SORN and a private road

[rotarymazda]

I have a car which will be SORN'd in a few weeks but I want to give it a run once in a while to stop things seizing up.

I live on a private road, a couple of miles long shared with 60 houses. Each of the residents own a share in the road and pay for its upkeep. Part of the road is a public footpath.

Would this road therefore be classed as private land for DLVA purposes?


Is it then legal to :

(1) Drive on this private road when SORN'd?
(2) Drive on this private road without insurance?

I tried searching on Pistonheads/DVLA/elsewhere and get conflicting answers.

[Impasse]

Who would pay for the neighbour's long term care should you knock one of them over while driving along this road?

[Randomthoughts]

I would imagine actually probably not. IANAL, but I think the DVLA tend to use the definition of a publically accessible road, rather than an adopted highway. Tracks are exempted, because you have to pay, and be let on to the track - 'private', ungated roads are probably fair game as far as the DVLA are concerned.

Whether that's truth or not, I haven't the foggiest, but I wouldn't be risking it. Rock it back and forwards on the drive, it's not as much fun but it's far less likely to end up in a legal battle, whether it's fair or not!

[tvrgit]

rotarymazda said:

Is it then legal to :

(1) Drive on this private road when SORN'd?
(2) Drive on this private road without insurance?

1. I think so - you need VED on a public highway (defined in law as "a highway maintainable at public expense" but not any other road;
2. No. Notwithstanding (1) above, it's still a highway (just privately maintained), with exactly the same rights of public access or passage (unless it's gated) - and insurance is needed not just on "public highways" but in "places with public access" as well.

roddyp said:

IANAL (Unlike others here) but really it's no different to driving on track ;-).

Oh yes it is - a track does not have "a public right of access or passage" so you don't need insurance under RTA.

[rotarymazda]

roddyp said:

Somebody, somewhere *does* own the road, and you should have an easement allowing you to use it. I suppose it's possible but unlikely that the easement requires you to have insurance. Check your house deeds.

Each of the 60 houses owns a share in the road and pays for its upkeep. We received the share certificate for it when we bought the house.

[tvrgit]

rotarymazda said:

Each of the 60 houses owns a share in the road and pays for its upkeep. We received the share certificate for it when we bought the house.

My answer still applies.

[Red Devil]

tvrgit said:

rotarymazda said:

Is it then legal to :

(1) Drive on this private road when SORN'd?
(2) Drive on this private road without insurance?

1. I think so - you need VED on a public highway (defined in law as "a highway maintainable at public expense" but not any other road;
2. No. Notwithstanding (1) above, it's still a highway (just privately maintained), with exactly the same rights of public access or passage (unless it's gated) - and insurance is needed not just on "public highways" but in "places with public access" as well.

roddyp said:

IANAL (Unlike others here) but really it's no different to driving on track ;-).

Oh yes it is - a track does not have "a public right of access or passage" so you don't need insurance under RTA.

Spot on re VED - see see VERA 1994 Section 62(1).

Insurance: is the road gated like this? Even then you need to be sure about it's legal status.
Look for a copy of Private Roads: The Legal Framework 5th edition.
http://www.privateroads.co.uk/media/31148/pr5%2020...
A public library with a good reference section may have one.

There is no compulsory insurance requirement for a track day
http://www.rmatrackdays.com/trackdays/track-day-fa...
They don't come under the definition of a road or highway.
That's why all standard policies exclude them.
You take the risk if you don't take out specific cover.

Edited by Red Devil on Wednesday 20th August 17:21

[Aretnap]

The OP says that part of the road is a public footpath. That part at least is certainly a public place gates or no gates, so insurance (though not tax) would be required to use a car on it.

[Zeeky]

rotarymazda said:

Is it then legal to :

(2) Drive on this private road without insurance?

If the answer to either of the following questions is yes, then you will need a valid insurance policy.

a) Is there a public right of way over the road? The fact that the road is private does not necessarily mean there is no public right of way over it..

b) If there is no public right of way do members of the public regularly use the road?

If you are in any doubt as to the answers then you should be insured.

[sherbertdip]

I thought you need valid insurance anyway in able to SORN it, and keep it insured?

Or am i talking rubbish???

[LoonR1]

sherbertdip said:

I thought you need valid insurance anyway in able to SORN it, and keep it insured?

Or am i talking rubbish???

You're talking rubbish.

You must have insurance if your vehicle is taxed. If it's SORNed then you don't need insurance, but you can still have it if you want.

[sherbertdip]

Thank you, I'm about to SORN a car, first time I'll have done it, and insurance will expire before i put it back on the road.

[Red Devil]

Zeeky said:

rotarymazda said:

Is it then legal to :

(2) Drive on this private road without insurance?

If the answer to either of the following questions is yes, then you will need a valid insurance policy.

a) Is there a public right of way over the road? The fact that the road is private does not necessarily mean there is no public right of way over it..

b) If there is no public right of way do members of the public regularly use the road?

If you are in any doubt as to the answers then you should be insured.

