PDA

View Full Version : Is it an offence to park outside your own house with an expired WOF?



Billy T
12-01-2006, 02:12 PM
Hi Team

We have some new neighbours in our street and one of them has given us an unwelcome New Year's present.

We have parked my wife's car on the road outside our house for the last 15 years or so, same car, same place.
It failed its last warrant, so with Christmas expenses coming up we left it parked there and unused since November while we accumulated the money for the necessary repairs.

It has current reg and with a personalised plate it is well known to all long-term residents of our somewhat secluded no-exit street. Last night we discovered that some kind person had reported it to the local Council, who had sent out an official who issued it with a "Stationary Vehicle" infringement notice for not having a current WOF.

I was a bit gobsmacked to put it mildly, firstly that somebody would report my vehicle parked outside my own home, secondly that I would get an infringement notice when it was "at home and at rest" as opposed to having been driven somewhere and parked, and thirdly that the local Council would have the power to issue such a notice.

The fine is $200, so needless to say I will be putting them through the hoops via a hearing etc before I give any thought to paying anything, and since the Council officer was only there for 1 minute I'll be expecting the complainant to front to the hearing, otherwise I'll be denying everything, like "the car was only parked there for two days".

My question is this: Does anybody know if it is a local body matter to ticket a vehicle parked outside its owner's home just because it has no WOF. I always though the crime was to "operate a motor vehicle without a current WOF" with "operating" requiring it to be driven, not just parked up at home. Would the Police issue a similar ticket if they happened to see it there?

Cheers

Billy 8-{) :mad:

To cap it all, the vehicle was actually immobile, because when I went out to move it I found that some kind soul had broken into it during the last few days and pulled the barrel out of the ignition lock. Fortunately they made such a hash of it they couldn't turn the ignition on with their screwdriver so they had to abandon it!

Greven
12-01-2006, 02:23 PM
it is illegal for an unwarranted vehicle to be on a public road unless it is being taken to be serviced or to get a warrant. That is the letter of the law, but most officers would leave it be if they knew the situation.

Graham L
12-01-2006, 02:33 PM
But most Councils will do the dirty on you. :D I don't know if they get the "Infrongement Fee". But I don't think you'll get anywhere by saying it was there for only a short time. If it was there when the ticket was written, you've committed the offence.

As for neighbours like that ...

Terry Porritt
12-01-2006, 02:37 PM
Google will show you that most city councils have bye-laws concerning issuing infringement notices for vehicles without WOFs parked on public roads.

So whilst it is not uncommon to see such vehicles, it is one way of ensuring vehicles are registered and warranted, ie it is a GOOD thing.

An unwarranted or unregistered vehicle should and must be parked off the road.

I would grit your teeth and pay up, you do not have a case Billy.

qyiet
12-01-2006, 02:38 PM
I've seen students write to council and say, "I'm broke, and really don't want a ticket, please can you waive this?" and the ticket got waived. Kinda taken aback that a excuse so flimsy had allowed someone an exemption I spoke to a friend who was a parking warden, she told me "Oh that's nothing, you'd be AMAZED at the excuses some people use that are upheld"

So while I believe techinicly you are in the wrong here, write to the council, explain your situation. It's quite likely you'll get off.

-Qyiet

Speedy Gonzales
12-01-2006, 02:40 PM
Somehow I dont think they take where it is, into account.

They see no current WOF on it, and give you an infringement.

By the looks of it (http://www.police.govt.nz/service/road/infringements_faq.php) if it doesn't have a WOF, it's $200.

Whether its going, or not. Well, whoever issued the infringement, wouldnt know that either.

pixeldust
12-01-2006, 02:43 PM
You don't own the road outside your house unfortunately. Might pay to park it in the driveway next time :)

plod
12-01-2006, 02:56 PM
the wgtn city council gave my parents a ticket a few years ago for parking in the wrong direction in there quiet cul de sac street out in the suburbs.
be careful b4 you start blaming the neighbours without proof as the parking enforcemwnt officers do make random trips out to the suburbs.
Yes it is illegal, you are in the wrong, but so are most car dealers that park cars for sale on the roadside with out a reg plate or warrant.
good luck at the hearing although I doubt it will do much use

gibler
12-01-2006, 03:23 PM
I'd write in saying that the car was (temporarily) immobilised and you couldn't remove it from the streets while getting repairs to bring it up to WOF standard.

They do the same in Dunedin too (the parking officers go out to the surburbs from time to time).

It is a bit odd as the LTSA website implies that you get fined if you operate an expired WOF vehicle. But Dunedin Council rules say just parking an expired WOF vehicle will get you a fine, so maybe it is a bylaw.

Maybe they want your parking space :) Not that it sounds like a good place to park a car anyway..

superuser
12-01-2006, 03:32 PM
I once recieved a $200 fine for parking in town with no WOF.

Getting off it was very easy, I wrote a letter and included a reciept for the WOF I obtained the following day and wrote some guff about it being an accident / WOF was only a week over due etc..etc....

They did warn next time I wouldn't be so lucky. :rolleyes:

Laura
12-01-2006, 04:24 PM
Afraid you're indeed illegal, Billy.

I found this out the hard way years ago in Auckland at a time when I was so penniless that I couldn't afford to pay the sum a garage wanted for the small repair needed to give me a WoF for my bomb (1948 Morris 10)

When it got a ticket right outside my door, the irony was that the fine was exactly the same amount.

And I DID have to find it then. I had to sell the car to do it.

Graham L
12-01-2006, 04:28 PM
Was that before you had to have a recent warrant to be able to sell the car?. :D

Laura
12-01-2006, 04:37 PM
Yes. It was an "As is - where is" sale.
And it really hurt.

Graham L
12-01-2006, 04:53 PM
And if you had held on to it, it would have changed from being an "old bomb" to being "worth a bomb" .

SurferJoe46
12-01-2006, 05:22 PM
You guys have it easy there in NZ about registrations and such. Let me enlighten you to the laws here in California:

All motor vehicles will have current registration sticker on rear license plate or a certificate of "Non-operation" (for a fee) at all times.

