Stick on Number Plates

[sicsr]

Are they legal and would they be legal without the white background?

[paul richards]

I don't know, but I do know I've used one for 7 years or so with no problems (inc. MOT).

[Mort]

No they are not legal, and they would therefore also be illegal without the white background. You'll find the guidelines on the DVLA website.

 

Edit: Relevant information here.

 

Edited by - Mort on 7 Mar 2012 13:48:37

[huwp]

Strictly speaking "no" and "no".

 

If you use a stick-on with the white background, as many do, I suspect you may not have too much of a problem. It is an MOT failure and a fixed penalty notice offence (I think).

[oldbuffer]

DVLA say "NO".

 

Since (I think 2001) they are illegal. The reasoning being that the "consumer" can make up the plates.

You must produce proof of ownership and the manufacturers details must be displayed it on the plate ie Caterham.

 

You still can buy very good stick on kits for "Show Cars", from a company in Wexford, ROI.

 

Still hasn't stopped the huge rise in "bilkings" from fuel stations by cars on false plates

[sicsr]

Quoting Mort: 

No they are not legal, and they would therefore also be illegal without the white background. You'll find the guidelines on the DVLA website.

 

Edit: Relevant information here.

 

Edited by - Mort on 7 Mar 2012 13:48:37

OK I did'nt reallise that. Seems one of those things that allthough illegal actually get overlooked to some extent so you takes your chance.....or not.

[Myles]

I'm willing to be corrected, but the last time I checked, the penalty for having no front plate was less (no points) than having an unapproved one (through materials, spacing, font, whatever).

 

I've never once had a problem at MOT or on the road with either stick-ons (had these for many years - FancyPlates in NI is an excellent source) or without any plate at all. Or overseas for that matter, when I think about it.

[Cookie Monster]

Another for Fancy plates

[Gavinsmithartist]

My sister-in-law had an MoT failure due to non compliance of number plate.

Although it was standard lettering and spacing, it was not compliance due to it being a 3D pressed plate. Obviously a jobs worth on that day

I have an extra snall plate at front and shorter plate on back to suit K7 GAV. I have kept my stanadrd plates off the tin top for the european trip and MoT

[LesG]

I have stick-on plates front and rear on my 7, to the correct size and spacing, with white and yellow backgrounds as they should be, and have had no issues with MOT.

 

Mind you, the guy I use for MOT always laughs when it comes to handbrake test, and signs me off anyway! Comes down to the tester I guess! 😬

[St Eve]

My front plate is stick-on. Characters and numbers are standard size and spacing on the correct background. No problems with MoT and I think the law have seen it often enough. As to the position, see here; Section 3(a). Note the "reasonably" and "reasonably". So not as clear cut as some may think.

 

Edited by - St Eve on 8 Mar 2012 19:13:52

[oldbuffer]

Quoting St Eve: 

My front plate is stick-on. Characters and numbers are standard size and spacing on the correct background. No problems with MoT and I think the law have seen it often enough. As to the position, see here; Section 3(a). Note the "reasonably" and "reasonably". So not as clear cut as some may think.

 

And the law apart, my own view? A plate stuck to the front of the nose-cone is instantly more legible (especially on a 7) than slung beneath it.

 

The point is that a "stick on registration plate" in the eyes of the law is not a "registration plate".

A "registration plate" has to be manufactured by a company authorised by the Police / DVLA.

Your quote is about the positioning of a legally made registration plate, not one you have made yourself whether legally spaced / sized /background or not.

 

Edited by - oldbuffer on 8 Mar 2012 19:16:02

[john milner]

I think the following means a stick-on plate would be OK if it met the required standard:

 

VEHICLES REGISTERED AND NEW REGISTRATION PLATES FITTED ON OR AFTER 1ST SEPTEMBER 2001 (MANDATORY SPECIFICATION)

 

1. The plate must be made of retroreflecting material which, as regards its construction, colour and other qualities, complies with the requirements of—

 

(a)

the British Standard specification for retroreflecting number plates published on 15 January 1998 under number BS AU 145d(1), or

 

 

 

(b)

any other relevant standard or specification recognised for use in an EEA State and which, when in use, offers a performance equivalent to that offered by a plate complying with the British Standard specification,

 

 

 

and which, in either case, is marked with the number (or such other information as is necessary to permit identification) of that standard or specification.

