Is the single seat an aftermarket job or did it get built like that? With Ducati Monoposto bikes (manufactured single seat) there are no rear seats nor pillion pegs and they pass WOF fine as is however if your bike was first built with a pillion seat and pegs then it falls under the umbrella of a two seater bike.
To save trouble in future buy a Ducati Monoposto. You will never have to face disappointment again.![]()
In space, no one can smell your fart.
Consider this scenario. Your brakes don't work at all. The WOF inspector fails to pick this up. You die driving out of the WOF inspectors premise because you couldn't stop before getting hit by a truck.
Could the death of this person have been otherwise prevented if the WOF inspection had not been negligent?
Alternatively, was negligence of the WOF officer a direct and contributing factor to the death of the motorist? If the WOF inspector had done their job correctly could this death been prevented?
If you answer yes to any of these, then you can extended negligent manslaughter into many other situations.
Yea well they were teenagers, and their mum came in and had a huge argument with the manager. He said he would rather lose there business than issuw WOf knowing that the car will be illegal after an hour. She reluctantly agreed. Interestingly, a car with no springs rolled and killed the occupants only a few days after this incedent. The fact that the car bounced off the road was the main factor in the crash, justifies, IMO, the WOF places stand on the matter.
"No matter what bike you ride. It's all the same wind in your face"
You must distinguish between the situation where something is clearly defective AT THE TIME OF THE WOF INSPECTION, but is passed by the tester; and something that is OK at the time of the test , but is found to be defective some time (anything from an hour to months) later.
In the first case the tester may be liable for negligence (because he was negligent - the fault was there and he passed it when defective). In the second case he is not.
So in your brake case, if the brakes didn't work when tested and the vehicle was passed, then the tester is liable. But if they worked OK when he tested them, then failed as the vehicle left the premises (hose burst without previous signs of damage; intermittent ABS fault ; etc), then he is not liable .
The tester tests the vehicle as it is at that moment in time. If he negligently passes something that is defective THEN , he may be liable . But he is not required to have a crystal ball to see the future.
Originally Posted by skidmark
Originally Posted by Phil Vincent
Originally Posted by skidmark
Originally Posted by Phil Vincent
So pulling this back to the original splinter from the thread on this; if the bike is meant to have pillion pegs (and lets make that assumption), and the WOF tester can see that they are not present, then they could be found negligent should an accident occur as a direct result.
It would be dangerous for a WOF inspector to exercise too much discretion in an area where the rules are clear - by passing a vehicle in an area where it should fail. They could end up in jail as a result (for negligent manslaughter if they were really unlucky).
Well, the tester can only make that assumption if the bike has a seat for a pillion passenger. Otherwise he would also need to fail it on not having a seat!
It is the same deal as vans, which sometimes have seats in the rear, sometimes don't. If you have rear seats, there must be seat belts for them. But if the van has no rear seats you don't have to have seat belts for the non existent seats.
EDIT
This is the VIR Manual wording (my emphasis)
"seating position" being undefined ! But clearly if there is a seat there is a seating position. If there is nowhere for a pillion to rest his/her bum, then there isn't a seating position. What about, I wonder, things like the old BSA Bantam that had a flat luggage carrier on the rear mudguard where the pillion seat would normally be . But had no pillion footrests as standard. It was quite possible to carry a pillion seated on that carrier. So would that be a "seating position" ?1. A motorcycle is not fitted with adequate footrests:
a) for the rider, or
b) for the pillion passenger where there is a pillion passenger seating position
Originally Posted by skidmark
Originally Posted by Phil Vincent
Hang on... if your vehicle fails a WOF, are you legally allowed to drive / ride it home anyway?
Re the rear footpegs... Ixion has your answer. Strap some huge box or other contraption onto the back where the pillion seat would normally go. Unless your pillion is a daddy long legs, no one could sit on the said contraption hence the bike is not setup to take a pillion.
Of course they could fail it for an unsafe load or something similar.
Seriously... do you have any paperwork from previous WOFs where something like no rear pegs was noted, that you can use for consistency?
Failing that, the law is the law and if Cycletreads are applying it, and VTNZ did not, you cannot blame Cycletreads.
Originally Posted by FlangMaster
what about the scooter riders who seem to think that, yes, we can fit two people on this bike, and no, her legs cannot reach the "floor" of the step through, so yes, they are dangling in mid air with only strappy sandals between them and a life time of stumpy feet. [see it 1000 times, mostly high school age, though i did know a mother who insisted on taking her daughter to school in this fashion. terribly unsafe for the kid... hardly anything to sit on and nothing to brace her feet on.
my blog: http://sunsthomasandfriends.weebly.com/index.html
the really happy person is one who can enjoy the scenery when on a detour.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks