Not so, by my logic you can not be liable for paying VED on cars that no longer exists, but that does not imply that you can not pay VED or that any VED disc are invalid or that you will not be guilty of a SORN offence if you do not either pay VED or declare SORN on an undeleted registration.
Again, shopping bags are not a car for any purpose but SORN liability exists merely on the undeleted registration and not on the car.
Tony
BTW, it may sometimes be useful to pretend that a shopping bag is a car because SORN is free whereas retention certificates are not :-)
Ton
"Anthony R. Gold" gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
You seem to be forgetting that getting a valid MOT on a shopping bag, so you can transfer the plate onto another vehicle, is slightly trickier than transferring the plate off a retention.
Well no, but neither, apparently, did you see why you should have carried out, or checked that the previous owner had carried out, the correct procedures for change of ownership. There's really no need to get aerated about it: the SORN procedures, whether you like them or not, and whether you can spot any logic in them or not, are perfectly clear, and readily available. If you buy a vehicle that's SORNed, or should have been SORNed, you immediately either re-SORN it, tax it, or notify permanent destruction. "Willy" is dead right in what he's said.
Put it this way, you dont
No - different rules.
It's all in the wording. You make a SORN declaration not registration. As the keeper, you're declaring that the vehicle is not being used (or parked) on the road. Effectively, you're making a promise to the DVLA and accepting that you'll be subject to a fine if you break that promise. No problem as long as you're in control of the vehicle, but you wouldn't want to be held to that promise once it's in someone else's posession.
Or you could just take the pragmatic view (I'm not advising you do this, of course) and not worry about it. The vehicle's already registered, so as long as the MOT station's happy with it, nobody'll be any the wiser. And as long as the MOT station can see an appropriate chassis plate / VIN plate / number / nothing (requirement varies with vehicle's age) they shouldn't have any reason to think anything's out of the ordinary.
Eh?
I'm not remotely aerated. And no, the procedure is most defintely NOT clear or readily available. Nowhere on the V5 is there any reference to making a SORN declaration, and no online page I've come across tells me that I need to SORN a vehicle for the same period twice - in fact I've still only the posters in this group to go on! Even as I made an online SORN declaration I was told that I did not need to as there was a current one already.
Then how about the DVLA actually telling the customer what he needs to do in order to stay within the law? Oh no, hang on, that wouldn't allow them to criminalise and extract extra money from people, would it?
Yeah, I think I prefer that course of action :)
_ gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
Have you got a V5 with your name on?
Somebody SORNed it last summer. It was either you, and you've forgotten, or the previous owner - in which case, he's probably still getting the paperwork through for it.
You don't. SORN expires after 12 months _or_ a change of keeper.
It's about half a year since you bought the car, but you said you have only recently sent off the V5.
explains how it should be done.
OK. It was the "what the hell" stuff that made me wonder.
"Buying a vehicle that has SORN on it
If you keep the vehicle off the road then you?ll need to make a SORN when you become the registered keeper. The previous SORN comes to an end on the date you buy the vehicle."
from
But wasn't that before you were the registered keeper?
They usually do. There are plenty of logical holes in DVLA procedures, but I don't think this is one of them. If you think they're unclear here, try telling them you've sold a car to Johnny Foreigner, but not actually pushed it onto the boat yourself, without signing something that's patently untrue.
Not yet, no. It hasn't been necessary up to now. I now have the old V5, which was the only thing that alerted me to the reg number, which I've now sent off so a new V5 will be along shortly. The 'change of ownership' is a piece of string - when, precisely, does the car become 'mine'? When I pay a deposit? But there *wasn't* a car then? When I take delivery of the finished vehicle? Or some arbitrary date in between?
Yes, I can Google the answer. What, presuming that I dont post here and come across it by accident, alerts me to ask the question?
Kevin Poole gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
Yup, done that a couple of times lately-ish. No problem at all.
"I declare that the vehicle will be exported on the date shown opposite" "Only use this section if the vehicle is being exported permanently"
_ gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
Right. So SORN isn't your problem, since you aren't the registered keeper.
Your basic responsibility to do a little simple research as to what you're getting into?
Well I think thats at least open to argument - I *still* haven't "bought the car", because its still with the seller, such as it is, and will remain so for a number of weeks yet. It is mine? Well, no, what it will
*become* is mine, when it finishes becoming what it will become.Indeed it was (or rather, *is*). But thats the point, isn't it? I have to notify the DVLA that I'm the new keeper, but at the moment that I send that off I now am responsible for SORNing it. Because the system isn't aware that paperwork is en route to tell them there is a new keeper, it attempts to stop me making the declaration for SORN. Its a chicken egg scenario!
Sorry, I dont get that! Gimme it again
Dont be silly. There is no reason publicly known to investigate the possibility of SORN needing re-notifying. I'm not a frivolous person who knowingly avoids obligations - I didn't realise a SORN was not transportable, in the same way that a VED is. I reckon if you asked the man on the omnibus, he'd not think he needed to re-apply either. Yes, there is an obligation to make oneself aware of rules and regs concerning an something they are about to do, but it would be inequitable for me to prosecute you for, for example, not having insurance to cover you against earthquakes linked to you digging spuds in your allotment when there is no sensible reason why you should have known that you *needed* such insurance.
By the way, you *do* have earthquake cover, dont you?
_ gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
It's on the back of the VED/SORN form.
He probably wouldn't even know what you were on about. Does that mean he wouldn't need to declare SORN at all?
"The man on the omnibus" is never going to buy an untaxed car and leave it untaxed. End of.
(Oh, and I don't have an allotment)
Wouldn't get a VED form for it, since it wasn't mine then. And a SORN
*form*? I thought it was only done online. Still, I'm sure you're right. Lets not fall out over it - I just maintain that, unlike the requirement for taxing a car or SORNing it in the first place, the requirement to RE-SORN an existing SORN'd vehicle isn't as widely known.
Given the circs, I dispute that. As I said, I'm not aware that I'm overly lax with keeping up with things, and I didn't know about it.
Who says that obviates the need to be insured for it?!!
_ gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
No, a VED/SORN form. The normal "your tax is expiring" reminder.
Tick the box, scrawl, drop on PO counter.
It's not.
But it's something that's a fairly rare requirement amongst the populace- at-large.
Oh, ffs... Don't start the legal lot off again...
Oh, *that* bloody thing! Are we meant to actually *read* that then?
Probably not, no. I'd imagine only a tiny percentage of used car sales involve an active SORN, but then I could be wrong I suppose. My question now though is have I fulfilled the obligation which you and others kindly made me aware of. I've 're-SORNed' that car, by virtue of filling in its reg and the document number off the V5. But I wasn't asked who *I* was, not that I remember anyway. And since I got all the bollocks about it already being SORN'd for the next six months I suppose they still have it registered to the previous keeper. So in doing that new SORN, even before they acknowledge that I'm the owner, have I SORN'd it as the new owner, if you follow my question!
_ gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
So how DO you want them to get the information across to you? Phone you personally and, in lilting Swansea accents, explain every last detail before asking if there's any possible scenarios they could have missed?
Umm, not if it's not your car it isn't. And by "your" car, I mean as far as Swansea's concerned...
Of course. The registered keeper is the only person with any real stake in whether it's SORNed or not. He's going to be wondering when he gets the confirmation letter in a couple of weeks...
No, you've SORNed it _for_ the current keeper...
Is it your car? Is it his car? I've completely lost track here of what the _actual_ situation is...
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required