Paperless car tax system. Has anyone challenged this (might be long)

I believe this system to be possibly unlawful. Not the lack of a paper disc but the fact that road tax is not transferable on change of keeper.

On change of keeper is there any way that DVLA or gov.uk does not receive double road tax for the current month? I think not and also think that this should be challenged in law.

I have recently, and unwittingly, possibly fallen foul of this.

28th of last month my wife's car insurance was due for renewal. Broker advised that it would be better to transfer the keepership from my trading name to my actual name. IE J R Smith changed to John Richard Smith. This done by filling in S.6 of V5 and sending off to DVLA. I did not want to transfer keepership to a new keeper, just change the name on the V5. Today I've received (1) a refund from dvla for tax from 1st March 2015, (2) a new V5 showing that I became the new keeper on 28th March and (3) a note saying '......this means that the vehicle has not been taxed since this date..........DVLA's enforcement section may be in contact with you regarding this gap in tax.'. Also today I have taxed the car from 1st April. No possible option to tax from 1st March. TBH I had forgotten about the new car tax regime. I imagine that I am now going to receive a whopping penalty for the car being untaxed for one month. The car was taxed for March. DVLA refunded this...... Blast.....I've answered my own Q. Ish. DVLA refunded and I should have retaxed from 1st March but I dated the form and sent it away on Saturday 28th March. Had I attempted to do so during the following three days the car would show as being taxed and I would not be able to re-tax it. Following that I would not have been able to re-tax to the beginning of the previous month anyway.

I apologise for being long winded. I'm a pensioner and was only trying to do what was right.

Finally gets to the points: Have I done summat wrong? Has this new (Oct 14) tax regime ever been challenged or tested in a UK court? If so, any links would be appreciated.

Many thanks and sorry to bore you, Nick.

Reply to
Nick
Loading thread data ...

might be worth getting up a petition, many people have been stung for large amounts:

formatting link
clamping is up from 5000 to 8000 over same periods due to the changes

Reply to
Mrcheerful

Thank you for that. I'd thought that I might be alone in this parc< but it would appear not. I hadn't realised that DVLA could clamp vehicles. Always thought this was a moneyspinner for the local authority. Once again I may be wrong. TBH I think the Guardian article has more holes than a sieve. I wouldn't mind starting a petition but have never done so before. IIRC such would need 100k votes to get before gubbinment. This might be a very good time to do so. Could do with some help with the wording as I tend to be long winded. Thanks again, Nick.

Reply to
Nick

Really, it isn't.

It's a really simple system, it works and the issues are casued by people over-thinking it.

There are many, many more important things to worry and petition about.

However, in this case, it would appear that the OP has incorrectly filled out the V5C.

Reply to
SteveH

Possibly, but I do have some sympathy with the OP in this case.

I'm sure there is no mileage in trying to make a legal challenge to the "new rules", but you *should* be able to correct the spelling of the owner's name without losing a month, just as you can change the address. I recently had a slightly similar issue with a tax exempt vehicle but I gave up trying to contact DVLA by phone and it didn't cost me anything to get a duplicate month's tax at a post office.

In your position I think I would write to my MP, trying to spell out the problem as succinctly as possible, and playing the pensioner card. Provided the story makes sense, the MP will just send it with a covering letter to the Minister and/or DVLA, where it will be read by someone sufficiently high up to get it fixed.

But do it now, before you get clamped.

Reply to
newshound

You can. But I reckon the OP managed to tick the 'new keeper' box.

Reply to
SteveH

it is a bit on the unfair side that a extra month's tax needs to be paid upon any transfer of ownership, even within the same household.

Reply to
Mrcheerful

Yes, but that's a change of owner. Doesn't matter if the address is the same - it has always added an owner, so was bound to kick in the tax changes.

If it's in the same household, you have the option to time it so you don't fall foul of it anyway.

I'm sticking with the OP ticking the change of keeper box.

Reply to
SteveH

is it possible to time the change to avoid losing a month's tax ?

Reply to
Mrcheerful

Some have suggested making the change at midnight on the last day of the month, applying online for the new tax. There is then no[1] period during which the car is untaxed. I have not checked the legislation but offhand I can't see why it should not work.

[1] or no significant: I'd hope a few minutes gap would be dealt with by the courts on the old principle of "de minimis no curat lex" ("the law does not concern itself with trifles" or if you get a blunt speaking lawyer "sod off and stop wasting my time").
Reply to
Robin

I was and am unclear what's going on but suspect there may be a new keeper.

I was unclear if this was (i) a transfer from a *company* trading as "J R Smith" to an individual or (ii) just a matter of spelling out the name of a self-employed person "trading as"?

I can see (i) the former might well affect insurance. And it certainly affects tax as a company and its owner/director are of course different persons in law.

I cannot see how (ii) affects anything - insurance or otherwise. (And AIUI it would be unlawful for, say, Tracy Stubbs to register her car to to Lady Penelope Creighton-Ward just because that's the trading name for her market stall.)

Reply to
Robin

Of course, dear.

Yes.

Your broker's an idiot.

With a "trading name"?

Reply to
Adrian

Exactly how much IS a "month's tax" for the majority of modern vehicles?

Reply to
Adrian

They've been doing it - and advertising widely that they do it - for at least a decade.

Reply to
Adrian

between nothing and 200 quid, all of mine would be 20 quid. not insignificant. I would prefer a fixed transfer fee if that was what they were trying to achieve.

Reply to
Mrcheerful

A _month_?

So all of yours are either 15yo+ or relatively high emission.

The average new car two years ago would be not insignificant.

In the grand scheme of the costs of changing car, yes. Insignificant.

You forget one small detail... Without a paper disc, how do you know that the first thing the person who sold you the car did after you left wasn't to cash the tax in? Sure, they could do that _with_ a disc (declare it lost), but it's harder. Without the disc (and about time too), it's the only sensible way.

The monthly overlap is just a legacy of the fact that the car tax system works monthly, not daily. To redevelop it would almost certainly cost millions and, when 2/3 of used car keeper changes involve untaxed cars, that's just not worth it - especially when ever-dropping CO2 and thereby tax means that the whole system's going to HAVE to change in the near future anyway, because revenue has to be dropping massively.

Reply to
Adrian

Yes, first year tax on a few vehicles is 1100 quid.

I and many others do not regard twenty quid as insignificant.

It would be quite possible to repay outstanding tax to the day of transfer rather than the seller lose the rest of the month. Likewise the new keeper could pay from the day of transfer rather than the beginning of the month of transfer.

Yes, all my cars are old ones, I like it that way.

Reply to
Mrcheerful

The new keeper's taxing doesn't get charged the "new vehicle" premium, so would be £505 - £40/mo - and the vendor's refund also ignores that premium.

B'sides which, compared to the depreciation on the first year of a Band M vehicle...

To put it into context, have you seen the list of what's in Band M? Virtually nothing this side of the odd great big lardy barge or off-roader (all except the £90k+ Merc G-wagon are petrol) and supercars. Even stuff like 911 Turbos and petrol Range Rovers come in below band M.

It would be quite possible to repay outstanding tax to the day of

I'm really not sure it would, y'know. If the computer systems are based on viewing the VED in monthly chunks, there would need to be substantial redevelopment. For the sake of - worst possible edge case - a quid a day.

As are mine - but you do need to recognise that 1550cc+ 15yo-40yo vehicles are a tiny %age of the stuff on our roads, and one that's shrinking daily.

Reply to
Adrian

About 20 quid at worst?

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

Thanks, I most certainly didn't tick the new keeper box. Nick.

Reply to
Nick

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.