A purported Licensing Authority policy, preventing all transactions in relation to a vehicle until all traffic tickets issued to drivers who used it are paid, is under legal challenge.
Earlier this week, Curepe-based auto body mechanic Neil Thomas, who was prevented from having his vehicle inspected because a driver authorised by its previous owner did not pay a ticket, was granted leave to pursue a judicial review lawsuit over policy.
In his court filings obtained by Guardian Media, Thomas claimed that he purchased a Nissan Wingroad from a woman in July, last year.
After paying $30,000 to the woman, they went to the Licensing Authority’s office at Wrightson Road, in Port-of-Spain, to transfer the vehicle.
A licensing officer inspected the vehicle’s engine and chassis numbers before verbally approving the transaction.
On February 13, Thomas was dropping his daughter at school in El Dorado when he received a fixed penalty traffic ticket from a traffic warden for using his cellphone while driving.
When Thomas sought to have his vehicle inspected at a private inspection garage the following month, he was told that he could not do so until a $1,000 ticket linked to the vehicle was paid.
After explaining that he had already paid the ticket he received, the vehicle inspector told him that it (the ticket) was not issued to him or the previous owner but to a third party.
Thomas confirmed the information through the Ministry of Works and Transport online database and sought to contact the driver who received the ticket.
The driver advised him of the purported policy and advised that he pay the fine quickly as it would increase the longer it remained unpaid.
He then contacted the authority, which informed him that the fine now stood at $1,500.
After threatening to file a lawsuit over the policy, the ministry’s permanent secretary wrote to him apologising for what transpired and advising that he could now have his vehicle inspected at any testing station.
In his court filings, Thomas’ lawyers, led by Senior Counsel Anand Ramlogan of Freedom Law Chambers, sought to explain why he still wants to pursue the case even though the ministry reversed the decision.
“He is extremely happy for this indulgence but he is unhappy because he takes his constitutional rights very seriously and do not think that such an indulgence was appropriate or necessary,” his lawyers said, as they pointed to three other motorists who experienced similar treatment as their client.
“The indulgence, in his view, simply highlights the arbitrary and irrational approach of the Licensing Authority in this matter,” they added.
Through the lawsuit, Thomas is seeking a series of declarations that the policy was unfair, illegal, and irrational and an order quashing it.
He is also contending that his constitutional rights were infringed by it.
Thomas is also being represented by Jayanti Lutchmedial, Robert Abdool-Mitchell, Natasha Bisram, and Vishaal Siewsaran.
The Transport Commissioner and the Attorney General’s Office was represented by Niquelle Nelson-Granville, Vandana Ramadhar, Laura Persad, Dominique Bernard, Petal Alexander, and Simone Yallery.
The case is expected to come up for hearing on Monday afternoon when the Transport Commissioner is expected to give his position on the policy in light of concerns over its legality and its effect on innocent third parties.
