Oh No!

[Bob Tucker]

BUT if the car is built from a doner vehicle,as mine is,the DVLA then Swop the registration of the doner,for that of another vehicle, Which in my case seems to be that of another 86 sierra

 

Hi Mogzee, thats not quite the case unless someone at the VRO which registered your car has made a cockup.

 

When I registered my 2B at Sidcup VRO I spoke to their "Kit Car Expert". She did know what she was doing. She said that they do not allocate the donors reg, or any reg they had already been issued to a vehicle. They have a list of unallocated numbers which follow on from the last registered car for that year and location. They just take the next number in sequence & give you that one.

 

HTH Bob

[Guest pogni]

Hi Mogzee, thats not quite the case unless someone at the VRO which registered your car has made a cockup.

 

When I registered my 2B at Sidcup VRO I spoke to their "Kit Car Expert". She did know what she was doing. She said that they do not allocate the donors reg, or any reg they had already been issued to a vehicle. They have a list of unallocated numbers which follow on from the last registered car for that year and location. They just take the next number in sequence & give you that one.

 

HTH Bob

Hi Bob,Now im even more confused.........So if the number/plate thats on my motor isnt from a sierra,why on earth do the police think its a sierra?....When i took it for its first MOT since the SVA (which was completed on October 9th 2007),the garage put my reg into their computer and it came up with...Robin Hood 2B.....also ive noticed that the chassis number ends in 120407 but i havent got a clue if thats got anything to do with anything...Im just Baffled Mate...

I have sent details of the Reg and chassis number to Mark B, who is going to put the details through "His" VOSA/DVLA linked MOT computer....But i think its going to say Robin Hood 2B........Which according to the details on my Tax renewal form the DVLA,Is what it is.........Even though the Police "THINK" otherwise......

Thanks to you and everyone for your help.....A very confused Mogzee

[Guest gdc]

just to confuse matters further my lightweight was regestered as a new vechicle as a 56 plate . had an mot prior to sva on chassis plate but has not had an mot since .

 

 

regards graham

[Bob Tucker]

Hi Bob,Now im even more confused

 

Sorry mate that wasnt the idea at all......

 

Thats what should have happened.....I can only imagine there's been a cockup at the VRO which did the registration.

Maybe the number they took from their list and gave for your car had already been issued in 1986 to a Sierra....seems like one hell of a coincidence it was a Sierra tho'.

 

Bob

[Guest pogni]

Hi Bob......HOW about THIS.......Following a chat this evening with my WISE OLD OWL of a mate,ive had a good look at the speeding ticket that the Officer seemed so "Proud" to present me with.........,which actually states that the vehicle that i was "speeding in" Was/Is a Robin Hood,And yet at the same time he chose to make me present a current MOT for a FORD SIERRA,Which it isnt.........So now it seems that i must have been driving two cars at the same time......A ROBIN HOOD 2B at 39 MPH in a 30 limit......AND THE 1986 FORD SIERRA that Didnt have a current MOT,For which ive been reported to the CPS, for driving at the time.

........Night All ....Mogzee

Edited October 9, 2008 by mogzee

[Guest pwlcarz]

That inconsistency may get you off BOTH offences!

 

Sure I've seen cases thrown out for less than that.

 

Let them take you to court and have your day!

[Guest pogni]

That inconsistency may get you off BOTH offences!

 

Sure I've seen cases thrown out for less than that.

 

Let them take you to court and have your day!

Yes Mate....I couldnt agree with you more.........NOW HEAR THIS......Mark B entered my vehicles details into his "MOT" computer this morning,and guess what......The Computer says..Reg 31/12/86......1993cc Petrol Silver/Blue......But its not listed as a Robin Hood.....OR ANY OTHER VEHICLE.

Even though ALL my documents,including the Logbook say its a Robin Hood..........So now i suppose im going to get nicked for driving an invisible car.....Or is it really a magic coach, thats about to turn back into a pumkin at midnight ?

