DVLA trouble

[AndrewBennettowl]

I am a solicitor with a 22 year old daughter who has just had exactly the same problem with the DVLA and Rossendales Debt Collection Agency - I am trying to trace and speak to Shelley and anybody else who has experienced similar problems with so-called late license offences. Would be grateful for any responses - NB whilst I am a solicitor I am dealing with primarily as a parent!!

I am a father of a 22 year old daughter with a combination of the DVLA and Rossendales Debt Collection Agency chasing her for a so-called late licence fee of £80. I understand that others have experience and I would love to hear from them as I am pretty sure this is a scam??

You might be better re-posting this in Legal Matters www.mumsnet.com/Talk/legal_matters.

The Site Stuff topic relates to techy problems with the MN site itself.

who is shelley?

What did the DVLA say when your daughter phoned them to ask about this late fee and whether Rossendales (who appear on the gov.uk website as one of the collection agencies they use) have been assigned this debt?

they contacted me last year regarding taxing an old car I traded in to a dealer. I had to send them rather a lot of information to dispute their claim, and the letter appeared from nowhere, following no previous correspondence from the DVLA themselves.

They did allow me 14 days to supply info, but it was rather stressy at the time.

I can't see any other threads on MN relating to Rossendales Debt Collection Agency - I'm even more bemused by this

What Fru said-you need to post this in the other topic.

Many thanks for your help. I am afraid I am new to mumsnet - and slightly embarrassed at the fact that one thing I am not is a mum - though I am a dad!

I have engaged in written correspondence with the DVLA. The only discussion with Rossendales was a very ill-tempered telephone conversation with someone who wouldn't talk to me due to the Data Protection Act. What I am very unhappy about is the fact that the letter my daughter received was effectively "double headed" notepaper with the DVLA on the left and Rossendales on the right. I have never seen anything like that.

Thank you to Katopotato - did the letters you received have both the DVLA and Rossendales at the top of the notepaper? I have sent copies of the sale/purchase receipt and the V5 to the DVLA but they say that is not sufficient evidence and they are not changing their decision. They say "disagreeing with the decision is not sufficient to challenge it". Did you receive any letters from the DVLA saying at the bottom "sent unsigned"??

I will take Fru's advice and now try the right place for my thread!!

there's loads of people who are not mums. It's just a name.

If your daughter is an adult, is there a reason she is not dealing with her own affairs? If she doesn't have capacity and you have been appointed, then they should deal with you.

Instead of reposting, you can ask mn to just move this thread.

I'll report it for you if you like and they can just put it into legal. Saves you having to start again.

Thank you Fenella - I have started again in Legal matters. My daughter certainly does have capacity - but as a 22 year old with a dad who deals with this sort of thing, she is used to letting me deal with this sort of thing.

Perhaps it would be worth reading this:

www.rossendales.com/rossendales/index.php/news/65/51/DVLA-awards-debt-recovery-contract-to-Rossendales

It appears that Rossendale Debt Collection Agency HAVE been awarded the DVLA contract.

many thanks for that. It is nevertheless very disappointing that the Government agency and their attack dogs are sharing the same headed paper. Despite the fact that the dispute procedure allows a period which is not over yet, Rossendales continue to send demanding letters - sometimes 2 sent on the same day.

Call me cynical if you want, but I noted this sentence on the Rossendale Debt Collection Agency website (under Road Traffic Debt):

Our collection rates have consistently exceeded our clients’ expectations and our clients’ testimonials demonstrate our achievements in this growing market.

www.rossendales.com/rossendales/index.php/road-traffic

Why would their collection rates exceed expectations?

I am used to working in government agencies who have 'contracted out' services. Such a symbiotic relationship relies on ACCURATE information being provided to the contracted service provider. I would suggest that DVLA have 'handed over' the details of the alleged debt without allowing their own appeal procedures to be exhausted.

I didn't respond to one of your concerns:

It is nevertheless very disappointing that the Government agency and their attack dogs are sharing the same headed paper.

That is absolutely par for the course. Many local authorities buy in financial contractors (I won't name the names - but they are all well known) and the contract agreement includes the use of 'double headed notepaper': that is, BOTH LOGOS are used.

It is believed that this gives the recipient of a letter the assurance that the service provider is genuinely acting for and on behalf of the named authority. In your daughter's case, the DVLA.

I suggest that you deal directly with the DVLA (under their appeal conditions) and copy in Rossendale Debt Collection Agency to get a common 'stay' of collection until the matter is appropriately adjudicated.

Once again, I am grateful for your contribution. I am dealing direct with the DVLA - though I am reluctant to deal with Rossendales in any way. The double headed notepaper is highly questionable and, rather than any sort of assurance, is much more by way of intimidation. It pre-supposes that there is a legitimate debt to be "collected".