All vehicles with current registration sticker will have current and legal insurance on such vehicle at all times, including "Uninsured/Underinsured motorist coverage, minimum state set values and by a licensed insurance brokered policy.

All vehicles will be in Federal and State requirements for emission controls inspections and certifications.

(Any vehicle offered for trade/sale/barter or transfer of ownership shall also have a current, less than 30 day old certificate of emissions inspection and compliance too.)

No unlicensed vehicles shall be viewable from the public thoroughfare or roadway at any time, unless such vehicle(s) are over twenty-five years of age (this allowance for classic car restorations). Vehicles being repaired are not exempt of continued certifications and licenses at any time.

No vehicle shall be towed or allowed to enter any public roadway or path without being duly licensed, insured and certified.

Failure to re-register a vehicle places that vehicle in a complete vehicle brake/lamp/emissions (and some times weight) re-certification process.

Temporary operational certificates to move a vehicle to a place of repair or demolition are issued on a one-time, one-way basis only, in a 24 hour time period for a fee.

Failure to comply with any/all or combination of the above is automatically an impound situation, that is fined on a calander basis (day-to-day), plus the impound fee and towing fee, payable by the latest registered owner of record. This fee is collected by the State of California's Attorney General office under the laws concerning taxes not collected and in arrears.

There is NO GRACE PERIOD for any registration/licensing/certifications, and any that are late are fined at the rate of a percentage of the original vehicle's selling price, usually between 2% and 20% of that value.

There are also administrative costs (read: local police) fees that are added to the fines and fees. The regulations provide for collection of fees through levies on personal property (houses, other cars, business taxes, credit cards or bank deposits) to satisfy the fines/fees. They take it outta you tax refunds if they like to also.

Vehicles found upon a public roadway may be impounded for those, plus these "rules":

No broken windshield; broken glass is a moving equipment violation
Missing/broken lamps, lenses and bulbs
Illegal (non-DOT reg) lamps, horns, accessories
Ovedsized tires exceeding the body and flaps
Headlamps too high from the ground or too low
Tinted windows at the driver's peripheral line of sight
Over-loud or blatantly modified exhaust system
Obviously missing emissions control devices
Missing safety devices (wipers, worn, broken, bent, defective, modified)
Missing/modified seat belts and appropiate harnesses, including baby seats that are to be certified and installed correctly
Missing mirrors or horns.
Missing or non-certified chains and hitches on towed vehicles or trailers.
Bald or worn tires, (must have 3/32'nds of an inch tread in all areas of tire)
Missing lug nuts or rim/tire fasteners.
Current registration papers, legally licensed driver at controls, current insurance certificates and any other certifications in the vehicle at all times.
No open alcoholic containers within driver's arm reach or in glove compartment.
No firearms that are useable without getting out of vehicle to access ammunition or pertenant parts of firearm to make it operable.
Failure to have appropiate safety belts on and being worn at all times engine is running or keys are in ignition.

Anything else the local police are checking that week. :D


You cannot win here. They have you by the shortest of your personal fur.

Greg
12-01-2006, 05:37 PM
C'mon Billy... stop putting us through such agony at reading your posts. I'd like to contribute to the help, but man, you coulda made the question a heck of a lot more concise. I'll read it later when I have a lot more time to spare.

[edit] I could possibly have offered a valid opinion given that I have some experience of the inner workings of the LTSA and associated authorities.

Myth
12-01-2006, 05:41 PM
Well, If you do go to court .. have a look outside the court house and check the police-cars for warrants and regos :D

Take a digi-cam with you so you can show the judge :p .. chances are one will be on the road with an overdue warrant or rego

Greg
12-01-2006, 05:41 PM
You guys have it easy there in NZ about registrations and such. Let me enlighten you to the laws here in California:

All motor vehicles will have current registration sticker on rear license plate or a certificate of "Non-operation" (for a fee) at all times.

All vehicles with current registration sticker will have current and legal insurance on such vehicle at all times, including "Uninsured/Underinsured motorist coverage, minimum state set values and by a licensed insurance brokered policy.

All vehicles will be in Federal and State requirements for emission controls inspections and certifications.

(Any vehicle offered for trade/sale/barter or transfer of ownership shall also have a current, less than 30 day old certificate of emissions inspection and compliance too.)

No unlicensed vehicles shall be viewable from the public thoroughfare or roadway at any time, unless such vehicle(s) are over twenty-five years of age (this allowance for classic car restorations). Vehicles being repaired are not exempt of continued certifications and licenses at any time.

No vehicle shall be towed or allowed to enter any public roadway or path without being duly licensed, insured and certified.

Failure to re-register a vehicle places that vehicle in a complete vehicle brake/lamp/emissions (and some times weight) re-certification process.

Temporary operational certificates to move a vehicle to a place of repair or demolition are issued on a one-time, one-way basis only, in a 24 hour time period for a fee.

Failure to comply with any/all or combination of the above is automatically an impound situation, that is fined on a calander basis (day-to-day), plus the impound fee and towing fee, payable by the latest registered owner of record. This fee is collected by the State of California's Attorney General office under the laws concerning taxes not collected and in arrears.

There is NO GRACE PERIOD for any registration/licensing/certifications, and any that are late are fined at the rate of a percentage of the original vehicle's selling price, usually between 2% and 20% of that value.

There are also administrative costs (read: local police) fees that are added to the fines and fees. The regulations provide for collection of fees through levies on personal property (houses, other cars, business taxes, credit cards or bank deposits) to satisfy the fines/fees. They take it outta you tax refunds if they like to also.

