They are the facts smac! If you don't know that, read yourWOF check sheet small print.
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 7, 3:25am
Using a vehicle on the road or inspection, servicing or repair
If you are using your vehicle on a road solely for the purpose, and directly to the place, of inspection, servicing or repair, you will have a defence for using an unlicensed vehicle. This is similar to the law which allows people to drive a vehicle without a current Warrant of Fitness as long as they are taking the vehicle directly to a garage or testing station. This means that your vehicle must be licensed if you are using it for any other purpose but you may drive it unlicensed for these purposes. Please note however, that the vehicle must still be safe to be operated on the road even if it requires repairs in order to obtain an inspection.
Additionally: This is also just "interpretation", the actual legislation (unless its changed from when I last looked it up) simply says something like: "Vehicles without a current Warrant of Fitness may be used on the road for the sole purpose of obtaining a Warrant of Fitness"
I wasn't, and speaking of heads. I think that one went straight over yours.
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 7, 3:30am
Thanks crzyhrse, thats the legislation I was thinking of and couldn't find a link to.
crzyhrse,
Nov 7, 3:31am
It certainly went right over the non-kettle!
fryan1962,
Nov 7, 3:46am
just checked they changed it in Aug 2011 good on them
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 7, 3:50am
BTW, I got the car delivered O.K. I did have a moment where I thought I was heading for a checkpoint (flashing lights and cones ahead with cops all over the road) but it turned out to be a truck had rolled.
It would be nice to be able to do these things without the stress though.
zooki007,
Nov 7, 4:01am
You are right the check sheet doesn't count for jack. I simply said "READ THE SMALL PRINT". It states on it what you are entitled to do. As for legislation not mentioning a w/shop/testing station - WHERE ELSE ARE YOU GOING TO GET A WOF (compliance check)! But thanks for the legislation info. I can see a tui ad here. "But I was on my way to get a WOF, officer" - yeah right
crzyhrse,
Nov 7, 4:10am
That's the very problem Jazz was alluding to. if they choose to not believe you then you'll probably have to fight it in court even if you're telling the truth.
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 7, 4:18am
Spot on, that's my issue. Its simply crazy to have everyone who is stopped on the way to a WOF check with an un-WOF'd car treated as a criminal when they have done nothing wrong.
If the Police are going to issue an infringement they should have at least some evidence you are guilty. What is even worse though is that they are actively trying to stop you from proving your innocence. (By ignoring any notice you give of your intent to use a vehicle on the road for the purposes of obtaingin a WOF.)
By the way, what is concerning me most is the "if they choose not to believe you" part is fast becoming the default setting. That and the snide tone and silly faces. I even got it on the phone this morning when I rang and asked them to note what I was doing. Being spoken to in a condescending tone was the last thing I expected when I was trying to do the right thing.
owene,
Nov 7, 4:20am
The regs are explicit and say that as long as you can prove that you are on the way to a WOF station, you may drive an unlicensed vehicle on a public road. But the court will only accept that this is what you were up to if you have made an appointment and the WOF tester then provides written confirmation of that fact. Plenty of test cases on this one that support the above.
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 7, 4:23am
This would be fine except the Police will (in my experience to date) not take a moment to verify the appointment and instead just issue the infringement notice anyway. So that dosn't help the problem.
In other words, as an innocent party doing nothing wrong you should not have to go to court over it.
crzyhrse,
Nov 7, 4:23am
That's not what the 'regs' say at all. Read them from my post at #61.
framtech,
Nov 7, 4:51am
Its not rocket science, renew your warrent before the old one runs out. Ortrailer the car to the garage if it has no warrent. PS you dont have insurance cover if you operate the car on the road without a current warrent
pollymay,
Nov 7, 5:02am
I've been driving round with no warrant for about a week. Why! The windscreen washer motor burned out the day I booked it in so told them to flag it while I fix it. That is sooooooo insignificant but they will want it fixed so I'm sourcing a new motor. New 255 potenza tyres, just fixed the rust in a small spot with a welded on patch, fixed some other stuff that isn't even WOF applicable and just annoys me.
I'm sure some asshat officer would love to give me a ticket anyway but I can't pull a washer motor out of my ass, I have an inline one but it was cheap chinese crap and lasted about 2 squirts so I'm back to getting a new OEM one which takes a bit of time. I'd hardly call it the end of the world but it's kept me out of WOF for a few days
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 7, 5:06am
Completely impractical and unreasonable and also incorrect regarding the insurance cover.
There are so many reasons why people reasonably can't renew the WOF in time. From buying a vehicle without a WOF, to coming back from overseas, waiting for parts as described below, the list goes on.
There is absolutely ZERO need for all these people to be hiring a tow truck at great expense just to take a car for a WOF check.
ESPECIALLY as the law says you are allowed to do it. The Police DO NOT make the laws and we need to prevent them from trying.
owene,
Nov 7, 1:45pm
My AMI policy explicitly states that the vehicle shall be roadworthy and carry a current WOF. It's written there in black and white.
owene,
Nov 7, 1:49pm
Read them again. I've been there, ticketed by the local cop and defended it in court at huge expense to the taxpayer.The Bench accepted the On-Road letter confirming that I did have a WOF appointment and dismissed the case after a question to the cop to the effect of "why did you not call On-Road to confirm this mans story!"
So maybe the Judge was wrong and all you bush lawyers know better.
owene,
Nov 7, 1:50pm
Correct but the key here is to have pre-made the WOF appointment and be able to prove that you did so.
owene,
Nov 7, 1:52pm
And also, bear in mind that most cops have heard it all and can hardly be expected to believe the unsubstantiated bullshit that 99% of the public feed them. Would you if you were a copper! But an arranged appointment is easy to verify and solves it all.
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 7, 5:16pm
The trouble is many cops won't verify it, that's the crux of the problem. They just give you the ticket and tell you to write in.
As for "hearing it all" I am sure they have and do get lots of BS stories. However that does not give them license to pass judgement and condemn everyone as guilty. If they are not capable of being patient and respectful and taking the time to verify whos telling the truth and who's telling lies they should not be in the job.
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 7, 5:20pm
Thats only one policy from one company. Interestingly though when I questioned AMI (I am with them as well) on this very thing I was told so long as the accident was not caused by a failure relating to an item that would have failed the WOF I should be O.K.
That was some time ago so anyone reading this don't take that as gospel.
bellky,
Nov 7, 5:24pm
heard they were doing that.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.