new driving licence

lutonmatt

The Torque Meister
Points
197
Location
chatham kent
Car
82 trans am kitt
got a letter today saying my driving licence photo is up for renewal

well i was waiting for the letter as i saw it runs out in january

but what i did not know it costs 20 quid just for a new photo

everything you do now costs you money

plus they tell you to do it by the post office and its quicker but then the post office will charge you for there time doing it
 
ya think that is due next year or year after least they are only every 10 years

but plus you have to get a new pic and find the time to do it all
 
I received the same letter a couple of weeks back. I voluntarily joined the photocard license scheme back in 1998, and paid £15 for the 'privilege' back then.

Now I'm told that I MUST renew my photocard. At a cost of £20. As far as I'm concerned my license is valid until 27 May 2040, as it was when I had the paper only license.

The paper part of my 'new' license does not have an expiry date upon it. I have queried this with the TVP. TVP says that they would not be concerned with an outdated photocard but that the expiry date of the license is now printed upon the card.

They are correct. It is. That date is 12/11/2010.

So, given that my paper license no longer has an expiry date upon it, what does that tell me?

That I should refer to the photocard? Well, it doesn't say that I should do that.

What it tells me is that my license does not expire at all!!!

Government propaganda tells all of us that this photocard business is to stop illegal license usage.

It doesn't work, does it.

So I shall renew it, under protest. I am not willing to utilise the court system as a mechanism to present my point of view. To do so would leave me in contempt of court.

Watch this space.
 
I think the idea is that like on a passport, your photo doesn't age as you do. But it does seem a little pointless as unlike a passport, a driving licence isn't a legal form of identification. So aye, it's a ripoff.
 
ya they dont tell you that you have to renew the photocard every 10 years i only knew about it when the first lot of cards come up and someone got done for there photocard being out of date

like yugguy said i can see why i look nothing like my pic 10 years ago but to charge you 20 quid for doing it is a bit much
plus then next year when i do my bike test i have to send it off again no doult pay more money to have the bike part put on
 
I will go the appointed Post Office to renew mine before 12 Dec 2010. And I will part company with twenty quid.

And whilst there I will hand over an invoice for my expenses incurred.

I will ask that the invoice is submitted to the DVLA.

Let's see what response I get :)
 
:lol: @ HDi - if you get somewhere with this let us know, they will then be receiving a barrage of invoices no doubt.

Loz: dont think its just 20 quid for your passport now, i had to have mine done overseas and they charge 200 quid.

Thank goodness that this thread appeared as it hadnt crossed my mind about the photo license expiring (must say when i got it years ago i didnt give it more than a passing glance). had just presumed it would be valid until i was 70.
 
Nope new passport in Feb cost me £76

thats the worst thing your license is actally valid till your 70 but the picture has to be changed every 10 years.
yet a change of name and address is free
 
I could be wrong here, but is it not free if you change your address? If it is, then just change one simple detail of your address, e.g remove your street or county, and place a photo in the envelope and hope for the best?? :confused:

Might work :D
 
I think it's another £20 the post office charge. I need a new passport & I've been putting that off for the same reason. :lol:

Passports are well worth renewing as soon as possible.

If it lapses you have to go through an interview process - ugh!
 
Have we all suddenly moved to the USA? I thought we spelt Licence with a c over here in the UK :)

I still have my green paper licence so Ya Bo Sucks to all you suckers :)
 
License and licence are interchangeable for this purpose. To give 'license', or permission to do something is always license.

But the name for a bit of paper or photocard/paper thing seems to be less rigorous.

I will get nowhere with my protest I know but I'd rather comply under protest than fail to comply in silence.

Courts are not the places to make a point and I'd have to lie and say I didn't receive the letter telling me to replace the photocard when I know full well that I did. Perjury is a serious offence.

Ironically I shall be using the same photo as last time and that will be accepted because I look little different.
 
Cambridge Dictionary definition:

licence noun

UK (US license) /ˈlaɪ.sənt s/ n


[C] an official document which gives you permission to own, do or use something, usually after you have paid money and/or taken a testa dog licence
a driving licence/US driver's license
a TV licence



[S or U] formal permission or freedom to do what you wantAs parents, they allowed their children very little licence.
[+ to infinitive] He was given licence to reform the organization.


This seems to say that the UK uses Licence and the USA license.
 
Quoting OG: Have we all suddenly moved to the USA?

If you want to be picky then please don't split infinitives.

But I like being picky :)

Nothing wrong with split infinitives. There is no English language rule that states infinitives can't be split.
 
Last edited:
But I like being picky :)

Nothing wrong with split infinitives. There is no English language rule that states infinitives can't be split.

To boldly go where no man has gone before?

The rule against split infinitives comes from latin where it is impossible to split the verb as there is no 'to'.
 
To boldly go where no man has gone before?

The rule against split infinitives comes from latin where it is impossible to split the verb as there is no 'to'.

Ah, but that is a rule is in Latin where, as you say, it is impossible (so, actually, no rule is required). We, generally, speak English over here, which is made up from many languages and has a 'to' so doesn't have to adhere to Latin 'rules'. If Latin had a 'to', split infinitives would have been possible and we wouldn't be having this argument as I doubt they would have made a rule to ban the use of it :)
 

Similar threads


Please watch this on my YouTube channel & Subscribe.


Back
Top