Missing required elements: Plate Type, expiration date, and body Type for out-of-state vehicles
I just got off the telephone with Austin, a terrific guy from PA. He read my blog post about missing required elements, and submitted his NYC parking ticket defense based upon a misdescribed “body type.”
He received a decision from a NYC DOF Adjudication Unit finding against him. The reason stated was that since Austin’s vehicle was an out-of-state vehicle registered in PA, the warrior’s description was “reasonably accurate.” Close gets the warrior a cigar for out-of-state vehicles.
When I wrote my blog post, I did not differentiate between a vehicle registered in NY, and an out-of-state vehicle. I apologize. 39-02(a)(2) states:
“Where the plate type or the expiration date are not shown on either the registration plates or sticker of a vehicle or where the registration sticker of a vehicle is covered, faded, defaced or mutilated so that it is unreadable, the plate type or the expiration date may be omitted from the notice of violation (parking ticket) provided that such condition is so described and inserted on the notice violation (parking ticket)”
The big but is that if the plate type or expiration date are shown on an out-of-state vehicle, the required element must be accurately inserted in the parking ticket.
With respect to “body type,” the warrior must insert on the parking ticket a reasonably accurate description of the body type, or the notation “N/S” or “N/A.” What constitutes a “reasonably accurate description” is up to the hearing official.
We recently beat a parking ticket for a PA vehicle where the “body type” inserted by the warrior was “van.” Our client’s vehicle was a huge pick-up truck. We submitted photographs of the vehicle, along with a copy of the invisible registration reflecting pick-up truck, and won.
Hearing official discretion is advised.
In most NYC parking ticket disputes, the more reasonable defenses, the better your chances of success.
If you believe you can beat a NYC parking ticket based upon an omitted, misdescribed or illegible required element; and also have a reasonable defense for the parking violation; be sure to present both defenses to the DOF Adjudication Unit. There is safety in numbers.
We are a community of the NYC driving public who feel the unjustified sting of a parking ticket warrior’s scanner. I welcome your comments about the interpretation of a parking rule; and invite any communication from our visitors, clients and friends stating that information needs to be explained further. We are in this together!
Please drop us a note. Your comments are important to us[Larry’s note: There is a conflict between VTL 238 (NY State law) and 19 RCNY 39-02 (NYC law) about whether a NYC parking ticket is required to be dismissed for a misdescribed body type for all vehicles. VTL 238 mandates a dismissal for ALL vehicles; while some NYC hearing officials interpret 19 RCNY 39-02 to mean the description of the vehicle must only be “reasonably accurate.”]
Latest posts by Lawrence Berezin (see all)
- Should NYC Car Sharing Cars Share On-Street Parking Spaces? - July 30, 2018
- A Common, Costly NYC Parking Ticket Mistake to Avoid - July 16, 2018
- Should NYC Employees be Permitted to Violate Parking Rules? - July 9, 2018