Major tax fraud linked to the registration of luxury cars

jetfiremuck

These must be all pre 08 vehicles. Ffs 7 years old. Reason for cheating is big disparity/value between pre and post 08. If road tax was more reasonable the level of cheating would be less. Full vrt was paid on these cars anway as its customs/nct resposnibility to ensure vin and engine capacity are matched. They well know how to stick you when you clear a car with an optional leather steering wheel.

BarryD

I don't think Atlantic Dawn is arguing that the insurance companies be tax collectors but that insurance companies normally price their policies on the basis of engine capacity etc. If someone makes a fraudulent claim that the engine in their car is smaller than in reality to save on car tax and uses the same basis for insurance purposes, the question that arose is - are they insured? Clearly this practice is not in the insurance companies interest just as clearly it isn't for the taxman??

Special Circumstances

ShaunieVW wrote: »

I had a 530d which was 2 litre tax but still insured as 3 litres. Only person who lost out was the tax office, hardly the biggest crime of the century. If they were incorrectly declared to insurance then that's a different matter.

How did the "inaccuracy" come about?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

BarryD

ShaunieVW wrote: »

Only person who lost out was the tax office, hardly the biggest crime of the century.

Eh, what about the rest of the compliant tax paying public? Who in theory would pay more to make up for those for pay less?

jetfiremuck

Jesus and all along i believed the badges on the back of the Beemers and Mercs were all you needed to know lol.

daRobot

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

They don't have a get out. The car is insured correctly, if they have declared it to the insurance company as such. The tax status of the car does not affect cover.

daRobot

BarryD wrote: »

I don't think Atlantic Dawn is arguing that the insurance companies be tax collectors but that insurance companies normally price their policies on the basis of engine capacity etc. If someone makes a fraudulent claim that the engine in their car is smaller than in reality to save on car tax and uses the same basis for insurance purposes, the question that arose is - are they insured? Clearly this practice is not in the insurance companies interest just as clearly it isn't for the taxman??

No, that's not what we were discussing.

If the car is a 530d and the person has told their insurance company that it is a 2.0d, when there's a 6cyl diesel up front, they are not insured, there is no question of that.

Special Circumstances

BarryD wrote: »

Eh, what about the rest of the compliant tax paying public? Who in theory would pay more to make up for those for pay less?

I'd say the boys with fiddled registrations must feel very hard done by to have this dropped on them the week of cheltenham. It's gonna take from the thrill of washing their pillow case money through the bookies...

flutered

Dermo123 wrote: »

If a person declares the correct engine size to their insurer then the insurance company cannot really have a basis to restrict a claim because of a lower engine size on the logbook. The high premium was paid so they should be fully insured.
Now I would understand if it was the other way around!!!!

do not all insurance companys have the data base at their fingertips, any time i insure a car they have all the details for me, btw as regards the nct, the car i am driving had 109k when i bought it, the nct claimed 54k as the milage, so i am thinging that the das had to be changed, it is a renault kangoo btw, who are rather famous for electrical probs

kona

Wossack wrote: »

any 1.3 turbo Glanza's?

They wouldn't care as they ain't tax fraud. Both turbo and non turbo pay the same tax.


Lets not forget the real thieves here, the green parties two tier tax system.

Put the tax on the fuel, simples.

Irishcrx

kona wrote: »

They wouldn't care as they ain't tax fraud. Both turbo and non turbo pay the same tax.


Lets not forget the real thieves here, the green parties two tier tax system.

Put the tax on the fuel, simples.

WHAT????...but that'd be fair sure!! wheres the profit in fair play??

Atlantic Dawn

BarryD wrote: »

I don't think Atlantic Dawn is arguing that the insurance companies be tax collectors but that insurance companies normally price their policies on the basis of engine capacity etc. If someone makes a fraudulent claim that the engine in their car is smaller than in reality to save on car tax and uses the same basis for insurance purposes, the question that arose is - are they insured? Clearly this practice is not in the insurance companies interest just as clearly it isn't for the taxman??

