traffic offence???
Discussion
Earlier today, my wife took the Passat (Estate) to carry a rather large and unwieldy bag of old clothes and stuff to the help the Aged charity shop, situated in the precinct. In order to access this shop, she has to pass along the 1 way system in place, which is clearly marked 'no entry' except for loading and unloading.
She therefore pulls up outside shop, takes large bag out of boot and carries it into shop.
Lo and behold, less than 1 minute passes by and Traffic Warden is writing reg. no. in book.
Wife gets to car, explains purpose of car being in precinct to no avail.
Then she says' you better give me parking ticket then'. Warden replies, 'it 's not a parking ticket, you will get a summons for traffic offence of passing through no entry sign 'and that the exemption is for commercial vehicles only.
Question - warden puts reg. in her 'book', right? Does not ask for any ID of driver, car is taxed 'PLG' class (Private/Light goods). Get out clause, surely???
Waiting for summons, letter drafted ready to appeal....
Appreciate thoughts on this matter
streaky said:
Was it this sign:
?
If yes, then you may be wasting your time. The lorry shape means "Goods vehicle" - 'light' or 'heavy' - it does not include motor cars. Sorry - Streaky
I tested this in court Streaky, mind you it would be about fifteen years ago now.
And it was over two vindictive Traffic Wardens who kept ticketing me outside my own entrance when I was loading engine components from a Volvo estate into my workshop.
Exact same environment and sign as above only they tried to imply it was obstruction of the entrance.
The court ruled that an estate car, when being used in this manner, was clearly a goods vehicle as it was being use in the course of a business.
I think you could stretch that to a charity as well.
Had it been a saloon car, you would have a problem, but not an estate.
Dwight VanDriver said:
If a summons is forthcoming, in fact you might want to this beforehand, then approach your local Authority and ask to see the Traffic Regulation Order covering the No Entry - there has to be one. read and see what it says about vehicles involved/loading/unloading.
DVD
Depending upon what you find therein, and there is no weight restrictions, which surely should have been signed then.....
Don't forget that under the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 linked here you will find the following definitions:-
TSRGD 2002 said:
"goods vehicle" means a motor vehicle or trailer constructed or adapted for use for the carriage or haulage of goods or burden of any description;
"passenger vehicle" means a vehicle constructed or adapted for the carriage of passengers and their effects;
also see the definition within those regs of unladen vehicle:- namely
Ref schedule 18
(a) that the motor vehicle is a motor car, a heavy motor car, or a motor tractor;
(b) that no goods or burden are being carried in the motor vehicle or combination of vehicles; and
(c) that not more than 2 persons (excluding the driver) are being carried in the motor vehicle or combination of vehicles.
Arguable imo that a Passat Estate, could be classed as a laden goods vehicle.
on grounds that
1) it meets sched 18 a) & b) passengers re c) no info available.
2) it is clearly "constructed or adapted for use for the carriage or haulage of goods or burden of any description;" even better if the rear seats are folded.
I am making the presumption that the size and weight of the goods were such that it can be considered unreasonable for the driver to park some distance away and transport the load by hand. Magisbeaks will require proof of that.
Nevertheless the devil will be among the detail.
FiF
DVD supplementary question, even if this is a civil enforcement area any appeal will still have to be heard in court and not in front of council administrator won't it?
edited: one day I'll get the hang of formatting urls
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Friday 6th May 11:55
IOLAIRE/FiF - I recall (but nothing to cite) that this has been tested (perhaps only in Mags Court) and that an estate car carrying personal effects - which donations to a charity shop are until within the shop itself - failed to convince of exemption.
Sorry I can't be specific, and I accept that "burden of any sort" could cover the situation.
I suspect Mags (Clerk) might look to parking restrictions for precedent in the absense of other advice.
FiF - I don't follow your argument. TSRGD defines 'goods vehicle' - estate car fails that test (surely?) or at least passes the test for "passenger vehicle", thereby failing as a goods vehicle as it must be one or the other. I don't see how you leap to an estate being a "laden goods vehicle" ... or are you simply inverting the definition of an unladen goods vehicle?
Streaky
Sorry I can't be specific, and I accept that "burden of any sort" could cover the situation.
I suspect Mags (Clerk) might look to parking restrictions for precedent in the absense of other advice.
