Reversion To Former Warrant System Urged

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28907, 29 May 1959, Page 13

Reversion To Former Warrant System Urged

The system of issuing warrants of fitness stickers in two parts, the warrant and a separate sticker for the windscreen, should be reintroduced, the council of the Automobile Association (Canterbury) decided last evening. The council received a report from its roads, patrols and service committee that when a motorist lost his warrant of fitness sticker it was not possible to obtain a. duplicate without a further inspection of the vehicle. It was possible to obtain only a receipt for the fee paid. “Mr A. S. Crew said that, after a short period, it was difficult to read the writing on the warrant of fitness stickers and he understood that the testing station was receiving constant inquiries from individual motorists on the exact dates on which their warrant of fitness were to expire.” said the report.

In a written report to the council, the secretary (Mr E. S. Palliser) said he had obtained information from the district officer of the Transport Department <Mr D. Hogan) and the assistant superintendent of the Christchurch City Council (Mr W. H. Birdling). Duplicate Warrant Mr Hogan, who had conferred with his head office, said there was nothing in the Traffic Regulaitons to prevent the issue of a duplicate warrant of fitness by an authorised issuing authority if the original had been lost or accidentally destroyed, said the report. The mere fact that there was no specific mention of the point in the regulations did not stop duplicates from being issued.. “Mr Hogan has confirmed from the Audit Department that that department has no objection to the issue of duplicae warrants of fitness provided the issuing authority records sufficient details for cross reference and verification. ’’ Mr Palliser said.

Mr Hogan said that authorised garages did issue duplicate war-

I rants and that the Transport Department had. in fact, discussed the matter with the New Zealand retail motor trade. It was understood that any garage raising the question with the trade was told that it might issue a duplicate warrant provided: (a) that garage issued the original; (b) the duplicate was back-dated to the date of issue of the original: (c> the duplicate was clearly marked as such. "Mr Birdling considers that the municipal testing station should not issue duplicate warrants because there is no specific provision for this in the regulations. He says that for the financial year ended March 3'. 1959. the testing station issued 69.654 warrants of fitness, and he emphasises the difficulties of tracing the original records as the basis tor the issue of duplicate warrants, particularly under the new system whereby the windscreen sticker is the sole warrant. On such stickers the information fades rapidly, and this also adds to the testing station s difficulty in tracing through its records,” he said. Two Parts “The present problem arises primarily through the provision contained in Amendment No. 2 of the Traffic Regulations, 1956. under which warrants of fi’ness are issued only in the form of windscreen stickers. I consider that the difficulty would be largely overcome if there were a reversion to the rystem by which the warrants were issued in two parts, namely, tin warrant Itself and a separate sticker for the windscreen,” said Mr Palliser.

After suggestions by the chairman (Mr E. R. Casbolt) and Mr F. W. Freeman that batter stickers and glue should be used. Mr Crew moved, and Mr C. H. Browne seconded, that the old system of a separate warrant and sticker be reintroduced. This was carried.