Inshan: Transfer tax issue no big deal

Published: 8 Sep 2009

President of the pre-owned Automobile Dealers’ Association, Inshan Ishmael, says the 50 per cent increase in motor vehicle transfer tax, announced during the 2009/2010 budget, will not affect motorists in any way.

“I don’t see it as either here or there, as a motor vehicle is a very expensive item.” Ishmael commended Government for increasing the penalties for traffic law violations, and noted that for five years he had been calling on Government to implement such measures. “I just hope the measures are actually enforced,” Ishmael said.

Finance Minister Karen Nunez-Tesheira, in her budget presentation yesterday, announced that people who used vehicles without park lights, overtook improperly on the left side of the road, overtook traffic at a dangerous place, exceeded the specified speed limit would be made to pay an increased penalty—from $200 to $1,000.

She also said use of the Priority Bus Route by unauthorised vehicles would incur an increased penalty—from $200 to $2,000; while the penalty for illegal tints would be $2,000. Owners of vehicles not outfitted with seatbelts, she said, would face a $2,000 fine. (LS)

Article Tools
 

And who determines the

And who determines the illegality of the tint? The duncey police, or licensing officers? Will the law now specify a grade to be the 'darkest' allowed so that a standard can be met? Many a time motorists have gone to tint shops and bought their tints according to an 'acceptable' scale and yet arbitrarily told at the next duncey exercise that it is illegal.

Will the 'armed' forces be subject to this same law?

Jumbie's Watch

There's an unwritten law

There's an unwritten law within the police service that no junior officer can charge anyone senior to them, so who going to charge the hundreds of police officers who use the PBR daily? I witness traffic jams by the Morvant intersection of the Bus Route, with just one or two cars displaying a PBR sign on the windscreen.

Lawlessness is a trickle down thing. Do as I say.....

http://dsaltsman.blogspot.com/

Owners of vehicles not

Owners of vehicles not outfitted with seatbelts, she said, would face a $2,000 fine.

But, what is the fine for those who do have seatbelts and do not use them? I imagine most cars within the past 20 years would be 'outfitted' with seatbelts...

What about the penalties for those who do not have children over a certain age/height buckled in? Or is that for another governmental body to announce?

La Diva

La Diva, I guess as Conrad

La Diva, I guess as Conrad Infell said on the rather heated debate on crime on CNG last night (which was PRICELESS to watch I must add) - and I thank God that I stumbled upon it. The Gov't has 'agencies' and it's the 'agencies' responsibility to handle such matters - not the government.

I must say, I have never in my life witnessed such arrogance and stupidity exhume physically from an individual. Which could have only resulted from having his head shrunk from the witch in "BeatleJuice" (The head to shoulder ratio was waaay off)...

Also keep in mind that these 'laws' were literally etched in stone even before we were under Britsh Rule, hence why Karen would say "Cars not outfitted with seatbelts" Maybe if we all put up and purchased a chisel they could amend it to something with the effect "PERSONS not outfitted with seatbelts"... Shall I call round for pricing?

 
 

Feedback