Don’t rely on DVLA when buying a used vehicle
THERE are many potential pitfalls when buying a used vehicle but the one thing you would think you can rely on is information contained at DVLA about the vehicle. Unfortunately, this is not always the case, as Robert from Kettering found out when he uncovered a major flaw with DVLA records. Robert purchased a Toyota Rav4 for £11,490 from a private seller. The advert stated that the vehicle was ‘first registered’ in 2013 and showed the number plate as a ‘63’ plate, which indeed signifies the year of manufacture as 2013. Before making the purchase Robert carried out an HPI check which came back clear and also recorded that the vehicle had a 63 year plate. Three months after purchasing the vehicle, Robert took it in for a service. He then received a shocking phone call from the dealership who informed him that the vehicle was in fact a 2011 model. Robert naturally could not understand this as the V5, issued by DVLA – a Government department – stated that the vehicle was registered in 2013. So what happened? It transpired that the car was indeed a 2011 model and that it had first been registered in Japan. It was then imported into the UK and the buyer at the time applied to DVLA to register the vehicle in the UK. That same buyer informed DVLA that the year of manufacture was 2013 – hence why the vehicle was designated with a 2013 number plate. This story highlights two major issues with DVLA. Firstly, the ‘date of first registration’ as shown on a V5 is highly misleading. This therefore means the date when the vehicle was first registered with DVLA – so why does it not say ‘Date of first registration in the UK’? Secondly, DVLA carry out no due diligence as to the provenance of a vehicle being registered with them. Instead they simply accept everything they are told by the person or entity registering the vehicle. This is absurd, given the great reliance that dealerships and individuals place on V5 documents. It is also surprising given the fact that there are international databases that show if a vehicle has a history in another country that DVLA can access. My view is that Robert therefore has a case to claim compensation against the DVLA here. I would be interested to hear from anyone else that has found themselves in a similar situation.