps creating holes in tax code to facilitate tax avoidance. I think that is pretty clear, but I am fine if you call it just my opinion.

I see no issue with apologising either, I could be wrong and if I am wrong I will admit to it and apologise if needed. Now I had to read all posts again to see where I have "wronged you" and what I need to apologise for... I stated that concept of tax and number plate only exists on public road (and that is correct), I was as well under impression that fines were given on the sport via ANPR or manually checking that car is untaxed an issuing the fine, which obviously would be impossible if car has no number plate. Am I wrong here? 

Not it seem you are suggesting that fines are handled automatically as soon as tax expires and car is neither taxed nor SORN, in that case, yes - owner would get fine automatically no matter if car has number plates attached or not (in which case you are correct). Now I don't know if that is how tax fines are issued... and if they are then what is the point of clamping the car if owners could be fined by merely looking at the system?

So in the end - are the fines issue automatically, or does the car needs to be spotted by DVLA? If automatically, then yes you right and I am sorry, I was wrong, but if not automatically, then I guess my comment still stands.

[Sundance]

2 hours ago, Malc said:

just out of interest ..........anyone know what the position is with registered cars for sale on a garage forecourt ?

Malc

Here you go Malc ... extracted from gov.uk ...

Exceptions for motor traders

You do not need to make a SORN on a vehicle if you’re a motor trader or vehicle tester and all the following apply:

·       it’s only temporarily in your possession (until you sell it)

·       it’s being kept at your business premises

·       the registered keeper has notified DVLA that the vehicle has been sold or transferred to you

You count as a motor trader if you’re a:

·       motor dealer

·       motor auctioneer

·       vehicle dismantler

·       vehicle insurer looking after a vehicle while a claim is being settled

·       finance company licensed to temporarily hold a vehicle following an order for repossession

 

[royoftherovers]

For the avoidance of doubt and misunderstanding;

If a vehicle is to be used on U.K. roads, Public or Private it must be Taxed, Insured and MOT`d

If a vehicle is not used on U.K. roads, then none of the above apply, but it must be SORNED.

[Spacewagon52]

4 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

I think before we even started this debate I have already stated that the discussion and the point I made was moot, because it was proven that van in questions was parked dangerously in front of pedestrian crossing, so I am not even inclined to debate it further. However, I found comment saying - "simply park it on private land" insensitive and detached from reality, majority of people simply have no such luxury of parking cars on private land. And to scrap the car just because of temporary financial issue (no work during covid) makes no sense. This is my opinion.

I have stated that the way taxations works is indifferent and inconsiderate to people circumstances and sometimes it could damage public more than it helps. This is clearly an opinion as well.

Then regarding overall fairness of where tax goes and how it is distributed - again clearly my option and we can agree to disagree. I don't see funding NHS as necessarily linked to that - everyone uses NHS, but why in particular car drivers have to pay twice for it? Why not for example tax international mega corps like Amazon? I mean I don't want to make this into another massive topic about how "unfair" everything is, but the reality is that drivers (some of whom are poor) pay hefty price, whilst goverment keeps creating holes in tax code to facilitate tax avoidance. I think that is pretty clear, but I am fine if you call it just my opinion.

I see no issue with apologising either, I could be wrong and if I am wrong I will admit to it and apologise if needed. Now I had to read all posts again to see where I have "wronged you" and what I need to apologise for... I stated that concept of tax and number plate only exists on public road (and that is correct), I was as well under impression that fines were given on the sport via ANPR or manually checking that car is untaxed an issuing the fine, which obviously would be impossible if car has no number plate. Am I wrong here? 

Not it seem you are suggesting that fines are handled automatically as soon as tax expires and car is neither taxed nor SORN, in that case, yes - owner would get fine automatically no matter if car has number plates attached or not (in which case you are correct). Now I don't know if that is how tax fines are issued... and if they are then what is the point of clamping the car if owners could be fined by merely looking at the system?

So in the end - are the fines issue automatically, or does the car needs to be spotted by DVLA? If automatically, then yes you right and I am sorry, I was wrong, but if not automatically, then I guess my comment still stands.

Read the posts again CAREFULLY and you will see what you said was wrong. I will help you:-

 

You said: Here I am afraid you are wrong, Steve said it was on private land. Number plates, tax, insurance, roadworthiness etc. are concepts which only exists on the public road.

 

 

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

 

[Spacewagon52]

1 minute ago, royoftherovers said:

For the avoidance of doubt and misunderstanding;

If a vehicle is to be used on U.K. roads, Public or Private it must be Taxed, Insured and MOT`d

If a vehicle is not used on U.K. roads, then none of the above apply, but it must be SORNED.

Thank you John - the prosecution rests its case!

[NemesisUK]

25 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

So in the end - are the fines issue automatically, or does the car needs to be spotted by DVLA? If automatically, then yes you right and I am sorry, I was wrong, but if not automatically, then I guess my comment still stands.

From .gov website.. (my highlighting)

"You must insure and tax your vehicle if you do not have a SORN. If you do not, you’ll automatically be fined £80 for not having a SORN. There’s also a fine for having an uninsured vehicle.

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

 

[Linas.P]

24 minutes ago, royoftherovers said:

For the avoidance of doubt and misunderstanding;

If a vehicle is to be used on U.K. roads, Public or Private it must be Taxed, Insured and MOT`d

If a vehicle is not used on U.K. roads, then none of the above apply, but it must be SORNED.

I am fine with that,

Small correction thought. Depending on the definition of "private" road car may not need to be taxed - example race cars used on tracks, tractors used on farms (there could be private road between farms) etc. If the road can be accessed by public then RTA applies, if road is private (gated) including drive way in front of your house, then RTA does not apply.

If the cars was previously registered, then yes it unfortunately needs to be SORNed, other countries have term "unregister" which is more definitive - i.e. you unregister once and car is no longer in use, SORN on other hand is almost like temporary status. 

24 minutes ago, Spacewagon52 said:

Number plates, tax, insurance, roadworthiness etc. are concepts which only exists on the public road.

This is correct, just that "public road" or "public highway" as per RTA could be any road where public has access to it... 

But, it does not make you wrong either, so apologies for that.

[Linas.P]

5 minutes ago, NemesisUK said:

From .gov website.. (my highlighting)

"You must insure and tax your vehicle if you do not have a SORN. If you do not, you’ll automatically be fined £80 for not having a SORN. There’s also a fine for having an uninsured vehicle.

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

Thanks. 

Although, they always send letter for tax renewal if not automatic, so I guess there is no excuse for not renewing it. 

[NemesisUK]

36 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

Thanks. 

Although, they always send letter for tax renewal if not automatic, so I guess there is no excuse for not renewing it. 

There is no excuse for not renewing one's road tax, if one desires to continue using the car but the automatic fine is for not declaring SORN, which is the default condition of not having road tax. 

[Boxbrownie]

3 hours ago, Linas.P said:

. However, I found comment saying - "simply park it on private land" insensitive and detached from reality, majority of people simply have no such luxury of parking cars on private land.

I assume this is aimed at me, well get it correct...I never said “simply find some private land”....I stated get the vehicle SORN’ed or put it on private land, and I’ll say it again if the driver cannot be arsed to get it SORN’ed which costs nothing, they don’t deserve the privilege (because that’s what it is) of driving on public roads.

[Linas.P]

Yes but having it SORN'ed makes no difference if one (like majority of the people) don't have access to private land. As well you sentence does not make sense "if the driver cannot be arsed to get it SORN’ed which costs nothing, they don’t deserve the privilege of driving on public roads." - because if you SORN'ed it then you quite clearly not planning on driving it.