 

SCHEDULE 2 REQUIREMENTS FOR REGISTRATION PLATES

[oldbuffer]

May be it's me not explaining this well enough

 

Stick on registration plates are NOT legal. They are illegal because they are not produced by a registered supplier. If you have passed an MOT with a stick on registration plate it does not then make it legal.

 

One of the main reasons is they cannot be read by ANPR cameras.

 

Please read the following from a Business link

 

Register of number plate suppliers in the UK

 

Introduction

 

"The purpose of the register of number plate suppliers is to ensure that number plates are only supplied to people who can establish a connection with the vehicle for which the plates are intended and can provide proof of ID.

 

The register is maintained by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) and is an important source of information for the investigation of vehicle crime. These measures introduce some control over the supply of number plates and represent an essential component of the government's vehicle crime reduction strategy.

 

This guide explains who must register as a number plate supplier under this scheme, who is exempt and how you can apply to the DVLA to join the register.

 

It also describes the sales records you must keep when you are a registered supplier, and the documents that must be provided by the customer."

 

Hope this is of some help 😶‍🌫️

 

Edited by - oldbuffer on 8 Mar 2012 19:39:41

 

Edited by - oldbuffer on 8 Mar 2012 19:42:12

[oldbuffer]

Hopfully this clarifies the situation regarding stick on plates

 

Registration Number Plates

 

New checks have been introduced to the MOT Test to ensure the registration plate confirms to the Road Vehicles (Display of Registration Marks) Regulations 2001.

 

These checks will now confirm the following:

 

The characters and background colour comply with regulations

The character font is an a correct type

The characters are the correct size as is the size of the margin

The plates are fitted vertically

The non-reflective border is within the permitted width

Finally an unacceptable symbol or flag, such as football team crests or logo, is not displayed.

 

Also for vehicles registered on or after 1 September 2001 ( i.e 51 plates and later ) the additional checks will also be performed:

 

It displays the BSAU 145d marking

It also displays the name and postcode of the registration plate supplier

It does not display a honeycomb or similar effect background.

 

[Fil M]

Strange that on the grounds of safety many years ago motorcycles we not obliged to have front plates ... if they can do without em so can cars? makes em a little more fuel efficent and better on the eye too

[Domus]

[skeetsy]

Quoting oldbuffer: 

Hopfully this clarifies the situation regarding stick on plates

 

Also for vehicles registered on or after 1 September 2001 ( i.e 51 plates and later ) the additional checks will also be performed:

 

It displays the BSAU 145d marking

It also displays the name and postcode of the registration plate supplier

It does not display a honeycomb or similar effect background.

 

My interpretation of that would be that assuming the lettering, colours, size, etc. were all correct then a stick on numberplate would be perfectly legal on any car rgistered before 1 September 2001.

 

Or am I missing something?

 

All the best

 

Richard

[oldbuffer]

You missed The plates are fitted vertically

[andy couchman]

I would hope that 'they' would adopt a reasonableness test. Are the plates clearly readable? and, given the nature of the vehicle, trying to trace any individual 7 is probably a lot easier than say a VW Golf. So we are doing these thngs not to get round the law but for other reasons (including, you can argue, safety).

 

Older cars may be better off and certainly there is evidence that 7s had nosecone stick on plates fitted in the 50s.

 

I remember when reflective plates were new and technically illegal - not sure there were ever any prosecutions!

 

I would hope for reasonableness but plan for something else...

 

Andy

[skeetsy]

Quoting oldbuffer: 

You missed The plates are fitted vertically

 

I submit that this was covered under my general "etc."