Re a). It doesn't necessarily mean there is either.

I agree 100% that, as a rule of thumb, it's always wise to assume you need insurance on the car unless it's on your own individual private property. What I said earlier still stands though. Before assuming you can declare SORN under CIE read the book. Not all 'roads' are the same.

Edited by Red Devil on Friday 22 August 13:28

[ging84]

i live on a new estate, the roads are due to be adopted by the local authority but have not been yet, so presumably these are exempt at the moment, but given that right now it's planned and almost guaranteed that the local authority will be the one who pays for any actual maintenance, because it won't need any for a while, so any wear and tear vehicles add now, will come out of public money eventually
i don't really know what i'm getting to be honest, can i keep a unicorn when horses are forbidden ?

[Dwight VanDriver]

Schedule 4 Para 34 of Finance Act 1995 inserted new Schedule 2A into Vera 1997 allowing Sec of State to make Regs re clamping/removal of unlicensed/unsorned vehicles in a public place (See SI 1997/2439 and SI 2008/2266) giving power to DVLA to clamp/uplift if continuous registration (sorn)breached on unadopted roads, those maintained by Housing Associations, public car parks etc. but other than parking areas associated with a dwelling.

The lane mentioned appears to be 'public place' so therefore one would at risk

dvd

Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Friday 22 August 07:52

[Zeeky]

I think you are confusing the circumstances in which a vehicle may be clamped/removed because it has been used in contravention of a SORN with the circumstances in which there is a contravention of a SORN. They are not the same.

An authorised person should struggle to show he has reason to believe a vehicle is being used on a public road if he hasn't checked the status of that road.

[Antony Moxey]

LoonR1 said:

sherbertdip said:

I thought you need valid insurance anyway in able to SORN it, and keep it insured?

Or am i talking rubbish???

You're talking rubbish.

You must have insurance if your vehicle is taxed. If it's SORNed then you don't need insurance, but you can still have it if you want.

I have a kit car that's SORNed as I'm in the middle of upgrades and it's in the garage in bits. I have insurance but at a much lower premium (obviously) as a just in case. The insurers are aware of this and the premiums will go back to normal once it's back on the road.

[Red Devil]

Dwight VanDriver said:

Schedule 4 Para 34 of Finance Act 1995 inserted new Schedule 2A into Vera 1997 allowing Sec of State to make Regs re clamping/removal of unlicensed/unsorned vehicles in a public place (See SI 1997/2439 and SI 2008/2266) giving power to DVLA to clamp/uplift if continuous registration (sorn)breached on unadopted roads, those maintained by Housing Associations, public car parks etc. but other than parking areas associated with a dwelling.

The lane mentioned appears to be 'public place' so therefore one would at risk

dvd

Shouldn't that be 1994 not 1997?

I can't find any mention of public place in any of the legislation quote above: only public road which brings us right back to what constitutes a public road. If I have missed something can you point me to it?

Housing Associations always seem to me to be a very grey area, given that the parking places are associated with dwellings (there is a clue in the word Housing!). I guess there is nothing to stop each Association imposing its own conditions re VED and insurance in the tenancy agreement or lease. If so, would that not need to be checked by the DVLA or their contractor before any removal takes place?

[Dwight VanDriver]

Public road is defined under Vera 1994 (not 7) in England as one repairable at public expense.

The 2008 amending SI removed public road and redefined as 'relevant place' (i.e. where found)for DVLA authorised persons to enter to take action re untaxed/unsorned to clamp and or remove. If you look at the explanatory note to the 2008 SI you will see it covers virtually anywhere then public go other than the curtiledge of a dwelling.

Not a very clear way of making the law but hey they have to look after their own make a living.

Interesting have a look at
https://www.gov.uk/.../Vehicle_Enforcement_Policy_...

dvd

[Red Devil]

Thanks dvd. I knew I had seen a reference to it but wasn't sure where to find it. I'm still baffled by it though.

The 2008 S.I. adds this to regulation 2 (interpretation)

Amendment of Regulations

3. In regulation 2 (interpretation), in paragraph (1) after the definition of “release” there shall be inserted—

““relevant place” means a place to which Schedule 2A to the 1994 Act applies;”.

The Explanatory Note clearly states that: (This note is not part of the Regulations).

The wording of Schedule 2A unequivocally says public road. So surely only that is a 'place' to which it applies? I can't find where anything has been substituted for public road, so once again we're back to the definition thereof.

I'm like Pooh - a bear of very little brain. If there is a gate like here does that make a difference? The road beyond it is stated to be a private road (there a fair number of extremely expensive properties in that estate). I would be surprised if it is lawful for the residents to block free passage along a public road but I may be wrong.

Given that the note is not part of the Regs I don't see how it gives the DVLA, or anyone to whom they have delegated their powers, carte blanche to go anywhere they fancy (subject to the dwelling bit). I suspect that clarification is meant to cover developments where it can be hard to tell where the public road ends a the private part begins.

What am I still failing to grasp here?