[kingshawn1234]

Today i had my bike parked in a parking lot and a police officer came to me and asked for my registration and license plate (since its new i didn't have it) and then he asked to see my motorcycle license and i dont have one and he said i need one to operate it since its under 800lbs and has three wheels and he threatened to impound it but then hes like have someone pick it up so idid. but everyone is telling me i dont need a motorcycle license. Do i need one? He gave me two tickets one for not having a having registration and one for not a having a license plate....
later that day I was driving it a little aggressively and the check engine light came up i think it over heated so i waited 45mins and it turned off but then after 15mins of driving very slow and easy it went back on. do u think if i wait like 4 hours it would be fine?

 

[woodz428]

Currently it depends on the state, the law varies some. However, that being said, it appears that you reside on the left coast. The other Ca. owners can tell for certain, but I would be willing to bet that you need one there. In Illinois, where I reside, you do. I have had a bike license from the time they first instituted that provision in the law( late 60s/early 70s) and have always retained for my job...a neccesity.
The officer could be incorrect, but since they have to go in and defend it if you contest the ticket ( at least here they do), I don't think he would strick you with one that he couldn't enforce. Now on the registration, once again local laws apply, but in Illinois you have 2-3 days to get it registered. If it was longer than that, regardless of whether it is new or not, you would be out of luck here.

 

[irish2themax]

Today i had my bike parked in a parking lot and a police officer came to me and asked for my registration and license plate (since its new i didn't have it) and then he asked to see my motorcycle license and i dont have one and he said i need one to operate it since its under 800lbs and has three wheels and he threatened to impound it but then hes like have someone pick it up so idid. but everyone is telling me i dont need a motorcycle license. Do i need one? He gave me two tickets one for not having a having registration and one for not a having a license plate....
later that day I was driving it a little aggressively and the check engine light came up i think it over heated so i waited 45mins and it turned off but then after 15mins of driving very slow and easy it went back on. do u think if i wait like 4 hours it would be fine?

WV has a separate 3-wheeler license good for Spyder and conventional trikes.

The cop was wrong!! According to DMV, you do NOT need as license for trikes in CA. Direct from the California DMV handbook.
NOTE: Class C licensees may operate a motorcycle with a side car attached or a three-wheel motorcycle. A Class C license is the standard drivers license. Just ask the Governator...he got into an accident while driving his side car-equiiped motorcycle without a license.

 

[woodz428]

The cop was wrong!! According to DMV, you do NOT need as license for trikes in CA. Direct from the California DMV handbook.
NOTE: Class C licensees may operate a motorcycle with a side car attached or a three-wheel motorcycle. A Class C license is the standard drivers license. Just ask the Governator...he got into an accident while driving his side car-equiiped motorcycle without a license.

Very interesting, with every other regulation they have to raise revenues( apparently not enough) I am astonished that they don't have a motorcycle specific classification. Here the only 2 wheeler you can operate without a bike classification is a moped or a scooter less than 50cc( note how many small scooters are 49cc).

 

[woodz428]

I never take any posts I read on the internet to be "fact" without some checking. That is the case with the Ca. driver's license question. According to V.C. Section 12804.9 - Examination and Driving Test: Classifications, a class C license in Ca is a 2 wheel license, so yes if you have a class C license you can operate the Spyder...because it IS a motorcycle license, not a general Driver's license as was implied. I think the officer was correct and the Va. post is wrong, at least according to the Ca. DMV website. But what do I know??
So anyone with internet access to post the original question could have googled the DMV and gotten the exact answer he needed instead of a bunch of speculation from afar.

 

[Spyderman]

I never take any posts I read on the internet to be "fact" without some checking. That is the case with the Ca. driver's license question. According to V.C. Section 12804.9 - Examination and Driving Test: Classifications, a class C license in Ca is a 2 wheel license, so yes if you have a class C license you can operate the Spyder...because it IS a motorcycle license, not a general Driver's license as was implied. I think the officer was correct and the Va. post is wrong, at least according to the Ca. DMV website. But what do I know??
So anyone with internet access to post the original question could have googled the DMV and gotten the exact answer he needed instead of a bunch of speculation from afar.

Good post Woodz428!

Very interesting, I read it slightly differently (but same conclusion as you), as I read it (not a lawyer, but do deal in lots of legal issues), it appears you do not need a motorcycle "endorsement" to drive a Spyder in CA. It looks like under subsection 3-D the Spyder is part of the "standard Class C license", AND motorcycles specifically excluded from the class C license by subsection 3E.

Motorcycle classification/endorsement is in addition the "C" class, called "M1" and is very clearly only for two-wheeled cycles in Section IV, again, I'm no lawyer, but to me, bringing the section and ticket to the police station, a the second ticket should get tossed. I know in AR, you have 30 days to register a new vehicle, as long as you are carrying the signed and dated Bill of Sale, the officers will not ticket for that here.

(3) Class C includes the following:

(A) A two-axle vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating of 26,000 pounds or less, including when the vehicle is towing a trailer or semitrailer with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000 pounds or less.

