Crosswords0 min ago
vehicle ownership
17 Answers
is there anyway of finding out who is the registered owner of a vehicle?
Answers
1 to 17 of 17
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by theparrots. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
A pedantic (but possibly relevant) post:
There is no such thing as a 'registered owner' of a vehicle. The DVLA records only show who the 'registered keeper' is. That is frequently someone completely different to the actual owner of a vehicle. For example, Acme Leasing might own a vehicle which is leased to Bloggs & Co, who in turn provide it as a company car to their employee, Fred Smith. The registered keeper ought to be Fred Smith (since he's the one who'll be collecting speeding tickets in it) but it's actually more likely to be the company secretary of Bloggs and Co, even though neither of them owns the vehicle.
There is no register of the owners of vehicles, only of their keepers.
Chris
There is no such thing as a 'registered owner' of a vehicle. The DVLA records only show who the 'registered keeper' is. That is frequently someone completely different to the actual owner of a vehicle. For example, Acme Leasing might own a vehicle which is leased to Bloggs & Co, who in turn provide it as a company car to their employee, Fred Smith. The registered keeper ought to be Fred Smith (since he's the one who'll be collecting speeding tickets in it) but it's actually more likely to be the company secretary of Bloggs and Co, even though neither of them owns the vehicle.
There is no register of the owners of vehicles, only of their keepers.
Chris
thank you its just that i have always bought my son his vehicles and taxed and insured them, but now that he has moved away and we have lost contact im not sure if the last vehicle is still in my name or if he has transfered it to himself, the reason i am enquiring is that i feel the insuranse is due any time soon.
-- answer removed --
It is correct that the DVLA deliberately states its record as being that of keepers, not owners (although the two may at times be one and the same). However, they contradict themselves when they state that if you sell a vehicle you MUST inform the DVLA without delay. Moreover, if someone wants to tax a vehicle, without being the keeper or owner then he/she may be refused that service, particularly if the insurance and registration document is in two different names. The consequence is that, for example if you are the owner, your son is the keeper, but you want to insure and tax it for him then "the system" will refuse to cooperate with you to maintain that position - even though the system was ostensibly designed for precisely that. They are trying to avoid resposibility for sorting out ownership arguments while ensuring who is responsiuble for infringements (speeding, parking, etc.), yet they deliberately meddle in things in a way that implies another aim. Thus, in practice, the DVLA is trying to do two things at once and achieving neither - the system is a mess that, to my knowledge, is unique to this country.
It is the law of the land not DVLA that dictates actions and responsibilities in regard of the vehicle register.
The law states that the Registered Keeper (intended to be the primary, usual driver) of the vehicle has legal responsibility to ensure the vehicle complies with road traffic law (Tax, MOT etc.). If the owner is not the keeper then the owner should not involve themself in these matters let alone a person who is neither keeper nor owner. If the keeper is not able to sort out their legal obligations for themself they shouldn't have control of the car. It makes perfect sense for there to be only one person as point of contact for a vehicle - the Registered Keeper.
The law states that DVLA must be informed when a vehicle is "sold or transferred" resulting in the change of keeper - "transferred" to cover a keeper to new keeper exchange; "sold" to cover those transfers where the keeper is also the legal owner.
The law states that the Registered Keeper (intended to be the primary, usual driver) of the vehicle has legal responsibility to ensure the vehicle complies with road traffic law (Tax, MOT etc.). If the owner is not the keeper then the owner should not involve themself in these matters let alone a person who is neither keeper nor owner. If the keeper is not able to sort out their legal obligations for themself they shouldn't have control of the car. It makes perfect sense for there to be only one person as point of contact for a vehicle - the Registered Keeper.
The law states that DVLA must be informed when a vehicle is "sold or transferred" resulting in the change of keeper - "transferred" to cover a keeper to new keeper exchange; "sold" to cover those transfers where the keeper is also the legal owner.
Well THANKS Chris, you've totally blown my cover !
How in hell did you manage to trace me (Frederick A Smith) through my leasing agent David Bloggs And Co to their clients Acme Motor Leasing of Burselem ?
I tried every trick in the book to cover my tracks now you've ruined the whole thing !!
I kept the speeding tickets under my mattress as instructed by Dave but what's the good of that now!!?
I'll probably go down for this!
HAPPY NOW !!?
You Utter UTTER ........
How in hell did you manage to trace me (Frederick A Smith) through my leasing agent David Bloggs And Co to their clients Acme Motor Leasing of Burselem ?
I tried every trick in the book to cover my tracks now you've ruined the whole thing !!
I kept the speeding tickets under my mattress as instructed by Dave but what's the good of that now!!?
I'll probably go down for this!
HAPPY NOW !!?
You Utter UTTER ........
