Cyclists beware - there are two crazy people driving around Sydney, who do NOT like cyclists. It's a dark red Mitsubishi sedan, their number plates are covered with cardboard with "TRAFFIC" written on in texta.

Yesterday afternoon the guy on the right threw a battery at me, and then got out of the car and punched me. I suppose that's assault and battery?

N.B. I have reported this to the police. They're not hopeful of catching them, given they don't have any good images of their faces, or a car rego.

UPDATE: A friend of a friend said this car is sometimes parked in Petersham. Keep your eyes peeled in that area.

FURTHER UPDATE: My business partners will kill me if I don't plug our bike shop, Omafiets Dutch Bicycles. If the people in the photo are identified, I would love to buy them a beer, and lend them a couple of bikes from the shop for a week, so they could ride around the Inner West. I think they'd be pleasantly surprised - and might make it a regular form of transport? They could even do the City of Sydney's free cycling courses.
I'm not interested in pressing charges. I think a better outcome would be if these people were able to gain a bit of insight, and empathise with other road users. There is too much antagonism on the roads, and I don't want to contribute to that.

Views: 41301

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

They're smart enough to have accurately labelled their car.

But gee, that sounds like a scary incident - hope you're OK.

I assume he didn't have a permit for an unregistered vehicle. Supposed to carry a label in good view. Did the police check for any such permit recently issued? It is good for one trip only.

He wouldn't need one. Vehicles can be driven or ridden for reasons relating to registration such as listed at .
I'd say this car was unregistered and possibly in the process of being registered. The 2012 label is probably expired. So it might next be seen with a 2013 rego label.


UVP is usually used for Tractors and farm equipment etc when they are temporarily on the road.

I don't like the chances of proving anything here. Someone might like to post this to the netrider motorcycle forum and see if they can keep an eye out too. We may need your help one day too.

Ok, but you can get a permit and label for traveling to a motor registry, once only. But apparently it isn't compulsory. Confusing.

You don't need a permit or a label for a light vehicle at all WHEN used as stated in the link I posted - purposes relating to registration including to the RTA, mechanic, repairer, even to the closest CTP insurers office.

You could possibly get a UVP for the above (RTA would probably just tell you to drive it unregistered) and I'd say that really should be required since it comes with CTP for the time it is driven.

 The UVP requires, for some vehicles, that you declare it as roadworthy. An example where a UVP might be required is when, say, an F1 car was driven across the Harbour Bridge for a demo. They mention purpose-built race cars in the form but how a purpose built F1 car can be considered roadworthy is beyone me.

It wouldn't surprise me if the Magna in the photo had been taking advanatge of the unregistered regulations. Where would he/she be going to on a Sunday for a purpose related to registering the car and why would he/she need a passenger? The excuse of going to a mates place to get it fixed or to buy oil wouldn't pass in my books. Maybe there was a UVP on that car and it wasn't displayed but I can't think of any reason a UVP would be issued to a Magna except to ensure CTP for a rego related purpose.

There's one question in the UVP form: "Why is the vehicle NOT being registered?" - you'd need a good answer for that.

I reckon we need to require UVP's for rego related purposes and require temporary plates at least for temporary CTP benefit  with the added benefit of a vehicle being able to be identified.

You must by law provide and have clearly visible your registration plates, or if you dont have plates, you must not put anything in place of those plates. Regardless of waiting for registration or not, these guys are displaying fake plates and should be charged with doing so.

We are starting to talk about it on our site now. have a read, it's still a facebook page, but it has some momentum.

Rego plate visibility aside the "Traffic" plates are clearly obscuring a P Plate. The driver may not have been on P Plates but there is mention of a visible P Plate on the rear. So, there's a fine there for either obscuring a P Plate or driving with one displayed when not on P's.


"Traffic" is something from eons ago that has been used but I can't see it in the regulations. Someone might like to contact the RTA to ask if displaying "Traffic" is legal or recommended - I'll email but don't expec a quick reply.

The driver making the offensive hand signal is a 'she' btw.


Passenger who threw punch looks male, but could be a Coco/Rosie type of course.

Facial hair on the passenger is a bit of a giveaway but, though I considered the possibility of femininity for the driver, I decided there was not enough evidence to be definitive.

On what do you base your theory, MG?

The driver was a woman, the passenger a man.

That sounds like a good basis for Martin's theory.

Thanks for update. Will keep eyes peeled if ever in Petersham.

Yikes, not happy about the fact that I go through that intersection at least twice a day, every day. I will be on the lookout.

Hopefully they can be caught and their licences revoked at the very least (though you do wonder if that would keep the kind of person who is prepared to drive around attacking people and consciously obscuring their rego from continuing to drive).

Did you have any witnesses that could have provided any more of a description?


© 2020   Created by DamianM.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service