(B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), a two-axle vehicle weighing 4,000 pounds or more unladen when towing a trailer coach not exceeding 9,000 pounds gross.

(C) A house car of 40 feet in length or less.

(D) A three-axle vehicle weighing 6,000 pounds gross or less.

(E) A house car of 40 feet in length or less or vehicle towing another vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000 pounds or less, including when a tow dolly is used. A person driving a vehicle may not tow another vehicle in violation of Section 21715.

(F) (i) A two-axle vehicle weighing 4,000 pounds or more unladen when towing either a trailer coach or a fifth-wheel travel trailer not exceeding 10,000 pounds gross vehicle weight rating, when the towing of the trailer is not for compensation.

(ii) A two-axle vehicle weighing 4,000 pounds or more unladen when towing a fifth-wheel travel trailer exceeding 10,000 pounds, but not exceeding 15,000 pounds, gross vehicle weight rating, when the towing of the trailer is not for compensation, and if the person has passed a specialized written examination provided by the department relating to the knowledge of this code and other safety aspects governing the towing of recreational vehicles upon the highway.

The authority to operate combinations of vehicles under this subparagraph may be granted by endorsement on a class C license upon completion of that written examination.

(G) A vehicle or combination of vehicles with a gross combination weight rating or a gross vehicle weight rating, as those terms are defined in subdivisions (j) and (k), respectively, of Section 15210, of 26,000 pounds or less, if all of the following conditions are met:

(i) Is operated by a farmer, an employee of a farmer, or an instructor credentialed in agriculture as part of an instructional program in agriculture at the high school, community college, or university level.

(ii) Is used exclusively in the conduct of agricultural operations.\ (iii) Is not used in the capacity of a for-hire carrier or for compensation.

(H) A motorized scooter.

(I) Class C does not include a two-wheel motorcycle or a two-wheel motor-driven cycle.

(4) Class M1. A two-wheel motorcycle or a motor-driven cycle. Authority to operate a vehicle included in a class M1 license may be granted by endorsement on a class A, B, or C license upon completion of an appropriate examination.

(5) (A) Class M2 includes the following:

(i) A motorized bicycle or moped, or a bicycle with an attached motor, except a motorized bicycle described in subdivision (b) of Section 406.

(ii) A motorized scooter.

 

[woodz428]

I actually went back and reread it, really, all the suffix letters in caps and lower case were a little confusing..to say the least. I see where a sidecar could fit into the 3 axle category, but a spyder is 2 axles. Just like a car, but so is a motorcycle.But I think you'll find that the exposed rider status will push it out of that category. I would wade into it pretty humbly, because it doesn't look like it's on his side. It's the class M1 license that really applies, but again, I don't live in Ca. Since they are the largest bike buying state( I know from working dealerships for decades), I doubt that they would pass on the extra revenue that generates. I think the technical line is drawn with the 3 axle clause. 3 wheels does not mean 3 axles, it can, but it is not inclusive. Just as 4 wheels doesn't mean 4 axles, I think he is going to have to pay the fine. Age seems to also play into it, since there was no age posted...it may be that he is too young to even get a M1 license without a rider training program.
In all honesty,it shocks me that the elected representatives could pass this and think it was easily understood by those that have to abide by it. Unfortunately that's not just a Ca. problem.

 

[Spyderman]

I actually went back and reread it, really, all the suffix letters in caps and lower case were a little confusing..to say the least. I see where a sidecar could fit into the 3 axle category, but a spyder is 2 axles. Just like a car, but so is a motorcycle.But I think you'll find that the exposed rider status will push it out of that category. I would wade into it pretty humbly, because it doesn't look like it's on his side. It's the class M1 license that really applies, but again, I don't live in Ca. Since they are the largest bike buying state( I know from working dealerships for decades), I doubt that they would pass on the extra revenue that generates. I think the technical line is drawn with the 3 axle clause. 3 wheels does not mean 3 axles, it can, but it is not inclusive. Just as 4 wheels doesn't mean 4 axles, I think he is going to have to pay the fine. Age seems to also play into it, since there was no age posted...it may be that he is too young to even get a M1 license without a rider training program.
In all honesty,it shocks me that the elected representatives could pass this and think it was easily understood by those that have to abide by it. Unfortunately that's not just a Ca. problem.

I'd say it is a good thing to ask, but I'd sure be wiling to as a Mechanical Engineer testify in court the Spyder is a three axle vehicle , so it is covered under the base class. The service manual has plenty of documentation to verify this and the Spyder patent would certainly back up the intent.

What is really funny, is cars have not been two axel's for years

(D) A three-axle vehicle weighing 6,000 pounds gross or less.

The real question is what is meant by "three axles"?

They may actually mean "pairs of wheels" when they say axle's.... but that is not what the words say. he-he

 

[irish2themax]

I never take any posts I read on the internet to be "fact" without some checking. That is the case with the Ca. driver's license question. According to V.C. Section 12804.9 - Examination and Driving Test: Classifications, a class C license in Ca is a 2 wheel license, so yes if you have a class C license you can operate the Spyder...because it IS a motorcycle license, not a general Driver's license as was implied. I think the officer was correct and the Va. post is wrong, at least according to the Ca. DMV website. But what do I know??
So anyone with internet access to post the original question could have googled the DMV and gotten the exact answer he needed instead of a bunch of speculation from afar.

