On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 03:55:52 GMT, AstraVanMan in message
I fully accept that this type of measure will make very little difference to those determined to commit the offence. As with almost all anti-crime legislation of recent years, it is the "casual" criminals who will be most affected.
Is it just me 890Quite! In SE London, pretty much all BMW drivers make absolutely sure that they have their fogs on all the...
I wouldn't go so far as to say "law abiding".
Nor am I suggesting they *actually* forget. But they know they will probably get away with it if they claim to have forgotten, at least in the first month.
And they may be mostly law abiding, but don't regard dodging tax as particularly criminal - I think there are a lot of people who will dodge tax if they think they can get away with it, who wouldn't dream of committing crimes against other individuals, or even against most businesses.
And for these people, it feels like much more of a crime to do something positive, like falsely declaring SORN, than to just not renew their tax.
I believe those people probably account for a larger number of untaxed vehicles than the hardened criminals, or even the habitual petty criminals do.
SORN scam 889And they still probably will. The SORN fine system isn't *that* efficient, you know. I have in my hand here a "Failure to relicense vehicle" letter saying that the car had no tax as of...
You clearly believe otherwise, but neither of us have any real evidence regarding what types of people are more commonly driving untaxed vehicles.
But even if I am wrong, and the type of people I am talking about are only a small proportion, this will make *some* difference. It is only if they are a completely insignificant proportion that it will make no noticeable difference.
-- Alex Heney Global Villager Gargle twice daily - see if your neck leaks. To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTPLUSDOTcom
