email to dvla

[sibab]

hello to all, I just send an email to DVLA asking who is the owner of my car.:)



Hello, I am the registered keeper of vehicle **** ***. I would like DVLA to tell me who is the owner of the vehicle. If DVLA says that I am the owner can you please send me a letter to say that I am the owner of this vehicle.

Keeper : 1: one that keeps: as a: protector b: gamekeeper c: warden d: custodian echiefly British : curator

Owner: 1 a: to have or hold as property : possess b: to have power or mastery over <wanted to own his own life>

[los_nomo]

That's interesting. I doubt that you will get an inteligent answer.

[number_6]

I do not understand this obsession with the RK v Owner. I can find nowhere that states that if you register a vehicle in your name that you have given up ownership of the vehicle. The idea behind having a RK is that in some cases the RK may not be the legal owner. This would apply in the case of company cars or cars on a finance agreement. This is to facilitate the prosecution of speeding tickets etc., not to give ownership of the vehicle to DVLA. Nowhere can I find law that states that the RK cannot be the legal owner. You can be both the RK and the owner at the same time.

[johntrevy]

I do not understand this obsession with the RK v Owner. I can find nowhere that states that if you register a vehicle in your name that you have given up ownership of the vehicle. The idea behind having a RK is that in some cases the RK may not be the legal owner. This would apply in the case of company cars or cars on a finance agreement. This is to facilitate the prosecution of speeding tickets etc., not to give ownership of the vehicle to DVLA. Nowhere can I find law that states that the RK cannot be the legal owner. You can be both the RK and the owner at the same time.


How does that explain their (DVLA) power to crush your car? If its your car they cant do it. If it is thier car, they can practically do what they want.

"Its our property, we just let you use it and keep hold of it. Under OUR (DVLA) terms. If you dont pay your car tax, or break any of the terms set out in your contract, then you wont be eligable to keep it anymore."

[the worm that turned]

How does that explain their (DVLA) power to crush your car? If its your car they cant do it. If it is thier car, they can practically do what they want.

"Its our property, we just let you use it and keep hold of it. Under OUR (DVLA) terms. If you dont pay your car tax, or break any of the terms set out in your contract, then you wont be eligable to keep it anymore."

Valid point. Otherwise you could say "er hang on mate, that is criminal damage and I am prosecuting you!"

[number_6]

"Its our property, we just let you use it and keep hold of it. Under OUR (DVLA) terms. If you dont pay your car tax, or break any of the terms set out in your contract, then you wont be eligable to keep it anymore."

Where are you quoting that from? Are you suggesting that this is a bona fide quote from DVLA or have you made it up? You mention "terms set out in your contract" can you give evidence that such a contract is in existence, as I would be very interested to see one.

[hey_jude]

I do not understand this obsession with the RK v Owner. I can find nowhere that states that if you register a vehicle in your name that you have given up ownership of the vehicle. The idea behind having a RK is that in some cases the RK may not be the legal owner. This would apply in the case of company cars or cars on a finance agreement. This is to facilitate the prosecution of speeding tickets etc., not to give ownership of the vehicle to DVLA. Nowhere can I find law that states that the RK cannot be the legal owner. You can be both the RK and the owner at the same time.

The obsession as you claim is;

if you pay £10,000 for a car wouldn't you like to know who the owner is?

I think I'll send one too!

[simplysimon]

It is interesting that even though you are the owner of the vehicle, once you register it with DVLA you are the Registered Keeper and not the Registered Owner. Ask yourself why they would change the title?

[number_6]

It is interesting that even though you are the owner of the vehicle, once you register it with DVLA you are the Registered Keeper and not the Registered Owner. Ask yourself why they would change the title?

But DVLA never deny that the RK can at the same time be the legal owner. They just agree that the person keeping the vehicle may not be the owner, as in the case of a company car. As I said before the idea behind having a RK is so that traffic offences can be dealt with quicker.

[simplysimon]

I agree, with what you say. Wouldn't it make more sense to ascertain whether you are a keeper or an owner?

Instead you are a registered keeper and appear to have signed away all rights to your property under the legal system.

Another thing that strikes me as particularly odd is why a man or woman needs to register a "Person" at birth. Wouldn't you register a boy or a girl?

[dreamweaver]

How does that explain their (DVLA) power to crush your car? If its your car they cant do it. If it is thier car, they can practically do what they want.

"Its our property, we just let you use it and keep hold of it. Under OUR (DVLA) terms. If you dont pay your car tax, or break any of the terms set out in your contract, then you wont be eligable to keep it anymore."

