Oh No!

[Guest Ian & Carole]

Thanks folks.

 

After two pm's and Sues post the penny finally dropped!!!!!!!!!!

 

proves how stupid I really am

[Big Jim]

First of all, the cock-up is all the DVLA's fault. That usually comes about because of the staff they employ, there are a lot of temps employed, because the wages are poor for working in the capitol, so staff turn-over is high, therefore a large measure of incompetence.

 

Now let’s put things straight, how the SVA laws are supposed to apply.

 

If you build all the car out of NEW parts (you are allowed 1 fully reconditioned major unit, and you're supposed to have paperwork to prove that it's been reconditioned professionally) after completing the SVA test OK, you are then allowed a new registration number, you car is deemed new at time of SVA, and you don't need MOT for 3 years.

 

This is why the full kitted superspecs are classed as a new car.

 

Now, if like the majority of Robin Hoods, the car is built from a Donor vehicle, or second-hand parts, then providing there are enough components of the original (cough!) donor car, once through the SVA, it will get an *Age related* number plate (not the one from the donor vehicle) and should be MOT'd in 12 months time, as it's not new!

 

(that's what has happened with this vehicle, unfortunately the DVLA haven't completed the scrapping of the original Sierra that the number plate came from.)

 

With a car built from a single donor, you will get first year as the donors year, if however you built it from "parts" you'll get a *Q* plate, ie no known date, and the logbook will be marked *Built from parts 2008* or whatever.

 

NOW, I know that a lot of you can tell different stories, of new numbers, registered as new, no MOT for 3 years etc. but all that is because of the total incompetence of the DVLA and taxation dept. So the thing to do is shut up & keep quite!!

[Guest robinj66]

Jim is correct. Especially about the source of the "cock-up"

 

...Except that DVLA @ Swansea have erecently advised me that they require an MOT before the car can be submitted for its Build Up Inspection / First Registration procedure.

[Guest pogni]

Jim is correct. Especially about the source of the "cock-up"

 

...Except that DVLA @ Swansea have erecently advised me that they require an MOT before the car can be submitted for its Build Up Inspection / First Registration procedure.

Well hear we go again........ It looks to me like im a sitting duck waiting for the police to nick me for.....No MOT.....and even driving a vehicle thats not registered "properly" just because, even though its "New" in one sense,its not in another,because the engine is 1986......So what if i had replaced an engine in a 1999 car with an engine from a 1990 car ? Does that then turn my 1999 vehicle into a 1990 one ?.........Why dont "they" make all this clear to kitcar builders from the start ?

I dont dissagree with the latest postings,and it seems to me that By Hook or By Crook im going to get nicked, and i cant even get legal aid to defend myself.

I hope my problem has not "opened a can of worms"for all you other kitcar owners that may now realise that they are also breaking the law.......Thanks for the help.....A rather tired Mogzee

Ps Ive left a pic of me that was taken "off set" when "we" filmed ......"Back to the future" I hope you all like it.

Edited October 2, 2008 by mogzee

[NeilD]

Ps Ive left a pic of me that was taken "off set" when "we" filmed ......"Back to the future" I hope you all like it.

Hello pretty boy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Dave Ed]

hi all,

i've just come up with a similar sort of problem yesterday,

whilst entering all of my details through Admiral multi car insurance on the web my exmo came up still registered as a sierra, although all my docs state Robin Hood sports car, mot, v5, tax disc etc..

should i be worried

Also the premium of the multi car "discount" was £200 more than if i'd insured both individually.

[Guest pogni]

hi all,

i've just come up with a similar sort of problem yesterday,

whilst entering all of my details through Admiral multi car insurance on the web my exmo came up still registered as a sierra, although all my docs state Robin Hood sports car, mot, v5, tax disc etc..

should i be worried

Also the premium of the multi car "discount" was £200 more than if i'd insured both individually.

Hi again, Mogzee here.......I think its very important that members read about this subject from the time it began, to avoid getting into a situation similar to mine.....Please Look at the original posting called "Urgent Help Needed And A Warning" the last post was by me on 29th September......In order to understand the full story, you need to read it from the very first posting by Mat T......If you dont, you maybe heading for a "Nick" the very next time you go for a "Jolly" in what you think is a legal motor,When in Fact Its Not. Regards Mogzee

Ps THIS COULD APPLY TO DOZENS OF KITCAR OWNERS.......I hope its its not YOU.

Edited October 2, 2008 by mogzee

[Longboarder]

Steady on mate. Your situation is still far from clear. All the requirements that the registering department of the DVLA requested after SVA were satisfied and they issued the registration. If they were not happy they would not have issued the reg number and paperwork. Your car is not the car you are accused of using without MOT. That car is a sierra with a different number and is known to have been scrapped. This is not the first time this ghost existence has come up. I had a SORN request for the donor months after my Hood was registered. I still had photocopies of all the forms and my letter requesting they terminate the existence of the donor. I had not filled in the V5 to scrap the sierra because I did not trust DVLA not to somehow scrap the Hood as well. (DVLA incompetence is not a new thing)

The requirement for an MOT is on the retaxing reminder form. If it asks for one you have to have an MOT to get the tax. If your car is taxed then they didn't ask for one. As far as I can see that is the only way you can know, in the case of a kitcar, that an MOT is needed.

