Displaying Leaner Plate........

**imdying** · 19th December 2006, 14:39

I wouldn't waste your time. You didn't securely fasten it to the bike and got nicked, lesson learnt.

Those using velcro, well wtf did you expect would happen... At a guess, the velcro is designed to be used inside a cars windscreen. It doesn't take too many brain cells to rub together to figure out that on a bike velcro is next to useless.

**Snapper** · 19th December 2006, 14:45

Originally Posted by jumma

Sorry to hear about your misfortune. I've been pulled once and the officer kindly suggested I stick an L plate on, but said he wasn't losing any sleep over it himself.

Must admit to never putting one on, have managed to avoid the plod for five months now, and come the end of January I shouldn't be required to display one any longer.

Keep us posted as to the outcome.

Thanks Jumma and good luck with the full test!!!

**Snapper** · 19th December 2006, 14:46

Originally Posted by imdying

I wouldn't waste your time. You didn't securely fasten it to the bike and got nicked, lesson learnt.

Those using velcro, well wtf did you expect would happen... At a guess, the velcro is designed to be used inside a cars windscreen. It doesn't take too many brain cells to rub together to figure out that on a bike velcro is next to useless.

I secured it as best I could, hence wanting to not pay $400 punishment for not doing so. I.e. why should I pay $400 for not making an effort when I did make an effort.

I can see your point, but I guess I'm stubborn!

**NighthawkNZ:Me** · 19th December 2006, 14:49

Why is it $400 for no L-Plate and only $150 for no WOF...

WTF

I will admit when I was on my learners many a year ago... I didn't bother with the L-Plate and was pulled over a few times... Mr Plod didn't seem to care about it and I never got stung...

Its just revenue gathering

**jumma** · 19th December 2006, 14:53

Originally Posted by Snapper

Thanks Jumma and good luck with the full test!!!

Restricted actually, cheers.

**imdying** · 19th December 2006, 14:55

Originally Posted by Snapper

I secured it as best I could, hence wanting to not pay $400 punishment for not doing so. I.e. why should I pay $400 for not making an effort when I did make an effort.

Look at it like this; in this case, they're not fining you for not making an effort, they're fining you for making an inadequate effort.

Originally Posted by Snapper

It's happened several times.

Or if that doesn't make you feel better, then how about this; they're not fining you for not making an effort, they're fining you for making an inadequate effort more than once.

The reality is, plenty of people can manage to bolt there L plate on successfully, you'll get no sympathy here, especially given that you knew your method of afixing it to the bike was flawed. Think of it as third time unlucky... the first few times it fell off were your warnings.

**klingon** · 19th December 2006, 19:26

Originally Posted by McJim

I used the old "drill a hole through number place and bolt it onto the mudguard" technique. Worked for me.

I've drilled two holes through the number plate and two through the L plate and bolted it on. Interestingly, my full-licensed partner sometimes rides my bike and apparently he can be fined for riding a bike with a learner plate when he's not a learner! But a securely attached plate is a pain to remove... looks like we can't win.

On the L plate package it gives clear instructions on how to use the enclosed velcro to attach the L plate. 1) cut the velcro 2) attach the velcro to the inside of your rear window... after looking for my Volty's rear window for several minutes, I eventually caught onto the idea that velcro may not suit my purposes...

Originally Posted by Snapper

LOL. Well now I know this I will chose the 150, assuming there are no demerit points for that?!?!?

Hmmm... I would still prefer to have my rear reflector showing. The potential demerit points are some idiot rear-ending you! Is there any way you can modify the L plate to allow your reflector to show? Chop a bit of the corner like Sunhuntin or drill a massive hole through the middle if you need to!

**KLOWN** · 19th December 2006, 19:45

Originally Posted by imdying

I wouldn't waste your time. You didn't securely fasten it to the bike and got nicked, lesson learnt.

Those using velcro, well wtf did you expect would happen... At a guess, the velcro is designed to be used inside a cars windscreen. It doesn't take too many brain cells to rub together to figure out that on a bike velcro is next to useless.

I used the velcro to attach my L plate and it never fell off. Eventually I took it off when I had enough confidence and didn't want to get pulled over for exceeding 70km. I have been pulled over by cops twice and they let the no l-plate slide.

**Hitcher** · 19th December 2006, 19:47

Originally Posted by Snapper

I was fined for not displaying a leaner plate.

Is that a plate that is thinner than normal, or some sort of permit required before one can turn one's bike? Certainly a fine seems in order for the latter, rather than the former.

**M1CRO:Me** · 19th December 2006, 20:07

What did you say to the cop that stopped you on the side of the road? Is it possible that he wrote down some other reason "at the time"?

**mynameis** · 19th December 2006, 23:24

Originally Posted by Snapper

So someone driving at night with only one headlight should not be given the benefit of the doubt that it was working when they set off? I disagree. Someone who gets pulled frequently for such issues, sure, nail them.

The law may be the law, but it does have leniency and guidelines which are at the discretion of the officer at the time. If I can show that I have made every effort possible I don't see why I shouldn't be let off due to that discretion being harsh.