It is universally the practice to ensure there is someone legally responsible for each and every road vehicle, mainly for tax and potential danger/crime considerations. To my knowledge, only the UK has when framing the law decided to exclude the ownership issue from the registration process by putting the responsibility on the "keeper" who legally is not necessarily the owner. The DVLA enacts the law on behalf of and under the direct oversight and direction of the legislative powers, and the DVLA's actions, records and requirements have a more or less unshakable legal status. Also, in the form of the DVLA, only the UK has fluffed the issue by nevertheless insisting on notification of sale or transfer of ownership (which should however be quite irrelevant) - thus directly contradicting its stated premise. This is a plain mess.
None of the earliest systems for vehicle registration were designed to confer legal title. Law to do such was only framed in a select number of jurisdictions after the fact e.g. the US developed a system for definitive ownership using Certificates of Title.
Here is a 2006 paper questioning whether Canada should implement a similar Title system...
http://docs.google.co...Motor_Vehicles_En.pdf
The Registered Keeper having prima facie liability for the vehicle needs no connection with ownership. We do not expect teachers to adopt pupils before accepting responsibility for their care. Involving DVLA with matters of ownership would result in more administration (= more cost to drivers).
Here is a 2006 paper questioning whether Canada should implement a similar Title system...
http://docs.google.co...Motor_Vehicles_En.pdf
The Registered Keeper having prima facie liability for the vehicle needs no connection with ownership. We do not expect teachers to adopt pupils before accepting responsibility for their care. Involving DVLA with matters of ownership would result in more administration (= more cost to drivers).
Hopefully a working version of that link again...
http://docs.google.co...Motor_Vehicles_En.pdf
http://docs.google.co...Motor_Vehicles_En.pdf
It appears that AB is having a problem with Google Document Quick Viewer...
http://www.ulcc.ca/en...Motor_Vehicles_En.pdf
http://www.ulcc.ca/en...Motor_Vehicles_En.pdf
It is of course a matter for each country to choose its own system, however, it is not very clever to define a system as being for registering keepers and deliberately maintain that this is not a register of owners, and then decide to insist that any keeper must advise the registration authority if he/she sells the vehicle (thus automatically assuming that it registers owners or at least that keepers can and do act as owners - an entirely nonsensical twist to the original premise). That is simple doubletalk or worse and it instantly brings the system into disrepute by contradicting itself. Over the past year I have personally experienced two different post offices taking opposite stances on this (one adopting the principle of keeper and not owner being relevant, the other the opposite) and two offices of the DVLA similarly having oposite approaches. While being a predictable result of a muddled system, this is not very clever, whatever loyalty/reverence one might have to/for the system - it is a mess and badly needs a fix. Bad systems lead to bad discipline and general disrespect for authority.
The wording may have changed over the years but in the last few months I sold a vehicle the registration document for which specifically told me that I must notify the DVLA if I sold the vehicle. The newest registration document I have access to repeatedly makes the linkage between existing keeper and owner and new keeper and buyer where it is difficult to interpret in any other way than the first two being one and the same party, the second two another and the same. There is a note at the bottom of page 3 ("Selling your vehicle privately") which states "The registered keeper (seller) must: Complete Section 6 of the Registration Certificate......return the page opposite .... to: DVLA....".
This is quite clear and beyond dispute - if I sell a vehicle I am no longer meant to be its registered keeper (even if that is what is intended by the buyer and myself), the new owner(buyer) must be recorded as the new keeper. The whole thing is not a register of keepers without their first also being owners but it is not stated (by the authorities) as a register of owners, only keepers.
If a prospective owner wants to at his expense tax a vehicle that is currently off the road in order that he can thereafter pay for the vehicle and immediately drive it away, both he and the current owner will possibly (it has happened but not in every case) be refused (because the insurance is in his name) unless the keepership is transferred to the owner-to-be. If that is done (as it has been) before payment has been made, the current owner is robbed of keepership (and the only legal document linking him to the vehicle - not that it proves ownership, as we know) before he has sold the vehicle and been paid.
The system is a hoot - yes, a joke - and it reflects badly on the people who try to run it. That is a pity because the responsibilities thus played with are very serious.
This is quite clear and beyond dispute - if I sell a vehicle I am no longer meant to be its registered keeper (even if that is what is intended by the buyer and myself), the new owner(buyer) must be recorded as the new keeper. The whole thing is not a register of keepers without their first also being owners but it is not stated (by the authorities) as a register of owners, only keepers.
If a prospective owner wants to at his expense tax a vehicle that is currently off the road in order that he can thereafter pay for the vehicle and immediately drive it away, both he and the current owner will possibly (it has happened but not in every case) be refused (because the insurance is in his name) unless the keepership is transferred to the owner-to-be. If that is done (as it has been) before payment has been made, the current owner is robbed of keepership (and the only legal document linking him to the vehicle - not that it proves ownership, as we know) before he has sold the vehicle and been paid.
The system is a hoot - yes, a joke - and it reflects badly on the people who try to run it. That is a pity because the responsibilities thus played with are very serious.
1 to 17 of 17