Yes it's a means for them to get out of the claim, they look to get out of claims over technicalities. Similarly if you were to insure your car for double its actual value they will only give you the book value regardless of the extra premium you have paid. A car which has a different engine on the logbook than is in the car has little or no resale value until this "intentional fraud/clerical error" has been removed.

Pic from RTÉ news of an M3, someone doesn't incorrectly declare a 3.2 litre engine in an M3 as 2 litre due to any simple error...

Special Circumstances

Irishcrx wrote: »

[/B]

WHAT????...but that'd be fair sure!! wheres the profit in fair play??

Indeed, a level playing field? No room for the winky winky nudgey nudgey "What you pay depends on who you know" ? Pandemonium boy, riots in the streets.

9935452

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

i doubt it because the turbo and N/A are the exact same cc.

The crack with the glanzas was basically an insurance scam. Getting a cheaper quote because the car 'had no turbo' on the system

kona

Irishcrx wrote: »

[/B]

WHAT????...but that'd be fair sure!! wheres the profit in fair play??

A idiot tax in this country aimed at politicians and the like who make these laws would yield more than catching some lad driving a m3 paying 2l tax.

Remember the lad is still being bent over for 710 a year if he's mental enough to pay it upfront.

Irishcrx

kona wrote: »

A idiot tax in this country aimed at politicians and the like who make these laws would yield more than catching some lad driving a m3 paying 2l tax.

Remember the lad is still being bent over for 710 a year if he's mental enough to pay it upfront.

The worst thing about it is , they tax the ****e outta fuel anyway...and we pay massive motor tax...It's another classic Ireland double hitter...

Special Circumstances

Irishcrx wrote: »

The worst thing about it is , they tax the ****e outta fuel anyway...and we pay massive motor tax...It's another classic Ireland double hitter...

If it makes you feel any better, some cute hoor with a stack of cash in hand money is running a 530d regged as a 2L on agri diesel and laughing his hole off at you?

kona

Special Circumstances wrote: »

If it makes you feel any better, some cute hoor with a stack of cash in hand money is running a 530d regged as a 2L on agri diesel and laughing his hole off at you?

Just ban diesels too

Seriously this agri diesel and road diesel is nonsense too

muckwarrior

Not sure how an insurance company could legitimately refuse to pay based on the wrong cc engine under the bonnet. My car is a 1.3, 1.7 on the book, insured as a 2.6 and yet it's all above board :rolleyes:

kona

muckwarrior wrote: »

Not sure how an insurance company could legitimately refuse to pay based on the wrong cc engine under the bonnet. My car is a 1.3, 1.7 on the book, insured as a 2.6 and yet it's all above board :rolleyes:

Your car is a rotary engine, there's different ways to calculate volume in them as opposed to a piston engine.

I agree with ya tho, they do what they want when it suits them and by that I mean what way they can ride ya the most for cash.

Special Circumstances

Volume is volume. God help us if Irish politicians and civil servants were to re-evaluate the laws of nature, nmaths, physics...
I really have no problem with rotary owners taxing their cars as 1.3 because they are just following the rules.
Do two stroke engines of capacity X get charged a different rate versus a four stroke of capacity x? No. (admittedly I'm struggling to come up with an example, some micro car with a wierd engine?)

Duke O Smiley

Ha.

Haha.

Hahahahahahaahah.

Glad.

kona

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Volume is volume. God help us if Irish politicians and civil servants were to re-evaluate the laws of nature, nmaths, physics...
I really have no problem with rotary owners taxing their cars as 1.3 because they are just following the rules.
Do two stroke engines of capacity X get charged a different rate versus a four stroke of capacity x? No. (admittedly I'm struggling to come up with an example, some micro car with a wierd engine?)

It's not a rotary completes its cycle over 1080 degrees and a 4 stroke piston engine over 720 degrees. Therefore you cannot compare their volumes as equal.

Personally I couldn't care less 1.3 tax on a rx7 twin turbo happy days.

