the dvla

hi there

Looking for some advice help etc on dealing with big brother the dvla,I don’t want to go into to much detail in case they have their beady eye on things
Great the get out of debt group is back, you helped me on a few occasions before.
Digging around the internet its pretty obvious the dvla are possibly the biggest bunch of idiots labelled a as a government department.
Im a car trader who as suffered the seizure of one of my cars by the dvlas clowns the NSL, renowned for intimidating every car trader in the neighbourhood armed with their anpr cameras,who are literally a stones throw from the garage where the car was booked in for an mot. The car had been stored at a garage for over a year due to it not selling and then transported for its Mot on trade plates, not sorned due to me being a trader it is registered in my name. At the time it was parked just across the way on a public pavement unbeknownst to me by the garage it was booked in at for a mot,so the garage was legally responsible for it.


I duly received a letter in the post declaring it had been seized, and asked to agree an out of court settlement as well as paying the storage fees incurred, which I aint going to do and bluntly told them so.I have now received the court papers with announcement of impending action etc etc
I have started their complaints procedure, which frankly is a waste of time.first stage is complain to the relevant department, next an apparently independent complaints assessor, then the ombudsman.
The dvla are saying that I cant have my case assessed before the complaints assessor until I had either paid the out of court settlement or the court had reached its decision, obviously loaded in their favour, the court announcement is urging me to plead guilty to avoid a lesser fine etc,I,I intend to fight it all the way and take it to the court of appeal if need be.
I feel the DVLA are making up the law as they see fit

I know that you can legally use a vehicle on the road without a registration mark & no MOT as long as you are heading for an MOT, also the MOT station can put the vehicle on their own insurance, as it is the MOT station that has put the vehicle on a public road i would assume they are liable.

Is the gripe with the 'criminals' that it had no SORN & parked on a public road? Logic would dictate you have done no wrong but commerce & that of extorting money by these criminal gangs always comes tops.

In addition f they have a claim it is up to them to prove this - not you!

You need insurance of you head for an MOT or return from it, but if you are a trader AND have trade plates then you also have appropriate insurance aka business insurance which is an insurance to drive any vehicle in connection with your business, and not insurance on a specific vehicle.

In this case it would appear that the ANPR system has flagged the vehicle as having no insurance because it doesn't as it is covered on a trade policy which covers any vehicle you are using in connection with your profession, as it has no individual insurance they are trying it on and hope to make you pay.

Once at the MOT testing station it becomes their responsibility and they are covered on their insurance.

Several points here, the vehicle is classed as "in trade" on their systems, it is registered in the name of the trading company name or the sole traders name and this will be recorded on the Motor Insurance Database, so it will show as having insurance through the name of the sole trader or business.

Every vehicle has to be booked in for an MOT and this is also on line so this will be recorded with DVLA as being booked in at the testing station.

Personally I would hit them with a counter claim and with a high value, they cannot prove the vehicle was uninsured, they know you are a legitimate dealer as they have issued you with trade plates, and they have the record of the vehicle being booked in for an MOT.

You haven't said exactly what you've been charged with, also did you leave the trade plates on the car or take them off when you left it?

Tiggy, the general advice from the DVLA is to remove the plates if they are mounted externally to the vehicle, as many are, apparently this is to stop them being stolen as there is a huge market for stolen trade plates according to the DVLA current advice.

However; this is like all advice from Government departments, vague and spurious as it agrees with a lot of their policies and contradicts so many more of them.

assassin wrote:Tiggy, the general advice from the DVLA is to remove the plates if they are mounted externally to the vehicle, as many are, apparently this is to stop them being stolen as there is a huge market for stolen trade plates according to the DVLA current advice.

However; this is like all advice from Government departments, vague and spurious as it agrees with a lot of their policies and contradicts so many more of them.

Possibly, but I suspect the Insurance Policy under which the trade plates operate says they have to be on the vehicle for that particular vehicle to be classed as insured.

No, the idea of trade plates is not to need to tax and insure vehicles individually, this is why they they are used within the trade so they don't have to tax and insure each vehicle individually, yet they are taxed and insured for purposes relating to the motor trade, a condition of having trade plates is that you carry a traders policy and this is checked online and if it lapses the trade plates are automatically flagged and become invalid.

assassin wrote:No, the idea of trade plates is not to need to tax and insure vehicles individually, this is why they they are used within the trade so they don't have to tax and insure each vehicle individually, yet they are taxed and insured for purposes relating to the motor trade, a condition of having trade plates is that you carry a traders policy and this is checked online and if it lapses the trade plates are automatically flagged and become invalid.

