November 2024

by Robin Astle.

From FBHVC Historic 2024 Issue 3

Legislation by Lindsay Irvine

Introduction

As you will read in detail in my esteemed colleague Ian’s column, time indeed flashed by as, with your assistance, the Board and the Legislation Committee strained sinews in constructing a response to the Call for Evidence on the registration of “old” vehicles only to be bounced with an early general election. The work is unlikely to be wasted as the Federation engages with the new administration.

Aside from the DVLA, I have quite a few topics for your education, information and entertainment in this edition and not all have featured prominently before. If the tone on occasion seems slightly scolding, I apologise, but reminding fellow enthusiasts of their responsibilities under the law is important. So, on the topics of the Single Justice Procedure (SJP), seatbelt and mobile phone enforcement cameras and the ACPO Preserved Police Vehicles Protocol, I seek to be supportive as well as instructive! Whilst again not covering CAZ and LEZ in any depth, I will briefly mention the Oxford “filters” and provide an update on Martyn’s Law, the details of which I described comprehensively in the last edition. Finally, though not of special significance to HVs, I will alight briefly on a change in Welsh Government policy on speed limits and conclude with a topic which I have covered extensively previously and is already raising its head in the first few weeks of the new government, Road Pricing.

Single Justice Process

Est quidem vera lex recta ratio naturae congruens, diffusa in omnes, constans, sempiterna, quae vocet ad officium iubendo, vetando a fraude deterreat;

OK so not my usual source of Latin quotes, Horace, but this time Cicero, the Roman statesman and lawyer: He is saying “Law is spread throughout everyone, unchanging and eternal, which calls people to their duty by ordering and deterring them from fraud by its prohibitions.”

Unfortunately, a few in our community have been caught out by the universal tentacles of the law including the SJP. What is it? The full facts sheet is here https://bit.ly/3SNaYKv but essentially, by an amendment to the Magistrate’s Court Act 1980 in 2015, a new process was introduced whereby a single magistrate, supported by a legal adviser, could decide adult, summary-only, non-imprisonable and victimless offences. This is on condition that the defendant has pleaded guilty or has not responded to notification that they’re being prosecuted. Examples of cases covered by the SJP include TV offences, failing to show a valid train ticket while travelling on a train service, driving without car insurance and exceeding a speed limit.

However, the area where some members have fallen foul of the system is in relation to vehicle excise duty (VED) and “Being the registered keeper of an untaxed vehicle.” Whether through a mistaken belief about the effect of a zero rate of VED or through illness, some owners have taken their vehicle off the road, not retaxed (or perhaps even insured) their HV without notifying the DVLA through submission of a Statutory Off-Road Notice (SORN). The DVLA have been using the SJP system since 2018 (as we have confirmed through an FOI request). For that offence the DVLA would normally issue a £180 Fixed Penalty (reduced to £40 if paid within 28 days). If that is ignored, the DVLA may then commence proceedings via the Single Justice Procedure, which can result in a significant fine, plus a claim for back-tax. There are other related and potentially more serious offences if the car is seen on the road.

As reported in the media, there have been some distressing cases where a very elderly or ill owner has ended up being criminalised as their next of kin have only discovered correspondence from the DVLA very late in the day and the single justice/magistrate has not been made aware of the situation due to the speed and relative inflexibility of this streamlined system.

Although, we will monitor and, if necessary, pressure the DVLA to take a compassionate approach to such an eventuality, once matters have passed a certain stage it is difficult for the prosecution to be stayed.

For those who are in the ‘mistaken belief category’, can I take the opportunity (in the least scolding way I can) to remind them that a registered vehicle, even up on jacks minding itself in the garage, must still be taxed or a SORN declared in respect of it.

Preserved Emergency Vehicles

Retired Police cars, motorbikes and fire engines are popular HVs and there are a number of clubs which cater for them. With the obvious possibility for misuse, either deliberate or accidental, particularly in relation to the more recently retired vehicles, in 2009 a Protocol was promulgated by the then Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO now NPCC) to regularise the use of retired police vehicles on the road. In order to ensure that owners were not constantly pulled over for Road Vehicle Lighting Regulation infringements, the Protocol encouraged officers to take a “pragmatic” approach to enforcement provided that enthusiasts in turn were responsible in their use of the vehicles. Certain procedures were laid down in the Protocol in relation to covering up lights and logging journeys. With the change from ACPO to NPCC and the Protocol only applying to Police Vehicles, we were approached some while ago by a retired police officer with proposals for a comprehensive update including the application of a revised arrangement to all types of former emergency or “blue light” vehicles. He had an understandable concern about examples of misuse including the high-profile example of a fire engine used by the protest group Extinction Rebellion. The Federation consulted with some of the specialist groups and made contact with the staff of the Chief Constable responsible for Roads Policing policy. Understandably, the Roads Policing Policy unit have many competing priorities, and it was only recently that we received a response from a Chief Superintendent seconded to this policy unit. In announcing their intention to formally withdraw the obsolete Protocol, we were much encouraged by the positive and trusting attitude he took to the HV community and by his advocacy of a light touch approach. He has agreed that I should publicise their decision through this medium and it is best I quote him directly on the way forward.

“We do agree that the ACPO guidance which dates back to 2010 is out of date and our intention is to officially withdraw that document.

There are a number of valid points made in the correspondence you submitted such as the example of the Fire engine being used by XR but my view is that there is legislation in place already to deal with those who use a vehicle to impersonate emergency services which is fit for purpose. There are also a wide range of vehicles on the roads which have a genuine and legitimate use for a range of markings.

