Roger (Roger ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

Some of us still have cars off road that can't be sorned and I still
think the long term plan is to ultimately prevent such cars from ever
returning to the road.

Not at all - but you do need to request a V5C if you haven't got one for
'em.

Seriously, the FBHVC is strongly onto this sort of thing. If you're not a
member of an FBHVC-affiliated club, hassle your club to join - or join a
club that is.

The message
from Adrian contains these words:

Some of us still have cars off road that can't be sorned and I still
think the long term plan is to ultimately prevent such cars from ever
returning to the road.

Not at all - but you do need to request a V5C if you haven't got one for
'em.

I have updated to V5Cs.

Seriously, the FBHVC is strongly onto this sort of thing. If you're not a
member of an FBHVC-affiliated club, hassle your club to join - or join a
club that is.

FBHVC?

--
Roger Chapman

In article ,
GbH wrote:
Ok then. Read GbH's point *carefully* and give your answer to it. To
remind you he asks just why registration is necessary in the first
place. Not SORN, but registration. I'll look forward to it.

Am I missing something here? Of course registration is necessary in
the first place, but this is all about having to notify SORN every
year when there's no need. If you forget, you would still have
committed an offence or if you used it without licence whilst SORNed
or you sold it without notification etc., the only difference is the
extra penalty for forgetting, which only you don't get paid for but
can cost you.

Martin

Of course??

See what I mean Mr Shackles?

A grovelling apology would now be nice. Unless you're just a troll. ;-)

--
*Even a blind pig stumbles across an acorn now and again *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Mike G wrote:
It's about waste of time and resources inherent in my telling them
repeatedly that yes, this vehicle is still not on the road, once I've
told them it's off-road, there it should rest unless or until it goes
back on the road, when it needs to be licensed, or scrapped or sold,
when it becomes someone else's responsibility.

It makes it an active act where you are prompted to do something.
Rather than just ignore or possibly forget to do it when a change is
made. As human nature being as it is many will do. *You* may not being
an organised individual, but these things happen because many aren't.

I 'think' I can see your point, but can't agree with it. Whether a
vehicle is SORNed or not, one is still legally obliged to notify a
change of ownership.

Bearing that in mind I don't see how repeatedly having to notify the
DVLA that a car is still off the road once it has been declared as such
helps keep track of a vehicle. It would still be an offence if it were
sold without notifying the DVLA, so I can't see why it is necessary.

That would be going back to what existed only a few years ago. The DVLA
decided on SORN to try and help sort out the number of 'untaxed' vehicles
around. Since it costs no more than a stamp I really can't see what the
fuss is about.
I can't find any figures that would prove or disprove whether it has done
what it set out to do. My guess is it has worked to some extent.

--
*Your kid may be an honours student, but you're still an idiot.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Mike G wrote:
It's about waste of time and resources inherent in my telling them
repeatedly that yes, this vehicle is still not on the road, once I've
told them it's off-road, there it should rest unless or until it goes
back on the road, when it needs to be licensed, or scrapped or sold,
when it becomes someone else's responsibility.

It makes it an active act where you are prompted to do something.
Rather than just ignore or possibly forget to do it when a change is
made. As human nature being as it is many will do. *You* may not being
an organised individual, but these things happen because many aren't.

I 'think' I can see your point, but can't agree with it. Whether a
vehicle is SORNed or not, one is still legally obliged to notify a
change of ownership.

Bearing that in mind I don't see how repeatedly having to notify the
DVLA that a car is still off the road once it has been declared as such
helps keep track of a vehicle. It would still be an offence if it were
sold without notifying the DVLA, so I can't see why it is necessary.

That would be going back to what existed only a few years ago. The DVLA
decided on SORN to try and help sort out the number of 'untaxed' vehicles
around. Since it costs no more than a stamp I really can't see what the
fuss is about.


Even less than a stamp if you tax or SORN on line, Dave - IF the various
people concerned would talk to each other! Last month I tried to tax my
shopping trolley, a 1993 Peugeot something-or-other but failed as the DVLA
had no record of it being insured. Rang the insurance company who confirmed
it was correctly insured. Turns out they batch up the info and send it
Royal Mail once a month or so.... Blimey, you could have done this on line
back in the days of Sinclair ZX and Amstrad. Probably.

Going back to an earlier post (sorry, lost it) re has anybody had a SORN
inspection? Not exactly, but I had my E inspected some years ago in order
to retain the original registration. Bit of a hoot, really - half the body
was in Reigate, the rest in Woodhatch, the engine/gearbox in Merstham - it
was basically smeared over half of Surrey. Oh, and the instruments were in
Manchester. Never mind, the suit seemed happy to climb over piles of junk
in a lock-up to confirm that the bulkhead was there as this is apparently
the bit wot defines the car.

