I'm not sure what your point is. Are you saying that the Off-Road Vehicles Act applies when operating a motorcycle in a private lot?
|
|
|
Paking lot practice question
- Thread starter matt123
- Start date
I'm not sure what your point is. Are you saying that the Off-Road Vehicles Act applies when operating a motorcycle in a private lot?
I think that is what they are trying to say... but they're wrong.
A parking lot is private property, not covered by the HTA or the Offroad Vehicle Act.
A privately owned parking lot is neither "public" nor "common".
Immaterial. Insurance is only waived when you are operating a vehicle on either your own property, or property that you are the "occupier" (lessee) of. Not your property? Better have insurance. It doesn't matter if it's "private property" or not, if it isn't YOUR property.
Where does the line get drawn? Does a landscaper need insurance on a riding mower. Mowing a neighbour's lawn with a riding mower would be illegal. What about a self propelled snow blower? I realize the average cop would only use the law if there was some potential of danger but Fantino isn't the average cop.
If the owner "leased" the property to a friend for a dollar for the afternoon would that circumvent the law?
If the owner "leased" the property to a friend for a dollar for the afternoon would that circumvent the law?
Take a look at the law that I linked to. As turbodish said, the definition of a motorcycle is pretty broad, in that law. While you aren't likely going to get tagged for cutting a lawn being in a parking lot, where other people can reasonably be encountered, is a much different story.
As to your second question, transparent attempts to circumvent the law don't fly.
So NOW you're telling us that we are operating outside the law at every race or track day.
Sorry NOPE.
I don't OWN Mosport, Shannonville or TMP, but I LEGALLY ride there several times a year... same rules as a parking lot... again neither public nor common.
Where is it defined in any of the acts that insurance is only waived on your own private property? Although private/leased property would be a fine example, it is not exclusive. As per the Compulsory Automobile Insurance Act:
2. (1) Subject to the regulations, no owner or lessee of a motor vehicle shall,
(a) operate the motor vehicle; or
(b) cause or permit the motor vehicle to be operated,
on a highway unless the motor vehicle is insured under a contract of automobile insurance. 1994, c. 11, s. 383; 1996, c. 21, s. 50 (3).
Definition of highway as per the Highway Traffic Act:
“highway” includes a common and public highway, street, avenue, parkway, driveway, square, place, bridge, viaduct or trestle, any part of which is intended for or used by the general public for the passage of vehicles and includes the area between the lateral property lines thereof; (“voie publique”).
There is no specific requirement in that definition that the private property or area must be owned or leased by the same person who is operating the motor vehicle. No need to extend the definition beyond what is already clearly stated in the acts. If I had a friend or family member with a large property and had built a trail, I could operate my motor vehicle on it with his consent without the need for liability insurance as this private trail does not fall under the definition of "highway". If the owner was prudent enough, he/she would make me sign a legal waiver absolving him of any responsibility for my injuries.
We must also be careful with thinking that just because an area is privately owned that this automatically waives the need for compulsory auto insurance. A parking lot is a good example. If I own a piece of land and I decide to build a store and a parking lot for customers where they can freely enter and leave, even though I own this lot, because it is used by the general public I cannot operate my motor vehicle on it without insurance. This is why the acts are not defined based on who owns the property but based on whether you are operating your vehicle in a public space.
Also per the Highway Traffic Act;
“motor vehicle” includes an automobile, a motorcycle, a motor-assisted bicycle unless otherwise indicated in this Act, and any other vehicle propelled or driven otherwise than by muscular power, but does not include a street car or other motor vehicle running only upon rails, a power-assisted bicycle, a motorized snow vehicle, a traction engine, a farm tractor, a self-propelled implement of husbandry or a road-building machine; (“véhicule automobile”)
“motorcycle” means a self-propelled vehicle having a seat or saddle for the use of the driver and designed to travel on not more than three wheels in contact with the ground, and includes a motor scooter, but does not include a motor assisted bicycle; (“motocyclette”)
Last edited:
The HTA definition of a motor vehicle does not include a farm tractor, self-propelled implement of husbandry, road building machine, etc when that equipment is being used for its intended purpose. If it's not considered to be a motor vehicle, then there is no requirement for insurance, vehicle registration, or operator licensing as far as the HTA is concerned.
Regardless, any reputable landscaper would have at least a million $ or more in general liability insurance. Any business or condo that is contracting out landscaping services would usually demand proof of such liability insurance as part of the contract. And most home owners also have liability coverage under their home insurance policies, and that would cover the use of a riding lawn mower.
Now if you're using said lawn mower for a use other than its reasonably intended purpose, everything can change quite quickly.
That example is just the most recent example from around here that I'm aware of. You'll find that such incidents are quite common all over Canada and the US, and not just in Fantino's shadow.
Hardly.
Last edited:
Mosport and Shannonville each hold event liability umbrella policies that cover participants in the paddock. On top of that, any serious event promoter would have their own event liability insurance over and above the track's. The liability waiver you sign makes you party to that policy.
First off, a key part of the definition of a highway is the very last few words - "and includes the area between the lateral property lines thereof". In other words, the highway includes not only the road's driving surface but also the shoulders and ditch right up to the adjoining property line. The "and" in the definition implies that this last defining characteristic of a highway ends at the lateral property lines.
The insurance requirement for off-road (meaning not on highway) use is clearly stated in the Offroad Vehicle Act, as is the exemption for the owner or occupier of a property. The definition of a highway is the same under the Offroad Vehicles Act. http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90o04_e.htm
Except that everything you just said is not supported by the text of the Offroad Vehicles Act. The owner having you sign a waiver does squat to make it legal, and it also does very little to cover the owner's back. It being a "private" trail also doesn't change the legal technicalities. The defining aspects that work against you are 1) a motor vehicle, 2) private property not your own, and 3) a legal requirement for insurance if 1 and 2 are in effect.
Actually, you can operate your own vehicle on your own "open to the public" parking lot without insurance, without vehicle registration, and without a driver's license. It would open you up to huge liability issues if something were to happen, but even a "public" parking lot falls outside the definition of a "highway". Remember the "lateral property lines" boundary in the HTA and ORVA definitions of a highway?
Yes, but that is in the context of the HTA which deals primarily with vehicles on a highway. Private property, even if nominally open to the public is not a highway.
The definition of a vehicle under the Offroad Vehicles Act also covers any 2- or 3-wheeled motorized vehicle with no exceptions stated in the law, and would include a motorized bicycle.
Last edited:
I understand all of that...all too well... BUT we weren't talking about liability as such. We were talking about the laws.
The question was, and still is, are you required to have liability insurance to operate a motor vehicle in a private parking lot.
... and the answer is still; NO.
A parking lot is not public, common or crown land... or a highway (as defined in the HTA).
I gave you the link. I suggest that reading it might be worth your time.
The presence of EVENT liability insurance has already been stated.
I'm resurrecting this due to a post in the stunting section.
The stunting issue would be the need for insurance to practice in an industial or commercial parking lot if the bike was trailered to the site. Is there a definative answer?
|
|
|
|
|