That's right, BUT they have to be displayed on the vehicle.

Permitted uses of trade licences
You must only use trade licences for the particular business purposes for which we issued them. These include:
• to test or trial a vehicle, its accessories or equipment during or immediately after its construction, modification or repair
• for a return journey to a public weighbridge or for registration or inspection by an authorised official
• to undertake a test trial for the benefit of a prospective purchaser or the press
• to demonstrate the operation of a vehicle, its accessories or equipment, when you hand it over to a purchaser or deliver it to the place where they intend to keep it
• for moving vehicles:
– for valeting or accessory fitting between traders’
premises. (Valeting means the thorough cleaning of a vehicle before its registration or to prepare it for sale; it includes removing wax and grease from the exterior, the engine and the interior of the vehicle.) Please note: this does not apply to a drive through car wash or hand car wash business that is open to the public to bring their vehicles for cleaning at any time.
– to a workshop where special equipment or accessories are fitted
– between traders’ premises and another location
– between traders’ premises and auctions or other
places of sale
• to go to and from places of test or inspection and for
going to a place for breaking and dismantling.
A motor trader may use the trade licence on mechanically propelled vehicles only if they are temporarily in their possession in the course of their business.
A motor trader who is a manufacturer may also use the licence on a vehicle kept only for research and development purposes, or on vehicles that other manufacturers submit to them for testing.
A vehicle tester may use the trade licence only on vehicles submitted to them for testing (including the vehicles trailer, its accessories or equipment).

4. Display of trade plates
A trade plate:
• must be displayed on a vehicle as long as it is visible and vertical on both the front and rear (rear only for motorcycles)
• cannot be displayed inside a vehicle
• must not cover the vehicle’s existing number plates
(except motorcycles)
Please note: motorcycles can continue to display a trade plate over the existing number plate.

Here is the contradiction, and yes you have found one of them and there are many.

Official advice from the DVLA is that a trade plate is only to be used while travelling in, or transporting a vehicle to another permitted place or trader, and upon arrival the trade plates must be removed for security reasons to prevent their theft as they are hot property in the criminal world apparently.

The second contradiction is that it must not cover the vehicles number plate, yet in official advice to users the DVLA specifically states that you must only mount them over the existing number plate so it is covered.

Which is correct? in either case they contradict themselves.

assassin wrote:Here is the contradiction, and yes you have found one of them and there are many.

Official advice from the DVLA is that a trade plate is only to be used while travelling in, or transporting a vehicle to another permitted place or trader, and upon arrival the trade plates must be removed for security reasons to prevent their theft as they are hot property in the criminal world apparently.

The second contradiction is that it must not cover the vehicles number plate, yet in official advice to users the DVLA specifically states that you must only mount them over the existing number plate so it is covered.

Which is correct? in either case they contradict themselves.

If that's what's happened (ie the OP removed the trade plates) then that's exactly what I was going to suggest they use in mitigation.

Me to, but the DVLA never respond to questions for them to clarify their position and the law on this unfortunately.

When we take our trucks for the Ministry test we use one of our sets of trade plates and attach them to the grill of the truck above the number plates and once inside the test facility we have been told to remove them and take them with us for security reasons, the rears simply slide into a holder which do not cover the original number plate either.

From what the DVLA have previously admitted, you have to leave the original number plates visible for the following reasons:

1) If the original number is visible it can be checked online to see if it is registered "as in trade" immediately.

2) To check that the vehicle trader (sole or business) is registered as a company or sole trader.

3) To check the sole trader or business holds an appropriate business insurance policy to use vehicles for motor trade business. This may be a motor policy or a combination policy with the provision to use "in trade" or "in connection with business" usage.

been laid up with the blasted flu, thanks everybody for getting back
They are charging me with keeping an unlicensed vehicle on a public road with no SORN, the trade plates weren't on it at least not mine.
It was parked just across the road from the garage where it was booked in for the MOT,not by me but the garage.
I have included a copy of the picture they very kindly sent me  of the car when it was seized heavily censored,I think the dosey garage owner thought it was ok to put it  on the pavement.
I like the idea of a counter claim,the court form as a mitigating circumstances option if I plead not guilty,I feel the garage must be liable  for placing it on a public space,well pavement not an actual road.
NSL the muppets who work for the dvla are probably one of the biggest bunch of crooks going,armed with their  anpr cameras they are renowned for intimidating the motor trade, what legitimacy in law do they actually have for actually seizing somebody's property,germany as banned anpr cameras for breaching peoples human rights

Hi thoughtpath,

do you mind if I ask have you had the car back yet?