Yet if you put the tax on the fuel......

Duiske

Korat wrote: »

This invalidates their insurance as well.

They'd be liable for all the damages if they hit anyone.

Insurance company would still be obliged to pay 3rd party claims, but they can then go after the policy holder to recoup the money. In a case like this, the insurance company might not even chase the policy holder. What chance have they recovering possibly €10,000's from some tight git would risk having his car seized rather than pay an extra €20pw motor tax.

Special Circumstances

kona wrote: »

It's not a rotary completes its cycle over 1080 degrees and a 4 stroke piston engine over 720 degrees. Therefore you cannot compare their volumes as equal.

So, in a class of vehicle where an engine of capacity X could be 2stroke or 4stroke, which should be taxed more or less?
Why make the exception for rotaries only? ( Although I'm sure their owners are happy about the by on the emissions test...)

Supergurrier

Motor tax rates have got out of hand anyway.

Especially when you consider most of the people taxing pre 08 cars are not exactly flush.

Tax on fuel is the only fair system.
- Polluter pays (drive more pay more/want a lowmpg car then you pay for it that way)
- Less office work/hassle
- Evasion becomes almost impossible
- Weekend cars become a reality

kona

Special Circumstances wrote: »

So, in a class of vehicle where an engine of capacity X could be 2stroke or 4stroke, which should be taxed more or less?
Why make the exception for rotaries only? ( Although I'm sure their owners are happy about the by on the emissions test...)

Two stroke would be doubled as they are 360 degree cycles

I'm just saying this is how to even it out since 4 stroke is the norm .

The problem with all this is that there's such a mess with loopholes etc that people can and will take advantage.

Tax on fuel and there's no avoiding it at all. No bull****. Give the farmers a tax break or something to please them.

Special Circumstances

kona wrote: »

Two stroke would be doubled as they are 360 degree cycles
I'm just saying this is how to even it out since 4 stroke is the norm .

Oh I know how it works, I'm just saying I've never seen 2 stroke and 4 stroke differentiated in tax (admittedly there's very few trabants around), so why differentiate for rotary. It's academic and pedantic and off topic anyway, lets get back to the schadenfreude fest for the tax dodgers...

Idbatterim

Especially when you consider most of the people taxing pre 08 cars are not exactly flush.

Tax on fuel is the only fair system.
- Polluter pays (drive more pay more/want a lowmpg car then you pay for it that way)
- Less office work/hassle
- Evasion becomes almost impossible
- Weekend cars become a reality

they should simply pull back the ridiculous higher rates i.e. from 2.6L up IMO, keep cars in the country on the road and tax compliant... Something like maybe E1200 max One of the reboot Ireland proposals I saw suggested was lowering the motor tax on "large" engined cars under the cc system...

kona

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Oh I know how it works, I'm just saying I've never seen 2 stroke and 4 stroke differentiated in tax (admittedly there's very few trabants around), so why differentiate for rotary. It's academic and pedantic and off topic anyway, lets get back to the schadenfreude fest for the tax dodgers...

Because rotary make lots of power and cost lots of money so since the government don't want anybody to have fun on the cheap they just pull a figure out of their bum. Bit like vrt!

Cee-Jay-Cee

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

What they should have in law is any car where they CC is being reduced by an engine replacement should have to present to NCT for engine testing and cerification.

A simple trawl of Donedeal for the "xyz on Book" merchants would bring in hundreds of cars.

Unless the NCT tester strips the engine snd measures cubic capacity then in many cases there isn't any other way to tell.

This mainly happens with imported cars and not newly registered irish cars as it easier to change particulars on import paper work before its handed over to revenue

kona

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

Unless the NCT tester strips the engine snd measures cubic capacity then in many cases there isn't any other way to tell.

This mainly happens with imported cars and not newly registered irish cars as it easier to change particulars on import paper work before its handed over to revenue

Engine number , turbos and the amount of spark plugs is a giveaway.

