Displaying Licence 'discs'

[Machpoint005]

On 16/03/2017 at 11:52, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

The more cynical amongst us might think the reason for removal of the tax disc was precisely in order to automatically generate a vast  number of £80 penalties.

It certainly happened to me as I hadn't collected my post for a while and missed a renewal notice. There was not only a Penalty fine for using the vehicle on the road with no tax, but some other further penalty I had to pay in order to renew the vehicle tax at all. I think the mistake cost me about £160 in all. 

But with CRT it is different. They don't have APNR cameras everywhere with automated fine generation.  

There's a gov.uk web site where you can check tax and MoT status instantly. Don't go to the imitation one where they make a charge to your mobile phone account, though.

[Iain_S]

18 hours ago, Muddy Ditch Rich said:

Not sure how CaRT would attempt to reason to a judge that the 1962 Transport act applies to licences when they were not a requirement until 1975 , and a public right of navigation existed on all BWB waterways until 1968, can an act of Parliament apply to something not conceived of at the time ?

Sec.43 of the 1962 Act is written to cater for charges and conditions for facilities or services which might be provided in the future. With the abolition of the public right of navigation, it could be argued that allowing a boat to be kept on the canal became a facility supplied by BW.

The answer to the question must be "Yes". As an example, the road traffic Acts restrict the legal use of Sedgeways, hoverboards and the like to private property. I don't think they were conceived of when the definition of "mechanically propelled vehicle" was drawn up  

[Muddy Ditch Rich]

6 hours ago, Iain_S said:

Sec.43 of the 1962 Act is written to cater for charges and conditions for facilities or services which might be provided in the future. With the abolition of the public right of navigation, it could be argued that allowing a boat to be kept on the canal became a facility supplied by BW.

The answer to the question must be "Yes". As an example, the road traffic Acts restrict the legal use of Sedgeways, hoverboards and the like to private property. I don't think they were conceived of when the definition of "mechanically propelled vehicle" was drawn up  

If the 62 act permitted BW  to add conditions to licences why did they create all the further BW acts and seek the consent of Parliament without anyone ever mentioning that they could do whatever they saw fit since 1962 ? The bill for the 1995 act was discussed for years and consulted many user groups, BW's lawyers, and senior management, even testimony from mere boat owners,  but in the minutes I've read no one ever claimed the 62 act already allowed BW to create its own licence terms and conditions.