Well surprise, surprise, my grandson having been granted an exemption by the court managed to drive himself to and fro to the show without incident. In spite of the NZTA assuring us he was a huge liability on the road, he proved not to ber. I have as promised written to the Minister of Transport asking some pertinent questions. Shall we wait for the duck shoving and stone wall approach which is all too familiar. Watch this space. Incidentally the Crown Solicitor when she lost had the graced to shake his hand and hope he enjoyed the show. Nice
sw20,
Jan 3, 3:40pm
What makes me angry about taking government departments to court when they are wrong is that they have a huge legal counsel to draw from. All paid for with tax dollars.
smac,
Jan 3, 5:16pm
Can you clarify which bits weren't applied correctly! As far as I know the rules around exemptions would be internal NZTA policy, so the judge would not know whether or not they were applied correctly.
bashfulbro,
Jan 3, 6:46pm
sounds reasonable, when you consider other exemptions that are wriiten in the stupid bloody law anyway.tell me ,what this has to do with road safety.A restricted driver can legally drive his unemployed siblings to the pub.but he cannot drive his employed siblingsto work.what sort of stupidity is this !, what sort of halfwit inventsthis sort of rubbish.
Go to LTNZ and read exemptions .some rules do not apply if your partner, Civil union partner, etc,are on social welfare, Dole, Sickness,Invalid,benefit or DPB,.but, if you and them work.you have to go to court to get an exemption.F/wittery.
romulan7,
Jan 4, 11:21am
Disagree if you want but my view on restricted licences is that they are abused to much and clearly in some situations simply an unworkable stop gap measure between a learners and a Full Licence.
My own thoughts are get a learners be accompnaied by someone sober over 21 and minimum of 3 years full licence.Then pass your test for a Full but be on probabtion for a set period where a motoring offence can bounce you back to Learners Licence.
vtecintegra,
Jan 4, 11:22am
I don't agree with that part at all - someone could cover 1,000km or 100,000kms over the three years
scotty20001,
Jan 4, 2:52pm
the nzta are a bunch of pen pushing idiots, enough said.
valb1,
Jan 4, 4:40pm
thankyou scotty you are so right. I will await the Ministers - or his minions reply with great interest. Hey guys, I am fighting for the DECENT Focused young people, who are being han dicapped by stupid noddies in Palmerston North who have no idea. What is worse, they cannot interpret the Legislation correctly, which is disturbing. This is not about nutters who drive anyway, this about the law set in place to allow for genuine young people to be able to ;pursue a normal path without some government moroon "just doing a job" and not thinking outside the square! Shame on them and the cost is horrendous, but sometimes, it is worth it so show them how stupid their arguments are if they have the intelligence to acept it. I doubt it. Watch this space!
valb1,
Jan 4, 4:42pm
to smac - the judge ruled they have to prove that - HE is unsafe and cannot apply statists as they tried to.Read the regulations, and you will see they are stupid, which is what the judge decided.
valb1,
Jan 4, 4:46pm
to sw20, you are so right. This case involved a female driving from Tauranga to Rotorua and back, at the tax payers expense as it was the only court we could get it into quickly. I have thought about the cost not only to the tax payer but myself, and it is stupid. Our barrister also had to travel to Rotorua as we did. How dumb is this. I wish you could have listened to the pathetic defence she put up it was laughable - she knew that as well, but hey she was getting paid so what the hell!!
As you'll see, I'm not seeing any requirement for the NZTA to prove that the applicant would be unsafe in order to not grant the exemption. On the contrary, the legislation all relates to making sure that compliance with the original rule would be unreasonable in the case in question. Completely different to what you are saying.TO say what you say he said, perhaps he's referring to some precedent, in which case I'd be keen to see the details of the case.
valb1,
Jan 6, 11:33am
to smac I believe there was a precedence where a lad was having to start work before 5am. The Crown silicitor tried to argue that it was not a precedence because it was paid work, where my grandson was a volunteer. The Judge overruled her saying work is work whether it is paid or unpaid and he deemed the technical work my grandson was doing constituted work. I believe the wording clearly unreasonable etc applied in this case.
lou-lyn,
Jan 6, 12:03pm
good on you sir thats the way to do it we are in the dark anyway ! do you no that you or your grandson are no drivers anyway but merly traverlers and yes we dont need a driving licence .look in the dicshonary and you will find a drive is a person who drives for payment or gain and we have the right to travel as stated buy the magna carter 1215 there used to be a lot of laws but from the word go we have been led to beleve this is what we have to do as we are ruled under maritime law and not as free men of the land thing is his mother and your mother applide for a birth cirtifcate wereyour mother said you would abide buy all the laws of this goverment any way i could go on and on try this you tube BURSTING THE GOVERMENTS BUBBLEregards lou free man of the land god bless
lou-lyn,
Jan 6, 12:08pm
hi again just read that and for all the comments il get about spelling and commas and the like im enternaly sorry fingers dont work as fast as brain.