FiF - I don't follow your argument. TSRGD defines 'goods vehicle' - estate car fails that test (surely?) or at least passes the test for "passenger vehicle", thereby failing as a goods vehicle as it must be one or the other. I don't see how you leap to an estate being a "laden goods vehicle" ... or are you simply inverting the definition of an unladen goods vehicle?
Streaky
streaky said:
IOLAIRE/FiF - I recall (but nothing to cite) that this has been tested (perhaps only in Mags Court) and that an estate car carrying personal effects - which donations to a charity shop are until within the shop itself - failed to convince of exemption.
Sorry I can't be specific, and I accept that "burden of any sort" could cover the situation.
I suspect Mags (Clerk) might look to parking restrictions for precedent in the absense of other advice.
FiF - I don't follow your argument. TSRGD defines 'goods vehicle' - estate car fails that test (surely?) or at least passes the test for "passenger vehicle", thereby failing as a goods vehicle as it must be one or the other. I don't see how you leap to an estate being a "laden goods vehicle" ... or are you simply inverting the definition of an unladen goods vehicle?
Streaky
You're shooting yourself in the foot here Streaky.
An estate car is quite clearly both: whne the rear seats are up it is a passenger vehicle with a capacity of 4/5 people.
When the seats are folded down and and the rear shelf removed it has the same type of load space and carrying capacity as a van.
That was the argument I used and one that the court accepted; how could you possible argue against that.
It is clearly "A vehicle adapted for the purpose of carrying goods"
streaky said:
IOLAIRE/FiF - I recall (but nothing to cite) that this has been tested (perhaps only in Mags Court) and that an estate car carrying personal effects - which donations to a charity shop are until within the shop itself - failed to convince of exemption.
Sorry I can't be specific, and I accept that "burden of any sort" could cover the situation.
Equally I don't know if it has ever been tested. As usual the regs I have looked at are not clear, are they ever?
Perhaps I should have emphasised the word "arguable" in my post. I believe, subject to more informaton being made available, that this is not a roll over and "hands up it's a fair cop guv" situation.
In other words worth arguing in front of a court to decide the specifics and whether the use was legal and reasonable.
streaky said:
I suspect Mags (Clerk) might look to parking restrictions for precedent in the absense of other advice.
I thought the warden said it was not reported for parking but ignoring a traffic sign, much more serious offence. Also are we now into a society where is is acceptable that the first charge we thought of won't stick, so we'll get you on one that we didn't want to apply at the time. Tongue very firmly in cheek, because that goes on all the time, allegedly.
streaky said:
FiF - I don't follow your argument. TSRGD defines 'goods vehicle' - estate car fails that test (surely?) or at least passes the test for "passenger vehicle", thereby failing as a goods vehicle as it must be one or the other. I don't see how you leap to an estate being a "laden goods vehicle" ... or are you simply inverting the definition of an unladen goods vehicle?
Re laden/unladen.
Yes. It wasn't unladen therefore it must be laden. Again an arguable point, wouldn't you agree?
re passenger vehicel/goods vehicle.
Yes it could pass the test for passenger vehicle.
Isn't an estate car hence classed as a dual purpose vehicle? I dunno I don't have to hand "The Motor Vehicle Approval Regulations 2001" wherein the precise legal definitions lie. However Appendix 1 of SVA scheme defines it as:-
DfT said:
Dual-purpose vehicle means a vehicle constructed or adapted for the carriage both of passengers and of goods or burden of any description, where the unladen weight does not exceed 2,040 kilograms, and which satisfies the following conditions as to construction:
the vehicle must be permanently fitted with a rigid roof, with or without a sliding panel;
the area to the rear of the driver's seat must -
be permanently fitted with at least one row of transverse seats (fixed or folding) for 2 or more passengers and those seats must be properly sprung or cushioned and provided with upholstered back-rests; attached either to the seats or to a side or the floor of the vehicle; and
be lit on each side and at the rear by a window or windows of glass or other transparent material having an area or aggregate area of not less than 1,850 square centimeters on each side and not less than 770, square centimeters at the rear; and
the distance between the rearmost part of the steering wheel and the back-rests of the row of transverse seats satisfying the requirements specified in sub-paragraph b(i) above or, if there is more than one such row of seats, the distance between the rearmost part of the steering wheel and the back-rests of the rearmost such row must, when the seats are ready for use, be not less than one-third of the distance between the rear most part of the steering wheel and the rear most part of the floor of the vehicle.
