subk2002
|
 posted on 15/11/04 at 07:31 PM |
|
|
Dvla charge for sorn cars
I just heard that the dvla have proposed a charge of £4.50 on sorn cars
There is a petition to stop it in the link.
More info here http://www.fbhvc.co.uk
[Edited on 15/11/04 by subk2002]
[Edited on 15/11/04 by subk2002]
[Edited on 15/11/04 by subk2002]
|
|
|
|
|
Chris_R
|
| posted on 15/11/04 at 07:44 PM |
|
|
Dunno, but if there were I'd sign it.
A bit of slapstick never hurt anyone.
http://www.chris.renney.dsl.pipex.com/
|
|
|
subk2002
|
| posted on 15/11/04 at 07:48 PM |
|
|
There is a petition on the link. Print it of and pass it round.
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 15/11/04 at 08:01 PM |
|
|
http://www.fbhvc.co.uk/petition040918.pdf
thats the link to the adobe pdf.
Beware! Bourettes is binfectious.
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 15/11/04 at 08:05 PM |
|
|
is it genuine, or a trawl for email adresses?
atb
steve
|
|
|
subk2002
|
| posted on 15/11/04 at 08:08 PM |
|
|
Yes its genuine.
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 15/11/04 at 08:12 PM |
|
|
and they dont ask for an email address either!
Beware! Bourettes is binfectious.
|
|
|
Dusty
|
| posted on 15/11/04 at 08:58 PM |
|
|
Its not a charge for SORN. It's an administrative charge by DVLA on all 'retaxing' events to defray costs of new car registrations
and photo ID driving licences. (Charging the economic rate for these two things doesnt seem to have occured to DVLA). It will be applied to normal
retaxing, as well as currently free transactions such as historic vehicle (pre72) tax, disabled vehicles and SORN. It will not be regulated by
parliament like car tax but will be controlled by DVLA who can increase it at will.
|
|
|
wilkingj
|
| posted on 15/11/04 at 09:34 PM |
|
|
I have already replied to this some weeks ago, Its a consultation paper on the DVLA site. on the restructuring of fees etc for the new driving
licences.
The £4:50 is a admin fee for RE-REGISTERING your vehicle each year, ie to stay on their database.
Frankly speaking this is an OWNERSHIP TAX, ie you pay cos you OWN your vehicle, not whether you USE it on the roads.
Complain bitterly about Stealth Taxation, You should not be taxed on your posessions, but fairly for the use of the roads.
Its not a wind up, its Kosher on the DVLA website, under Consultative Docs.
OK its £4:50, but that does not cover the true cost of admininstration fees etc.
So its bound to go UP.
It costs £30 to send out a bill, if you count the time taken by the people, and systems to raise it. So £4:50 is way LOW, hence it will go up, ie
another way of extracting money from your pocket.
Please respond to the DVLA website, and tell the Gov't, and sign a petition as well.
The DVLA website is probably more important to respond to than a petition.
Be POLITE, and to the point.
1. The point of a journey is not to arrive.
2. Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Best Regards
Geoff
http://www.v8viento.co.uk
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 15/11/04 at 09:52 PM |
|
|
could be too late
http://www.dvla.gov.uk/public/consult/driver_fee/df_deadline.htm
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 15/11/04 at 11:12 PM |
|
|
Did it a month ago...
and had a nice letter back from them saying they appreciate my input. Thing is it will only be £4.50 for the first year then they will put it up to
cover its administration costs and you will have to send separate fees out for each vehicle you own if you have more than one off the road.
It'll be a bugger for collectors.
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 16/11/04 at 07:55 AM |
|
|
on the other hand, if you can afford to have several cars off the road as a collector, is a 30 quid or whatever charge really gonna be a problem?
atb
steve
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 16/11/04 at 08:27 AM |
|
|
devils advocate again steve?! its the principle.
Beware! Bourettes is binfectious.
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 16/11/04 at 10:13 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
devils advocate again steve?! its the principle.
yeah, to some extent.
but if you have a car or two hanging around for fun as 'dead money' then is 30 quid (as an example) a big problem?
But I agree - who wants to pay for something we are not already!
to put it in context, a tyre for my car costs 130 quid.... and I need a set a year.
dont some countries require you to pay yearly licensing fees? Perhaps USA listers can confirm, but my understanding is that the car plate is tied to
the driver, not the car, and has to be renewed each year.
