No driveway, no tax, but...

cormie

Hi,
Just curious as to whether it's ok to park a vehicle on a public road without tax if there is no driveway (private property) but you have a residents parking permit for the road does anyone know?

Any feedback appreciated:)

KTRIC

Nope, not legal. You need to have a vehicle taxed before it touches a public road.

Guy:Incognito

Wouldnt have thought so.Residents parkign is just to stop you havign to pay for parking so it would be the same as parking there and filling the meter.

unkel

What the lads said. If it's not taxed, best take it off the public road

Wishbone Ash

Although it's illegal, if the car is not in use, the Gardaí generally won't bother you. If the car is an eyesore (e.g. an wreck with flat tyres etc.), causes obstruction or is reported by neighbours then it might be a different story.

cyrusdvirus

Can I ask the question. Why no tax?

unkel

Wishbone Ash wrote:

Although it's illegal, if the car is not in use, the Gardaí generally won't bother you. If the car is an eyesore (e.g. an wreck with flat tyres etc.), causes obstruction or is reported by neighbours then it might be a different story.

That's my experience too. Very risky though if it is out of tax by more than 3 months and a few neighbours ring the guards, it's quite likely it will be confiscated

md99

You could always take down the thing that holds the tax and ins. certs..

at least that way people and passing traffic wardens/gardaí won't actually SEE outdated tax discs, and few will bother to follow up I'm sure..

DukeDredd

md99 wrote:

You could always take down the thing that holds the tax and ins. certs..

at least that way people and passing traffic wardens/gardaí won't actually SEE outdated tax discs, and few will bother to follow up I'm sure..

I think the offence is not displaying tax and insurance even if the car has both so they could still slap a ticket on the windscreen.

galwaytt

DukeDredd wrote:

I think the offence is not displaying tax and insurance even if the car has both so they could still slap a ticket on the windscreen.

correct - there are two offences here; not displaying, and not having. At least displaying an out of date one shortens the list !!

cormie

But it's also the law to always have such discs displayed. I've been fined before for not having my insurance disc in because I left the car with my bro who had to get his own insurance. Was just wondering would it be any different if I had a residents permit displayed.

I want to sell the car so don't want to tax it if I wont be using it;)

Gary ITR

Just tax the car and add it on to the sale price, a car with tax is easier to sell

Wishbone Ash

Onkle wrote:

Just tax the car and add it on to the sale price, a car with tax is easier to sell

Maybe it's over 3000cc. €1300 approx PA. :eek:

EDIT: €1343 or €379 for 3/12.

blorg

I seem to remember a thread on here a while back from someone who got done for _exactly_ what you are describing, leaving an untaxed car parked on a public road. So I wouldn't do it.

unkel

Wishbone Ash wrote:

Maybe it's over 3000cc. €1300 approx PA. :eek:

EDIT: €1343 or €379 for 3/12.

Don't remind me. My tax is up next week. That's €5372 spent on taxing one car over the last 3 years :eek:

Wishbone Ash

unkel wrote:

That's €5372 spent on taxing one car over the last 3 years :eek:

4 years?

cormie

Jaysus, that's a lot.

Anyone know what it WILL cost to tax a 6L murcielago?

unkel

I got the car 3 years ago. Taxed it
Taxed it again 2 years ago
Taxed it last year
Taxing it now

That's 4 times €1343 in 3 years!

unkel

cormie wrote:

Anyone know what it WILL cost to tax a 6L murcielago?

All private cars over 3,000cc are €1343

Perhaps one day you WILL be able to afford the tax on a Murcielago

IrishRover

We've had this thread before, and it was a thread that Cormie started before too.

There is only an offence for not displaying a valid tax disc on a car that is in use on a public road. I remember we checked the wording of the actual law on the last thread and the only way it could be an offence to have a car parked on a public road without displaying tax is if you interpret the meaning of "in use" to include "parked with nobody in the car" - which I think we agreed last time wouldn't make sense as in that case, the wording would not include the words "in use" and would simply read "...offence not to display valid tax on a car on a public road..."

Cormie, in the last thread there was a guard who still decided to do you for this, even though the car wasn't in use and he seemed to be avoiding all your attempts to contact him - likely because he realised he was in the wrong on this issue. Did you ever update us on what happened with this? Is this the same issue you are talking about now?

cormie

I'm pretty sure I posted a reply to that thread.

This is a different situation now, that was insurance parked on a public road with no parking permit, this was just asking if a parking permit made it ok really.

The law is very very very unclear regarding "in use" but it boils down to "in use" also being "parked" on a public road. I wasn't willing to go to court at the risk of a higher fine and taking the time off to do so to argue whether or parked included not being in the parked car, just the fact it was parked, i.e, on a public road at all. Would be interesting to see get the true meaning of parked.

unkel

cormie wrote:

The law is very very very unclear regarding "in use" but it boils down to "in use" also being "parked" on a public road

I believe so too

Wishbone Ash

IrishRover wrote:

There is only an offence for not displaying a valid tax disc on a car that is in use on a public road.