I am also firmly of the opinion that there is a significant difference between genuine enthusiasts who preserve vehicles and take them to shows or events and would sign up to an association and those who seek to use such vehicles for a criminal purpose and therefore by the very nature of their intent would not!

Those people who are genuinely preserving vehicles as enthusiasts will be aware that when driving the vehicles on the public highway they should cover emergency equipment so the vehicle cannot be mistaken for a current vehicle. The vehicle if stopped will not be registered to a Police force and through effective investigation at the roadside officers will establish this is the case and unless there are other relevant factors would be unlikely in my view to take enforcement action.

Officers are regularly briefed on emerging trends and intelligence in relation to protest activity and criminal behaviour so they can carry out their relevant duties effectively including considering the use of emergency vehicles with criminal intent.

In conclusion I do not believe there is a need for a working group or a revised code of practice and I see no significant benefit to the creation of a register of historic vehicles. To ensure this is not just my view I have raised this within my National Heads of Roads Policing meeting and there was no indication this is a current issue and everybody was support of the above position.

In return for this thoughtful conclusion, it is important that his faith in genuine enthusiasts is maintained and that the concerns of the retired officer mentioned above are not reinforced. So, on behalf of the Federation please be responsible in the use of your blue light vehicles of any era and type and adhere to the principles of the defunct Protocol to avoid prosecution and damage to the reputation of the HV community.

Oxford ZEZ

In issue 1/2024 I predicted that as an increasing numbers of cars met emissions regulations or those which did not were “retired”, councils would gradually shift to the other tool in the Transport Act armoury, congestion charging or similar. The two varsity towns of Oxford and Cambridge have flirted with variations of this as reported extensively in the media. The significance for the HV movement is that the exemptions we have previously enjoyed in relation to emissions zones (because our vehicles cannot be modified to comply) are not similarly applicable to congestion zones (as is evidenced by the London Congestion Zone from which we are not exempt). Oxford was pursuing a

camera enforced filter scheme from this autumn. https://bit.ly/4corBTy This covers a much larger area than the existing ZEZ. Appreciating that some HV owners like to take their vehicles to Oxford for some ‘Inspector Morse’ type photography, this scheme will further restrict such ambition, albeit it is virtually impossible to gain access to photogenic areas today. Oxfordshire residents will be able to apply for a limited number of passes.

However, the breaking news is that due to delays on replacing the railway bridge on one of Oxford’s main arteries, the scheme has been postponed with further updates awaited.

Martyn’s Law

As previously described in edition 2/2024, this legislation, properly named the Terrorism (Protection of premises) Bill, was inspired by the family of one of the victims (Martyn Hett) of this appalling terrorist incident at the Manchester Arena in 2017. The subsequent inquiry found failings by the event organisers and others relating to prevention of a terrorist act and measures to mitigate the effects of such an act when it occurred. The current proposition of the legislation is fully detailed in the above-mentioned edition.

On the announcement of the early election date, certain pieces of legislation already in train had priority for passing through all the parliamentary stages before the dissolution of Parliament but this Act missed the cut. However, it was announced in the King’s Speech and will therefore be in the new Government’s programme subject to parliamentary time. We will be monitoring how far our concerns about the potential burden on smaller venues are addressed.

Wales

I stress from the outset that, understandably, the Federation would not and did not have a view on the justification or otherwise for the widespread introduction of the 20mph limits across the country almost a year ago. Views across Federation members would have varied. However, by May this year, an online petition had gathered almost half a million signatures calling for the limits to be rescinded and the Welsh Government is in the process of reviewing them. As I will mention below in the context of road pricing, this demonstrates that petitions can be very effective.

Big Brother is watching

After extensive trials, mobile camera units which can detect drivers not wearing a seatbelt or illegally using a mobile phone are with us. You won’t even be aware of the presence of such a unit. I have seen photographic evidence and even in the dead of night, the offending behaviour is clear to see.

The law on use of mobile phones when driving is clear and unambiguous and unquestionably justified as past horrific accidents have demonstrated. The Regulations were amended a couple of years ago to make unlawful virtually all interaction with the phone except hands-free. In relation to seatbelts, this is all very well where the overwhelming majority of vehicles on the road are fitted with seatbelts which must therefore be used. What about the HVs (such as my own 1954 car) which are not so equipped (nor are obliged to be equipped)? Given that seatbelt equipment is not on the list of vehicle details on the DVLA register, in the event of being photographed by such a mobile camera, at what stage will it be identified that the driver is not in fact committing a moving traffic offence?

I took advantage of the new line of communication with the Roads Policing unit to ask what the likely sequence of events would be. The view was that the age and lack of seatbelt requirement would not be picked up at force level. More probably a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) would be sent to the registered keeper and then they would have to respond providing the relevant information of about the age and type of vehicle. He appreciated that this might cause worry for some drivers (who may never have had a speeding ticket or similar) but believed the numbers involved should be extremely low. He indicated that if numbers did escalate, they would consider if there is a better way. I hope I won’t have to find out!

Road pricing

For a full and, if I might say, fairly impressive exposition in this topic, can I refer you to Edition 3/2022. Amongst all the other priorities and pressures on the last government, this did not come close to rising to the surface. However, pressure groups such as the Green Alliance (who are likely to have even more influence with the current government) were already giving thought to the concept https://bit.ly/3yzgoBP. My forecast is that it will be brought forward in this parliament, but having suffered such a drubbing under the previous Labour Government in 2007 when 1.8 million responded in the negative in a petition, it will be trailed extensively first. As I described previously, it need not necessarily be a bad thing for the HV movement given the relatively low mileages HVs cover on average and there may be concessions we can procure in any event. As ever we will be alert to any policy proposals put forward.