 

My point was if the car was registered before 1st September 2001 then it would be legal to have stick on plates as the additional checks do not apply, or isn't this the case?

 

Edited to add: I'm not being Caterham specific here, just a general comment on stick on plates, so in the case of a Caterham a stick on rear plate would be acceptable on a pre 01/09/01 Seven, whereas a stick on front plate would be a bit dodgy.

 

All the best

 

Richard

 

Edited by - skeetsy on 10 Mar 2012 10:17:53

[oldbuffer]

Quoting andy couchman: 

I would hope that 'they' would adopt a reasonableness test. Are the plates clearly readable? and, given the nature of the vehicle, trying to trace any individual 7 is probably a lot easier than say a VW Golf. So we are doing these thngs not to get round the law but for other reasons (including, you can argue, safety).

 

Older cars may be better off and certainly there is evidence that 7s had nosecone stick on plates fitted in the 50s.

 

I remember when reflective plates were new and technically illegal - not sure there were ever any prosecutions!

 

 

 

I would hope for reasonableness but plan for something else...

 

Andy

 

Unfortunately we are dealing with the "Law" here not common sense or "reasonableness".

"Are the plates clearly readable ?" In the eyes (sorry) of the law... no.

The "Law" says "easy to read by both humans and automatic recognition systems".

I presume that is why they have to be displayed in a verticle position. "Classic" 7's appear to okay but you would need "Historic" on your (Exempt) tax disc?

 

[Ozzy]

Another thought.

 

If the front plate is so important for ANPR or Scameras. What happens in the case of Motorcycles! Must be a fair few of those on the road, which aren't taxed/insured etc.

 

I would have thought the rear plate is far more important, for those reasons alone, as you get all vehicles. Do we actually know that the BIB point ANPR at the front, as well as the rear?

 

Why do average speed cameras point at the front, which is of no relevance to bikes? Someones got their thinking wrong somewhere, surely!

 

If I had anything to do with it, I'd scrap front plates entirely, and have a mandatory rear plate (for all vehicles) along the lines of the German system, which are nearly impossible to fake.

 

 

[oldbuffer]

I’ve spent far too much time on this post. I still can’t find any loop holes to make stick on number plates legal... unless it’s a “Classic” car.

Stick on plates fail on the following points.

They don’t meet the BSI standards including the pre 01/09/01 BSI’s. They are not vertical and they also fail on the laws interpretation of “readable”.

 

No doubt someone will be along in a minute with a different opinion which is fair enough but we must remember the law can be an ass and the original post was are stick on plates legal.

 

M/C’s are exempt front number plates on the balance of safety (too many pedestrians cut in half).

ANPR cameras only need a (legal?) number plate to read, front or rear.

I think average speed cameras (they can cover 4 lanes) read the front number plate due to the camera technology, my thinking being the front is less “cluttered” than the rear of a vehicle. There was a story that the Renault graphics on some of their sports models confused the cameras... but that will be another thread? London black cabs have legislation covering advertising wraps on the rear of their cabs for similar reasons.

As in Germany plates issued by DVLA with an MOT and Tax Disc on the plate would be the answer to all these contrived plates that we see today.

 

[St Eve]

I’ve spent far too much time on this post.

 

Indeed – so forgive me if I push this a bit further. You said earlier ‘we are dealing with the "Law" here not common sense or "reasonableness"’. See again my earlier post, Section 3a here. There it is – the notion of reasonableness is a part of the law and, with that, what is clearly clear is that the situation remains unclear. The degree (or not) of reasonableness would need to be tested in court, and let’s hope none of us have to endure that.

 

I agree with Andy Couchman’s view – “I would hope for reasonableness but plan for something else...”.

 

Now, as ever, I stand to be corrected. If you are a policeman or a lawyer (I am neither) and have had direct experience of this question, please declare it because any precedent would be useful.

 

As for MoT requirements - well, we all know there are shades of grey there, too.