Most petrol head could spot one without opening the bonnet.

Supergurrier

Funny thing about this is I would probably buy adiesel ecobox daily if tax was on fuel. Just not viable/able to justify 1300e a year tax on a car thats not used much.

(Hilarious thing to have to say about an 8 year old Ford Focus but there it is)

Technoprisoner

everyone is going on about the road tax....what about the vrt that is lost due to cars being imported and different cc on the log book....i know yoiu cant really get away with that now because the car is inspected but back in the day cars were been registered as all sorts

BeachView

How much would they save? Would think anyone with a bmw 3 litre would not be short of money to pay tax

kona

BeachView wrote: »

How much would they save? Would think anyone with a bmw 3 litre would not be short of money to pay tax

Save nearly a grand a year. 3l BMW can be bought for less than some Eco ****box. Madness really, tax bands have caused the car prices in this country to be bizzare

BarryD

Supergurrier wrote: »

Motor tax rates have got out of hand anyway.

Especially when you consider most of the people taxing pre 08 cars are not exactly flush.

Tax on fuel is the only fair system.
- Polluter pays (drive more pay more/want a lowmpg car then you pay for it that way)
- Less office work/hassle
- Evasion becomes almost impossible
- Weekend cars become a reality

Increase tax on fuel? Two or three things come to mind:

- you put greater costs onto law abiding rural folk, as they inevitably have to drive further to access normal things like shops, schools, jobs. Public transport ain't an option in most places as there is none and what there is here & there, is being eroded.

- some rural folk will use green diesel. We've had diesel motors since 2003, use auto diesel but never been checked once in that time.

- you hit the road haulage industry and push up other costs in shops etc., that way.

Supergurrier

BarryD wrote: »

Increase tax on fuel? Two or three things come to mind:

- you put greater costs onto law abiding rural folk, as they inevitably have to drive further to access normal things like shops, schools, jobs. Public transport ain't an option in most places as there is none and what there is here & there, is being eroded.Most rural folk driving diesels are paying over the odd's as it is in pre CO2 system cars, will probably work out cheaper unless doing huge milage

- some rural folk will use green diesel. We've had diesel motors since 2003, use auto diesel but never been checked once in that time. Kind of Illegal sorry

- you hit the road haulage industry and push up other costs in shops etc., that way. Tax rebate

colm_mcm

How is using auto diesel kinda illegal.

Supergurrier

colm_mcm wrote: »

How is using auto diesel kinda illegal.

The suggestion of using green is, im rural also and is alot using it.

BlatentCheek

Is this not nearly yesterdays news?

If they're bringing in water charges surely motor tax will be reduced back to reasonable levels...surely?

Long Time Lurker

Lads, as these cars were seized doesn't that mean that unless all outstanding penalties are paid then these cars won't go for auction. Instead they'll be crushed. Now that's a crime.

vectra

Long Time Lurker wrote: »

Lads, as these cars were seized doesn't that mean that unless all outstanding penalties are paid then these cars won't go for auction. Instead they'll be crushed. Now that's a crime.

Not really,
I remember an ST220 was impounded for vrt non payment. The owner got certain time to sort it and never did, The car was converted to a Traffic car and am sure many of you faw it in your rear view mirrors. 03-D I think it was.

My point being there could be lots of M3's and M5's etc. patrolling our roads one of these days.

PrettyBoy

vectra wrote: »

My point being there could be lots of M3's and M5's etc. patrolling our roads one of these days.

Never going to happen.

coylemj

PrettyBoy wrote: »

Never going to happen.

Didn't the cops get one of those bulletproof BMWs that was seized (probably by CAB) from the Dundon gang in Limerick?

nice_guy80

Delighted for them!
Jail and a hefty tax bill

R1_Pete

Better sell my 1.6tdi 911 before the next nct

Long Time Lurker

Wait till they twig all the LPG converted 350z car vans running on vat reclaimable forklift gas

Oh I've gone and done it now :-)

joe912

The only fraud here is been pepertrated by the government