SORN petition

it's only meant to be partly about that. I think it unreasonable to fine me
40 quid for forgetting, but then I could avoid that easily. However, it's
also about the waste of resources inherent in them sending out reminders
(which they mostly do) and processing the returned forms. OK, if it's done
online, chances are it uses less resource, but how many do that?

 

So, bloke A sells bike to bloke B.
Neither bloke A nor block B bother to do the right thing and get it
unSORNed, bloke B uses it off road etc (but is pikey and uses the road to
get to off road and gets a speeding ticket (camera).

Bloke A now gets a NIP, and a fine for not unSORNing.

So, a yearly reminder would be handy here ?

 

So, forgetting to stick to the speed limit should not be a fine either ?
Or why not have an MOT last for life, why should that be yearly ?

Even by computer standars, thats not a lot of resource.

The offline forms are more than likely scanned, just like letters for
postcodes.

 

well, yeah. But if I was bloke A I'd make damned sure that I notified I was
no longer the keeper, so as to avoid any fines. Which is, as someone
pointed out, a good incentive.

 

now you're just being deliberately obtuse. Well done.

I break speed limits all the time, but I keep my eyes open while doing it
and so far I've been lucky and not got caught.

as for MOT, well, that's just not a comparison.

 

No. by the time a yearly reminder has arrived, bloke B could already
have done a hit and run.

Transferring keepership (keeperhood?) of a vehicle, like taking a
vehicle off-road or modifying or exporting or scrapping it are clear
changes of vehicle status which only need advising once.

In the case of SORN, not even once because as I've already explained,
failing to tax a vehicle must by default be taking it off-road, though
I'll accept that positively telling the DVLA *once* clearly indicates
that it wasn't simply an oversight.

After all, you wouldn't expect to have to advise the DVLA that your
'bike is still sold' yearly, would you?

 

Ah, but you may forget to tax it and leave it on the road.

Don't you dare suggest that to them !

 

Why not, the 1st 3 years of a vehicles life it is deemed road worthy with
no reminder.

 

Which is a load of crap, TBH, with the mileage people do now. 's only
private cars and bikes, other stuff is annual from the word go.

 

Thus spake Austin Shackles () unto the assembled multitudes:

I reckon it's more of a ploy to boost the economy. I know plenty of people
who buy a new car just before their "old" one's first MOT is due, just to
avoid the so-called stigma of having a vehicle that's old enough to need an
MOT. Maybe the government is taking advantage of that?

 

I'd agree that's part of it now. Certainly the original purpose of MoTs
was laudable and still is, given how many unsafe bangers there would be
on the road without it.
The whole SORN thing is a blind, a con, simply to reduce the amount of
older vehicles around by the steady application of reminders and fines.
Many keepers of SORNed vehicles will eventually grow tired of the hassle
and just scrap them.

FFS, getting fined for not doing something is ridiculous.

 

Well, that's what a tax reminder is for.

Heh. Oops.

 

Tell me about it, I have a notice here that tells me I owe the cunts 80
fucking quid for failing to sorn my CBR after I bought the fucking
thing. It was already sorned when Blaney owned it, why the **** should
I have to inform them it still is just because it's now owned by a
different person. It wasn't MOT'd (which comes up on their new system),
it wasn't insured (which comes up on their new system) - to all intents
and purposes it is deemed 'off the road' by default and they know it
too, if they actually looked at their new fucking system. What fucking
difference does it make if I sign a piece of paper declaring it so
every year?

I'll tell you - it makes a 40 quid difference to my spending money if I
don't, which increases to 80 quid if I fail to pay within 28 days.

Fucking bunch of money grabbing useless cunts, I've a good mind to
declare the fucking bike scrapped, then I wouldn't have to fill in a
sorn declaration ever again.

--
Lozzo
Suzuki SV650S K5
Honda CBR600 FW trackbike
Yamaha SR250 Spazz-Trakka
Suzuki GSXR750 L
Suzuki TS50X
Suzuki TS50X

 

I trust you signed my petition...

 

<snip>
So, you bought the bike, didn't mot it, didn't insure it and told them
about it. How do they know you are not using it ?

Why are so many moaning about such a trivial thing ?

 

Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, Lozzo

You silly man. You sent the form off in the notoriously unreliable post.
You remember!

Write and tell them that.

 

being stung 80 quid is hardly trivial. I'm not aware that it says on the V5
that if the vehicle is SORN then you have to re-declare it on change of
keeper - it might do, but if so I've not noticed.

There's also the point that if it was SORN he could still be using it
illegally. SORN doesn't stop illegal vehicle use, and since plod can easily
access insurance/mot data they can soon check if a machine on the road is,
or isn't, legal.

 

ah, it's only the DVLA that are allowed to use that excuse. Next thing I
have to do is send the green slip for my minibus in to get a new V5, 'cos
they've lost the one that the dealer I bought it from sent in. I don't
imagine the dealer forgot to send it, it's a normal part of the process. And
I know for a fact that the dealer had it, 'cos I signed it as new keeper. I
even offered to take it and post it, and the chap said nah, don't bother,
cos we send a batch off every week. I also checked with the dealer (so that
I could tell the DVLA that I had) who assured me that it had indeed been
sent.

Next thing I send to 'em goes registered and signed-for, then I can prove
that it got to the DVLA...

 

Austin Shackles wrote:
|| On or around Thu, 24 Apr 2008 19:40:30 GMT, YTC#1
|| <> enlightened us thusly:
||
||| On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 18:07:27 +0000, Lozzo wrote:
|||
|||| Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
||||
||||| FFS, getting fined for not doing something is ridiculous.
||||
|||| Tell me about it, I have a notice here that tells me I owe the
|||| cunts 80
||| <snip>
||| So, you bought the bike, didn't mot it, didn't insure it and told
||| them about it. How do they know you are not using it ?
|||
||| Why are so many moaning about such a trivial thing ?
||
|| being stung 80 quid is hardly trivial. I'm not aware that it says
|| on the V5 that if the vehicle is SORN then you have to re-declare it
|| on change of keeper - it might do, but if so I've not noticed.
||
|| There's also the point that if it was SORN he could still be using it
|| illegally. SORN doesn't stop illegal vehicle use, and since plod
|| can easily access insurance/mot data they can soon check if a
|| machine on the road is, or isn't, legal.
|| --
|| Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
|| Travel The Galaxy! Meet Fascinating Life Forms...
|| ------------------------------------------------\
|| >> http://www.schlockmercenary.com/ << \ ...and Kill them.
|| a webcartoon by Howard Tayler; I like it, maybe you will too!

Apparently, it is the owner that is SORN'd, not the vehicle. i.e. the owner
is declaring that he/she wont use the vehicle on the road, not relying on
the vehicle itself to get on the road all by itself. IYSWIM.

Change of owner = New SORN declaration

Still uckin stoopid

--
===========================
Martyn K
FJ1200
FZS600
GSXF400 Kat


http://www.czd.org.uk

 

I did not mean the 80ukp was trivial, just the moaning that people do
because they are incapable of using their heads

When you get a new vehicle, that is untaxed, you normally go and tax it.
If you are not going to use it, you SORN it. Not hard is it ? The SORN is
for a vehicle kept at a location by a person. A new person/location = a
new SORN. I have a bike, GSX250, kept 20 miles away, I have no problem
reSORNing it each year.

I conceed it is an utter waste of time, and totally a game of paper
shifting. However, for the few seconds it takes to reSORN it is a
nobrainer.