It seems to me that my case needs to go to court to expose the flaws in the Dvla etc, and someone needs a kick up the Arris.

All the best...Mogzee

[Guest pogni]

Yes Mate....I couldnt agree with you more.........NOW HEAR THIS......Mark B entered my vehicles details into his "MOT" computer this morning,and guess what......The Computer says..Reg 31/12/86......1993cc Petrol Silver/Blue......But its not listed as a Robin Hood.....OR ANY OTHER VEHICLE.

Even though ALL my documents,including the Logbook say its a Robin Hood..........So now i suppose im going to get nicked for driving an invisible car.....Or is it really a magic coach, thats about to turn back into a pumkin at midnight ?

It seems to me that my case needs to go to court to expose the flaws in the Dvla etc, and someone needs a kick up the Arris.

All the best...Mogzee

I now realise that im being a bit unfair on the police in some ways,because its not really their fault that someone else has failed to do their job and enter the correct details at the time the car was first registered by its previous owner/builder Mat T,who i am sure has done everything correctly.....The cause of the problem seems to be something to do with the DVLA, the SVA,or the VRO people....and not the fault of the police,who i would imagine, must be as confused as i am.

Oh Well, THE SUNS OUT, and im off for another "Jolly" in my invisible motor.....Regards Mogzee

Edited October 10, 2008 by chris brown
wanted add removed

[Longboarder]

Might be a good time to slow down and take stock. I think issues like these sometimes get a momentum of their own and all involved parties start to behave as they are fighting WW2 on the side of the good guys.

You were speeding. You were pulled. By your own admission. Tough break, not a major disaster and doesn't make you public enemy No 1. Most of us have done it. The cop who pulled you then somehow got confusing details from the computer check and ended up reporting you for no MOT on a non existent car. Anyone can make a mistake particularly when faced with computer evidence that supports that mistake. That bit is unlikely to ever go to court.

You have to figure what is in your best interest. Do you really want your day in court and try to make a young cop look like an idiot? Do you want to create maximum fuss and alienate the local constabulary? Not like you fade into the background when out in the car. The magistrate is likely to be a Daily Mail reader and may think you are getting off one charge on some dodgy legal technicality. He/She is also human, probably establishment and will react badly if thinks you are taking the wee.

Minimise your own damage. Take legal advise and try to settle it nicely and with good grace.

 

Nigel

 

Was writing this as you posted the above. beat me to it by 5 mins.

[Guest pogni]

Might be a good time to slow down and take stock. I think issues like these sometimes get a momentum of their own and all involved parties start to behave as they are fighting WW2 on the side of the good guys.

You were speeding. You were pulled. By your own admission. Tough break, not a major disaster and doesn't make you public enemy No 1. Most of us have done it. The cop who pulled you then somehow got confusing details from the computer check and ended up reporting you for no MOT on a non existent car. Anyone can make a mistake particularly when faced with computer evidence that supports that mistake. That bit is unlikely to ever go to court.

You have to figure what is in your best interest. Do you really want your day in court and try to make a young cop look like an idiot? Do you want to create maximum fuss and alienate the local constabulary? Not like you fade into the background when out in the car. The magistrate is likely to be a Daily Mail reader and may think you are getting off one charge on some dodgy legal technicality. He/She is also human, probably establishment and will react badly if thinks you are taking the wee.

Minimise your own damage. Take legal advise and try to settle it nicely and with good grace.

 

Nigel

 

Was writing this as you posted the above. beat me to it by 5 mins.

Ok Nigel,You are right......I dont need the hastle...and im not out to slag the local police off,over something thats not their fault.....And War is not the solution.....So Ive put the jolly old "spitfire" back in the hanger, If you know what i mean............Mogzee

[enforcer]

Nigel - great post and wise words. My sentiments exactly.

 

Mogzee - similar respect for your last entry. I wish you well.

 

Rich

[Big Jim]

Whilst listening to Nigels post, and that of yourself, I'll go back to somewhere in one of my posts, where I said that it's not the police officers fault, but that of the DVLA.