If the DVLA owned the car, you wouldn't be able to sell it on to someone else. Being able to sell or give the property to somebody else is one of the basic tenets of ownership.

I think that what technically happens when they find you using the vehicle on the road without paying tax is that they confiscate the vehicle, then crush it.

[the worm that turned]

If the DVLA owned the car, you wouldn't be able to sell it on to someone else. Being able to sell or give the property to somebody else is one of the basic tenets of ownership.

I think that what technically happens when they find you using the vehicle on the road without paying tax is that they confiscate the vehicle, then crush it.

Could they take me away and crush me if I didn't pay my tax? :D

[dreamweaver]

Could they take me away and crush me if I didn't pay my tax? :D

Well, if they tried it with me, I could crush a grape... then they'd be sorry.

[the worm that turned]

Well, if they tried it with me, I could crush a grape... then they'd be sorry.

I always wondered what had become of Stu Francis and now I know ;)

[dreamweaver]

I always wondered what had become of Stu Francis and now I know ;)

Who he? :confused:

[the worm that turned]

Who he? :confused:

Cracker-jack - kids tv - ooh I could crush a grape - stu francis

you're either too young VERY old or foreign - or i guess never watched crap tv! :)

[dreamweaver]

Cracker-jack - kids tv - ooh I could crush a grape - stu francis

you're either too young VERY old or foreign - or i guess never watched crap tv! :)

Or pretending not to know. ;)

[the worm that turned]

Or pretending not to know. ;)

I thought you must know, or I was a vinicious knid!!

[johntrevy]

Could they take me away and crush me if I didn't pay my tax? :D

Thats what they are trying to do with the "income tax dodgers".

Not that i use the word "dodger" in a negative sense, the less these green goons get out of us the better.

[number_6]

Cracker-jack - kids tv - ooh I could crush a grape - stu francis

you're either too young VERY old or foreign - or i guess never watched crap tv! :)

Blimey, I must be getting old. When I used to watch Crackerjack (CRACKERJACK!!!) Eamon Andrews was the presenter:eek:

[tien an]

Y'know...I muddled this around in my head for a while and tried something out for myself...Make of it what you will:

A few months ago, a neighbour pointed out to me that a car with a tax disc from July 2008 was parked down the road. He said it had been there for a month or so.
I'd taken my car off the road because I couldn't afford to run it; this car was smaller than mine and, because of its economics...on a whim, I rang the DVLA and asked them about ownership rights etc.; could I have the car if it was abandoned?
The response I got surprised me very much.

I was told that if I filled out a V20 (request for logbook) and sent them £25, they would send me a new logbook...after having tried to contact the 'registered keeper'.
I wouldn't be allowed to sell the car, and if the 'keeper' wanted to have his car back, it could only be done by taking me to court, which "wasn't likely to be successful".

I then contacted a vehicle locksmith who confirmed that, on production of the logbook, he would indeed break into the car and change the locks and ignition assembly for me (for about £150, depending on model/make of car).

As it happens, the DVLA did get in touch with the registered keeper and sent me my money back, with an explanation.

So; in future when you see a car with a ridiculously out-of-date tax disc and you fancy the car...if the 'keeper' has done a runner to another country, or has just abandoned the car...that's how to 'take possession' of it legally.

The thing that gets me is...if the DVLA doesn't own the vehicle...why have they got the right to pass the title of 'registered keeper' to another?

Answers on a postcard please...

[arten]

Oh ffs they do have the right because like JH explains in his talk at stoke Idiots give them the legal right when they register the car with them.
One day God is going to wake me up and say this is all shit I really cannot understand this bollocks thT WE ARE ALL FALLING FOR AND i WANT TO FUCKING START A RIOT AND I AM THE SORT THAT CAN LOL

[dreamweaver]

The thing that gets me is...if the DVLA doesn't own the vehicle...why have they got the right to pass the title of 'registered keeper' to another?
It's an interesting point, but the state assumes title of all sorts of property deemed "abandoned" (and a banger left behind by someone who fled the country most likely meets those criteria). The state automatically gets a cut when someone dies without leaving a will for example.

And in the example you gave, the DVLA did hear back from the owner/RK and sent your money back, which rather undermines your argument that they were the owner.

With all due respect to John, I think he's wrong on this idea that registering a vehicle makes the state the owner but we'll just have to wait and see on this as it's largely untested so far. If the state sees the freeman thing as expanding and threatening its interests, then it will fight.

