PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Notice of Intended Prosecution, But I wasn't speeding?
cruz
post Wed, 18 Jul 2018 - 19:28
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 1 Dec 2012
Member No.: 58,646



Hello

I have today received a notice of intended prosecution from North Wales Police

All it say is my speed was 68mph at A483 Dual carriageway Junction 7 Rossett, Wrexham.

This is obviouslt a mobile camera as a fixed probably wouldn't flash under 70mph on a dual carriageway

I was driving my Renault Traffic van which I had fully converted to a campervan and sent the V5 document off to reclass it as a Motor Caravan. My V5 clearly states Motor Caravan on it.

As far as I am aware this reclassification now allows me to drive at 70mph on dual carriageways rather than the 60mph limit from when it was a commerical panel van.

Am I correct in my Motor Caravan assumption of 70mph? The V5 says Motor Caravan and N1

This link suggests I am https://www.gov.uk/speed-limits

Thanks.

This post has been edited by cruz: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 - 19:43
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 43)
Advertisement
post Wed, 18 Jul 2018 - 19:28
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Steve_999
post Sun, 29 Jul 2018 - 18:51
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,397
Joined: 12 Jun 2008
From: West Sussex
Member No.: 20,304



QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Sat, 28 Jul 2018 - 20:49) *
The VSA response is pointless anyway, they have already admitted their own classification system doesn't, for some bizarre reason, allow you to reclassify a vehicle even though repurposing especially larger vehicles is relatively common.

As SP says bearing in mind the range is very broad, it is just a matter of fact whether it is a motorhome. Someone might just have a mattress in the back of a panel van which, although covering all the loading space, is unlikely to make it a motorhome. Conversely, I used to know a carpenter who had kitted out a panel van to an amazing standard, but with no windows, he just used to open the sliding door. That, to me, has been "repurposed", as in permanent modifications rather than just the chattels of a home in a van.

But, without a judge ruling on it, the safest way is to get it approved either via a professional installer or presenting it for inspection - that way the police seemingly roll over.


Quote from DVLA
<h2 id="motor-caravan-minimum-features">Motor caravan minimum features</h2> In order for a converted vehicle to qualify as a motor caravan it must have certain minimum features:

  • a door that provides access to the living accommodation
  • a bed, which has a minimum length of 1800mm or 6 feet - this can be converted from seats used for other purposes during the day but must be permanently fixed within the body of the vehicle
  • a water storage tank or container on, or in, the vehicle
  • a seating and dining area, permanently attached to the vehicle - the table may be detachable but must have some permanent means of attachment to the vehicle. It is not good enough to have a loose table
  • a permanently fixed means of storage, a cupboard, locker or wardrobe
  • a permanently fixed cooking facility within the vehicle, powered by gas or electricity
  • at least one window on the side of the accommodation
If the vehicle has all of these features present, permanently fixed and installed properly, then it is a legal requirement to have it reclassified as a motor caravan on the V5C.




(apologies that their formatting doesn't paste well!)


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cruz
post Sun, 29 Jul 2018 - 20:06
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 1 Dec 2012
Member No.: 58,646



laugh.gif biggrin.gif matress
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
notmeatloaf
post Sun, 29 Jul 2018 - 21:47
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,306
Joined: 4 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,659



QUOTE (Steve_999 @ Sun, 29 Jul 2018 - 19:51) *
Quote from DVLA

The DVLA have many interpretations of statute, most of them wrong. If it isn't written in legislation or been decided on by a court of record then a case would be decided on it's own merits. I doubt in these crazy days of bottled potable water that a water tank would be a requirement.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Steve_999
post Sun, 29 Jul 2018 - 21:59
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,397
Joined: 12 Jun 2008
From: West Sussex
Member No.: 20,304



But sometimes much easier to fit in with their "interpretation" than to fight them.

Depends upon how much time you have on your hands and, possibly, the depth of your pockets.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 10:20
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here