lou-lyn,
Jan 6, 12:28pm
hi valb1 just read your comment on your barrister of course she was pathetic all solictors and barristors work for the bar the bar is owened buy the goverment,thats why they allways tell the young just plead gilty and you will only get a fine thats why a judge sits on a bench ins a roman word for tax collector that why you dont have to lisent to a police officer that gets stroppy hence the wordpolice a hes not an officer does he have stripes on his arm no does he have pips on his sholders no and no custard on his ha he isnt even a law officer he to an oath to uphold the peace not the law.nex time you are summond to court dont quake as to the layman summons mean we go blackmores verstion its you are invited just reply and say no thanks dont whant to go to your party ,, i could go on hey try this next time you get pulled up for speeding just say thank you for bringing tha to my attension if he still gives you a tickrt dont take it of him straight away but right him out a recite before you take it there will be no way in hell hel take it hel tell you the recet is the ticket but its not thats the citation he will not take it but tell you every thinq even that hes goin to arrest you then tell hi thats ok ill send you abill im 100 dollars an hour .googal freeman of the land and be born again and i dont mean cristain hey guys sorry about spelling full stops but youl ether get it or still sit in the dark BECOME FREE MEN .
lou-lyn,
Jan 6, 12:28pm
hi valb.1 just read your comment on your barrister of course she was pathetic. all solictors and barristors work for the bar the bar is owned buy the goverment,thats why they allways tell the young just plead gilty! and you will only get a fine .thats why a judge sits on a bench its a roman word for tax collector thats why you dont have to lisen to a police officer that gets stroppy hence the wordpolicehes not an officer does he have stripes on his arm no ,does he have pips on his sholders no ,and no custard on his hat he isnt even a law officer heswore an oath to uphold the peace not the law.nex time you are summond to court dont quake. as to the layman summons mean we go. blackmores verstion its you are invited just reply and say no thanks dont whant to go to your party ,, i could go on hey try this next time you get pulled up for speeding try this just say thank you for bringing tha to my attension if he still gives you a ticket dont take it off him straight away but right him out a recite before you take it there will be no way in hell hel take it .hel tell you the receit is the ticket but its not thats the citation. he will not take it but tell you every thinq even that hes goin to arrest you then tell hi thats ok ill send you a bill im 100 dollars an hour as you have broken no law.googal freeman of the land and be born again and i dont mean cristain hey guys sorry about spelling full stops but youl ether get it or still sit in the dark BECOME FREE MEN .
jasongroves,
Jan 6, 12:32pm
,.,,.,!!.,,,,';
Just thought you might want to borrow some punctuation! Lol.
valb1,
Dec 3, 6:33am
Recently my grandson was forced to take the LTNZ to court to obtain an exemption to allow him to drive home between 10pm and 11pm after working at a threatre doing the lighting. Stonewalled all the way, finally into court where the Judge overturned the LTNZ decision. There decision making process is obviously flawed, and I wonder how many people have been severely affected by them to say nothing of the fees they are happily gleaning in!
crzyhrse,
Dec 3, 7:41am
NZTA. But what more did you really expect from a government department!
valb1,
Dec 3, 7:51am
Well I had hoped for a little common sense silly me. He is two months off being able to apply for a full licence. Interesting comment the Judge made, compare this time of the year and daylight saving with July! Great summing up, don't think I have finished with them yet, watch this space
usdefault,
Dec 3, 7:57am
Rules are rules, what makes your Grandson exempt from the rules every other kid has to abide by!
tigra,
Dec 3, 8:02am
Rules should always be flexible to allow for eventualities some desk--bound bureaucrat hadnt thought of.Should always be an opportunity to appeal to a neutral moderator. Glad to hear your grandson had the fortitude to take it to court and fight the "system". Hope he got awarded costs.
moosie_21,
Dec 3, 8:02am
You'd make a great American cop.
bitsy_boffin,
Dec 3, 8:23am
Rules cover a general case and as a result have to be overly broad, not a specific one.That is why there are exceptions to every rule.
I'd expect that the fellow was granted an exemption specifically to travel from the theatre, usually such exemptions even specifically include the route that must be followed.
valb1,
Dec 3, 9:05am
In answer to "rules are rules". what makes my grandson special. He is doing a difficult job for a musical theatre group. Most of his mates just drive anyway, so the fact that he doesn't makes him special. We live 33 ks from the theatre with no public transport. The exemption process has been put in place for this type of thing, as indicated by the Judge. Only bone headed beuocrats can't see the wood from the trees. The Judge made mention of his mature attitude, and congratulated him for having the determination to see it through. No no costs, we didn't ask for it, just grateful to get the exemption, and hope no other decent law abiding kid has to be put through this. So in answer to the rules are rules, if they were not challengeable, there wouldn't be an exemption process in place.
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.