The thing is that they will not be defeated in their courts by arguing about what an American law dictionary says words mean. Dictionaries are not especially useful for arguing points of law in court. I'm sure John is aware of this - the important thing is that he is building a movement of people who want out of this system. In that sense it's reminiscent of the struggles of the Diggers and the Levellers - a topic which I mean to start a discussion about but keep forgetting.

[number_6]

All this talk of by registering a vehicle you pass ownership of the vehicle to DVLA is rubbish. They will only recover (and possibly crush) vehicles that are parked on the highway that are untaxed. It is essential that the land they are lifting the vehicle from is land that is maintained at public expense. This is because the law states that a vehicle being used on a public highway that is maintained at public expense must be taxed, not because they own it. If DVLA truly owned your vehicle they could legally remove and take permanent possession of it from your driveway, garage or from wherever it was parked, if it were untaxed or even taxed.
And, if they truly owned it, they could remove a vehicle that was MoT'd, taxed and insured and keep it permanently. I don't think so.

[arten]

All this talk of by registering a vehicle you pass ownership of the vehicle to DVLA is rubbish. They will only recover (and possibly crush) vehicles that are parked on the highway that are untaxed. It is essential that the land they are lifting the vehicle from is land that is maintained at public expense. This is because the law states that a vehicle being used on a public highway that is maintained at public expense must be taxed, not because they own it. If DVLA truly owned your vehicle they could legally remove and take permanent possession of it from your driveway, garage or from wherever it was parked, if it were untaxed or even taxed.
And, if they truly owned it, they could remove a vehicle that was MoT'd, taxed and insured and keep it permanently. I don't think so.

No it is not rubbish at all it is happening for the most trivial of reasons get and watch the John Harris Talk from Stoke he explains it in a very lucid way. When you register your car or your child with the government agenices you give up ownership of car and child and those tossers from the government can at any time take car or child or anything else off of you.

A government that is big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to tak it all away.
Barry Goldwater

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0IM7Hobd_k

[simplysimon]

All this talk of by registering a vehicle you pass ownership of the vehicle to DVLA is rubbish. They will only recover (and possibly crush) vehicles that are parked on the highway that are untaxed. It is essential that the land they are lifting the vehicle from is land that is maintained at public expense. This is because the law states that a vehicle being used on a public highway that is maintained at public expense must be taxed, not because they own it. If DVLA truly owned your vehicle they could legally remove and take permanent possession of it from your driveway, garage or from wherever it was parked, if it were untaxed or even taxed.
And, if they truly owned it, they could remove a vehicle that was MoT'd, taxed and insured and keep it permanently. I don't think so.

I think you'll find that is a statute.

[dreamweaver]

No it is not rubbish at all it is happening for the most trivial of reasons get and watch the John Harris Talk from Stoke he explains it in a very lucid way. When you register your car or your child with the government agenices you give up ownership of car and child and those tossers from the government can at any time take car or child or anything else off of you.
I can go one better than viewing the video, arten, I was there. ;)

I don't think what John is saying is "rubbish", but I do think he is mistaken on the "registration" issue because as I pointed out in my own posts above, title is not actually transferred to the DVLA - the owner/RK has the right to sell the car or give it to someone else, which is a tenet of ownership.

However, you're certainly right that the government give themselves the power to take things (and even children) from us. However, this is a power that dates back to feudal times when the lord of the manor could dispossess the serfs.

That's the golden age of common law, the idyll before statute law. So anyone who thinks doing away with statute law will stop governments stealing our stuff is unfortunately mistaken as far as I can see.

[wakeupworld]

That's the golden age of common law, the idyll before statute law. So anyone who thinks doing away with statute law will stop governments stealing our stuff is unfortunately mistaken as far as I can see.[/QUOTE]


Why couldn`t it it still be a golden age of common law as common law has not gone away because of the introduction afterwards of statue law.

[madbomberjones]

Could they take me away and crush me if I didn't pay my tax? :D

Not yet, but I am sure that when they create another climate of change, they will eventually make this option available to themselves as well.
Through deception, they have already used section 41 of the terrorism act 2000 to lock me up without valid reason for six days, not needing to notify my family, or allowing me access to legal assistance. What gives any human the right to do that to another human? If I did that, I would be imprisoned for kidnap, but if the state do that, they are praised for fighting terrorism? Who created the threat of terrorism, and if there was no terrorism, would we willingly allow the ptb to pass these laws that steal our civil liberties? NO

Signing a V5 is giving ownership of the car you paid for over to the DVLA, they need you to do this in order to give themselves the power to destroy their own property. The same way the social services can come and take your children from you, whose birth you have registered.