The levying of charges, or fines as they actually are, should not be left to the DVLA, who are judge and jury in their own cause. This would not have happened in the past as the only "fines" in road tax cases would be imposed by Magistrates. No Bench of Magistrates would impose a fine in a case such as my daughter's - where she has purchased a new car from the main dealer and the main dealer purchased her old car.

I cannot help you any further. I have explained that a double logo is customary where a service is contracted out.

I have also suggested that the alleged debt was handed to Rossendale Debt Collection Agency far sooner that it should have been.

I recommended that you continue to correspond with DVLA and explore/exhaust the appeal procedure set down.

There are strict procedures to follow when relinquishing ownership of one car and purchasing another. Are you absolutely sure that your daughter did not just hand over her V5 without a signature and name of person she sold to? (car dealers have been known to ask for this so they don't have to declare ALL previous owners.)

Did your daughter:

• complete section 6 of the V5C (‘new keeper or new name/new address details’)
• sign the declaration in section 8
• fill in section 10 (‘new keeper supplement’) and give it to the purchaser - this section is also known as the V5C/2
• send the V5C to DVLA

Did she keep copies of this paperwork transaction (as you would do as a lawyer)?

If so - send it all off to the DVLA with a covering letter as part of your appeal.

There certainly have been problems with banks and others putting out very confusing note paper not making clear XYZ debt collectors is actually just an office within Lloyds Bank or whatever and I think companies need to be very careful about notepaper although loads of organisations are allowed to use logos - eg plenty of those who deal with the NHS in various ways ARE allowed to use the NHS logo.

It sounds as though you are now dealing direct with DVLA,. never mind this law firm, what is the issue? Has your daughter been charged for something she is not due to pay? Has she got a defence?

Thank you for your interest JillyR2015. My daughter bought a new VW Polo in August 2014 from the VW main dealer in Stafford. She had previously bought a new Polo in September 2013 from the same main dealer. Part of the "deal", it being a personal contract plan, involved free road tax and free insurance. The same "deal" accompanied the new car in September 2014. In short, she went into the main dealer in the old car, completed all the forms, and left in the new car. In January 2015 she started receiving demands from the DVLA/Rossendales for a late penalty charge for an "offence" date of 1 September 2014 in respect of the car she had sold. The sale/purchase receipt is dated 30 August 2014. She manifestly has not committed any offence which magistrates might convict her of in court. (I am a criminal defence lawyer myself) The problem is that the un-named representatives of the DVLA will not accept that they are wrong. They are clearly a judge in their own cause and seem to me to be intimidating people into paying "fines" which should not be imposed. What do you think??

Did she receive a proof of sale letter from the dvla once she traded old car in? Normally issues approx 6 weeks after sale? This would have the date on it from themselves and would then surely confirm she wasn't the owner and registered keeper from that date onwards?

Probably not KissMyFatArse (great name!) My daughter is 22 and hopeless with her personal organisation. The plain fact is that Zoe actually paid 13 months tax in the 12 months since she bought the first car. She never at any stage owned 2 cars. The purpose of the legislation is to ensure that road tax is paid - not to give the DVLA any sort of authority to hound (usually young) car owners and bully them into paying a late penalty when the car has either been sold on by the main dealer or has been at the dealership awaiting sale.

KissMyFatArse asked: Did she receive a proof of sale letter from the dvla once she traded old car in

Response from AndrewBennettowl: "Probably not KissMyFatArse (great name!) My daughter is 22 and hopeless with her personal organisation."

Well there you have it!

Does your daughter not know that there are legal requirements regarding buying/selling cars and SORN? She's 22 years old and you still want to suggest that the mistake is not your daughter's.

I suspect that she has handed her V5 into the dealership unsigned. The car has been sold on - but your daughter is the last registered owner.

www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/new-and-used-vehicles

she went into the main dealer in the old car, completed all the forms, and left in the new car.

Are you absolutely sure that your daughter completed ALL forms? Did she walk away with copies?

So she sold her car to the dealership and presumably got the bit back you get when you sell the car of the DVLA registration document and then she sent her bit to DVLA to notify them she had sold the car or did she not do that? Is that the problem so DVAL thought she had two cars? Also did the dealer not pass that registration doc to the new owner who then notified DVLA they had bought the car?

My daughter is, no doubt, like many others who put their faith in the car dealers. I don't doubt that many people are not entirely clear as to their legal responsibilities vis-a-vis the DVLA. She knows that part of owning a car is paying the road tax - which she has done. The DVLA should not rely on every individual to contact them to inform them when a vehicle has been sold. That information should be on their database in any event. This is not some sale to a man in the pub by cash. That is what may very well cause the DVLA to have difficulties keeping abreast of who owns what vehicle. The fact remains that the road tax was paid for each vehicle. I am querying the legitimacy of a Government Agency imposing fines which, at one and the same time, are handed over to a debt collection agency to collect.