Need for insurance, mot or tax on a private road?

Soldato
Joined
7 Dec 2002
Posts
4,072
Location
UK
I really should know the answer to this but I don't as i've never come across it before.

Basically we have a private access "Road" to a farm that runs down the side of our house, it is covered in tarmac until you get to the last bit when it splits off into a pair of dirt tracks, it's about 1.5 car widths wide.

If I had the owners permission to run a car down it that was not MOT'd Taxed or Insured would this cause a legal issue?

I have not done this yet by the way, it's just a curiosity at present.
 
Can the public drive onto it? The answer to that question is the same as yours :)
 
If it's a private road you are fine.

Nope.

If the public have access to it by foot/car/horse ect then it's not private

No, private roads can be public highways. Private just refers to who has to maintain the road, not about who uses it.

If the public can access it, i.e. not access controlled via a gate or otherwise, you are subject to RTA requirements.
 
No, private roads can be public highways. Private just refers to who has to maintain the road, not about who uses it.

If the public can access it, i.e. not access controlled via a gate or otherwise, you are subject to RTA requirements.

I'd always though this was true but a mates experience seemed to disprove it. He had his 205 gti sorned (and uninsured) on the unadopted road outside his house and was issued a fine for it by the DVLA. Once he'd got proof from the council that it was an unadopted road they dropped the fine.
 
So every driveway must also be subject to the RTA legislation, meaning no one can legally park a SORN'd car on it?

According to DVLA:

"If you don’t use or keep your vehicle on a public road (eg, you keep it in a garage, on a drive or on private land), you don’t have to buy a tax disc. Instead you must make a SORN."

But I'm not sure if SORN and offences under the RTA follow the same criteria.
 
I'd always though this was true but a mates experience seemed to disprove it. He had his 205 gti sorned (and uninsured) on the unadopted road outside his house and was issued a fine for it by the DVLA. Once he'd got proof from the council that it was an unadopted road they dropped the fine.

That sounds completely wrong. An unadopted private road is still one to which the public would expect access (same as for supermarket car parks) so is therefore subject to the normal traffic rules.
 
The issue is not really whether the road or path has a barrier, it's about if access serves a public purpose. Private roads do not become publically accessible by reason of the fact that a postman or milkman has an implied invitation, on that road or land, so on the whole, you are a visitor on a private road. So you could establish that an unadopted road, without any physical barrier to or for access, is still not a public place.

A public place can be defined as a place "the public have access or which members of the public are to be found without having obtained access either by overcoming a physical obstruction or in defiance of prohibition express or implied." However, the extent and nature of the public's reason and frequency for accessing the road is what it boils down to, not any barrier.

Probably best summed up:

Planton v DPP

The case of Planton was a prosecution for driving in a public place vehicle with excess alcohol. The case turned upon the definition of a 'public place'. Access to the causeway from the mainland was not prevented by any physical obstruction.

He was charged under section 5 (1) (a) of the Road Traffic Act 1988. Section 5 (1) (a) provided;
“if a person drives or attempts to drive a motor vehicle on a road or other public place after consuming so much alcohol that the proportion of it in the breath, blood or urine exceeds the prescribed limit he is guilty of an offence”

The prosecution alleged that a road linking an estuary island to the mainland was a public place.

The causeway allowed access to and from the residences on the island.

Royal Mail collected and delivered to the island.

Signs present on the road were "Private Road, Residents and Authorised Vehicles only" and "Private Road, No Parking".

Lord Justice Pill gave consideration to the question of whether there had been any evidence of public usage. He found that the evidence in the case was "wholly insufficient to entitle a court to conclude that the causeway was a public place"

"There is no evidence of any general public access to the island for any purpose. If, for example, there had been evidence of a viewpoint on the island from which there was a beautiful view of the sunrise, and evidence of use by the public of the causeway to obtain access to the island to enjoy the view, that would be evidence material for present purposes"

http://www.mibclaim.co.uk/resources/library/cases/planton-director-public-prosecutions-2002/

In a nutshell, unless the general public have a reason or entitlement for access to a private road, it's likely not be construed as a public place.
 
A public place can be defined as a place "the public have access or which members of the public are to be found without having obtained access either by overcoming a physical obstruction or in defiance of prohibition express or implied." However, the extent and nature of the public's reason and frequency for accessing the road is what it boils down to, not any barrier.

So if there was a large sign that said 'No public entry', would that constitute a private road?
 
No, the road has to be privately owned. If the road is privately owned and clearly signed as such, unless you are there for “business or social purposes, or to visit a particular place” , then you would have an argument for it not being a public place.

If it's a signed, private road, but say, leads to a public beach, and the general public regularly use it to access the beach, then it's highly likely it will be defined as a public place...once that happens, you are subject to the RTA etc.

"Any road may be regarded as a road to which the public have access, upon which members of the public are to be found who have not obtained access either by overcoming a physical obstruction or in defiance of prohibition express or implied (e.g. 'private' notices at the entrance to a farm lane or a short driveway which obviously leads to a private family home. It is not possible to trespass on a road)."
 
No, because a driveway isn't a road.

Forgive me if i am incorrect here as i am not as frequent here as i used to be, but aren't you in the police force?

I have noticed that you regularly get involved in legal threads such as this, yet never actually quote any case law as Mr Fett has above. Rather you often seem to post your opinion on what the law may be. Its a little worrying in that (as in this case) you are sometimes posting incorrect advice.
 
Forgive me if i am incorrect here as i am not as frequent here as i used to be, but aren't you in the police force?

I have noticed that you regularly get involved in legal threads such as this, yet never actually quote any case law as Mr Fett has above. Rather you often seem to post your opinion on what the law may be. Its a little worrying in that (as in this case) you are sometimes posting incorrect advice.

I believe he is a police volunteer who does a few hours a week etc.


Whats your day job burnsy, something in IT isn't it going by other threads?
 
Back
Top Bottom