It is my opinion that if you register something, you are allowing whoever you are registering whatever with, to ascertain some form of involvement, opinion or even ownership of whatever you are registering. When you sell the DVLA's car to someone else, does it say new owner or new keeper!

[dreamweaver]

Why couldn`t it it still be a golden age of common law as common law has not gone away because of the introduction afterwards of statue law.

Well, what I'm saying is that it wasn't that great even when it was just common law. Yes, of course we need to strip away all these crappy statutes, no argument there, but let's not romanticise the era when it was just common law. Life was still nasty, brutish and short for most people living then.

[spoonogsback]

REGISTRATION.................
When someone or thing is registered with another party a lien position that was in existence is re-established ab-initio (from the beginning). Because Debt notes were used by the Purchaser to obtain the thing in the first place from a source of fraudlent conversion wealth. Therefore you did not equally compensate the one or ones that built or made the thing in question so you, when you believe you are purchasing something are not in reality only in fiction (so you have obtained a lein position but you are holding it without a perfected claim of right). When you act as a fiction in commerce you are goverened by the rules of commerce thats why the governor (of the bank AKA JUDGE) gets to tell you what to do they created the fiction initially (it's theirs) anything that fiction does or will do is under their controll ( by presumption and by behaviour ). So when they look at an entry in a computer for ex. and it tells them that a fiction somehow has managed to get a man to act for it and give to them First lien position and place themselves in a lower lien position thats why they can do with it as they please ....Tax it crush it etc.....

[arten]

I can go one better than viewing the video, arten, I was there. ;)

.

Cool M8 did you enjoy it and would you go again? Did you get the chance to speak to any of the people who got up on stage and spoke to the audience and when is the next one?

[dreamweaver]

Cool M8 did you enjoy it and would you go again? Did you get the chance to speak to any of the people who got up on stage and spoke to the audience and when is the next one?

I did enjoy it and would definitely go again, met quite a few familiar faces too. :) The next one is on 13 June 2009 at Friends House, 173-177 Euston Road, London NW1 2BJ. I know that venue well - it's a pretty big hall, owned by the Quakers.

I didn't really get the chance to talk to any of the speakers on that occasion, I piled down the pub with the people I knew during the lunch break, but I since met John Harris at the talk he gave in London.

[sibab]

hello, I had no reply from DVLA so I send them another email:

Hello I am still waiting for an answer! I have asked for information from DVLA and you have ignored my request.
I have a parking ticket that I need to forward to the owner of the car. Can you please tell me who is the owner? If I still don’t hear from you then I will send the parking ticket to DVLA.
You have 3 working days to reply to my email.
______________________________________

lets see if they will reply now. if not then I will be sending them a nice letter.

[sindakit]

When you send them a letter, ensure you enclose a print of the e-mails you have sent to them just to let them know you have contacted them prior to the letter.

Although, if you are going to do that, be aware that under statute, whoever was driving the car and made the parking offence is liable for the charge.
Before I heard of freeman, i used to ask for proof of who was driving from parking companies (not council tickets) but they could never provide it and they soon got squashed. This was all in the realm of statute tho. Now I would take the lawful route and ask for bills and contracts etc

It may turn out that either owner or registered keeper are liable (you will see this on notices from the council if a ticket is unpaid), if this is the case and the DVLA send it back claiming you'r the registered keeper and you have to deal with it, then send a copy of the registered keeper (i.e. birth certifacte) to the parking company/council etc.
Good luck :D

[sibab]

When you send them a letter, ensure you enclose a print of the e-mails you have sent to them just to let them know you have contacted them prior to the letter.

Although, if you are going to do that, be aware that under statute, whoever was driving the car and made the parking offence is liable for the charge.
Before I heard of freeman, i used to ask for proof of who was driving from parking companies (not council tickets) but they could never provide it and they soon got squashed. This was all in the realm of statute tho. Now I would take the lawful route and ask for bills and contracts etc

It may turn out that either owner or registered keeper are liable (you will see this on notices from the council if a ticket is unpaid), if this is the case and the DVLA send it back claiming you'r the registered keeper and you have to deal with it, then send a copy of the registered keeper (i.e. birth certifacte) to the parking company/council etc.
Good luck :D

hi, I do not have a parking ticket, just messing with them. if you get a parking ticket the owner of the car has to pay, if its speeding then the driver has to pay. If I ever get a parking ticket I will ask them for the bill :)

[sibab]

Ok I got the reply from DVLA. they still do not say who its the owner!!


Thank you for your email.
I am sorry that you do not appear to have received the reply which I have now copied below .
The vehicle register does not attempt to record ownership and DVLA is not concerned with issues of ownership. Possession of a V5C Registration Certificate is not proof of ownership.
The Department of Transport is only required to record the details of the registered keeper of all motor vehicles.
The registered keeper should be the person who possesses the vehicle and is responsible for its use on public roads. The keeper is the person whom the police and other law enforcement agencies normally wish to contact about the vehicle’s use on public roads.
The keeper need not necessarily be the driver nor the legal owner of the vehicle.
The document records the details of the person who has told us that they are the keeper of the vehicle.
As you are shown as the registered keeper of the vehicle on our records, and still in possession of the vehicle, then if you dispute the parking ticket you have received, I suggest you return it to whoever issued it to you.
Regards
Lesley L Beynon
www.direct.gov.uk/motoring

[yozhik]

Ok I got the reply from DVLA. they still do not say who its the owner!!


Thank you for your email.
I am sorry that you do not appear to have received the reply which I have now copied below .
The vehicle register does not attempt to record ownership and DVLA is not concerned with issues of ownership. Possession of a V5C Registration Certificate is not proof of ownership.
The Department of Transport is only required to record the details of the registered keeper of all motor vehicles.
The registered keeper should be the person who possesses the vehicle and is responsible for its use on public roads. The keeper is the person whom the police and other law enforcement agencies normally wish to contact about the vehicle’s use on public roads.
The keeper need not necessarily be the driver nor the legal owner of the vehicle.
The document records the details of the person who has told us that they are the keeper of the vehicle.
As you are shown as the registered keeper of the vehicle on our records, and still in possession of the vehicle, then if you dispute the parking ticket you have received, I suggest you return it to whoever issued it to you.
Regards
Lesley L Beynon
www.direct.gov.uk/motoring

Then I'm confused.

Surely, if not morally, then by simple logic; it has to be the owner who registers a vehicle?
Is he also saying that the register is NOT the vehicle; the register is a record of the keeper?
If so, then how do they act upon the vehicle?
If so, then how do they tax the vehicle?

This just makes no sense.

If all they have to do is to record the details of the keeper; then why do they ask for details of the vehicle on the papers? Why are they even there? If this is not information they require; why do they print it on the paper?

Sorry; but either this man is lying through his teeth or he has just admitted a huge fraud unknowingly.

AFTERTHOUGHT
This word "keeper" ... it seems to me it is the same word as "maintainer", which is used when referring to registered children; i.e. the father and mother have parental duties including the maintenance of the child. In other words, they are the child's keepers.

Question: why is ownership never implied, admitted, included or referred to? This is a common feature of most of the issues we discuss. Houses, cars, and any other large ticket property item, or in the case of children - any "asset" of true value (current or future) - is registered and then maintained.

[number_6]

Then I'm confused.

Surely, if not morally, then by simple logic; it has to be the owner who registers a vehicle?
.

This is not as sinister as most here seem to think. DVLA acknowledge that the person who is in possession of the vehicle may not be the legal owner. This would apply in instances of company vehicles where although the company is the owner, the person who drives it keeps it at their home address. The same applies to vehicles on finance. The finance company own the car, but the person who has the finance is the keeper. At no point do DVLA say that the registered keeper cannot be the legal owner. They accept that it can be the case. The only reason they do this is to speed up the process of traffic offences and contraventions. I really do not understand this obsession shown here about the words "registered keeper". The term registered keeper is a relatively new one for those of us that remeber the old log books.

[pleasuredome]

Then I'm confused.

Surely, if not morally, then by simple logic; it has to be the owner who registers a vehicle?

the owner did register it when the car was newly bought

Is he also saying that the register is NOT the vehicle; the register is a record of the keeper?

yes

If so, then how do they act upon the vehicle?

they act on the car because they own it

If so, then how do they tax the vehicle?

the licence duty is the licence to drive that particular vehicle

This just makes no sense.

If all they have to do is to record the details of the keeper; then why do they ask for details of the vehicle on the papers? Why are they even there? If this is not information they require; why do they print it on the paper?

just joinder to the particular vehicle the keeper will be registered to

Sorry; but either this man is lying through his teeth or he has just admitted a huge fraud unknowingly.

