How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Jo C. Your Own Question
Jo C.
Jo C., Barrister
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 71051
Experience:  Over 5 years in practice
Type Your Law Question Here...
Jo C. is online now

I have recently exported cars to Cyprus that are cat c recorded.

Customer Question

I have recently exported cars to Cyprus that are cat c recorded. After speaking to dvla they advised me that a vic check is not required for a vehicle that is being exported and that an export certificate can be issued in place of a registration document.
After speaking to dvla I purchased the first car, and applied for an export certificate, then exported it. I did receive an export certificate, and registered the car in Cyprus.
Being happy that the process works, I purchased a further 5 cars and applied for export certificate, and exported the cars, but this time dvla replied with , we cannot issue an export certificate without a vic check. The problem is the cars are now stuck in customs in Cyprus costing huge storage charges because I have no documents to customs clear these cars.
Dvla are unwilling to help, even tho they admit they have issued me this document before 3 weeks on a different car with the same criteria.
Any help?
Submitted: 2 years ago.
Category: Law
Expert:  Jo C. replied 2 years ago.
Thank you for your question. My name is ***** ***** I will try to help with this.
What would you like to know about this please?
Customer: replied 2 years ago.
Since deal have set a precedent ,in issuing me with this export certificate, in my due diligence stage, can I claim compensation from dvla for my expenses incurred, more importantly I want to know, can I force dvla to supply me with export certificates, since this was not my fault that I was misled.
Expert:  Jo C. replied 2 years ago.
No, I am sorry.
I am afraid the first incident doesn't amount to a binding precedent. Either it was wrong or the DVLA are wrong this time. Either way, it makes no real difference. The fact that they did this previously doesn't mean they are committed to it in the future.
In terms of compensation, you don't have a contract with the DVLA so there is no breach of contract argument.
You could argue that they have been negligent in their advice and clearly one or the other must be wrong. However, this is pure economic loss which is not a head of compensation arising from the tort of negligence.
The Cypriot customs will be able to find a way through this though. I don't practice in Cyprus but they will not keep these cars in customs forever. Either they can be retuned or they can be imported in some way. Before EU standardisation you just had to have the relevant works done in the country in question.
I'm very sorry but I have to give you truthful information.
Can I clarify anything for you?
Customer: replied 2 years ago.
I appreciate that we have no contract, but the fact that they were negligent in their service and advise has led me to near financial ruin, and simply returning the cars to the UK, comes at a cost of apx £1000 per car, the value of the cars is almost equal to the transport costs.
Expert:  Jo C. replied 2 years ago.
Yes, I understand.
But that is pure economic loss.
This case
is the seminal one covering the issue of pure economic loss.
Customer: replied 2 years ago.
Is economic loss not the whole point of small claims courts? And is it not the negligence of one party that causes the financial loss of another party , that the small claims court deals with.
Expert:  Jo C. replied 2 years ago.
Pure economic loss is not a head of compensation for the tort of negligence.
Customer: replied 2 years ago.
Well, I have read the general points of that case, and I don't see the relevance, apart from on going consequential loss was rejected by appeal court, but the initial compensation was up held.
And power water and gas supplies can be interrupted for a number of reasons and any business sensitive to interruption , however caused should have contingency plans in place.
Hardly the same situation.
Expert:  Jo C. replied 2 years ago.
No, of course the facts are not the same.
But the principle is the issue.
Im happy to continue with this but please leave feedback for my answer.
Customer: replied 2 years ago.
Yes I will leave feed back when we finish. Compensation, is the last thing I want. I want Dvla to issue export certificates, as they led me to believe, and subsequently did issue for the same category car, that they now say can not be issued and that the previous advice and issuance of certificate was a mistake by dvla.
I know they can make an exception in this case.
I am not asking them to continue to supply them in the future, just the immediate ones that they left me in the lurch with. Much the same as the Spartan steel case.
if I understood it correctly the work in progress was compensated, just the future loss of profit on the following orders that have not commenced when the negligence occurred, was rejected.
Expert:  Jo C. replied 2 years ago.
I don't think there is any more I can add so will opt out.