smash wrote: » I never said it's a contract for service. It's a fee for usage rights."Liability for motor tax arises when a vehicle is used in a public place/road."https://www.motortax.ie/OMT/staticContent.do?page=faq Even the RSA used the word entitled when referring to categories of vehicles a license holder can drive. I've dug no hole.
smash wrote: » I never said it's a contract for service. It's a fee for usage rights."Liability for motor tax arises when a vehicle is used in a public place/road."https://www.motortax.ie/OMT/staticContent.do?page=faq
smash wrote: » Even the RSA used the word entitled when referring to categories of vehicles a license holder can drive. I've dug no hole.
RainyDay wrote: » Motor tax (like all taxes) is not a contract for service - you don't get anything specific for it. It is a tax. The hint is in the name.
RainyDay wrote: » So I guess that no matter how many times you are asked, you will not be able to produce any evidence of your mythical entitlement. You've dug a bit of a hole for yourself here. Time to stop digging.
smash wrote: » ......I've stated already that the entitlement for the car to be used on a public road lies in detail of a valid motor tax disc.
smash wrote: » Here's two specific questions for you because you're very pedantic. Answer them and explain please... If I'm a fully licensed and insured driver who owns a car that has a valid NCT but has not paid motor tax, am I entitled to drive my car on a public road? If I'm a fully licensed and insured driver who owns a car that has a valid NCT and up-to-date motor tax, am I entitled to drive my car on a public road?
seamus wrote: » No and No. There is no absolute entitlement to drive on any public road, regardless of whether motor tax has been paid. Motor tax is a requirement for operating a vehicle in a public place, but it does not confer an entitlement to do so.
smash wrote: » Owning a valid license entitles me to dive a vehicle for which the licence is valid: "Whether you have a driving licence or a learner permit, you are only entitled to drive the category of vehicle for which the licence or permit has been issued."Source So I am entitled to drive the vehicle, however I've stated already that the entitlement for the car to be used on a public road lies in detail of a valid motor tax disc.
The Dark Side wrote: » Do Boards hand out a medal to the guy who can turn up in the most threads and spout nonsense on topics about which he patently knows nothing?
smash wrote: » If you are unlicensed yet you have paid motor tax on your vehicle then that vehicle is entitled to be used the road network providing it is driven my a licensed and insured driver. It's true that there are steps such as a license, valid NCT and insurance but the entitlement to use the road network lies with the car having a valid motor tax certificate.
RainyDay wrote: » Nope. The absence of entitlement does not create entitlement either. Where is the entitlement?
smash wrote: » If I have a car and have not paid motor tax, am I entitled to use it on a public road?
RainyDay wrote: » Liability is not entitlement. Can you provide any proof or evidence of this entitlement - such as legislation? Or is it a matter of faith perhaps?
smash wrote: » No, you're twisting it to suit your agenda. If you are unlicensed yet you have paid motor tax on your vehicle then that vehicle is entitled to be used the road network providing it is driven my a licensed and insured driver. It's true that there are steps such as a license, valid NCT and insurance but the entitlement to use the road network lies with the car having a valid motor tax certificate. "Liability for motor tax arises when a vehicle is used in a public place/road" https://www.motortax.ie/OMT/staticContent.do?page=faq
RainyDay wrote: » You can keep saying it as often as you like, but that doesn't make it true. There is no entitlement to use the road. By your logic, any banned driver just has to pay their motor tax, and then they are 'entitled' to drive. Could you please explain where your 'entitlement' comes from? What bit of legislation entitles you to use the road? Because the legislation that I've seen requires you to pay motor tax, but doesn't entitle you to diddley-squat. The entitlement exists only in your mind.
smash wrote: » ....I don't pay motor tax because I use the roads, I pay motor tax to be allowed use a motorised vehicle on the roads in the first place.
It is a legal requirement to have motor tax if you want to drive your vehicle in a public place. Motor tax is a charge imposed by the Government on some motor vehicles. Motor tax is collected by local authorities.
smash wrote: » Motor tax is a payment for an entitlement. Payment of motor tax entitles the motorist to use that particular vehicle a public road. Without payment they are not compliant and are not entitled to use that vehicle on a public road. I don't pay motor tax because I use the roads, I pay motor tax to be allowed use the roads in the first place.
RainyDay wrote: » As was pointed out earlier, motorists don't pay motor tax FOR road usage, they pay motor tax BECAUSE they use the road. It is not a payment for a service. It's a tax, based on opportunity. Also, I don't pay tax as a motorist, or a cyclist, or a water drinker. I just pay tax - it all comes out of the same pocket. So, to summarise; - most cyclist pay motor tax - roads are funded from general taxation - general taxation is funded from all taxes paid by everybody - income tax, VAT, customs and motor tax etc Motor tax is not a payment for a service or payment for an entitlement - it's a tax.
smash wrote: » My point is that not everyone seems to know this: I was just clarifying for RainyDay that no, he has not paid tax to use his bike on the roads. He has only paid tax which funds the road network infrastructure development.
ardmacha wrote: » A better analogy is that if you own two cars you have to pay tax for both of them, you cannot drive the second one on the basis that you paid for the first one.
smash wrote: » Some cyclists seem to think that paying motor tax for car usage entitles them to use for their bike. My point is that it doesn't, as cyclists don't have to pay for usage at all.
smash wrote: » Cyclists who are also motorists makes absolutely no difference to the fact that as a motorist, you pay through taxation for your usage rights. Cyclists can use a road without paying to use it. Your opinion is that you pay motor tax to use a road in your car so this means you've paid to use your bike on the road. You haven't, you've only paid to use your car on the road. As a cyclist you don't have to pay to use your bike on a road. So to sum it up Motorists pay usage rights for their cars. Cyclists don't pay usage rights. Because they don't have to. If you're a motorist and a cyclist, your motor tax only covers your car usage. It doesn't mean you've paid for bike usage.
smash wrote: » Not at all. There's the motorists who use the age old nonsense of "They don't even pay for the roads" and then there's the cyclists who point out that they pay for the roads through their taxes, which is true. My point is that everyone pays for the roads, but only motorists pay for road usage. In the form of a motor tax. Some cyclists seem to think that paying motor tax for car usage entitles them to use for their bike. My point is that it doesn't, as cyclists don't have to pay for usage at all. Paying tax for usage rights on your car does not transfer the usage rights to your bike, because you don't need a usage right for your bike. That's all.
CramCycle wrote: » What was your point then, I think everyone has known this for quite sometime. I don't pay motor tax so I feel better about cycling to work. I pay it because I may want to use my car sometimes for various reasons. If I didn't have a car I wouldn't feel guilty for cycling, I would feel the same as I do now.
RainyDay wrote: » based on current law, it does translate that a tax compliant cyclist HAS paid to use their bike on the road, in exactly the same way that your beloved motorist HAS paid to use their car on the road.
rubadub wrote: » A similar situation is the fact that people watching RTE TV on internet do not have to have a TV licence, if all they have is a laptop. Some people, especially those paying a tv licence fee, feel this is unfair and that they should contribute.
rubadub wrote: » I don't get why posters keep saying stuff like this? what is the goal? to make fellow "motorist only" people think "see, cyclists who pay motortax are still scum", or make the cyclists who do pay feel bad/guilty or something? Because I really don't think its achieving anything other than wasting your own time.
