BREACH OF MOTOR LAWS

Taranaki Daily News, 10 June 1931, Page 7

BREACH OF MOTOR LAWS

EXCHANGING NUMBER PLATES “LIABLE TO CRUSHING FINES.” COURT POSTPONES THE PENALTY. Five young Inglewood men and a business man at Eltham found themselves involved in a complicated case of breaches of the Motor Regulations. Evidence at the Inglewood Court yesterday disclosed some remarkable juggling with motor registration plates. AIL were convicted. Counsel’s argument will be heard at the next court sitting before the penalty is inflicted. “Registration of motor vehicles,” said the magistrate, Mr. R. W. Tate, S.M., “is the groundwork of legislation pertaining to motor vehicles. The seriousness of the offence may be gtiaged by the fact that great loss may bo incurred by any individuals involved in an accident with unregistered vehicles, and they could not claim any insurance. The fines in the case in question would be crushing in that cumulatively they amounted to thousands of pounds and would mean gaol for the defendants if applied in full. Yet a small fine could not be made without leaving an impression on others that the offence was not a serious one.”

The evidence on the six charges was taken collectively, the charges being: (1) That Leo G. Pope failed to register the sale of a motor vehicle; (2) that he caused wrong number plates to be affixed to a motor vehicle; (3) that Herbert N. Murray, owner of the business, failed to procure a license for using the vehicle; (4) that Charles Gudgeon used a motor vehicle without the assigned number plates; (5) that Alan Baker drove a motor vehicle without assigned number plates or distinguishing marks; (6) that Jack Gudgeon affixed other than the assigned number plates on a motor vehicle; (7) that Percy G. Gudgeon failed to notify the destruction of a car and to hand over the registration papers of the car destroyed. All pleaded guilty. Constable Longbottom stated that Pope managed a plumbing business for Murray. He purchased a Dodge runabout truck to take the place of a Ford truck which was registered. He did not hand over the registration plates of the Ford, but used them on the new car. The Ford had been repaired at a garage and plates had been taken off an old Standard car which had been dismantled. Witness did nbt consider Murray, the owner of the truck, who lived at Eltham, had any knowledge of the truck being used without a new registration.

Mr. J. L. Weir appeared on behalf of Murray and stated that his client had given instructions for the new vehicle to be registered. The regulations, stated Mr. Tate, showed that any person using a motor vehicle or permitting a motor vehicle to be aged without the assigned nunjber plates was liable to a fine of £2O a day? and any person causing to be affixed any wrong number was liable to a fine of £lO. It was obvious Murray knew nothing about what was going on, and the others apparently did not realise the seriousness of the offence. All were convicted and the magistrate advised the defendants to employ counsel to state reasons at the next court sitting why heavy fines should not be inflicted. |