Driving commerical vehicle as private use

clint_silver

I know it used to be the case you couldn't, but from reading online that may have changed over last few years for designated vehicles such as land rover discoverys where theres a class called N1 brought in primarily for reasons such as farmers wanted a commercial vehicle and wanted to use it for private use as well, or am I just reading that wrong and theres just no way you can drive a private vehicle for commercial use and vice versa.

_Brian

My insurance policy covers “social and domestic” use along with commercial.

Social and domestic isn’t broken down in any way or limited to anything.

blackbox

_Brian wrote: »

My insurance policy covers “social and domestic” use along with commercial.

Social and domestic isn’t broken down in any way or limited to anything.

Your insurance is compliant, but is your motor tax?

clint_silver

blackbox wrote: »

Your insurance is compliant, but is your motor tax?

Thats kind of what I meant, sorry I should have stated that, theres lots online about commerical tax at 333 euro a year but if you do and then drive that car to the shops once a week you havent taxed your car properly as youre not using it for commercial purposes.

That had always been the case but theres a few articles online about an N1 class of vehicle that seems to allow it but I may not be reading it right.

clint_silver

I rang motor tax office, so you can drive an N1 privately but it must be taxed as a private vehicle. Stock answer is you can NOT drive a vehicle privately in any capacity if its taxed commercially.

Not sure of the insurance implications of driving a commercial vehicle privately.

Mooooo

Proving it is for private use at the time would be their issue. Insurance is covered as above

U_Fig

Mooooo wrote: »

Proving it is for private use at the time would be their issue. Insurance is covered as above

It's pretty much impossible to prove as you can slant a business use into almost anything

elperello

clint_silver wrote: »

I rang motor tax office, so you can drive an N1 privately but it must be taxed as a private vehicle. Stock answer is you can NOT drive a vehicle privately in any capacity if its taxed commercially.

Not sure of the insurance implications of driving a commercial vehicle privately.

Check your local authority website, the Motor Tax section.
There will be a list of documentation required to tax commercially.
If you can produce that documentation you can tax for €333.

As above you must check your insurance to confirm you are covered for SD&P.

Collecting a few messages once a week is hardly going to get you in any bother.

Del2005

elperello wrote: »

Check your local authority website, the Motor Tax section.
There will be a list of documentation required to tax commercially.
If you can produce that documentation you can tax for €333.

As above you must check your insurance to confirm you are covered for SD&P.

Collecting a few messages once a week is hardly going to get you in any bother.

It might not currently get you in bother but if you've taxed a vehicle commercially you've signed a statutory document that you won't use it for domestic use, which is picking up messages or going to mass, and like all things in this country it'll just take 1 case and they'll clamp down on it.

IIRC >3.5t vehicles have no restriction on domestic use when taxed commercially

elperello

We have discussed this on other threads before.
My position is that the current set up is unfair to people who have a legitimate right to commercial tax.
Restricting them from picking up messages or going to mass is just ridiculous.

Having said that you are correct according to the law and a case could be taken.
It's just very unlikely.

selfbuild17

It’s totally unworkable to expect commercial vehicle drivers to use their vehicles for commercial use 100% of the time. The law needs changing here. The insurance industry has already accepted that it is unworkable and insure commercial vehicles for social and domestic use as well, as a default. A guy dropping his kid to school on the way to work can’t be expected to go home in between and switch vehicles. A person using their van for commercial purposes 95% of the time shouldn’t be expected to purchase, tax, insure and run a separate domestic vehicle. Nor should they be expected to tax the van privately. The system needs to be a tad more flexible.

Del2005

selfbuild17 wrote: »

It’s totally unworkable to expect commercial vehicle drivers to use their vehicles for commercial use 100% of the time. The law needs changing here. The insurance industry has already accepted that it is unworkable and insure commercial vehicles for social and domestic use as well, as a default. A guy dropping his kid to school on the way to work can’t be expected to go home in between and switch vehicles. A person using their van for commercial purposes 95% of the time shouldn’t be expected to purchase, tax, insure and run a separate domestic vehicle. Nor should they be expected to tax the van privately. The system needs to be a tad more flexible.

Why shouldn't they tax it privately if they are using it privately? If you want the benefits of commercial tax you should stick by the statutory declaration you made, if you want use it privately then don't lie on statutory declarations and tax it privately.

elperello

Del2005 wrote: »

Why shouldn't they tax it privately if they are using it privately? If you want the benefits of commercial tax you should stick by the statutory declaration you made, if you want use it privately then don't lie on statutory declarations and tax it privately.

If you are entitled to commercial tax you should not have to pay extra for private tax for an element of private use. The fact that they still use the old cc rate for private tax on vans just makes it even worse.

I'm not talking about chancers who just want cheap tax on a jeep but genuine van drivers.