Vehicles found upon a public roadway may be impounded for those, plus these "rules":

No broken windshield; broken glass is a moving equipment violation
Missing/broken lamps, lenses and bulbs
Illegal (non-DOT reg) lamps, horns, accessories
Ovedsized tires exceeding the body and flaps
Headlamps too high from the ground or too low
Tinted windows at the driver's peripheral line of sight
Over-loud or blatantly modified exhaust system
Obviously missing emissions control devices
Missing safety devices (wipers, worn, broken, bent, defective, modified)
Missing/modified seat belts and appropiate harnesses, including baby seats that are to be certified and installed correctly
Missing mirrors or horns.
Missing or non-certified chains and hitches on towed vehicles or trailers.
Bald or worn tires, (must have 3/32'nds of an inch tread in all areas of tire)
Missing lug nuts or rim/tire fasteners.
Current registration papers, legally licensed driver at controls, current insurance certificates and any other certifications in the vehicle at all times.
No open alcoholic containers within driver's arm reach or in glove compartment.
No firearms that are useable without getting out of vehicle to access ammunition or pertenant parts of firearm to make it operable.
Failure to have appropiate safety belts on and being worn at all times engine is running or keys are in ignition.

Anything else the local police are checking that week. :D


You cannot win here. They have you by the shortest of your personal fur.
Yet another damn good reason not to live in the Fantasmical United States of The Worst Toilet Hole in History.

Go New Zealand!

SurferJoe46
12-01-2006, 05:48 PM
Easy Greg...this is just California's rules...we have state-by-state regulations that are for the most part typicall in alignmnet with federal regs...but California goes 'way overboard with theirs.

States like Texas, and Arizona and others that don't live off the Washington nipple so much, have lessened their restraints on their individual citizens.

While federal matching funds are nice for road repairs and infrastructure, some states are self-sufficient and tell the feds to pound sand and leave them alone.

California is very restrictive, but most of that is from the lack of $$ at the state level, and they raise revenues by odious taxes and levying fines. This is the largest welfare state in the union, and it is technically broke..so fines and fees and laws are getting larger and larger.

Graham L
12-01-2006, 05:59 PM
Tazz: What I often notiice as I ride past the court are the police cars parked on expired meters.

Greg: you complain about Billy's verbosity, but you
a very long posting which is only a small distance up the thread. :(

Greg
12-01-2006, 06:03 PM
I dunno mate... your laws, rules and regulations still make my hair stand on end.

My missus visited her dad recently in Nevada, via LA airport... they even made her remove her shoes during the search! Good grief! She stood in several queues for nearly 3 hours just trying to out-board the plane, and nearly as long trying to board on her return. ***!

I've visited probably 20 countries, including a few of the infamous communist era, and even they didn't give us such scrutiny.

Safari
12-01-2006, 06:06 PM
Yet another damn good reason not to live in the Fantasmical United States of The Worst Toilet Hole in History.

Go New Zealand!

Quite an ignorant rude comment Greg

They don't have a regular WOF check as we do here and those requirements are quite reasonable as they are basically the same as the WOF requirements here.
Instead of compliance at WOF time as in NZ they are a compliance at all times the vehicle is on the road and the penalties are to ensure owners keep their cars roadworthy. We enforce that here by the regular WOF checks.
Would like to see compulsory insurance here as well and heavy penalties if not current.

Safari
12-01-2006, 06:10 PM
I dunno mate... your laws, rules and regulations still make my hair stand on end.

My missus visited her dad recently in Nevada, via LA airport... they even made her remove her shoes during the search! Good grief! She stood in several queues for nearly 3 hours just trying to out-board the plane, and nearly as long trying to board on her return. ***!

I've visited probably 20 countries, including a few of the infamous communist era, and even they didn't give us such scrutiny.

And you are not aware of the reason for the increased security?

Scouse
12-01-2006, 06:11 PM
Hi Folks. Your could perhaps argue that the Land Transport Authority site mislead you at here (http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/vehicle-ownership/warrant.html) where is says that without a warrant your are not allowed to drive.......

What if my vehicle fails its WoF inspection?
If your vehicle fails its WoF inspection and your old WoF has expired, you are not allowed to drive it on the road (unless it is being operated solely for the purpose of bringing it into compliance and obtaining a new WoF — and provided the vehicle is safe to be operated for that purpose).

When all the areas that required attention have been fixed, the reinspection is free of charge if you return the vehicle to the same WoF agent within 28 days of the first inspection.

Greg
12-01-2006, 06:16 PM
Greg: you complain about Billy's verbosity, but you . :(Sorry, I missed your point. Verbose... moi? :dogeye:

Greg
12-01-2006, 06:20 PM
And you are not aware of the reason for the increased security?Ah man! Wouldn't you take a visit to an African safari park? Wouldn't you take an ocean cruise on a luxury liner? Wouldn't you... la de dah. There's risks in everything - but the Americans seem to be a bit over the top.

Greg
12-01-2006, 06:26 PM
This is the largest welfare state in the union, and it is technically broke..so fines and fees and laws are getting larger and larger.PS... off topic again... how's your Governor doing? Is he improving things at all? I quite like him, for what it's worth.

plod
12-01-2006, 08:31 PM
Instead of compliance at WOF time as in NZ they are a compliance at all times the vehicle is on the road and the penalties are to ensure owners keep their cars roadworthy. We enforce that here by the regular WOF checks.
.
We also have to be compliant all the time, not just when we have the check, but also the period during that time and to keep it to that standard.
officer; "here's a ticket for bald tyres"
lady: "but how can that be, I have a warrant on the car"

ninja
12-01-2006, 08:46 PM
It has current reg and with a personalised plate it is well known to all long-term residents of our somewhat secluded no-exit street. Last night we discovered that some kind person had reported it to the local Council, who had sent out an official who issued it with a "Stationary Vehicle" infringement notice for not having a current WOF.If you're anything like you are online in the offline world, I'd imagine most of your nearbys would be dying to report it in. :2cents:

Greven
12-01-2006, 09:07 PM
If you're anything like you are online in the offline world, I'd imagine most of your nearbys would be dying to report it in. :2cents:
Now don't you think that is a bit of a low blow? Perhaps the 2 of you have just been around the forum together for too long - I don't remember finding him annoying.

manicminer
12-01-2006, 10:16 PM
You would have been better off getting it "stolen".
Doesnt pay to be honest when local councils treat law-abiding people like criminals.

chiefnz
13-01-2006, 01:45 AM
Is it an offence to park outside your own house with an expired WOF?
As a warranted traffic officer the answer to that question is NO. No vehicle is allowed to be driven on a road without any CURRENT evidence of inspection (ie WOF or COF) unless you are on your way to get that evidence of inspection. So basically you can park it on the road but you cannot drive it unless you are going to get the WOF or COF whichever is required.