Without the interior measurements to hand re the one third rule I think this describes a Passat estate. Hence it is a dual purpose ve-hic-ule.
On the other hand, I agree with the rear seats up, one could argue that it is a passenger car, ie carriage for passengers and their chattels. Rear seats folded shifts the balance of use towards carriage of goods wouldn't you say?
On the other (third) hand it could be argued that a dual purpose vehicle is not a goods vehicle. Seeing as I don't have the definitions to hand per above difficult to say.
Not clear I do agree, and as pointed out elsewhere beneficial to lawyers and the wages of sin. All hinges on the word "ARGUABLE" in court imho.
FiF
PS damn Iolaire beat me to it.
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Friday 6th May 13:20
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Friday 6th May 13:27
Your on to it FiF - "dual purpose " vehicle, ie
passenger/goods.
Generally classification of a vehicle is as it comes off the line, car for passengers, goods for goods vehicle. The problem comes when you start adapting.
Now SWMBO is in a whirl as the Excise on the XR3i is Private LIGHT GOODS, so Goods vehicle means speed restrictions????? (She goes like hell). Whereas the Disco is a true "dual" because of the 4 x 4 and the passenger seats, rear window size etc.
Note that warden said report for summons. Presume offence is one that hasn't been decriminalised like parking/double yellow lines, so no civil action fine as opposed to Mags Court.
Twas me I would be into the Traffic Order with fine tooth comb as my experience is that civvy wardens are not up to date with all exclusion clauses.
DVD
passenger/goods.
Generally classification of a vehicle is as it comes off the line, car for passengers, goods for goods vehicle. The problem comes when you start adapting.
Now SWMBO is in a whirl as the Excise on the XR3i is Private LIGHT GOODS, so Goods vehicle means speed restrictions????? (She goes like hell). Whereas the Disco is a true "dual" because of the 4 x 4 and the passenger seats, rear window size etc.
Note that warden said report for summons. Presume offence is one that hasn't been decriminalised like parking/double yellow lines, so no civil action fine as opposed to Mags Court.
Twas me I would be into the Traffic Order with fine tooth comb as my experience is that civvy wardens are not up to date with all exclusion clauses.
DVD
IOLAIRE said:I defer - S
IOLAIRE/FiF - I recall (but nothing to cite) that this has been tested (perhaps only in Mags Court) and that an estate car carrying personal effects - which donations to a charity shop are until within the shop itself - failed to convince of exemption.
Sorry I can't be specific, and I accept that "burden of any sort" could cover the situation.
I suspect Mags (Clerk) might look to parking restrictions for precedent in the absense of other advice.
FiF - I don't follow your argument. TSRGD defines 'goods vehicle' - estate car fails that test (surely?) or at least passes the test for "passenger vehicle", thereby failing as a goods vehicle as it must be one or the other. I don't see how you leap to an estate being a "laden goods vehicle" ... or are you simply inverting the definition of an unladen goods vehicle?
Streaky
An estate car is quite clearly both: whne the rear seats are up it is a passenger vehicle with a capacity of 4/5 people.
When the seats are folded down and and the rear shelf removed it has the same type of load space and carrying capacity as a van.
That was the argument I used and one that the court accepted; how could you possible argue against that.
It is clearly "A vehicle adapted for the purpose of carrying goods"
Thanks folks for all your thoughts on this matter - i will keep you informed of the outcome. The bag in question would have been too heavy for one person (male or female ) to carry from the nearest available parking area, which the warden was made fully aware of by my wife. I am going to the site tomorrow to get sme photos of the signage (just in case the f**kers decide to change them!!)
Unsure as to whether a summons will be issued but I am sure I will be the first to know, being the reg. keeper. Might even claim my right to silence under the European human rights act, so not incriminating my wife!!!
Unsure as to whether a summons will be issued but I am sure I will be the first to know, being the reg. keeper. Might even claim my right to silence under the European human rights act, so not incriminating my wife!!!
WWWRRRRROOOOOONNNNNNNGGGGGGG.
Information (Notice to Court that offence committed) has to be laid generally in 6 months of coming to notice after which summons can be issued. If Information not laid in that time you smile. Summons can be issued any time once Information laid - you groan.
DVD
Information (Notice to Court that offence committed) has to be laid generally in 6 months of coming to notice after which summons can be issued. If Information not laid in that time you smile. Summons can be issued any time once Information laid - you groan.
DVD
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff