sumpcracker
Posted a lot
Yes, I’m still here.
Posts: 1,751
|
|
Jan 11, 2011 19:05:25 GMT
|
Maybe they will use all the £34 they steel from us to fix all the pot holes? Or maybe its going to pay for all the admin/letters they send out for this. As for scenarios, what about when they say they sent you a letter, but you don't get it (common dvla practice) , how does this "proving yourself innocent" stuff work then? They know its not going to help with anything exept their bank balance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2011 20:18:15 GMT
|
you can already be nicked for going equiped to commit a crime, thats nothing new, and speed cameras all presume you're guilty and you have to prove your innocence, its more paperwork I admit but I don't really see any issue, no one forces anyone to have loads of cars taxed at the same time, or loads on a SORN, and just because its been easy to buy and sell cars and sneak home without them being legal up to now is no reason to assume that it could carry on forever. That's true, I suppose it isn't anything different to what we have in some other areas. Going equipped to commit a crime usually involves carrying an illegal item or combination of items specifically used for crime though, does it not? But with this there is no tangible difference that indicates who is purposing to break the law as opposed to those who are not, so everyone gets it. It's the equivalent in your given reasoning of someone carrying a hammer and a large sack down the high street at night. Your reasoning says 'nobody is forcing him to carry those items at the same time, so he should have no problem not doing so if he wants to avoid being nicked'. My reasoning says the man could just as easily be clearing out his nans collapsed back shed, and until he puts the hammer through the front window of Thorntons and makes off with a years supply of chocolate starfish, you cant tell - assume - if he's a goodie or a baddie. I will assume thats hidden in the terms and conditions of pretty much all policies these days, so those people who have been driving cars they've just bought home with no tax on were probably not insured anyway. It's not required by insurance to have tax, proven both in the court and when you take your car for MOT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2011 20:29:19 GMT
|
Absolutely. It's not hurting anybody to leave a car off the road uninsured. With a car on PLG tax, and the fee to cash in a tax disc (which previously you DIDN'T have to do) you loose £25 (one month for the part month you cash it in, plus an £8 fee). If you happily go out and burn £25 on your drive, can you just give it to me instead? That's what's behind the 'overreaction'. That and the fact there will be loads of people getting caught out with this. People who have never heard of this. Did anybody hear about this on the TV or radio news? I didn't. I saw it online, and not everybody is online, or on Forums. There's a fee to cash in now? Agh. Right now, I want satisfaction from them. Back in the old days, highway bandits had the decency to wear masks. Plus like you said, it was previously a choice. Now you MUST do it, and you MUST pay to do it. I'm sure that's illegal; just give me a little time to remember why... As it says on the government website, in the first instance you will be sent a letter giving you a chance to right your wrong. If you don't then you will be dealt with. No fines will be issued until you haven't responded to the letter or declared SORN or insured it. That sounds fine - oh, except the DVLA are in charge of it... As Fred says, it will be inconsistent, and it's already bad as it is/was. You're sixth word in indicates why you can't rely on the information provided, or expect any good thing to come of it... ...and just because its been easy to buy and sell cars and sneak home without them being legal up to now is no reason to assume that it could carry on forever... This isn't making it harder to sneak home with a car illegally though, this is making it harder to drive home legally. What he said. What consistent tax-evading driver is going to take one jot of note? It's so simple to evade it makes the entire thing pointless. It's not a case of not being able to afford to loose a months tax, it's a case of why the hell should I? I'll loose out on an £8 fee, about £10 for the 10% charge for taxing for only 6 months, plus up to £16 for the months tax. That's £34, or to put it another way, that's 5 and a half hours of my life wasted in Halfords to pay for something there's no real reason for me to pay for. Tolerable? yeah, I guess so, Fair? not even close. Exactly. Stick it to the man. Or not, because for £8 it isn't worth arguing. Which is exactly what the plan has been from the beginning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[/quote]
It's not required by insurance to have tax, proven both in the court and when you take your car for MOT.[/quote]
says car must be legal on my policy even though mines a specific 4x4 policy and it covers me for offroad use so i could be using a non roadworthy vehicle quite legally, you are legally allowed to drive to an MOT station with no tax, however you are not legally allowed to drive 200 miles up the motorway to visit your inlaws without tax, I don't know if an insurance company would refuse to pay out if you had no tax and exterminated a bag of kittens, but it looks to me like they keep their options open in that regard.
|
|
Volvo back as my main squeeze, more boost and some interior goodies on the way.
|
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2011 10:02:51 GMT
|
I Just can't believe this thread is still going after 4 pages of moaning and people are still whining on about it ! Yes we get the picture you don't like this new law. no need to keep telling us. try telling the dvla
|
|
Last Edit: Jan 12, 2011 12:51:27 GMT by Deleted
|
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2011 11:14:50 GMT
|
It's not required by insurance to have tax, proven both in the court and when you take your car for MOT.says car must be legal on my policy even though mines a specific 4x4 policy and it covers me for offroad use so I could be using a non roadworthy vehicle quite legally, you are legally allowed to drive to an MOT station with no tax, however you are not legally allowed to drive 200 miles up the motorway to visit your inlaws without tax, I don't know if an insurance company would refuse to pay out if you had no tax and exterminated a bag of kittens, but it looks to me like they keep their options open in that regard. insurance companies will use any excuse not to pay out in the event of a claim. stay legal, and declare any mods to your insured vehicle and you should get paid out.