You got the ticket not for parking the car on the road but for failing to display current evdience of inspection.

Hope that clears thinngs up.

cheers

chiefnz

Greven
13-01-2006, 07:56 AM
So basically you can park it on the road but you cannot drive it unless you are going to get the WOF or COF whichever is required.

You got the ticket not for parking the car on the road but for failing to display current evdience of inspection.

Doesn't your last sentence contradict the one above it?

Metla
13-01-2006, 09:17 AM
As a warranted traffic officer the answer to that question is NO.

chiefnz

uh, Are you a parking warden or a cop?

pixeldust
13-01-2006, 09:25 AM
uh, Are you a parking warden or a cop?

Teehee, meter-maid.

Terry Porritt
13-01-2006, 11:12 AM
Doesn't your last sentence contradict the one above it?

No, it doesn't because the tickets are issued by the city councils under their bye-laws.

Having said that it should be made a national offence, not just a local offence, as it is in the UK, to have any unregistered, uninsured, unwarranted vehicle on the road, whether being driven or not.

The laws are generally too slack here, probably harking back to earlier 'colonial days' when it seemed 'almost anything went'.

Anything Goes (http://www.redhotjazz.com/songs/whiteman/anytgoes.ram)

MMM
13-01-2006, 11:45 AM
The laws are generally too slack here, probably harking back to earlier 'colonial days' when it seemed 'almost anything went'.
In the Colonial days, the British were running the country. :groan: We now have NZ'ers running the place...thank god! :thumbs: There are enough laws here in NZ thankyou very much.
Maybe it is the behaviour of the British people which creates the need for more laws??
I don't mean to be offensive Terry, but I'm a proud 4th generation NZ'er and we're doing just fine thankyou.

Terry Porritt
13-01-2006, 11:56 AM
NZ is not doing so fine regarding the number of antisocial hoons, boy racers, cars stolen and burnt out at the road side, and so on. I'm not saying it is better in the UK, just saying what the law is there, as Surfer Joe said what the Californian laws are.

'Colonial days' was just a turn of phrase, NZers have been firmly in control since the early days of motoring.

El tougho if you dont like what I say, but it pays to raise ones head out of the sand every now and then.

chiefnz
13-01-2006, 12:23 PM
uh, Are you a parking warden or a cop?

Well for all intense purposes I have enforecment powers from both of them.

I have certain powers vested in me under the local authority's by-laws and I also have powers vested in me under...

1) Section 113(2) paragraphs (a), (c) and (d) of the Land Transport Act 1998.

2) Schedule 2A of the Transport Act 1962 which includes breaches of by-laws for parking.

3) Section 37(1) and (2) of the Transport Services Licensing Act 1989.

Hope that clears things up Metla. :)



Originally Posted by chiefnz
So basically you can park it on the road but you cannot drive it unless you are going to get the WOF or COF whichever is required.

You got the ticket not for parking the car on the road but for failing to display current evdience of inspection.

Doesn't your last sentence contradict the one above it?


No it doesn't, maybe I put the word NOT in the wrong place. Basically what I meant was, that the infringement was issued for failing to display current evidence of inspection... it was not issued for parking an uninspected vehicle on the road.

cheers

chiefnz

Tukapa
13-01-2006, 12:36 PM
Just to clear this up...it is a national offence (as opposed to a by-law) to park a vehicle on a road (or in any public place for that matter) without WOF or current license (registration). Anyone, anywhere doing the above is up for a $200 fine for each of the above offences (ie no WOF and no license =$400), it doesn't matter where you live.

Whether councils task their officers to write offence notices out for this is up to them, but I can't see them not cos it would bring in a fair bit of revenue.

Graham L
13-01-2006, 12:38 PM
Was it an Auckland City Council ticket, Billy? All about Auckland CC parking tickets (www.aucklandcity.govt.nz/auckland/transport/parking/tickets.asp)

"A current Evidence of Vehicle inspection (formerly known as Warrant of Fitness) is not displayed." is why you got the ticket. I think their cash register is going to go "$200, thank you very much, Billy" :D

It doesn't look as if you would be let off it in Christchurch (www.ccc.govt.nz/quickanswers/Parking/ParkingInfringements/F334.asp), either.

Terry Porritt
13-01-2006, 01:16 PM
Just to clear this up...it is a national offence (as opposed to a by-law) to park a vehicle on a road (or in any public place for that matter) without WOF or current license (registration). Anyone, anywhere doing the above is up for a $200 fine for each of the above offences (ie no WOF and no license =$400), it doesn't matter where you live.

Whether councils task their officers to write offence notices out for this is up to them, but I can't see them not cos it would bring in a fair bit of revenue.

I don't think you are right, as far as I can tell the law only says about operating a vehicle on the road, not about parking without Evidence Of Vehicle Inspection.

eg

"The offence of operating a vehicle on a road without displaying current evidence of vehicle inspection, contrary to section 34(1)(b) of the Land Transport Act 1998."

http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/legislation/docs/penalty.rtf

Metla
13-01-2006, 01:17 PM
NZ is not doing so fine regarding the number of antisocial hoons, boy racers, cars stolen and burnt out at the road side, and so on. I'm not saying it is better in the UK, just saying what the law is there, as Surfer Joe said what the Californian laws are.

'Colonial days' was just a turn of phrase, NZers have been firmly in control since the early days of motoring.

El tougho if you dont like what I say, but it pays to raise ones head out of the sand every now and then.



Personally every single tiny bit of info I have ever seen about the glorious homeland makes me determined to avoid ever going near the place.

The UK can keep its overcrowding, slum areas, racial tension, Turkey twists, Bad teeth, football thugs, Coronation steet and their blessed Chavs.

El tougho if you dont like what I say, but it pays to raise ones head out of the sand every now and then.

Graham L
13-01-2006, 01:44 PM
I have an idea that it was or still is a statutory offence: "failing to display" a warrant of fitness, or registration sticker.

It looks as if enforcement has been passed over to the councils ... just to remove some load from the "justice" system.

The discussion paper Infringements Review (http://www.justice.govt.nz/pubs/reports/2004/infringements-review/glossary.html) mentions

"Stationary vehicle offences: include failing to display a valid warrant of fitness or vehicle licence label; using worn, damaged or smooth tyres; failure of a parked goods-service vehicle to display a red light; and unauthorised, deceptive, obscured or missing registration plates." and such infringements can be handled by a " Prosecuting authority: an organisation authorised by legislation to issue infringement notices. Currently, there are approximately 100 prosecuting authorities."

Of course Billy was lucky he didn't park a building in the street without its Warrant of Fitness. The fine for that is up to $20000.

Thomas01
13-01-2006, 01:48 PM
Some people are lucky - I had a warrant the parking meter attendant said had him confused - the dates looked wrong - the car had not been used since its last checkover and I had been in hospital with heart problems. This was its first trip out - I left it in the local garage that night and it passed - having only done a few miles. But no mercy - I was back in hospital again and fighting for my life but they actually contacted me there. The doctors asked me to get the name of the person phoning as they wanted to chase them up if I pegged it - they wanted me under as little strain as possible. The clerk refused to leave his name - I asked him if he thought a possible death sentence wasn't a little high for what could only be a technical offense. He thought for a moment or two then agreed perhaps it was. Fortunately one of my doctors blew her top and wrote a right royal letter - the fine was cancelled.
But blow me down some years later I got done for a parking violation. The council admitted when I pointed it out to them that the parking attendant had obviously changed what he had written at first as the leaving time. He probably then went for a cuppa because at the time he was supposed to be writing the ticket we were several miles away on our way home.
All admitted, but it made no difference - I had to pay. Wasn't worth making a fuss about but I have avoided the CBD of Christchurch ever since - I see NO reason to go there.
Tom

bonzo29
13-01-2006, 01:53 PM
Personally every single tiny bit of info I have ever seen about the glorious homeland makes me determined to avoid ever going near the place.

The UK can keep its overcrowding, slum areas, racial tension, Turkey twists, Bad teeth, football thugs, Coronation steet and their blessed Chavs.

El tougho if you dont like what I say, but it pays to raise ones head out of the sand every now and then.


Maybe those who havn't seen the inside of anything be it a computer OR a country are not qualified to comment constructively?

Metla
13-01-2006, 01:58 PM
Which would be a good cut if I had been the one to say whose input was valid.

To apply the logic from the other thread we would have to ask for opinions only from people who have a surface understanding of the country, And I would certainly fall into this catagory in regards to the UK.

Terry Porritt
13-01-2006, 02:19 PM
I agree with Metla, after all, I have chosen to come and live here for the last 30 years and be a citizen, that must mean something.

If you are a 4th generation NZer and I've no idea how that came into the topic, well you had no say in the matter, just an accident of birth.

At least I have a standard for comparison which many dont.

Tukapa
13-01-2006, 02:20 PM
Hmm...I am right. It is a national statutory offence. They haven't taken my stationary ticket book off me yet (and I don't work for the council). If I can find it at work tonight I will blow the dust and cobwebs off it and post the exact section that the offence is found under. Of course, if they have repaeled it since they gave me my ticket book then I spose I will just have to hand it back. ;)

andrew93
13-01-2006, 02:27 PM
The UK can keep its overcrowding, slum areas, racial tension, Turkey twists, Bad teeth, football thugs, Coronation steet and their blessed Chavs.
Hear hear!
BUT, is it turkey twists or turkey twizzlers? (http://images.google.com/images?q=turkey+twizzler)

Terry Porritt
13-01-2006, 02:28 PM
This snippet is from Grahams reference:


"1. New Zealand's first infringement regime was introduced in 1968 and was confined to parking offences in breach of local authority bylaws and overloading offences by heavy motor vehicles."

That seems quite remarkable. Does that mean before 1968, then "anything goes" ?

Graham L
13-01-2006, 02:35 PM
Great news. You can legally have a vehicle without a warrant of fitness, and be immune from infringement notices. The only snag is that the vehicle must be "for use only on Matakana Island". You can have an unregistered vehicle, and use it on the roads. If it's on the Chatham Islands. But it has to have a warrant of fitness. :(

Bad news. If you have a vehicle not displaying the appropriate stickers, better keep it out of sight. The definition of "road" in the LTA is fairly "flexible." As well as the expected things, a road is also "a place to which the public have access, whether as of right or not." 10 foot high block walls and razor wire seem to be indicated.

Metla
13-01-2006, 02:43 PM
Hear hear!
BUT, is it turkey twists or turkey twizzlers? (http://images.google.com/images?q=turkey+twizzler)

Yep, your right, and they look disgusting.

If i had one I could try and feed it to my son, then see how severe a beating I get from Mrs Metla....

Graham L
13-01-2006, 02:50 PM
This snippet is from Grahams reference:


"1. New Zealand's first infringement regime was introduced in 1968 and was confined to parking offences in breach of local authority bylaws and overloading offences by heavy motor vehicles."

That seems quite remarkable. Does that mean before 1968, then "anything goes" ?


No such luck Terry. It took minor things out of the court system. Before, everything went to court. It might have been good for lawyers, but it didn't do much for justice.

The infringement scheme means that there aren't convictions entered (because you haven't been convicted). If you want to fight an infringement notice, there is provision for appeals to the "prosecuting authority" ( see that Christchurch link I gave), and if you're not satisfied with that, you can choose to go to court. I think that can end up with a conviction, as well as a lot of expense.

Terry Porritt
13-01-2006, 03:12 PM
So, what all this contrary discussion means for the average Joe Bloggs including me, is that the law is not well written at all.

Even the road code does not mention parking without a WOF, this is all it says, which implies operating a vehicle:

IMPORTANT
You should not drive on the road any vehicle that is not up to warrant of fitness standard Certificate of Fitness. You can be fined if you do. A police officer can require you to stop for a roadside vehicle check at any time.

(my emphasis, note it says should not, not must not.)

http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/roadcode/your-vehicle/car-requirements1.html

Perhaps it is time the road code was re-written.

Graham L
13-01-2006, 03:27 PM
So, what all this contrary discussion means for the average Joe Bloggs including me, is that the law is not well written at all. ...

But you are making an elementary error. Laws don't have to be well written, sensible, nor just. They just have to be laws. :D

In fact, what we still call "Warrants of Fitness" are nothing of the sort. They have been renamed in the acts, because they do not "warrant" anything. You the driver are responsible for making sure the vehicle is in a roadworthy condition. You could be prosecuted for having a vehicle not in a roadworthy condition, after being stopped driving away from the testing place with your brand new sticker. It says only that the vehicle was considered to be roadworthy at the moment when it was inspected. If a light bulb burns out as you move off .... tough. :D

The road code is not "the law". It's a guide. Humans can't be expected to understand the law. That's why lawyers were invented. (There had to be some reason.:D) Ignorance of the law is no defence. They've got you coming and going. :(

Of course we have inherited this legal structure and our "rights" from Mother England. It could be worse.

Dally
13-01-2006, 03:36 PM
Forgive my ignorance but what is a turkey twissler?

andrew93
13-01-2006, 03:59 PM
Forgive my ignorance but what is a turkey twissler?
Check it our here (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/dietfitness.html?in_article_id=342500&in_page_id=1798) - I can almost guarantee that no turkeys were harmed in the manufacture of these food substitutes.
A

Tukapa
13-01-2006, 04:31 PM
Ahhh...found my book, blew the cobwebs and associated grmlins off it.

It is a "Stationary Vehicle Offence Infringement Notice" book. It is "issued under Section 42A of the Transport Act 1962 and Section 139 of the Land Transport Act 1998"

There are several of the most common offences included on the face of the ticket, which includes "No Warrant of Fitness" and "Unlicensed Motor Vehicle" each of which attract a $200 fine.

Now this is clearly set out in Statute which means that this can happen to anybody, anytime, anywhere NZ law applies.

I also see that I have written two of these notices in the last 7 years. Obviously I am not doing my bit for revenue gathering!!!!

Tukapa
13-01-2006, 04:37 PM
As an aside, if anybody cares and can be bothered reading it, below is s139 of the Land Transport Act 1998.

139.Issue of infringement notice—

(1)If an enforcement officer has reasonable cause to believe an infringement offence is being or has been committed by a person, an infringement notice in respect of that offence may be issued to that person by an enforcement officer.

(2)An infringement notice may be served—

(a)By attaching it, or a copy of it, to the vehicle to which the notice relates; or

(b)By delivering it, or a copy of it, personally to the person who appears to have committed the infringement offence; or

(c)By sending it, or a copy of it, by post addressed to him or her at his or her last known place of residence or business or postal address; or

(d)If the person is a holder of a land transport document, by serving it, or a copy of it, by post on that person at his or her last address for service provided for the purposes of that document.

(3)For the purposes of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957,—

(a)An infringement notice attached to a vehicle under paragraph (a) of subsection (2) is to be treated as having been served when it is attached to the vehicle:

(b)An infringement notice sent to a person by post under paragraph (c) or paragraph (d) of that subsection is to be treated as having been served on the person when it would have been delivered in the ordinary course of post.

(4)Every infringement notice must be in the prescribed form and must inform the person to whom it is issued that:

(a)No proceedings in respect of the infringement offence will be taken if the infringement fee (including any towage fees) is paid, within 28 days after the date of issue of the notice, to the enforcement authority at the address shown in the notice; and

(b)The person should write to the enforcement authority if the person wishes to—

(i)Raise a matter concerning the circumstances of the offence for consideration by the enforcement authority; or

(ii)Deny liability for the offence and request a court hearing; or

(iii)Admit liability for the offence, but make written submissions to the court; and

(c)If the person does nothing, a reminder notice explaining fully how to defend the charge and containing a statement of the person's rights will be issued to the person; and

(d)In the case of a moving vehicle offence, the owner of the vehicle is responsible for moving vehicle offences committed with the vehicle unless 1 of the relevant statutory defences can be established.

(5)Different forms of infringement notices may be prescribed for different kinds of infringement offences.

Dally
13-01-2006, 06:07 PM
Thanks Andrew - We obviously lead very sheltered lives in Glen Oroua but we do have wild turkeys that wander on the side of the road.

MMM
13-01-2006, 06:17 PM
NZ is not doing so fine regarding the number of antisocial hoons, boy racers, cars stolen and burnt out at the road side, and so on.
We do have laws regarding the above. ChCh even went so far as to let the little "darlings" use Ruapuna Race track for their antics in a safe place. Unless you have a copper on every corner no country will stop the offenders.
But in saying that, I would love to see the government give the police a lot more support re: more officers and equipment in order to be able to enforce the laws that do exist. That is where the holdup is.

At least I have a standard for comparison which many dont.
I have been over to England and still have family over there, and some who spent many years there before coming back. I, like them, came back thinking that NZ was a lot safer, had a better homelife, better scenery,etc. My head isn't in the sand. This country didn't cowtow to the yanks re: nuclear ships nor the illegal invasion of Iraq like Britain and Aussi did.

Billy T: I've been done for being late with my registration and WOF twice now - a total of $800.00 - which I paid for dearly while on the benefit and living very leanly. Be a man and pay up.

Cicero
13-01-2006, 06:39 PM
Yep, your right, and they look disgusting.

If i had one I could try and feed it to my son, then see how severe a beating I get from Mrs Metla....
It may look digusting to you my lad,but think if you didn't have Brit law,you may be residing in a pot at the moment,now that is digusting. :thumbs:

Winston001
14-01-2006, 11:20 AM
I think these are "strict liability" offences. This means that the normal situation of the prosecution having to prove the offence, is reversed, so that the defendant (Billy) has to prove the offence didn't occur. Usually pretty difficult to achieve.