I suspect that DVLA database has your donor still having a ghost like existence and a linked identity to your Hood. You should await events and may need some help from a solicitor, your MP and even the magazines. Perhaps the rules are going to be clarified at last. PITA that your the guy with the lucky dip.

 

Nigel

[Guest Jaffer]

... would it be worth contacting Paul Jepson to see if he will look into the issue Mogzee??? There's a fair chance that he knows the system better than the DVLA themselves, [i think he used to work for them as a kit car registration specialist.... something they appear to lack now perhaps?? ]

 

His details are on here somewhere.... in the SVA section I think...

 

Just a thought

 

Jaff.

[Guest pogni]

Steady on mate. Your situation is still far from clear. All the requirements that the registering department of the DVLA requested after SVA were satisfied and they issued the registration. If they were not happy they would not have issued the reg number and paperwork. Your car is not the car you are accused of using without MOT. That car is a sierra with a different number and is known to have been scrapped. This is not the first time this ghost existence has come up. I had a SORN request for the donor months after my Hood was registered. I still had photocopies of all the forms and my letter requesting they terminate the existence of the donor. I had not filled in the V5 to scrap the sierra because I did not trust DVLA not to somehow scrap the Hood as well. (DVLA incompetence is not a new thing)

The requirement for an MOT is on the retaxing reminder form. If it asks for one you have to have an MOT to get the tax. If your car is taxed then they didn't ask for one. As far as I can see that is the only way you can know, in the case of a kitcar, that an MOT is needed.

I suspect that DVLA database has your donor still having a ghost like existence and a linked identity to your Hood. You should await events and may need some help from a solicitor, your MP and even the magazines. Perhaps the rules are going to be clarified at last. PITA that your the guy with the lucky dip.

 

Nigel

Hi Nigel, Im afraid that Big Jims correct and that even though "nobody" seems (up until now) to know the facts,i will have to get a solicitor to represent me if they decide to prosecute me,and as i am a disabled person living on savings/benefits,I cant afford to defend myself against this minefeild of confusion, so i will have to take whatever they choose to throw at me.........I realise that i am expecting the worst,and they might drop it.....but i doubt it.......Whatever the outcome,i am still lumbered with the stress untill its over......Regards Mogzee

Edited October 3, 2008 by mogzee

[Guest Eric]

Morning Paul,

 

i'm with Nigel on this one, although Big Jim is technically correct,

all the paperwork and documents you hold for your car would appear to be in order,

and if presented before any reasonable person would be completely acceptable.

How?, and more importantly, why? should you be made responsible for someone elses incompetence

seems like the same old story, government agencies cock up and it's the innocent/unwitting motorist/citizen that gets shafted

 

this really boils my peas

 

at the end of the day the dvla and police need to get it sorted between them and then inform you of the outcome and any necessary action you need to take to remain legal, not prosecuting for their mistake

 

the speeding though you'r gonna have to take i think

 

cheers

ek

rant over

 

just remembered, every time i got a tax disc reminder it said"requires an appropriate mot from 01 08 2006"

it's had mot's every year from before sva,2003

[Guest timswait]

It was an annual occurrence for 2 or 3 years after building my car that I'd get a 'reminder' letter from the DVLA telling me to tax or declare SORN my Sierra donor. I'd send them a 'reminder' letter that the Sierra was scrapped and that I had filled out all the appropriate forms at the time and they'd send me an apology. I can't remember if it was 2 or 3 years they did that for, but they seem to have stopped now.

[Big Jim]

Righto lets go on a bit.

What eric has said is correct also.

Whilst the statement that I posted is the "correct way that SVA and registration" SHOULD be done, there are 100's of kits out there that have had a step *missed out* not by the builders doing, but by the officials, ie the DVLA offices.

 

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but your car was;...............

 

Built using a single donor, ie secondhand parts.

Was put in for SVA test and passed.

You presented the car at the local DVLA office, along with the SVA pass certificate, the receipts for the kit, the logbook for the donor car.

Someone came out, cast a quick eye over it, maybe checked the engine number was the same as on the log book.

Now you go back inside the DVLA office, they take off you the SVA pass certificate, the logbook from the donor car, £185. you get in the deal, an age related VRM, a certificate of authorization to have numberplates made up, and a tax disc.

 

You go away with a smile a yard long, get your numberplates and YIPEE!

 

Within the next week or so, Postman Pat drops a brand new logbook on your doormat, you check it, the VRM matches, the chassis number matches, it's registered as a Robin Hood 2 seater sports. job done! put it away in cupboard safe.

In 12 months time, you #should# get a reminder that youcar now needs to have an MOT test done.

 

Providing all this took place, I would love to stand up in court and wave the logbook, copy of SVA pass, and any other documentation that I had. You will show just how incompatent the DVLA are.