Is this true or have I been misled?
atb
steve
|
|
|
philgregson
|
| posted on 16/11/04 at 11:07 AM |
|
|
I'm kind of in two minds about this one - I, like everyone else, do not want to be hit with yet another sneaky back door tax. However if it
costs the government money to control the registration and taxing of cars then it has to be paid for somewhere - if they don't charge us
directly it will be a further burden on a different form of tax - it will never just come from nowhere.
Also quite frankly, the notion that car collectors will all have to give up their collections for the sake of an extra few quid per year is
ridiculous. I would have thought that, although an increased burden, it is the least of their expense. I for one don't want to pay more tax
elsewhere to subsidise the costs of poor poverty stricken collectors keeping thier collections.
The same applies to fuel tax - I, again like every one else, drive round Europe marvelling at how cheap fuel is every where else and complainig about
the price at home. On the other hand, if they don't tax fuel use highly(which is incidently poluting, congesting roads and causing a great
burden on the NHS through illness and injury) they will have to tax something else (despite high fuel costs the UK still has an overall low tax burden
compared with many European countries).
Is it fair, therefore, that little old ladies who do not drive cars should have their overall tax burden increased to cover the costs of administering
my car tax and my excessive use of poluting fuels and the road infrastructure?
Surely it is a good thing, in principle, that those of us who tear round the countryside causing no end of environmental, health, and other damage
should be made aware of, and pay, the true costs of doing so.
I would even consider putting all motoring related taxes onto fuel so that those who drive most pay most and can't avoid it (a great portion of
my road tax is a donation to those who wont, or can't be arsed, to pay thier own).
I know that this is a simplification of a very complex argument and does not address the rural issue etc., but I am just trying to point out that they
don't tax us 'cos it is fun - money has to be got from somewhere.
Phil (now less popular than even previously I shouldn't wonder)
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 16/11/04 at 11:20 AM |
|
|
1696 Window tax again.
Steve. You'll have to pay for each individual vehicle so your administration is increased. I declared sorn on my car and earlier on my bike and
it now takes about 30 seconds at the P.O. They swipe the barcode and stamp the form with no input from DVLA apart from sending the reminder. Your
attitude will encourage them in their efforts to extract cash from an unconcerned public. You will have it to pay on your bike as well and you will
pay for a year, if you tax for 6 months you are paying double for the sorn.
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
philgregson
|
| posted on 16/11/04 at 11:45 AM |
|
|
quote:
I declared sorn on my car and earlier on my bike and it now takes about 30 seconds at the P.O. They swipe the barcode and stamp the form with no input
from DVLA apart from sending the reminder
I can't believe I'm stannding up for the robbing barstewards who run the country but here goes:
Don't be fooled by the fact it takes 30 seconds to scan your barcode.
There are system development costs (the goverment probably invested billions in a system for doing this that didn't work first time round), the
costs of installing and maintaining the equipment, training costs, stationary costs, costs of owning/leasing and maintaining premises, staff to pay
(together with the costs of paying civil servants to spend half their working life off sick with stress) and even the oportunity costs - your 30
seconds at the counter of the post office probably occupies 5 minutes in total of time the post office could be making money selling something.
If that lot didn't add upto at least £4.50 every time you do it I'd be amazed.
Phil
[Edited on 16/11/04 by philgregson]
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 16/11/04 at 11:52 AM |
|
|
Pete
It did occur to me that the frame with an engine in it, and three boxes of bits that consitute my bike for the next month or two, would attract that
charge.
In that context its daft!
even more so - my 250 bike only costs I think 30 quid a year to tax!!!! so it would likely be cheaper to tax the boxes of bits with a road fund
license than any paid for sorn method!!!!!
I dont support any more taxes, unless I can see good reason for em. If the poor lowly paid welshies in swansea got a rise out of it, or it stopped
DVLA moving to Mombai, then I think we may all think its a worthwhile charge.
Phil makes some good points. You will end up paying somehow. And 'collectors' with cars costing several grand a chuck wont notice such a
small charge. Those that cant afford it wont have car collections anyways.
|
|
|
philgregson
|
| posted on 16/11/04 at 12:01 PM |
|
|
I wonder - would it be some sort of offence to road tax a box of bits that does not in i'ts current form constitute a vehicle.
Would you be able to keep yopur boxes on the street or would they need an MOT and insurance for that?
Oh Bugger - just spotted the flaw. You couldn't tax your boxes of bits without an MOT or insurance!!