You are entitled to your day in Court but unless you want to commit perjury and compromise your integrity, you are better to take a deep breath and pay up.

The enforcement problem is that every unwarranted/unregistered vehicle owner could say they had parked temporarily if the law allowed that defence. This law would become unenforceable, so it is strict liability.

Otherwise the streets would be littered with illegal vehicles all "temporarily" parked.

PaulD
14-01-2006, 11:44 AM
10 years ago I was caught in a similar situation while waiting for a panel beater. Despite the ticket being issued by the Police, a Wgtn Police supervisor was disappointed that one of their staff was wasting time on parked vehicles. God knows there are enough moving vehicle offences to keep them fully occupied. The Wgtn council's policy at that time was to give 7 days to remove the vehicle. Everyone agreed that the ticketing was petty but I still had to pay :-(

Roscoe
14-01-2006, 12:22 PM
Hi Team

We have some new neighbours in our street and one of them has given us an unwelcome New Year's present.

We have parked my wife's car on the road outside our house for the last 15 years or so, same car, same place.
It failed its last warrant, so with Christmas expenses coming up we left it parked there and unused since November while we accumulated the money for the necessary repairs.

It has current reg and with a personalised plate it is well known to all long-term residents of our somewhat secluded no-exit street. Last night we discovered that some kind person had reported it to the local Council, who had sent out an official who issued it with a "Stationary Vehicle" infringement notice for not having a current WOF.

I was a bit gobsmacked to put it mildly, firstly that somebody would report my vehicle parked outside my own home, secondly that I would get an infringement notice when it was "at home and at rest" as opposed to having been driven somewhere and parked, and thirdly that the local Council would have the power to issue such a notice.

The fine is $200, so needless to say I will be putting them through the hoops via a hearing etc before I give any thought to paying anything, and since the Council officer was only there for 1 minute I'll be expecting the complainant to front to the hearing, otherwise I'll be denying everything, like "the car was only parked there for two days".

My question is this: Does anybody know if it is a local body matter to ticket a vehicle parked outside its owner's home just because it has no WOF. I always though the crime was to "operate a motor vehicle without a current WOF" with "operating" requiring it to be driven, not just parked up at home. Would the Police issue a similar ticket if they happened to see it there?

Cheers

Billy 8-{) :mad:

To cap it all, the vehicle was actually immobile, because when I went out to move it I found that some kind soul had broken into it during the last few days and pulled the barrel out of the ignition lock. Fortunately they made such a hash of it they couldn't turn the ignition on with their screwdriver so they had to abandon it!


It is an offence to park your car anywhere on a public road without a warrant and/or registration. It does not matter if you do not intend to use it or not. Outside your house or anyone elses, immobile or not. Most of the time the police or the council are too busy to worry but if someone complains - a nasty neighbour perhaps - they are obliged to act. Unfair I know but that's the law.

Roscoe.

EX-WESTY
14-01-2006, 04:46 PM
The main reason councils go for the motorist with expired rego's, warrents etc is that they are a cash cow unlike rate payers.

The councils are constrained by law in regards to rates under the rating powers act ( someone will find the link ). I.E. they can charge for your property land value, capital improvements, and supply of services ( whether or not you can recieve them or avail yourself of them )

The motorist however is a different kettle of fish.
If you were so hapless as to be out shopping one day and were pounced on by the enforcement officers at each location you stopped at, each would be a seperate offence. In that regard the money that can be raised by the council is directly linked to the size of the catchment area, the number of enforcement officers employed and the stupidity or inability to pay of the motorists.

Cicero
14-01-2006, 05:22 PM
We await B's decision,after all the wonderful advice and comments.

HenryC
22-01-2006, 11:20 PM
The Land Transport Act 1998 provides that:

"Operate'', in relation to a vehicle, means to drive or use the vehicle on a road, or to cause or permit the vehicle to be on a road or to be driven on a road, whether or not the person is present with the vehicle ...

So, parking is covered. The English language is wonderful, isn't it?

george12
23-01-2006, 12:24 AM
Don't try and fight it Billy, it seems clear that you have committed an offence. I recommend you explain to them why you were parked there and they will most likely let you off.

SurferJoe46
23-01-2006, 04:40 AM
Forgive my ignorance but what is a turkey twissler?

Damn! I love youse guys...you don't know what a twizzled turkey is...and good on ya!

It is a know fact of history that most NZ'ers are the end product of staunch, rugged English sailors who sailed over deadly seas, battled huge typhoons at sea and ran the gauntlet of sea monsters all in the quest for:

Good tasting food.

Please keep twisted turkey by-products and the knowledge of same to a minimum..........you are much better off.

Eric
23-01-2006, 05:35 AM
ehats your neighbours address we will all come around and burn down their letter box

Billy T
23-01-2006, 11:21 AM
Don't try and fight it Billy, it seems clear that you have committed an offence. I recommend you explain to them why you were parked there and they will most likely let you off.

I can't deny the technical offence George, but challenge it I shall. There are many more ways to fight than by taking them head on. My motto is "fight smarter, not harder".

Cheers

Billy 8-{)

Graham L
23-01-2006, 02:00 PM
I think the council have a bet with you, Billy. They are betting that you will pay them $200. I think they will win. They dealt.

Cicero
23-01-2006, 02:21 PM
I can't deny the technical offence George, but challenge it I shall. There are many more ways to fight than by taking them head on. My motto is "fight smarter, not harder".

Cheers

Billy 8-{)
Show this lot what you are made of B,you can do it. :thumbs:

mark c
23-01-2006, 06:34 PM
AFAIK it is an offense to have an unwaranted vehicle, whether moving or stationary, on 'public roadways'. I know someone who had an unwarranted car parked in a supermarket carpark, got a ticket, and successfully contested it because the carpark was not a 'public roadway', but an area owned and operated by the supernarket. I also got off a DIC charge for driving accross a croquet court after a party. (Willfull Damage instead.)