You do not "lie" on the statutory declaration if you qualify for commercial tax. The paperwork has to be correct and it is only if you later use the vehicle for private purposes that you transgress.

It's a bad law that makes criminals out of ordinary hard working people for just going about life in the real world.

Marcusm

elperello wrote: »

We have discussed this on other threads before.
My position is that the current set up is unfair to people who have a legitimate right to commercial tax.
Restricting them from picking up messages or going to mass is just ridiculous.

Having said that you are correct according to the law and a case could be taken.
It's just very unlikely.

There is no such thing as commercial tax; there is goods vehicle tax. A fixed rate of motor tax applicable to vehicles designed and/or constructed principally for the carriage of goods not people. The problem is that (unscrupulous) motor dealers started marketing them to every Tom, Dick and Harriet as if any vehicle with N1 designation could get this tax rate provided there was some occasional use for commercial purposes (not even for goods purposes). Over time this will wash out as the restriction is now more significant to get the initial designation.

I would estimate that the number of Discos which are legitimately taxed is probably less than 5% and the child seat in the back is proof of this!

Marcusm

elperello wrote: »

If you are entitled to commercial tax you should not have to pay extra for private tax for an element of private use. The fact that they still use the old cc rate for private tax on vans just makes it even worse.

I'm not talking about chancers who just want cheap tax on a jeep but genuine van drivers.

You do not "lie" on the statutory declaration if you qualify for commercial tax. The paperwork has to be correct and it is only if you later use the vehicle for private purposes that you transgress.

It's a bad law that makes criminals out of ordinary hard working people for just going about life in the real world.

It’s not the law that’s the problem. The Transit driver who is an occasional passenger will never attract any fines. It’s the Discos etc that are leaches.

elperello

Marcusm wrote: »

There is no such thing as commercial tax; there is goods vehicle tax. A fixed rate of motor tax applicable to vehicles designed and/or constructed principally for the carriage of goods not people. The problem is that (unscrupulous) motor dealers started marketing them to every Tom, Dick and Harriet as if any vehicle with N1 designation could get this tax rate provided there was some occasional use for commercial purposes (not even for goods purposes). Over time this will wash out as the restriction is now more significant to get the initial designation.

I would estimate that the number of Discos which are legitimately taxed is probably less than 5% and the child seat in the back is proof of this!

Marcusm wrote: »

It’s not the law that’s the problem. The Transit driver who is an occasional passenger will never attract any fines. It’s the Discos etc that are leaches.

Sorry you are right it is goods vehicle.
The thread started out referring to commercial and I didn't bother correcting.

As you can see I agree about the jeeps. My point is in favour of the van driver.

Marcusm

elperello wrote: »

Sorry you are right it is goods vehicle.
The thread started out referring to commercial and I didn't bother correcting.

As you can see I agree about the jeeps. My point is in favour of the van driver.

And I personally don’t have a problem with a van driver with 2/3 seats occasionally using it for private purposes and neither did anyone else until all the fraudsters started with the Discos, Bentaygas etc.

elperello

Marcusm wrote: »

And I personally don’t have a problem with a van driver with 2/3 seats occasionally using it for private purposes and neither did anyone else until all the fraudsters started with the Discos, Bentaygas etc.

John Gormley was the minister and the civil servants produced the statutory declaration as a solution. He was foolish enough to buy it and the rest is history.

54and56

Marcusm wrote: »

And I personally don’t have a problem with a van driver with 2/3 seats occasionally using it for private purposes and neither did anyone else until all the fraudsters started with the Discos, Bentaygas etc.

The only difference between van driver and Disco driver is scale. Both are breaking the law.

Next we'll have TDs suggesting it's ok to break the drink drive laws in certain circumstances that suit their world view!!!

I doubt there's a goods/commercial taxed vehicle in the country which hasn't been used for some private use at least once. The regulation is completely ineffective and needs to be changed to reflect the realities of life.

Marcusm

54and56 wrote: »

The only difference between van driver and Disco driver is scale. Both are breaking the law.

Next we'll have TDs suggesting it's ok to break the drink drive laws in certain circumstances that suit their world view!!!

I doubt there's a goods/commercial taxed vehicle in the country which hasn't been used for some private use at least once. The regulation is completely ineffective and needs to be changed to reflect the realities of life.

I’m not sure that you are right on the law albeit that you are right on what DTTAS has written on the form. Regulation 7 of the 1992 regs requires additional tax to be paid if there has been a change of use but does not expressly prohibit occasional use for social, domestic or pleasure. My point re the Discos is that they are most often fraudulently registered as goods vehicles despite that not being the expectation or intention for their use.

I confess that a fully amended set of regs is not available to me but I think the SDP exclusion was an interpretation to deal with a problem (which hasn’t dealt with it in the usual Irish manner).