 

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.

 

I would write to the DVLA, recorded delivery, address it to the "Vehicle Registration Office Senior Manager" quote the last paragraph to him, enclose COPIES of the logbook, & SVA pass. Inform him of the impending prosecution for a vehicle that you've never had, as the VRM was issued to you by them.

 

 

I would also make a copy and take it to the police station, ask for the "Roads Policing" inspector (might be best to call first, asking for time to see him) or even sergent (enforcer will come along maybe with better advice on this) explain to him whats gone on, give him the copy of your letter to DVLA, informing him that although it's the DVLA's fault, you are doing your best to get it sorted, win him over, and maybe he'll be able to help you.

 

Meanwhile, do contact Paul Jepson.

 

The ONLY think you can legally be done for, is if your car is over 12 months since it's SVA, it should now have an MOT in it's own right.

 

PS. Mine still comes up as a 1984 sierra!!!!!

 

Also note, it's not the police officers fault either, but he could see sense and instead of bullying you, give the DVLA some pain instead. EVERYONE vaguely involved with the DVLA know how bad they are.

[Guest pogni]

Righto lets go on a bit.

What eric has said is correct also.

Whilst the statement that I posted is the "correct way that SVA and registration" SHOULD be done, there are 100's of kits out there that have had a step *missed out* not by the builders doing, but by the officials, ie the DVLA offices.

 

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but your car was;...............

 

Built using a single donor, ie secondhand parts.

Was put in for SVA test and passed.

You presented the car at the local DVLA office, along with the SVA pass certificate, the receipts for the kit, the logbook for the donor car.

Someone came out, cast a quick eye over it, maybe checked the engine number was the same as on the log book.

Now you go back inside the DVLA office, they take off you the SVA pass certificate, the logbook from the donor car, £185. you get in the deal, an age related VRM, a certificate of authorization to have numberplates made up, and a tax disc.

 

You go away with a smile a yard long, get your numberplates and YIPEE!

 

Within the next week or so, Postman Pat drops a brand new logbook on your doormat, you check it, the VRM matches, the chassis number matches, it's registered as a Robin Hood 2 seater sports. job done! put it away in cupboard safe.

In 12 months time, you #should# get a reminder that youcar now needs to have an MOT test done.

 

Providing all this took place, I would love to stand up in court and wave the logbook, copy of SVA pass, and any other documentation that I had. You will show just how incompatent the DVLA are.

 

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.

 

I would write to the DVLA, recorded delivery, address it to the "Vehicle Registration Office Senior Manager" quote the last paragraph to him, enclose COPIES of the logbook, & SVA pass. Inform him of the impending prosecution for a vehicle that you've never had, as the VRM was issued to you by them.

 

 

I would also make a copy and take it to the police station, ask for the "Roads Policing" inspector (might be best to call first, asking for time to see him) or even sergent (enforcer will come along maybe with better advice on this) explain to him whats gone on, give him the copy of your letter to DVLA, informing him that although it's the DVLA's fault, you are doing your best to get it sorted, win him over, and maybe he'll be able to help you.

 

Meanwhile, do contact Paul Jepson.

 

The ONLY think you can legally be done for, is if your car is over 12 months since it's SVA, it should now have an MOT in it's own right.

 

PS. Mine still comes up as a 1984 sierra!!!!!

 

Also note, it's not the police officers fault either, but he could see sense and instead of bullying you, give the DVLA some pain instead. EVERYONE vaguely involved with the DVLA know how bad they are.

Hi Big Jim, thanks for the info,which i will copy/print......It wasnt me that built the car,......And although im supposed to have a copy of the SVA i just cant find it....I believe it may be included in the video/dvd that was made of the build ect by the chap who i bought the car from...I will have a look later......I am worn out because of all this...and at the moment i dont feel like spending anymore Hours trying to write letters about a subject that i know very little about,and the more i try to understand,the more confused i get.......I can get a very good solicitor,who does know whats what,for a hundred quid,and to save myself any more stress, im tempted to cough up the money.......I havent had a single day since this all started on 19th sept (my Birthday) that hasnt been spent trying to explain the mistakes of others,either to myself, or to people who dont wana know....Sum Birthday present A ?.....Many thanks to you and everyone whos helped.....Mogzee

Edited October 3, 2008 by mogzee

[enforcer]

Good post Jim

 

Don't waste your money on a solicitor. Write the letter as per Jim's post and write a similar one to the police, addressing it to the Chief Inspector, Criminal Justice Support Unit to make your representations and why you do not feel that a summons should be raised. (It is this office that will actually translate the officer's report into a court case file and they will employ Prosecution Managers who review the evidence and have the power to decide whether there is sufficient evidence in a case and also whether it is in the public interest). Include in the letter your absolute willingness to plead 'not guilty' and to defend your case if it comes to trial.

 

Then sit back and wait for a reassuring letter back informing you that no further action will be taken. Worst case scenario is that you are summonsed for the offence, in which case enjoy your day in court making the DVLA look like buffoons and graciously accept the magistrates ruling that the case is not proved.