Indeed it does IrishRover.....

4.—(1) The licence for a vehicle shall be carried on the vehicle at all times when the vehicle is in use on a public road.

(2) The licence shall be carried on the vehicle as follows :—

(a) on a bicycle (other than a bicycle used for drawing a sidecar), tricycle or invalid carriage—in a conspicuous position on the near side of the vehicle in front of the driving seat ;

(b) on a bicycle used for drawing a sidecar—on the near side of the handlebar of the bicycle or the near side of the combination in front of the driving seat ;

(c) on a pedestrian-controlled vehicle—in a conspicuous position on the near side of the vehicle ;

(d) on any other vehicle—

(i) where the vehicle is fitted with a glass windscreen extending across the front of the vehicle to the near side—facing forwards on the near lower corner of the glass and either on the glass or within two inches of it, or

(ii) on the near side of the vehicle, facing towards the near side of the road and not less than two feet six inches nor more than six feet six inches from ground level and between two imaginary parallel lines, the first drawn vertically through the rear-most part of the driving seat or cab (or where there is no such seat or cab, the foot plate) and the second drawn vertically six inches in front of the base of the front windscreen or, where there is no front windscreen, through a point four feet forward from the first line.

(3) Where the licence is carried on a glass portion of the vehicle, it shall be in a weather-proof container and in any other case, the licence shall be carried in a durable weatherproof container with a transparent cover.

(4) The licence shall be carried in such a manner as to show at all times the date of expiry and the particulars set out in paragraph (b) of article 3 of these Regulation.

(5) Where the licence is carried on or adjacent to the windscreen in accordance with sub-paragraph (i) of paragraph (d) of sub-article (2) of this article, it shall be clearly visible from the front at all times by daylight, and in any other case, the licence shall be placed and carried so as to be clearly visible at all times by daylight to a person standing at the near side of the vehicle.


BUT


....the definition of "in use" is given as including "parking".

IrishRover

I would agree that if you are parking a car then it is in use as you are in the car and driving it when parking. But if a car is parked and there is no one in the car then it is not in use.

Like I say, it only makes sense to me that if "in use" was really intended to include parked vehicles (or to put it another way "vehicles that are unoccupied, stationary, and with engine off") they would simply have written the clause without the words "in use", as the term doesn't expand the meaning of the sentence. The term can only limit the meaning.

If it really was an offence for a car to "exist" on a public road without a valid tax disc then it would simply say "It is an offence for a car to be on a public road without a valid tax disc". I'm convinced this is the only reasonable interpretation and I'd be willing to take my chances in court that a judge would agree with my rationale.

unkel

IrishRover wrote:

I'm convinced this is the only reasonable interpretation

I agree that is a reasonable interpretation

IrishRover wrote:

I'd be willing to take my chances in court that a judge would agree with my rationale.

Fair play to you! Perhaps no one has challenged it in court yet

cormie

Cover the costs and I'll go back and challenge my old fine:D I'd love to after I was charged 50% more cuz the garda wouldn't ring me back (I must have rang the station about 30 times, no joke)

Wishbone Ash

cormie wrote:

I was charged 50% more cuz the garda wouldn't ring me back (I must have rang the station about 30 times, no joke)

Why didn't you go to the Garda Station in person? It's always much more effective regardless of any inconvienence it may cause.

MAYPOP

unkel wrote:

Fair play to you! Perhaps no one has challenged it in court yet

I'd make sure that a decent solicitor was doing the talking, judges hate normal people arguing their case!

IrishRover

I don't see this as an existing statute that no one has yet challenged. I'm at the other end of the telescope on this one. You are being penalised under a law that doesn't exist. To put it in poker terms for you Cormie, that gard told you he was holding 5 Aces and you folded. You never called him (went to court), so you never got to prove him wrong. In fact "prove" is the wrong word. Demonstrate more like.
(BTW, to me it seems pretty obvious that the reason he never called you back is because he realised later that he had made a mistake and knew that if he spoke to you about it he would have to back down on it and lose face. Of course he wouldn't be eager to get in touch with you and eat humble pie ).

As for the judge disliking a civvy making his own case, I doubt you would have to. I would expect any competent judge on hearing that the car was unoccupied, not in motion and not running would dismiss the case. Perhaps if he was feeling vindictive he might ask the gard "please do me the courtesy of explaining to me the use that the car was being put to at the time?"

Can anyone explain what "use" a car is that is stationary, unoccupied and not running is being put to? Who is "using" such a car?

cormie

I'd love to talk for myself in court! "Actually Mr. Garda, I'm not wearing a tie at all!":D

Can you go back and challenge fines? Maybe I will when I have some more disposable income/time and could afford a bigger fine if it doesn't go too well:)

Nephew

I don't really know the specifics but I know someone who parked an untaxed car in his estates parking area (25metres from his house) and it was towed away. A few weeks and many heated phone calls later he got it back without having to pay anything. Mind you he had two other taxed vehicles in his drive which may have helped his case.