AFTERTHOUGHT
This word "keeper" ... it seems to me it is the same word as "maintainer", which is used when referring to registered children; i.e. the father and mother have parental duties including the maintenance of the child. In other words, they are the child's keepers.

Question: why is ownership never implied, admitted, included or referred to? This is a common feature of most of the issues we discuss. Houses, cars, and any other large ticket property item, or in the case of children - any "asset" of true value (current or future) - is registered and then maintained.

they keep it nice and quiet for obvious reasons. mr chumndley-williams wouldnt fancy spending a huge amount of money on a new jag if he realised that by registering it he was actually giving ownership of it away


.

[number_6]

Taken from DVLA website:

What is vehicle keeper information?
The DVLA holds a register containing details of all vehicles licensed for use on the road. This register also contains the name and address of the registered keeper of each vehicle. The registered keeper of a vehicle is the person or organisation responsible for the licensing and use of that vehicle – this is often, but not always, the legal owner.

So where does this idea come from that you no longer own the vehicle?

Also, if you do not pay a parking ticket, you will receive a "Notice to Owner"

Taken from Traffic penalty .gov site:

Ownership
The owner is presumed to be the registered keeper unless they prove otherwise. The council will check with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA) in Swansea to see who was registered as keeper of the vehicle at the date the penalty was issued. This person will receive the Notice to Owner.

[pleasuredome]

REGISTRATION.................
When someone or thing is registered with another party a lien position that was in existence is re-established ab-initio (from the beginning). Because Debt notes were used by the Purchaser to obtain the thing in the first place from a source of fraudlent conversion wealth. Therefore you did not equally compensate the one or ones that built or made the thing in question so you, when you believe you are purchasing something are not in reality only in fiction (so you have obtained a lein position but you are holding it without a perfected claim of right). When you act as a fiction in commerce you are goverened by the rules of commerce thats why the governor (of the bank AKA JUDGE) gets to tell you what to do they created the fiction initially (it's theirs) anything that fiction does or will do is under their controll ( by presumption and by behaviour ). So when they look at an entry in a computer for ex. and it tells them that a fiction somehow has managed to get a man to act for it and give to them First lien position and place themselves in a lower lien position thats why they can do with it as they please ....Tax it crush it etc.....

hi spoon, if the original purchaser used money of account to purchase the car, would it make any difference?

[wakeupworld]

Taken from Traffic penalty .gov site:

Ownership
The owner is presumed to be the registered keeper unless they prove otherwise. The council will check with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA) in Swansea to see who was registered as keeper of the vehicle at the date the penalty was issued. This person will receive the Notice to Owner.[/QUOTE]


This from the Traffic penalty is not definitive of ownership imo.
"The owner is presumed to be the registered keeper unless they prove otherwise."

Why only presumed?

why isn`t the wording as follows?


Ownership
The owner is the registered keeper unless proven otherwise. The council will check with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA) in Swansea to see who was registered as keeper of the vehicle at the date the penalty was issued. This person will receive the Notice to Owner.[/QUOTE]

[pleasuredome]

Taken from Traffic penalty .gov site:

Ownership
The owner is presumed to be the registered keeper unless they prove otherwise. The council will check with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA) in Swansea to see who was registered as keeper of the vehicle at the date the penalty was issued. This person will receive the Notice to Owner.


This from the Traffic penalty is not definitive of ownership imo.
"The owner is presumed to be the registered keeper unless they prove otherwise."

Why only presumed?
why isn`t the wording as follows?


Ownership
The owner is the registered keeper unless proven otherwise. The council will check with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA) in Swansea to see who was registered as keeper of the vehicle at the date the penalty was issued. This person will receive the Notice to Owner.

because they want to be vague and give you the wrong impression. like ive said before, if everyone in the country found out that they dont actually own the car after spending good money on buying it , there'd be a lot of angry people. what do you think would happen to car sales?

[john doe]

it clearly states on my irish registration certificate that I am the registered owner.

or rather, My Person is.

[markie_b]

:( there is no hope here guys and gals who are fighting a legal battle will lose point blank!

quoting things from sites which have been worded by the legal profession and decyphering them is very difficult indeed especially where they have many law dictionaries to work from!
so what i suggest is get a reciept of purchase that is true proof of owning something!ask under what law it is an offence and how under the law of the land by not registering your property is it a crime and that you have an inailenable right to use your property freely without hinderance!

lawful and legal are worlds apart and failing to see that will only trip yourselves up time and time and time again.

i dont wish to annoy anyone or make them seem silly but its common sense fighting a company under the same companies terms is bound to have you fail!