Phil
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 16/11/04 at 12:39 PM |
|
|
If they put their finances in order
and paid for their upgrades with money they've already taken off of me instead of squandering it on wars and stuff, how much road fund licence
and fuel tax finds its way into road related concerns must be on public record somewhere, then it would probably make them a profit. If I buy a new
computer I don't go and ask someone else to pay for it. I know that's not how business works but now these things are all expected to pay
for themselves it should be.
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
philgregson
|
| posted on 16/11/04 at 12:46 PM |
|
|
Ah Ha! but when you go and buy a new computer you do expect someone else to pay for it - the people who buy what ever great service you provide the
nation are paying from it.
In the same sense - when the government buys a computer they are using the money that we have paid them (through ou taxes) to run the country for
us.
There is an acountability issue but if someone does not like the service you provide they can go somewhere else and if we do not like the service our
govermnent provides for what we pay them we can employ another government - that is what elections are for.
|
|
|
andyharding
|
| posted on 16/11/04 at 01:04 PM |
|
|
If they hadn't introduced this sodding SORN system then there wouldn't be any admin and they wouldn't need to charge for it.
Are you a Mac user or a retard?
|
|
|
Spyderman
|
| posted on 16/11/04 at 06:04 PM |
|
|
If SORN is a necessary evil then why should it be necessary to renew it every year?
Why do they HAVE to send out
SORN reminders every year if there are no changes in circumstances?
It is just paperwork for the sake of showing you they are doing something.
The "road fund licence" car tax does not go to mainaining the roads so must be used for something. Presumably it is paying their salaries,
and as they are not exactly overworked as most of their job is automated, they have no justification in asking for funding for work they are creating
to keep themselves bussy!
If this was a manufacturing company demanding payment from you for something that they wanted to create and no-one wanted to buy would you pay
them?
To what purpose does the SORN actualy fulfill?
If a vehicle has no road tax then it will be recorded as having no road tax on the computer that DVLA and the Police use. Therefore it cannot be used
as protection against car tax evasion. If and when the vehicle is to be used on the road again then it has to be taxed. Period!
Is it to keep the records up to date for scapped vehicles? Why is that relevant unless it is for tax purposes.
The only reason for keeping records of vehicles that are SORN is as a form of taxation. It serves no other purpose.
I am well sick of this PC state we are being forced into where you can't speak for fear of offending. This Nanny state is taking away all our
liberties and making decisions on our behalf without consultation.
I'll get off my soapbox now!
Terry
[Edited on 16/11/04 by Spyderman]
Spyderman
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 16/11/04 at 10:36 PM |
|
|
perhaps it went summat like this :
A PRODUCTIVE DAY AT THE DVLA
"just had a great idea boss"
"really - as good as that one where you stuck cameras on poles and made money out of people doing 33 mph?"
"nah - that one was a classic - specially when we still get away with saying they are for safety reasons, and save lives - even tho 23,000 old
people will freeze to death this winter."
"what is it then - im working on this project to charge people 1500 quid for the right to oWn a car like they do in singapore....."
"Its that road tax problem - you know - some people not buying them."
"ah yeah, gives plod summat to do tho, doesnt it, fills in the time nicking them between changing rolls of film".
"well, I recon we can get the perpetrators with a fine"
"dont we do that already?"
"well, yeah, but this is different"
"im getting bored"
"well, if you dont buy a license, you have to tell us you are not gonna buy a license"
"say what - why would anyone wanna tell us they are not gonna buy a license!"
"cos if they dont, we will fine them."
"riiiiigggttt ----- dont we do that if they dont buy one anyways? Like plod spots them,?"
"yeah, but this is a great way to bring in a bit more cash".
"so...... they declare sorn, and still take the car out on the road - what then".
"Well, we do them for that too"
"hang on - this is great!!! - If they buy a tax and get all legal, we get about 160 quid. If they dont, and dont declare sorn, we get to fine
them. If they dont declare sorn, or even do declare sorn, and take the car on the road, we get em two times - double whammy"
"yeah - and if they are daft enough to follow the system, declare sorn, and take the car on the road, we have even got their signature saying
that its off the road, when its not. so they are well stuffed."
fantastic. now, how can we stick this idea on a blue pole and hide it where no one can see....
atb
steve
|
|
|
Chris_R
|
| posted on 16/11/04 at 10:54 PM |
|
|
lol
A bit of slapstick never hurt anyone.
http://www.chris.renney.dsl.pipex.com/
|
|
|
