Insurance requirements when parked

Our man in Havana

Just a general question for members of AGS.

When a vehicle is parked in a public place does it need insurance cover under the RTA 1961?

There has been some debate over people who have the drive other peoples cars cover. Does this cover cover a parked car when they are not sitting it? Would the car need a separate policy in that case?

It is something that has me puzzled.

Hooch

Bond-007 wrote: »

Just a general question for members of AGS.

When a vehicle is parked in a public place does it need insurance cover under the RTA 1961?

There has been some debate over people who have the drive other peoples cars cover. Does this cover cover a parked car when they are not sitting it? Would the car need a separate policy in that case?

It is something that has me puzzled.

Not that im aware.There is no provision in the RTA for parked vehicles to have insurance. Just a Road Fund Licence under the finance act. (TAX)

Our man in Havana

Thanks for that.

the locust

The only thing i can think of is the obligation to have an insurance disc displayed for owner/driver?

SV

Just to branch off here a bit, if a car is left parked in a public place without tax, can it be impounded?
(Bearing in mind the tax has been out for 3 years at this stage)

Our man in Havana

Oh yes.

SV

Bond-007 wrote: »

Oh yes.

That will do the finest.

Thank you!

Hooch

Bond-007 wrote: »

Oh yes.

I hate to contradict respected members but nope!!

Even our members dont realise it. The wording has driving or use. There is no mention in the act of parking. (Although they can be ticketed over and over and over)

ROAD TRAFFIC ACT, 1994 (SECTION 41) REGULATIONS, 1995.

4. Where a member of the Garda Síochána is of opinion that an offence to which section 41 (1) of the Act refers is being or has been committed in respect of the driving or use of a mechanically propelled vehicle, such member may take such steps, including the making of an arrangement with any other person as the member thinks fit, for the detention, removal and storage of the said vehicle.

gerire

As nga says, it cannot be impounded when parked on the side of a road; it can be ticketed tho

I have seen it in the village near where i live; 2 gardai having a chat with a local business man waiting for someone to come back to their car and 41'ed it once the engine was turned on


[edit] Woops I see nga has that mentioned about the ticketing them.

Hooch

gerire wrote: »

[edit] Woops I see nga has that mentioned about the ticketing them.

Was there ever any doubt!!!!

bravestar

nice guy always wrote: »

I hate to contradict respected members but nope!!

Even our members dont realise it. The wording has driving or use. There is no mention in the act of parking. (Although they can be ticketed over and over and over)

ROAD TRAFFIC ACT, 1994 (SECTION 41) REGULATIONS, 1995.

4. Where a member of the Garda Síochána is of opinion that an offence to which section 41 (1) of the Act refers is being or has been committed in respect of the driving or use of a mechanically propelled vehicle, such member may take such steps, including the making of an arrangement with any other person as the member thinks fit, for the detention, removal and storage of the said vehicle.

Yes it can be impounded and the owner issued a summons, for tax, insurance, NCT, no licence plate on front or rear etc. If it is parked in a public place then it obviously had to get there somehow. I know what the legislation says but in the real world things arent so black and white. There is an implied intent to drive.

How do I know this? Because I convicted someone for all of the above a few weeks back.

That being said, if the vehicle is parked outside the persons house because of lack of driveway or something then I doubt you would be getting a conviction.

Hooch

bravestar wrote: »

Yes it can be impounded and the owner issued a summons, for tax, insurance, NCT, no licence plate on front or rear etc. If it is parked in a public place then it obviously had to get there somehow. I know what the legislation says but in the real world things arent so black and white. There is an implied intent to drive.

How do I know this? Because I convicted someone for all of the above a few weeks back.

That being said, if the vehicle is parked outside the persons house because of lack of driveway or something then I doubt you would be getting a conviction.

So one rule for one person and one for another???

Read the legislation and if you want to seize parked cars for no tax etc then be my guest. But beware your warned:D.

Also there is no implied intention to drive for a parked vehicle, or any vehicle in fact. Even Section 50 needs intent to drive to convict which can be quite hard to prove. Also how can you prove how long the vehicle was there for and how it got there? Do they teach RTA in T/more anymore???:D

O and in the ''real world'' legislation is legislation and operating outside that remit will get members into trouble with GSOC. (IE that case last week with the seized car). Im not trying to get into an arguement with you.....just advice. Take it or leave it, its your choice

jpfahy

nice guy always wrote: »

I hate to contradict respected members but nope!!

Even our members dont realise it. The wording has driving or use. There is no mention in the act of parking. (Although they can be ticketed over and over and over)

ROAD TRAFFIC ACT, 1994 (SECTION 41) REGULATIONS, 1995.

4. Where a member of the Garda Síochána is of opinion that an offence to which section 41 (1) of the Act refers is being or has been committed in respect of the driving or use of a mechanically propelled vehicle, such member may take such steps, including the making of an arrangement with any other person as the member thinks fit, for the detention, removal and storage of the said vehicle.

Sorry but you are wrong. If my memory serves me correctly in the Definitions section in the Act it says "drive includes park" or "use includes park"
So if it's on the public road, moving or parked, it has to be taxed, insured, NCT'd and be displaying appropriate discs for each. Possible 6 offences to be done for, plus seizure under Section 41!

Hooch

jpfahy wrote: »

Sorry but you are wrong. In the Definitions in the Act it says "drive includes park"
If it's on the public road it has to be taxed, insured, NCT'd and be displaying appropriate discs for each. Possible 6 offences to be done for!

Were taking about seizing the vehicle....not prosecuting. Were gone off the topic slightly. Read the wording for Section 41

jpfahy

Was the original question not about insurance??

Hooch

jpfahy wrote: »

Was the original question not about insurance??

Yes my friend but if you read the posts you will see a question about seizing for tax if the vehicle is parked and not in use.

As per legislation you cannot sieze a vehicle under Section 41 unless it is being driven.

As I said we went off topic from insurance:o

jpfahy

nice guy always wrote: »

As per legislation you cannot sieze a vehicle under Section 41 unless it is being driven.

You should read it again yourself, together with the definitions in the 1961 Act

nice guy always wrote: »

As I said we went off topic from insurance:o

Did you say that??

lol

Hooch

jpfahy wrote: »

You should read it again yourself, together with the definitions in the 1961 Act

I did....and sent a request for clarification from Legal department and our Traffic Bureau HQ.
Response was the S.I. ammended it in 1995 and stated drive. No mention of park hense why we stopped taking them for no tax.

Lots of eagar beavers!

jpfahy

Still there as far as the Government of Ireland is concerned:

http://193.178.1.79/1961/en/act/pub/0024/sec0003.html

"use" in relation to a vehicle, includes park, and cognate words shall be construed accordingly;

jpfahy

I think the use of this forum to seek legal advice from Gardai is a very dangerous practice for all concerned. My entry into this discussion was to prevent the OP taking bad advice and finding himself in trouble. Not every Garda has a complete knowledge of legislation. What is going on here could lead to all sorts of complaints and litigation, I would call on the Mods to ban such requests for advice, don't we have a lot of unemployed solicitors in this country who would be delighted to give such advice, backed by their public liability insurance - and for a fee of course!!!!!

Shield

Legal advice is not given anywhere on boards, but there is a forum for Legal Discussion, which is what this has turned out to be. The OP simply gave a hypothetical situation, and received his answer a few times over.

Thanks to all that contributed.

Thread closed.