Kia ora and thank you for your email to the Complaints & Information Assurance team.
Our email inbox is monitored daily and we will be in contact once your request, complaint or enquiry has been allocated to a team member.

Thank you for your patience
Wellington City Council Complaints & Information Assurance Team

Hello Richard
 
Please accept my apologies. This should have been sent earlier to you.
 
I have set out your requests in bold, followed by my response to each:
 
1.      Can you please provide information as to how an authorised
enforcement officer is able to determine whether a vehicle is being
operated lawfully under the Land Transport Rule: Vehicle Standards
Compliance 2002 (the Rule)? Noting that 10.2(2) of the Rule provides an
absolute exception to the requirement to display a current warrant of
fitness or certificate of fitness, whichever is applicable.
 
The Land Transport Rule – Vehicle Standards Compliance 2002 section
10.2(2) states:
A person may operate a vehicle in service after the expiry of a warrant of
fitness, a certificate of fitness or an alternative fuel inspection
certificate if the vehicle is being operated solely for the purposes of
bringing it into compliance and it is safe to be operated for that
purpose.  A vehicle cannot be on a public road if it doesn’t have a
current warrant of fitness / licence label.  Being operated solely for the
purposes of bringing it into compliance, means this exemption would apply
if the vehicle was being driven directly to or from a vehicle testing
station for the sole purpose of bringing it into compliance / obtaining a
warrant of fitness.  It doesn’t mean leaving the vehicle on a public road
while organising repairs etc.  A vehicle must be driven directly to or
from a vehicle testing station, if the warrant / license is expired, for
this exemption to apply.
 
2.      What training is provided to enforcement officers so as they are
able to properly determine whether a vehicle is being lawfully operated in
service (as per 10.2(2) of the Rule)?
 
Parking Officers are trained to issue infringement notices to vehicles
displaying an expired warrant of fitness / license label where the label
has been expired for a period greater than 1 calendar month (this is a WCC
enforcement practice).  The only instance where this exemption, 10.2(2)
would apply is if the vehicle was parked outside of a testing station but
was there for the sole purpose of compliance.  If an infringement was
issued under these circumstances the vehicle owner could appeal the
infringement showing evidence of the vehicle test and this would be taken
into account when deciding the outcome of the appeal.  Each case is
different. 
 
3.      How does the Council ensure residents who have a current Residents
Parking permit, and no other off-road facility, are not wrongfully
subjected to enforcement action if the resident operates a vehicle in
service per 10.2(2) of the Rule?
 
It is part of the criteria of getting a residents permit / coupon
exemption permit, that a vehicle must have a current warrant of fitness /
license label to be eligible to obtain a permit.  Warrant of fitness /
license labels are the vehicle owners responsibility and are strict
liability.  Unfortunately a lot of property’s in Wellington don’t have
off-street parking however this is not a defence to have an uncompliant
vehicle on a public road.  You would need to get the vehicle into storage
or off road if it isn’t compliant.   
 
4.      Would the Council cover any cost incurred by a vehicle owner if a
vehicle was subject to enforcement action when a vehicle is being lawfully
operated in service per 10.2(2) of the Rule?
 
As explained in the answer to number 2 above, this circumstance would not
generally apply.  WCC does not pay or compensate vehicle owners whereby
they are appealing a legitimately issued infringement notice. 
 
There are High Court decisions to support the WCC interpretation of
10.2(2).  In a case Lane vs Whakatane District Council Judge Randerson
summed up by saying:
 
“The object of the Regulation is to ensure that motor vehicles are in a
safe condition and for that purpose to require that a current warrant of
fitness is obtained and displayed on the vehicle.  The use of the term
“solely” in the proviso makes it clear that the Legislature intended that
the provision should be narrowly construed and in my view it will only be
in a case where it can clearly be shown that the motor vehicle was being
operated solely for the purpose of obtaining a current warrant that the
proviso will have effect”. 
 
Thank you again for your email.  I trust this information is of assistance
to you.
 
Kind regards
 
Chris

Chris Brown | Assurance Advisor | Complaints & Information Assurance |
Wellington City Council
P 04 803 8368
E [1][email address] | W [2]Wellington.govt.nz | [3][IMG]|
[4][IMG]
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email may be confidential or
legally privileged. It is intended solely for the recipient or recipients
named in this message. Please note that if you are not the intended
recipient you are not authorised to use, copy or distribute the email or
any information contained in it. If you have received this email in error,
please advise the sender immediately and destroy the original message and
any attachments.

 
 
 
 
 

show quoted sections