MMDA appeal tricycle ban

MMDA Appeal Concludes that Tricycle Ban does not Apply to Tuk Tuks


On the 21st October 2020, an MMDA appeal by the driver of a Tuk Tuk who was given a ticket for the tricycle ban on Commonwealth Ave Quezon City given by an MMDA enforcer was heard by the Traffic Adjudication Division of MMDA.

This has been posted many times in many Tuk Tuk groups on Facebook, however the quality is not good and it is difficult to read.

Tuk Tuk 3-Wheelers who has three years been a major force in research of the laws concerning the use of three-wheelers has took the time to write it out so it is more readable.

As it is not written in plain English we will also break it down and explain what it means.

The writer seems to be unaware that since 1979 there has been a move towards using plain English in legal documents and it even become law in the UK back in 1999 that plain English must be used in English documents.

Breakdown and the Meaning of MMDA Appeal

During the hearing, the complainant fervently opposed the citation claiming that his driven vehicle is not a tricycle. He delineated it from the one attached with a side car which is totally banned from transversing and/or entering the major thoroughfares in the metropolis.

During the hearing the complainant fervently opposed the citation. Fervently is an example of not using plain English.

Fervently is so little used in the English language today if you search it on Google you only find it in dictionaries.

Fervently = very enthusiastically or passionately. They could have written During the hearing the complainant passionately opposed the citation. Making it understandable by all.

Moreover, he manifested that the change of denomination to reflect the appropriate ones was already applied prior to the apprehension and thus according to the LTO it shall release the updated registration this October 2020, that is why he was only able to present the prior erroneous registration of the vehicle upon apprehension.

Erroneous =Wrong or Incorrect

So in plain English that would read that is why he was only able to present the prior incorrect registration of the vehicle upon apprehension.

So that is implying that the registration with motorcycle with sidecar on it is incorrect.

In support of his claim, he submitted the OR/CR Motor Vehicle Inspection Report as well as the LTO Memorandum dated April 11, 2018 mandating the proper registration of tri-wheelers and/or conventional type of motor vehicle into non-conventional motorcycle.

It needs pointing out that they use a group of letters here “tri-wheelers” the reason I say it is a group of letters not a word is because it is not a word. There is no dictionary with “tri-wheelers in it” it is not a word in any language. The correct word is Three-Wheelers.

Meanwhile, respondent averred that the complainant’s vehicle is a three-wheeled motor vehicle which in turn, become the basis of the tricycle ban. He also submitted documents with pictures from Wikipedia in support of his apprehension.

Things start to get very interesting at this point.

Averred = allege as a fact in support of a plea.

The respondent in this case is the enforcer that gave him a ticket.

So we can change the start of this section to “Meanwhile the enforcer alleged.

The fact he made the alligation that it is a three-wheeled motor vehicle which in turn, becomes the basis of the tricycle ban, shows that he has never read the definition of terms in the law.

The definition of terms clearly states that a tricycle is a Motorcycle with Sidecar that renders services to the public.

The fact that he used Wikipedia in support of his apprehension would be laughable if it was not intimidating, stressing and costing drivers money.

The reason I say it is laughable is anyone can edit or add to Wikipedia.

Even Wikipedia says “Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone at any time. This means that any information it contains at any particular time could be vandalism, a work in progress, or just plain wrong. “

Add to that the enforcer should follow what is written in law. If he has not read and understood the law concerning the violation he should not be enforcing it. It is impossible to enforce a law you have not read or understood.

A scrutiny on the OR/CR and other relevant documents submitted disclosed that the subject vehicle is not a conventional type of motorcycle with side car but a built-in tri-wheeler pursuant to its registration.

Pursuant = according to something.

I suspect the word “pursuant“ Has been used incorrectly or bad grammar meaning it does not make sense where it is written.

Anyway basically this section is saying it is not a motorcycle with sidecar and the OR/CR is not correct.

However a closer look at the vehicle revealed it is not a motorcycle modified into a tricycle but a tri-wheeler in itself and as the memorandum mandates it should be properly registered as a non-conventional motorcycle.

This section confirms even more that it is not a tricycle it is a three-wheeler, the difference being a tricycle is a motorcycle modified into a tricycle.

Nonetheless complainant is advised to process the correction of his vehicle’s registration to avoid any more misunderstanding on the nature of his vehicle in the future.

This section is very important to us all as it advisers the driver to process the correction on his registration.

So if you are a private owner you should be going to LTO and getting the registration corrected as it is not a motorcycle with sidecar.

In view of the foregoing the citation for tricycle ban is hereby reconsidered.

This section simply means his MMDA Appeal was succesful, the case has been dropped and he will not be fined.

So we can conclude from this and the fact it was approved by Attorneys of the Traffic Adjudication Division, that legally a Tuk Tuk is not a tricycle, it should not be registered as a Motorcycle with Sidecar and the tricycle ban does not apply to factory-built symmetrical three-wheelers.

Traffic Adjudication Division Findings


REPUBLIKA NG PILIPNAS
TANGGAPAN NG PANGULO
Pagasiwaan Sa Pagpapaunlad Ne Kalakhang Maynila
(Metropolitan Manila Development Authority)
‘Traffic Adjudication Division

TVR NO, MM04-6875596-5

October 21 2020

For TRICYCLE BAN
RESOLUTION NO. 12892


For resolution 6 the protest filed by herein complainant on release his confiscated Driver’s license due to the above-mentioned citation.
Based on the record compliment was apprehended and issued citation for tricycle ban along Commonwealth Avenue by TA Bobby Luchavez of Commonwealth Special Traffic District.

During the hearing, the complainant fervently opposed the citation claiming that his driven vehicle is not a tricycle. He delineated it from the one attached with a side car which is totally banned from transversing and/or entering the major thoroughfares in the metropolis.
Moreover, he manifested that the change of denomination to reflect the appropriate ones was already applied prior to the apprehension and thus according to the LTO it shall release the updated registration this October 2020, that is why he was only able to present the prior erroneous registration of the vehicle upon apprehension.

In support of his claim he submitted the OR/CR Motor Vehicle Inspection Report as well as the LTO Memorandum dated April 11, 2018 mandating the proper registration of tri-wheelers and/or conventional type of motor vehicle into non-conventional motorcycle.

Meanwhile, respondent averred that the complainant’s vehicle is a three-wheeled motor vehicle which in turn, become the basis of the tricycle ban. He also submitted documents with pictures from Wikipedia in support of his apprehension.

A scrutiny on the OR/CR and other relevant documents submitted disclosed that the subject vehicle is not a conventional type of motorcycle with side car but a built-in tri-wheeler pursuant to its registration. Unfortunately however the vehicles denomination as appears in the OR/CR is without side car which could have prompted the enforcer to beli9eve that it underwent modification. However a closer look at the vehicle revealed it is not a motorcycle modified into a tricycle but a tri-wheeler in itself and as the memorandum mandates it should be properly registered as a non-conventional motorcycle.

Nonetheless complainant is advised to process the correction of his vehicle’s registration to avoid any more misunderstanding on the nature of his vehicle in the future.

In veiw of the foregoing the citation for tricycle ban is hereby reconsidered.

Recommending Approval

ARIEL A VALLEJOS
Hearing Officer
Traffic Adjudication Division

Reviewed
ATTY CLARENCE ECLAR
Attorney IV
Traffic Adjudication Division

Approved
ATTY JOSEPH C . SALUD
Attorney V
Traffic Adjudication Division


1 thought on “MMDA Appeal Concludes that Tricycle Ban does not Apply to Tuk Tuks”

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *