DVLA

The DVLA claim always intrigues me.
The V5C document (log book) clearly states that it is not proof of ownership, so what is?

How can the DVLA clamp a vehicle that is not taxed, if they do not have some kind of hold over it. They wouldn't walk into your house and put a padlock on your washing machine door.

As we see on TV, bailiffs only accept a receipt / bill of sale as proof of ownership for a vehicle before they will remove a clamp.

I once read an interesting pdf relating to the Manufacturers statement of origin and vehicles. It mentioned that by asking the DVLA (3 times) to verify that they are holders of this MSoO, which they cant do, is the only surefire way to deregister you vehicle / conveyence with the DVLA and go round with no number plates.
It compared the MSoO with the birth certificate:

You parents receive a certificate of live birth, which they then give to the registrar in return for your Birth Certificate (which states on it that it is not a form of ID)

Similary a brand new vehicle comes with a Manufactureres Statement of Origin which the main dealer trades with the DVLA for a log book and a set of registration plates (log book is not proof of ownership)


No Fear

miss kermit,

be very careful. hwen 1st reg'd the MSO goes to ??? & the V5 + plates are issued. That forms a 'legal' title. which the DVLA own, in commerce he who creates owns, they pull a switch-er-oo

The DVLA is the Trust, the 1 who 1st reg'd car is the Settlor into Trust, that leaves the Trustee which is you (keeper), with responsibility for insurance mot etc for car but also become Benificiary with use of said car. DVLA also Benificiary  because they profit? as you pay for all administrative processes.

As DVLA own Title they can do what they want through that title. Even if that means coppers pull you over & take your car, they should ONLY take plates & if you have V5 on you when stopped give that too. Its possible plates & V5 are the vehicle, that are said to be attached to & being 'mechanically driven'

its all theft & a massive abuse of Trust Law.

miss kermit, the 'as seen on TV' becomes your equitable title which you perhaps should put into Trust? To claim 'allodial title' you would need that origonal MSO not a copy.

LionsShare That brings me back to my point.

I know it would never stand up in court but if the DVLA cannot show they hold the ORIGINAL MSO, then how can they claim allodial title and therefore have the abillity to set up a trust and make people settlors, trustees and beneficiaries. At least not against the vehicle chassis number.

I suppose no one has ever challanged it fully.

As you say it is a massive abuse of trust law.

they may not necassarily be claiming aliodial title? but more over whereas they have us holding the legal title we are said via legal fiction to be liable to pay for all administrative processes

ATM its hearsay to state exactly where the ORIGINAL MSO is, they may destroy them as the land reg do over land titles, or securitise them?

Or maybe in a vault in the Vatican.

Miss Kermit wrote:The DVLA claim always intrigues me.
The V5C document (log book) clearly states that it is not proof of ownership, so what is?

How can the DVLA clamp a vehicle that is not taxed, if they do not have some kind of hold over it. They wouldn't walk into your house and put a padlock on your washing machine door.

As we see on TV, bailiffs only accept a receipt / bill of sale as proof of ownership for a vehicle before they will remove a clamp.

Car Tax and SORN are the responsibility of the Registered Keeper, so it's the RK who would be liable in those cases. I don't suppose the DVLA care whether the RK is the owner or not. DVLA powers for clamping and seizing are set out in "The Vehicle Excise Duty (Immobilisation, Removal and Disposal of Vehicles) Regulations 1997".

So that's different from the TV scenario where they're pursuing a debt in the name of Person A, but where the vehicle registered in his name may actually belong to Person B.

miss kermit, here's 1 to watch?

https://goodf.forumotion.com/t6330-car-in-trust#43085

miss kermit is this of any interest. found it on line

Thanks LionsShare.

The above explaination is how I would see the scam is used.

I understand the whole TRUST idea and see what the lady in the above Facebook video is trying to say but that would beg the question "can property be part of 2 seperate trusts at the same time?"
I would say no because there would clearly be a conflict of interests between various Trustees, Beneficiaries etc.
So if the DVLA set up a trust for the vehicle, making them exceutor and the RK trustee and benficiary, then surely the RK cannot place the same vehicle into a seperate trust to remove the power from the police.

The above statement does contradict itself though by claiming that the "government own the vehicle" but also saying that "the copy of the MSO is not a document for proof as only originals are".

Again back to my original point, if no original MSO can be proven to exist by the DVLA, how can they make a legal claim to the vehicle.

As the RK DOES have a receipt / bill of sale for the metal, plastic and rubber that comprise the vehicle / conveyence, then surely the RK has a higher claim.

I have even looked into how Kit Car registration works and what happens if there is no MAJOR donor vehicle.

I understand its a circular argument and we, the living people always get screwed, but I see it similar to the DCA argument. Burden of proof lays with the claiment and if the DVLA claim we as RK's need to pay tax and liabillities, then they need to show us proof of claim and where it stems from.
No one from the DVLA is going to stand in court under oath and state that a original MSO exists, presumably if the original has been destryed then a certified copy cannot be produce so all they hide behind is legislation and statutes again. And also the obligations we agree to take on when we purchase something that they claim to have created.


No Fear

Maybe interesting to start with a FOI to the DVLA regarding MSOs ,of course it would need to be carefully worded to give them no wiggle room.

Could then be followed up by a NoCA ,again with the correct wording, concentrating on your specific VIN number.

There are so many things of this nature put online, but does anyone actually ask the questions of those who perceive their authority ?