If not what happens if you are found "guilty" do you get it back with out an MOT?

In essence this many be an option as Germany have banned ANPR cameras on the grounds of Human Rights, so an EU precedent is in place.

It doesn't need a SORN if it is in trade.

thoughtpath wrote:They are charging me with keeping an unlicensed vehicle on a public road with no SORN, the trade plates weren't on it at least not mine.

thoughtpath wrote:It was parked just across the road from the garage where it was booked in for the MOT,not by me but the garage.
I have included a copy of the picture they very kindly sent me  of the car when it was seized heavily censored,I think the dosey garage owner thought it was ok to put it  on the pavement.

Doesn't that suggest a defence, that you weren't keeping the vehicle at the time?

LionsShare wrote:Hi thoughtpath,

do you mind if I ask have you had the car back yet?

If not what happens if you are found "guilty" do you get it back with out an MOT?

Not got the car back.I suspect the clowns have crushed it

pieintheskywhenIdie wrote:

thoughtpath wrote:They are charging me with keeping an unlicensed vehicle on a public road with no SORN, the trade plates weren't on it at least not mine.

thoughtpath wrote:It was parked just across the road from the garage where it was booked in for the MOT,not by me but the garage.
I have included a copy of the picture they very kindly sent me  of the car when it was seized heavily censored,I think the dosey garage owner thought it was ok to put it  on the pavement.

Doesn't that suggest a defence, that you weren't keeping the vehicle at the time?

Thanks everybody for getting back,I did put that to the dvla,I was not responsible for placing it on the pavement, but it was brushed off saying it was my legal responsibility,barmy I cant sleep in the car,the dvla arent the brightest lot going.
I think that might be my best course,no way am I simply treading their line and pleading guilty Ill have my day in court,if I lose I will take it to the court of appeal and maybe the human rights court.
Searching on the net I find that NSL are a part of the marston group,there is a lot from ex employees of NSL who left after been disgusted with management pushing them to met quotas per day driving round in their anpr vans


nsl employees

Hi everybody,not been on for a couple of months during which I received a fine from the magistrates court for a ridiculous sum.
Any way talking to a solicitor he told me to apply to have the case re opened under section 142,which i did.
It involved me taking time out from my buisness and travelling expenses petrol parking etc,to cut a long story short,the court dismissed the fine,null and void.
So the whole basis of the DVLAs claim is dead,I now want the car back or its value,renumeration for loss of income due to the car being sold when it was seized and whatever else i can claim back,il be chatting to the solicitor on tuesday about my options,any thoughts or ideas on my courses of action many thanks

I think the exact wording of the appeal judgement would have a bearing on your next move.

daveiron wrote:I think the exact wording of the appeal judgement would have a bearing on your next move.

the court was a bit vague on my next steps, dvla might pursue me for back tax and clamping fee,both null and void,since the whole basis of their claim is dead
The car was stored on a car lot,since i aquired it never used on the road,should i contact the court for details of the appeal judgement

I would think the garage would be responsible if they parked it there whilst in their care & control .Have you considered claiming from their insurance ?

Also on another note ,take a look at the 'windows on the world ' thread i posted earlier today ,there is a lot of info on NSL there although i have only had time to listen to about 10 mins so far.

Not been back on here for a while I was hoping for more by going through the various hoops presented to me by the various so called independent bodies,the outcome is they just agree with the DVLA goons and the actions of NSL. I feel sullied by the whole experience,shut up put up with it and have done.I was under the illusion the government were public servants not the other way round
Being very careful about what I say here since part of these proceedings I posted were actually used in some of their arguments gleaned from other forums.Id be stupid to think otherwise plus a certain motoring forum that I wont name is really just a whitewash set up the DVLA.
Im considering different approaches one is actually suing the DVLA,or rather their bank since you cant sue a government body,certainly now pursuing the garage for reparations by their placing it on the road.Is it an illegal act on their part placing a vehicle on the road knowing full well it wasn't taxed,though the DVLAs argument is its registered in my name so I'M responsible for its fate etc,sounds like another shaky legal assumption by the dvla