More DVLA mess ups - SORN Insurance "penalty"

[owl10]

Hello BCF.

I know there’s a few of you who are by now pretty much experts in this stuff....

Here goes;

Received a “Failure to insure” £100 GBP Penalty (Bribe) recently.
My response was, that due to not having a V5 and due to moving house, I applied on the relevant postal form for both SORN and a new V5 several months previously.

DVLA Standard response of “registered keeper must show us our acknowledgement, you are still liable etc ” received this week.

Ok. good so far. - In the past, I’ve successfully argued away a £100 similar penalty bribe related to not informing of change of keeper (except I did – sent in the post, standard interpretations act defence, etc).

My question is should my response to this Insurance / SORN one be the same (e.g i did post it, prove i didn’t, show me statute legislation which says i must contact you if i don’t get an acknowledgement etc etc), or, is the failing to insure / SORN offence somehow different?

I read a recent thread where it is suggested I would need to show “evidence”:

Id happily show evidence in the form of a signed witness statement that I was with someone who saw me posting a letter (although not what was in it, how could they know), FOI evidence that DVLA do lose things, and supporting evidence of me calling the bank to cancel an un-cashed cheque for £25 for a new V5, but I’m not sure how strong this position will be.

All responses appreciated as usual!

Regards
Alex
____________________
DanceLikeAMonkey says: "An infinte amount of web pages available
Yet I still end up reading crap like that"

[stinkwheel]

The interpretation act has been specifically bypassed for the purposes of being in posession of an uninsured vehicle. You can't just say "I sent it, prove I didn't."

In the end it comes down to a balance of probability as to if you did or did not make an appropriate declaration in a magistrates court at the end of the day.
The witness statement and uncashes cheque are certinly going to count as supportive evidence but a lot would come down to how plausible the magistrate thinks you sound.

For what it's worth, I was fined around £240 for the same offence in court having plead guilty and given a (fairly kick-arse in my oppinion) statement of mitigation so work on that being a bottom-end fine if found guilty. People who didn't turn up were being routinely fined £350 in their absence. People who didn't fill in the means testing form got another £50 on top of that.

Start by reading the appropriate sections of the Road traffic act. 1988 (sections 144 A and B)

It's part B paragraph 9 that fucks over the Interpretations act defence.

[Rogerborg]

I've long since caved and now send everything to them recorded delivery (although Royal Fail aren't above screwing that up either).

Nothing to add to that except to emphasise that even if you're fully prepared then it'll be a crap shoot with the magistrates, who will also be used to banging through loads of uncontested guilty verdicts.

If your goal is simply to minimise your losses rather than to have a laugh with it at potentially considerable expense, then I would suggest negotiating with the muggers now, and at the courtroom door.

Remember, they get nothing on a conviction and they don't give a toss about the rights and wrongs of it. Any amount of a bribe is still a win, so start with a derisory amount and work upwards.

Best of luck; it's an abhorrent piece of legislation that achieves nothing and pisses in the face of justice.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike

[cheeseman]