Prohibition Of Roadworthiness

sassy_one

vaio wrote: »

So the owner is liable not the driver?

What if the owner is the driver?

I think the registered keeper would be liable, might be wrong but I think they would be.

As say you hire a car, get stopped by VOSA, they see it's a CAT C and hasn't had a VIC check - then the hirer can't be expected to have had that done before hiring it!

Might be wrong though, mad world!

cyclonebri1

[QUOTE=sassy-one;35621201]I think the registered keeper would be liable, might be wrong but I think they would be.


Might be wrong though, mad world![/QUOTE]


I think you are getting the hang of it Sassy, still wrong but at least qualified :T:T

Hammyman

sassy-one wrote: »

I can't see how the OP can be held accountable for the claim by VOSA on the defect, as how would have he of known?

By the banging and vibrations it would've been making. You cannot miss a propshaft bearing failed to the point VOSA issue a PG9. PG9s aren't issued for stuff that's just a little bit defective.

mrbadexample

Ok, just to clarify:

The driver won't be prosecuted in this case. If he was going to get prosecuted, they'd have interviewed (or at least cautioned) him at the checkpoint. If they didn't, he's in the clear.

A prohibition notice has been issued - the operator of the vehicle (not necessarily the owner) has 7 days to have the defect remedied & the vehicle presented for a full or partial test to clear the prohibition. If the prohibition is not cleared during this time then it may no longer be used on a public road.

The operator may choose to scrap the vehicle if they wish.

Roadworthiness prohibition notices are either delayed or immediate. If it is immediate, then the vehicle must be repaired on site or recovered. If repaired on site, the prohibition may be cleared by the examiner (i.e relatively new vehicle with a blown indicator lamp), or it may be varied so that it can be driven away, but it will still need presenting for test to clear the prohibition.

Delayed prohibitions just give the operator some days (during which time he can still use the vehicle) to have the defect repaired & the vehicle tested.

Prosecution would rarely follow the issuing of a delayed prohibition, as the defect is not serious enough - it just wouldn't stand up in court: "What, my vehicle was so dangerous that I'm being prosecuted, and yet they let me drive away?"

So relax, OP, you have nothing to worry about.

mrbadexample

droodle wrote: »

and issued a prohibition of road worthiness certificate stating the van must be repaired and presented for an mot within 14days or they will prosecute.

Roadworthiness prohibitions don't state this. They state that if the vehicle is used in contravention of a prohibition notice then the user may be liable to prosecution.

Hammyman wrote: »

Actually they can.

Actually they can't. They can issue a piece of paper that says the vehicle may not be used on a road unless the defect is rectified & the prohibition cleared. The vehicle may be scrapped, or sold (as long as the buyer is made aware of the prohibition and has the prohibition cleared before the vehicle is returned to service).

vaio wrote: »

What if the owner is the driver?

Then they are liable.

goldspanners wrote: »

but if the prop sahft bearing was bad enough for it to be deemed un roadworthy then any driver would have noticed it.

Hammyman wrote: »

By the banging and vibrations it would've been making. You cannot miss a propshaft bearing failed to the point VOSA issue a PG9.

I'm not a mechanic but the OP just states:

droodle wrote: »

and they found a defect with the propshaft main bearing carrier,

I don't think that means the bearing had failed. As it was an old, replacement van, I think a few knocks and rattles would be quite normal, and if it wasn't your regular vehicle, you wouldn't necessarily notice a new noise.

droodle

Thank you for all the replies has put my mind at ease.
I'm not the owner, just an employee driving a vehicle owned by one of my bosses. There wasn't any vibrating/shuddering/clanging, you could hear. Just a droan from the engine, and for a 1996 transit it felt very solid. The prohibition notice doesn't come into affect for a week so i assume it wasn't overly serious, however i have refused to use the van, and am waiting for our usual van to be returned.
Its amazing the help you receive/can get in this forum!

mrbadexample

droodle wrote: »

yThe prohibition notice doesn't come into affect for a week so i assume it wasn't overly serious, however i have refused to use the van, and am waiting for our usual van to be returned.

You can use the van during the 7 days if you wish. If the defect was dangerous, you wouldn't have left the check site in it.

sassy_one

mrbadexample wrote: »

You can use the van during the 7 days if you wish. If the defect was dangerous, you wouldn't have left the check site in it.

If the van is repaired, will a new MOT have to be sought on the van? or would the old one come back into affect?

mrbadexample

sassy-one wrote: »

If the van is repaired, will a new MOT have to be sought on the van? or would the old one come back into affect?

A nice shiny new MOT will be required. The new test certificate is then (in the case of cars & light goods vehicles) taken to a police station, who issue a prohibition clearance notice. This must then be sent to VOSA for the prohibition to be removed from their system.

Hammyman

sassy-one wrote: »

If the van is repaired, will a new MOT have to be sought on the van? or would the old one come back into affect?

It'll be going through a full MOT. Once the wheeltappers generally find something serious enough to warrant a notice then they leave it for an MOT examiner to find anything else.