It's not VOSA's fault, and it's not trhe SVA's fault either.

Do not sit back and wait for the Good Fairy to make it all better again, sorry, but she's been made redundant!

But write your letter explaining politely what has happened etc. Use FACTS, list them.

 

If they still wish to take you to court over the MOT, then go there to win, DO NOT ROLL OVER on this, it's certainly NOT YOUR FAULT!

 

Jim

[Guest pogni]

Whilst listening to Nigels post, and that of yourself, I'll go back to somewhere in one of my posts, where I said that it's not the police officers fault, but that of the DVLA.

It's not VOSA's fault, and it's not trhe SVA's fault either.

Do not sit back and wait for the Good Fairy to make it all better again, sorry, but she's been made redundant!

But write your letter explaining politely what has happened etc. Use FACTS, list them.

 

If they still wish to take you to court over the MOT, then go there to win, DO NOT ROLL OVER on this, it's certainly NOT YOUR FAULT!

 

Jim

Hi Jim,Ive spent hours trying to compose a polite letter/explanation,(as previously suggested)But i cannot explain something that i dont really understand myself........I dont know how this mess has occured,so i dont think there is much point in trying to explain the unexplainable,to "someone"else, that so far,cannot explain/understand it themselves.And as its now in the hands of the CPS,i doubt very much,that anything i say will influence their judgement.

I tried to explain,in person,the Facts,to the police,and for "understandable"reasons,i failed,and im sure that this would also be the case if i were to try again.....either in person or by way of a "polite" letter.

One thing that i am certain of,is that if anyone wishes to take me to court,over the mistakes of those who should know better,i will most definately defend myself.

Ive already found a solicitor who is very experienced in this field,if thats what its going to take to sort all this out.

Once again thanks to you and everyone else for their comments......Night all....Mogzee

[Guest pwlcarz]

I agree with Jim, don't rollover and accept it.

I think you've done the right thing by putting things in the hands of a solicitor (hopefully someone who understands and knows their stuff).

 

With due respect to Enforcer, fully understand that police officers are only human as are the other individuals, however they, the CPS and the other bodies involved are supposed to be the 'professionals' and therefore have a duty of care to the public to ensure they get things right. Of course, mistakes are made but that doesn't mean 'Joe Public' should just lie down and accept it. That's why we have democracy and a court system.

 

If someone has done something 'incorrectly' then it should be challenged and corrected. If that means another offence is then 'thrown out' (the acknowledged speeding offence) then so be it (someone might get a rocket so that it doesn't happen again) - that's what happens all the time in our court system. It's just playing the game everyone involved plays, but to your own advantage.

 

This is REALLY not a dig at the police or any other officials, but the argument that "well someone made a mistake filling in the data, so tough" is not acceptable. You could argue Mogzee made a mistake by exceeding the speed limit, but no one is saying "that's OK, don't worry about it" to him.

 

If a mistake has been made I repeat, it needs to be challenged and corrected.

 

(rant over)

[Guest timswait]

If I was you I'd definitely write the letter. What have you got to loose? Nothing. What have you got to gain? You might stop it going to court, which will be more aggro and probably money, and may get you on the wrong side of the local bill as Nigel said.

All you need to write is what Jim put in his post:

The car passed THEIR test.

It was taken it to THEIR offices for it's build up inspection.

THEY were given all the neccessary documentation requested (as you wouldn't have got it registered otherwise)

THEY gave you an age related VRM, one that you've never seen before.

THEY gave you a tax disc.

THEY gave you authorization for numberplates to be made up.

THEY sent you a log book that ties up with all neccessary details.

That's it. You don't need to explain (or understand) any more than that. You don't need to work out how, why or who cocked it up. That's for the police, the DVLA and VOSA to sort out amongst themselves and is not your problem. All you need to do is explain that the rules were followed when the car was built, and you still got nicked for not showing an MOT certificate for something that was demonstrably not a Ford Sierra.