Other than that Billy T, I'd say yes you're in the wrong but contest with all your wits, ask for 'reasonablness' (or one of its nany guises) to be taken into account. I've got off a few things like that. I don't recommend you see them as a giant, blind, destructive, anti-human bureaucarcy but rather as a bunch of peeps doing a job like the rest of us.

godfather
23-01-2006, 06:42 PM
I wonder when "a certain unnamed poster on PF1" that may have an aversion to WFTWE and other such threads by Billy took up residence in the street and made the original complaint?

Or do I suspect a conspiracy that does not really exist perhaps ...

OK - it's just paranoia, carry on as you were.

Cicero
23-01-2006, 06:53 PM
I wonder when "a certain unnamed poster on PF1" that may have an aversion to WFTWE and other such threads by Billy took up residence in the street and made the original complaint?

Or do I suspect a conspiracy that does not really exist perhaps ...

OK - it's just paranoia, carry on as you were.
By George,I think you have got it.

SurferJoe46
24-01-2006, 04:49 AM
I wonder when "a certain unnamed poster on PF1" that may have an aversion to WFTWE and other such threads by Billy took up residence in the street and made the original complaint?

Or do I suspect a conspiracy that does not really exist perhaps ...

OK - it's just paranoia, carry on as you were.

...and watch out for those pesky black helicopters...they can read the name on a golfball at 60,000 feet altitude.

I suggest wearing aluminum foil hats to protect yourself from brain probes..and it might be a good idea to cover all the inside walls of your home with foil too...keeps the alien saucers away.

If you don't follow these helpful hints, you are gonna be the next front page of the National Inquirer..."Space Aliens Stole My Unwarranted Vehicle"

Graham L
24-01-2006, 12:03 PM
AFAIK it is an offense to have an unwaranted vehicle, whether moving or stationary, on 'public roadways'. I know someone who had an unwarranted car parked in a supermarket carpark, got a ticket, and successfully contested it because the carpark was not a 'public roadway', but an area owned and operated by the supernarket. I also got off a DIC charge for driving accross a croquet court after a party. Willfull Damage instead.) ...
Have another look at the definition of a "road", Mark. It is"... a place to which the public have access, whether as of right or not." I don't know how old that definition is, but you and your friend were lucky. Or you got ignorant prosecutors and judges. (Or they owed your lawyer money, or he had something on them).

PaulD
24-01-2006, 01:17 PM
While it may get results, I don't believe any supermarket would allow ticketing in their carparks.

SurferJoe46
24-01-2006, 02:09 PM
ALL parking lots in California are dedicated rights-of-way and have the onus of being police patrolled and have the same enforceable laws as streets and byways. All applicable laws are gleefully enforced by the local constables.

Another shot in the arm here lately.

California has so many older cars in very good condition body-wise, that it is a cottage industry to pull one out into a field and make it look like it's been parked there for a few years. The Sunday drivers from the big city see them and make ridiculously large offers to purchase them for "restoration".

That being said, now along comes ol' Arnie The Governator, and he sees revenue in them there fields and sics the state tax board onto the land owners and fines them for having unregistered vehicles in eye shot. Even if they are in rusted hulk-condition, they are still taxable (via the department of motor vehicles definition of "vehicle = a contrivance that is used to purvey persons and/or cargo any distance via the use of internal combustion" ideology.

So..we get guys with suits and field glasses peering into the fields and open barn doors to see if by chance they can espy a vehicle of any sorts and then enter it into their little laptops and have the state tax board collect fines and fees for the state because of delinquent registration and fees by seizing the property or tax refunds from the owner until the debt is paid.

California is beginning to s@(k really big nowadays.

Billy T
25-01-2006, 01:15 PM
Phase 1:

Posted a carefully worded letter to the Council today, sticking strictly to the options they provided and, amongst other things, pointing out that the vehicle could not be moved off the road because it had been immobilised by persons unknown. I also added a few other relevant facts and photos of the damage as proof of veracity.

I have disabled the steering lock and shifted it off the road of course, as a precaution against wanton towage.

Watch this space.

Cheers

Billy 8-{)

Cicero
25-01-2006, 02:32 PM
I have found my advocate,for when I get into strife. :thumbs:

Billy T
25-01-2006, 03:55 PM
I have found my advocate,for when I get into strife. :thumbs:

My pleasure Ciccy. :D Consumer advocacy is one of my business sidelines and I do enough each year to keep my hand in. Got a Disputes Tribunal matter coming up soon for myself, but within the limits they allow I have steered a few people through the process to a successful outcome. I have also acted as an expert witness commissioned by the Tribunal to assist the Referee in a technical dispute.

Cheers

Billy 8-{)

Cicero
25-01-2006, 04:34 PM
My pleasure Ciccy. :D Consumer advocacy is one of my business sidelines and I do enough each year to keep my hand in. Got a Disputes Tribunal matter coming up soon for myself, but within the limits they allow I have steered a few people through the process to a successful outcome. I have also acted as an expert witness commissioned by the Tribunal to assist the Referee in a technical dispute.

Cheers

Billy 8-{)
You have missed your vocation.Barrister. :cool:

bob_doe_nz
30-01-2006, 09:36 AM
Hmm now everyone with the Herald dated Monday 30th January, take a look at the sideswipe section of Section A (the back page)
Look at the last paragraph. It looks familiar somehow... :illogical:

Scouse
30-01-2006, 09:48 AM
Hey Bob..... don't forget most of the country don't see/get the Herald. Tell us all about it.

bob_doe_nz
30-01-2006, 10:22 AM
http://www.imagef1.net.nz/files/P1301084.jpg

Erm, BillyT isn't a jafa is he?
But the simalarities are soooo close

ninja
30-01-2006, 11:45 AM
http://www.imagef1.net.nz/files/P1301084.jpg

Erm, BillyT isn't a jafa is he?
But the simalarities are soooo close
http://pressf1.pcworld.co.nz/showthread.php?t=65760