Geoff MacK

Roger (Roger ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

Seriously, the FBHVC is strongly onto this sort of thing. If you're not
a member of an FBHVC-affiliated club, hassle your club to join - or
join a club that is.

FBHVC?

http://www.fbhvc.co.uk/

Have a read of the newsletters for the kind of high-level communication
they've got.

On or around Sun, 27 Jan 2008 10:10:33 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
enlightened us thusly:


See what I mean Mr Shackles?

A grovelling apology would now be nice. Unless you're just a troll. ;-)

I don't do grovelling. I will apologise for the implication that it was you
who started on about registration, since it wasn't.

However, my comments were based not solely on this thread. You seem to have
a habit of taking a contrary point of view regardless, in this group. This
may of course only be an impression I've formed, and not deliberate policy
on your part, but nevertheless, it IS the impression I've formed.

In general I don't contemplate killfile entries lightly; since apart from
the clearly terminally stupid or malicious types who seek only to post
complete drivel or pointless profanity, (normally seem to get them in school
holidays) almost everyone has something worth reading to say sometimes, even
if I don't always agree with them.

--
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!

On or around Sun, 27 Jan 2008 10:16:32 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
enlightened us thusly:

In article ,
Mike G wrote:

Bearing that in mind I don't see how repeatedly having to notify the
^^^^^^^^^^
DVLA that a car is still off the road once it has been declared as such
helps keep track of a vehicle. It would still be an offence if it were
sold without notifying the DVLA, so I can't see why it is necessary.

That would be going back to what existed only a few years ago. The DVLA
decided on SORN to try and help sort out the number of 'untaxed' vehicles
around. Since it costs no more than a stamp I really can't see what the
fuss is about.

See what I mean? I'm not advocating getting rid of SORN, and never was, and
neither is Mike G. it's the repeated declaration that's the waste of
resources, and it's not just the stamp, it's the waste of resources by the
DVLA as well. And yes, you can do it online, but it's still a waste of
resources, for no gain that I can see. If there was an annual charge for
SORN, as with VED, there'd be a reason for renewing it annually. But there
isn't.

--
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!

In article ,
Austin Shackles wrote:
On or around Sun, 27 Jan 2008 10:10:33 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
enlightened us thusly:


See what I mean Mr Shackles?

A grovelling apology would now be nice. Unless you're just a troll. ;-)

I don't do grovelling. I will apologise for the implication that it was
you who started on about registration, since it wasn't.

I suppose that's better than nothing.

However, my comments were based not solely on this thread. You seem to
have a habit of taking a contrary point of view regardless, in this
group.

Which group? You've cross posted. If you mean alt.fan.landrover I no
longer read it and have removed it from this reply.

This may of course only be an impression I've formed, and not
deliberate policy on your part, but nevertheless, it IS the impression
I've formed.

Fine. Well, if all you want is a series of 'AOLs' in every thread there's
not much point in reading them. The idea surely is to debate a point?

In general I don't contemplate killfile entries lightly; since apart
from the clearly terminally stupid or malicious types who seek only to
post complete drivel or pointless profanity, (normally seem to get them
in school holidays) almost everyone has something worth reading to say
sometimes, even if I don't always agree with them.

Who you wish to killfile is your business. If you think I'd lose sleep or
somehow be offended if you told the world you'd killfiled me, you're
mistaken.

--
*Reality is the illusion that occurs due to the lack of alcohol *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Austin Shackles wrote:
On or around Sun, 27 Jan 2008 10:16:32 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
enlightened us thusly:

In article ,
Mike G wrote:

Bearing that in mind I don't see how repeatedly having to notify the
^^^^^^^^^^
DVLA that a car is still off the road once it has been declared as
such helps keep track of a vehicle. It would still be an offence if
it were sold without notifying the DVLA, so I can't see why it is
necessary.

That would be going back to what existed only a few years ago. The DVLA
decided on SORN to try and help sort out the number of 'untaxed'
vehicles around. Since it costs no more than a stamp I really can't see
what the fuss is about.

See what I mean? I'm not advocating getting rid of SORN, and never was,
and neither is Mike G. it's the repeated declaration that's the waste
of resources, and it's not just the stamp, it's the waste of resources
by the DVLA as well. And yes, you can do it online, but it's still a
waste of resources, for no gain that I can see. If there was an annual
charge for SORN, as with VED, there'd be a reason for renewing it
annually. But there isn't.

I'll try once more. *Any* database is only of much use if as up to date
as possible. Look at the electoral register - they require you to give
details of who is living in your house regularly - even if there have
been no changes for years. Relying on an individual only contacting them
when there is a material change simply doesn't work. Many would forget or
just wouldn't bother. So you make it an act of commission rather than
omission.

If you'd ever run any database - like say a car club one - you'd know
this to be the case. Now you can't force anyone to give you up to date
information for this - but the government can. And I think this thread has
confirmed just why it has to be as it is.

--
*No hand signals. Driver on Viagra*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.