I have not received demerit points for this incidentally, and have been advised by my solicitor just moments ago that there should be no problem getting it waived with the help of my witnesses (one of which works for the Ministry of Justice).

I like your attitude boy! But without being a complete cirtical ass here get ready for a few unexpected things to be thrown at you when you're in court, remember it's their daily job and they've dealt with thousands like you before.

Yes you have made an effort which is good, but no your effort wasn't good enough hence the L plate fell off. On the other hand there are people who can sensibly, securely bolt the L plate on, what makes you think you're special and that the judge should or would consider your case.

So what would your answer be when you get this thrown at you? Just making sure you are aware of things which might come your way, that way you will be better prepared in court. Either case good luck.

mynameis

**Grub** · 20th December 2006, 07:19

Originally Posted by mynameis

I like your attitude boy!
Yes you have made an effort which is good, but no your effort wasn't good enough hence the L plate fell off. On the other hand there are people who can sensibly, securely bolt the L plate on, what makes you think you're special and that the judge should or would consider your case.

I agree with that in legal terms, but having been in that position, perhaps I can explain. My g/f got her learners and the plate from the AA. Remember, they are the agency contracted by LTSA to do this stuff. In the packet was two L plates and velcro. She's never ridden a bike before and it's a long time since I had. We figured that if they supplied velcro then velcro would do the job.When we lost the first two, we thought somebody had nicked them. It never occurred to us that they blew off.

Without experience of the wind loads and pressures that the plate(s) would be under, we fully expected the supplied equipment to be up to the job. There are clauses in the Commerce Act or Fair Trading Act to that effect. You pay money, you expect to be supplied with goods adequate for purpose - the law supports you. I would explain to the JP's that you expected velcro to work because that is what was supplied for the puropose.

We're much wiser now too ... but I don't think it's appropriate to beat up someone because they didn't know that the vendor of the L-Plate wasn't acting in good faith.

Brett

**sunhuntin** · 20th December 2006, 08:35

Originally Posted by Grub

I agree with that in legal terms, but having been in that position, perhaps I can explain. My g/f got her learners and the plate from the AA. Remember, they are the agency contracted by LTSA to do this stuff. In the packet was two L plates and velcro. She's never ridden a bike before and it's a long time since I had. We figured that if they supplied velcro then velcro would do the job.When we lost the first two, we thought somebody had nicked them. It never occurred to us that they blew off.

Without experience of the wind loads and pressures that the plate(s) would be under, we fully expected the supplied equipment to be up to the job. There are clauses in the Commerce Act or Fair Trading Act to that effect. You pay money, you expect to be supplied with goods adequate for purpose - the law supports you. I would explain to the JP's that you expected velcro to work because that is what was supplied for the puropose.

We're much wiser now too ... but I don't think it's appropriate to beat up someone because they didn't know that the vendor of the L-Plate wasn't acting in good faith.

Brett

sorry...im not buying that.
surely, if youve ridden bikes before, youll know how strong the wind can be by how you get blown about. theres no way you can expect a dot of velcro to withstand that wind.... you say its a long time since youd ridden bikes when you wife got involved...i doubt the wind got any weaker or stronger in the time you werent riding.

im sure, had you asked, the aa person would have advised on the best way to attach the plate so that it doesnt blow off. its not that hard...dot of velcro vs. a speed of 100k, and wind likely making that speed higher [wind speed, either head or tail.] means tiny dot of velcro will lose. even with the bolt, i wouldnt be surprised if mine vanished, but thats cos its old and brittle, not due to insecure attachment.

**mynameis** · 20th December 2006, 10:35

Originally Posted by Grub

I agree with that in legal terms, but having been in that position, perhaps I can explain. My g/f got her learners and the plate from the AA. Remember, they are the agency contracted by LTSA to do this stuff. In the packet was two L plates and velcro. She's never ridden a bike before and it's a long time since I had. We figured that if they supplied velcro then velcro would do the job.When we lost the first two, we thought somebody had nicked them. It never occurred to us that they blew off.

Without experience of the wind loads and pressures that the plate(s) would be under, we fully expected the supplied equipment to be up to the job. There are clauses in the Commerce Act or Fair Trading Act to that effect. You pay money, you expect to be supplied with goods adequate for purpose - the law supports you. I would explain to the JP's that you expected velcro to work because that is what was supplied for the puropose.

We're much wiser now too ... but I don't think it's appropriate to beat up someone because they didn't know that the vendor of the L-Plate wasn't acting in good faith.

Brett

Yeap Brett I couldn't agree less here. And that's the reason why I said good luck with it, I guess we wouldn't know what type of judge he gets and what the verdict is.

It's all a wait and see game. But to be realistic, I see he does have a chance and on the other hand you can get a dog who will just say, it doesn't take much to figure out that velcro isn't suitable for bikes but cars only and it doesn't take a genius to figure this out.

Yes we do rely on vendors to provide us with as much info as possible but do remember some responsibility does lie on buyers/consumers end as well and if the judge turns around and says you didn't carry out your responsibility properly then I don't think there is much to say?

What do you think mate?

mynameis