|
|
Last Edit: Jan 12, 2011 11:16:25 GMT by Autofive
Someone just shot the elephant in the room.
|
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2011 14:29:10 GMT
|
So what's the score with cars that have been off the road since before SORN was introduced?
|
|
1953 Minor (Long term project) PT Cruiser
|
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2011 14:35:15 GMT
|
So what's the score with cars that have been off the road since before SORN was introduced? If its not taxed you don't need insurance
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2011 15:29:31 GMT
|
on the plus side how much tax left on a car is kinda irrelevant when selling a car now!
I bought my old e30, and didn't realise it wasn't taxed until I stopped at a petrol station. It was a sunday, so I couldn't get to a post office, and I couldn't tax it online, as I had only just bought it, and didn't have the reference from the log book!
I know the ANPR database does not update straight away, I think it takes at least a day from what I heard: I got stopped last year when a friendly ANPR car stopped me for no insurance. (it was 12:20am and the insurance started at 12:05!) I explained this to them, and they decided I looked honest enough and let me go (after having a good look around the car!)
|
|
|
|
Lex
South East
日本車 <3
Posts: 2,404
|
|
Jan 12, 2011 16:15:43 GMT
|
I'm confused.
At the moment I have the civic off the road and is declared SORN, so I am right to say that I do not need to insure it as I have declared SORN.
And my current car (the Rover) which is MOT'D Taxed and Insured, if say I buy another car today and swap insurance over, am I then going to have to sorn my Rover and put it off the road immediately then try and sell it as sorn and make less money on it as a result.
Just doesn't seem well thought out to me.
|
|
Resto-UKal
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2011 16:19:50 GMT
|
I'm confused. At the moment I have the civic off the road and is declared SORN, so I am right to say that I do not need to insure it as I have declared SORN. And my current car (the Rover) which is MOT'D Taxed and Insured, if say I buy another car today and swap insurance over, am I then going to have to sorn my Rover and put it off the road immediately then try and sell it as sorn and make less money on it as a result. Just doesn't seem well thought out to me. That's the way it sounds bud, a load of balls really
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2011 16:56:45 GMT
|
I'm confused. At the moment I have the civic off the road and is declared SORN, so I am right to say that I do not need to insure it as I have declared SORN. And my current car (the Rover) which is MOT'D Taxed and Insured, if say I buy another car today and swap insurance over, am I then going to have to sorn my Rover and put it off the road immediately then try and sell it as sorn and make less money on it as a result. Just doesn't seem well thought out to me. why not buy the new one and not use it until the old one sells, if (as you say) a SORN car is cheaper, then buy one on a SORN (thus saving money) and continue to use your old one until it sells, transfering your insurance over and buying tax for it that day, you could always arrange for your buyer to not collect the car until the end of the month and you would be buying fresh tax ina fresh month then, cant see where the lost money is, in fact in your own words you'd have bought a cheaper SORNED car, sounds like saved money to me.
|
|
Volvo back as my main squeeze, more boost and some interior goodies on the way.
|
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2011 22:58:58 GMT
|
Good point, as word gets around (there will be a lag) it's won't be less attractive to sell a taxed car than a SORN'd one. Before Joe Public catches up though, there will be less interest. BTW once you transfer ownership, you have to SORN the car yourself. It's you that makes the SORN declaration, so unlike tax, when the reg'd keeper changes, the new keeper must do a new declaration.
|
|
|
|
MK2VR6
Posted a lot
Mk2 Golf GTi 90 Spec
Posts: 3,329
|
|
Apr 25, 2011 18:37:34 GMT
|
Bringing this back from the dead... with good reason! I bought my latest car about a week ago. It is currently taxed until the end of June 2011. However, it's not insured at present (I brought it back here with a 24 hour policy). My existing car is for sale and is insured, and I don't wish to insure my latest car until the old one has sold if that makes sense. Reading this thread suggests that my new car must be sorned as it is not insured. I have just done this online, so that is sorted. However, it seems madness to send off the road tax disk as I may well be putting the new car on the road in the next 2 weeks or so, when the old car hopefully sells. Is it possible to leave the tax in the window to save sending it off then re-applying for it in the very near future, whilst the car is sorned? How do I 'un-sorn' it when my old car has sold? Can't quite get my head around it!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2011 18:44:40 GMT
|
You unsorn it by buying a new tax disc... And you only get the refund when your 'old' tax disc hits the desk at Swansea... Well, around about that time anyway (read as, upto a month later)
|
|
|
|
MK2VR6
Posted a lot
Mk2 Golf GTi 90 Spec
Posts: 3,329
|
|
Apr 25, 2011 19:46:36 GMT
|
You unsorn it by buying a new tax disc... And you only get the refund when your 'old' tax disc hits the desk at Swansea... Well, around about that time anyway (read as, upto a month later) Looks like I will need to stick my tax disk in the post tomorrow then, even though I may end up putting the car on the road potentially within days!
|
|
|
|