Tax due today on husbands car. Just gathered all the documents together only to find the reg number on the certificate is wrong. Original document was wrong (one digit incorrect) and I called the insurers who are supposed to have amended it and they sent out a new certificate. To be honest I just filed it away without checking, only to find same error is there. Called the insurer, policy has been amended and they will send out a correct replacement certificate but it will be a few days before it arrives.
My question is are we now going to get a nasty fine for not getting the tax on time, if so how much? Fortunately, he doesnt use the car on a regular basis
|
In my experimnece you usually get a little leway before they send out fine. If they do it will be £80 + cost of Road tax.
You could go down and SWORN the vehicle but would have to keep of road until you retax it. A bit of hassle but better than £80 fine
|
|
|
|
Is the new tax disc due 1 June? If so you have the rest of the month to tax it or SORN it, so you should be OK.
|
Sorry it is SORN (Statuary Off Road Notification) not SWORN, although it makes you feel like sworning!
|
|
|
|
I worded that reply badly. You have the rest of the month to SORN it, but must tax it before you drive it (or keep it) on the road. No leeway now, so I'm told.
|
|
I was 2 days late only 2 months ago and had no problem. No guarantee I know and u are right offically no leeway. Only way to be sure is SORN it today.
|
|
For the premium you are paying and the fact that is their fault they should be couriering you a correct certificate with delivery guaranteed by midday tomorrow. Might take a few days is pathetic!
|
|
|
|
|
If you've got a new style MoT certificate, you could use www.vehiclelicence.gov.uk
OK, so the tax disk will take a couple of days to come through, but at least it'll be taxed, and that will put your mind at rest.
--------------
Mike Farrow
|
|
Once again the honest, law-abiding person falls foul of petty bureaucracy that is unable to overlook someone else's mistake. I was once re-taxing my car when someone else at the next counter was doing like-wise; person on the counter spotted that the MoT cert bore the same date for start and expiry, obviously a mistake by the tester completing the form. But they wouldn't issue a new tax disc; poor bloke was left with the task of going back to the garage and showing them that the MoT cert was wrong, and getting them to issue another one. No benefit of the doubt given.
|
Sorry Ivor E Tower, but the person on the Post Office Counter Desk has no discretion. If details are not 100% they they cannot (and indeed must not) issue the RFL. The rules are clear and quite explicit in this. If people were started to be rganted variances (grace if you will) then the system would be open to abuse...in any event it is the person who is providing the documents to check that at time of issue theya re correct. Not the accepting authority. Whats to say that the MOT certificate wasn't stolen or forged? Soirry, but the Operator was spot on. Any discrepencies, go back, get it sorted and then come back. Don't forget that the tightening of the rules for taxing your car etc. have only come about recently, why? Because people have abused it over and over and over again.
Your documents, your responsibility to ensure that your documetns are correct. No-one else is to blame. We live in a society where it is OK to blame someone else but not face fact and accept responsibility for the self.
-----
Im not plain stupid, just a special kind of stoopid.
|
>>Don't forget that the tightening of the rules for taxing your car etc. have only come about recently, why? Because people have abused it over and over and over again.
Which is *exactly* IET's point. To my mind.
You are spot on about the blame culture, but *I* don't think that was IET's point.
|
I'm lost :P
I thought IET was suggesting that the Clerk on the Counter should have used their discretion and still issued the RFL for the car? If this was so, then I was supporting the Clerks decission inr efusing to issue the RFL the rules are crystal clear: no/incorrect documents = No RFL. No ifs, no buts, no excuses. Obviuously, if I have taken off on the wrong tangent, apologies :)
-----
Im not plain stupid, just a special kind of stoopid.
|
Disagree Mr Tower.
An MOT certificate is a very important document (at least it is to me). One ought to have the common sense to read it before leaving the garage - you read the bill, why not the certificate for which you've paid?
Can understand more on the insurance paperwork. They send so much paper it's impossible to read it all!
|
|
|
I agree with both of you!
Yes, it is essential that the clerk stick to the letter of the law. (Although I have renewed with faxed ins. certs before.)
However, in the good old days, your local PO clerk would have known you as a good sort & would have issued it nonetheless. It is a sad reflection on today's society that this is no longer the case.
|
Fortunately, the lady at the PO issued the tax disk last thing yesterday so we are all fully legal again. I was honest I told her the problem - and she admitted she probably would not have noticed it!!
On a slightly different note, the insurance company told me it would not be a problem holding a policy certificate with the incorrect reg no on it because their system shows the correct details - so what would the implications be if the Police wanted to check your documents?
|
|
My point was that why can't discretion be used when there is an obvious mistake. If the MoT cert bears the same date for issue and expiry, then there is obviously something wrong, and it will be a "human" error. We all make mistakes, why should others suffer unnecessarily? So we should all check our MoT certs when handed them, but do we always do so? And what if some of the info gets written incorrectly - like the "approximate year of first use" which got altered by one year on one of my parents' old cars - when this was pointed out, response was "well, it does say approximate; remind me next year and we'll change it back" or something similar.
|
>>If the MoT cert bears the same date for issue and expiry, then there is obviously something wrong,
The start date or the end date ? If it is assumed to be the end date and tax is issued, but subsequently becomes clear that it was the start date and the car was lethal, then what ?
|
|
|
|
|
If the details are correct on the ins co's computer, how can the same computer issue an certificate with an error on it? Discuss!
|
Maybe their database backend doesn't have referential inegrity set up between tables, or in simpler terms, maybe someone overlooked setting up constraints? That would allow someone to make a change in one table which wouldn't be automatically cascaded to a related table, due to the relationship not being there.
No time to discuss further as I must get back to designing a new database based application for an online gaming company :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