Sorry but you're the one who is wrong! Now that you've "blasted" me for failing to do my research, I refer you to Motorcycle Handbook- License Requirements on The California DMV website

NOTE: Class C licensees may operate a motorcycle with a side car attached or a three-wheel motorcycle.

You too could have Googled the answer. All you had to do was search on my NOTE...Be sure you're right before casting stones

 

[woodz428]

Sorry but you're the one who is wrong! Now that you've "blasted" me for failing to do my research, I refer you to Motorcycle Handbook- License Requirements on The California DMV website

NOTE: Class C licensees may operate a motorcycle with a side car attached or a three-wheel motorcycle.

You too could have Googled the answer. All you had to do was search on my NOTE...Be sure you're right before casting stones

My,my aren't we a little touchy. If that is blasting, you are too soft skinned to be on that thing. I referenced the Ca. DMV. I'm sorry if their information was not adequate. I personally could care less,I choose not to live in Ca. for many reasons. I lived their for 13 years and that was plenty. With as snarled as their regulations are, I would be hesitant to give as BOLD advice from afar as you seem to feel comfortable doing. I believe if you re-read my post I mentioned "local laws" more than once. But since Va. and Ca. have the same laws, you are most likely correct...I mean you talk to god...you have to be as correct as Oral Roberts. That isn't blasting, I can assure you, because I know what it is.
If you frequented some of the forums I am on regularly, all of them vehicle sites, you will find that the clear thing about Ca. regs are they are not clear and seem to be changed on a whim...depending from where the dollars come .
My strongest comment had to do with anyone from any state taking legal advice regarding regulations from anyone from another state, unless they happen to practice that type of law,in THAT state. You did not indicate that you were so engaged, so even more reason to check with the LOCAL authorities...not someone from La.,Pa. or yes Virginia,Va.
If you aren't going to pay the piper, you shouldn't give advice that could cost someone else,especially with such an authoritarian tone.
I look forward to your legal advice in my state.

 

[irish2themax]

My,my aren't we a little touchy. If that is blasting, you are too soft skinned to be on that thing. I referenced the Ca. DMV. I'm sorry if their information was not adequate. I personally could care less,I choose not to live in Ca. for many reasons. I lived their for 13 years and that was plenty. With as snarled as their regulations are, I would be hesitant to give as BOLD advice from afar as you seem to feel comfortable doing. I believe if you re-read my post I mentioned "local laws" more than once. But since Va. and Ca. have the same laws, you are most likely correct...I mean you talk to god...you have to be as correct as Oral Roberts. That isn't blasting, I can assure you, because I know what it is.
If you frequented some of the forums I am on regularly, all of them vehicle sites, you will find that the clear thing about Ca. regs are they are not clear and seem to be changed on a whim...depending from where the dollars come .
My strongest comment had to do with anyone from any state taking legal advice regarding regulations from anyone from another state, unless they happen to practice that type of law,in THAT state. You did not indicate that you were so engaged, so even more reason to check with the LOCAL authorities...not someone from La.,Pa. or yes Virginia,Va.
If you aren't going to pay the piper, you shouldn't give advice that could cost someone else,especially with such an authoritarian tone.
I look forward to your legal advice in my state.

First of all, it's WEST Virginia. And I lived in California for seven years. You are the one who was quoting "legal advice" except that it was in error. It wouldn't have done much good for him to have checked with LOCAL authorities since they already indicated they didn't know their own laws. My point was that, if you are going to criticize or rebut another poster, be certain you're correct.

 

[woodz428]

It wouldn't have done much good for him to have checked with LOCAL authorities since they already indicated they didn't know their own laws. My point was that, if you are going to criticize or rebut another poster, be certain you're correct.

Take you own advice,scrooge. If I qouted the Ca. DMV and it is wrong and the Ca. Local authorities don't know even more reason fro someone in another state to shut the F*** k up about giving legal advice. I guess they must contact w.Va. or someother "all knowing" state resident for their guidance. I will say the same thing I said before ...the person in Ca. should IGNORE your "absolute" advice and check with his local authorities, because I can assure you that if he says "some yoyo in W.Va. told me I didn't need one" they'll laugh him all the way to the fine payment. If you can read, which seems questionable...I NEVER gave LEGAL advice, other than checking with the local police. You, on the other hand, PRONOUNCED with absolutely NO substance that the officer was wrong... I said that I "thought" he was correct and that YOU may be wrong. If you keep taking that as a blast, it will continue as long as you feel you are somehow qualified to counsel people on legalities that you are 3000 miles from. If you would just concede that his best bet is to check with the locals instead of some pinhead(not only you ,but anyone )in another state, you might have hope, otherwise I doubt it. I am not a Lawyer, and you surely aren't, but I have defeated the states attorney on stupid charges by "researching the local laws". It never came from some post on the internet by some anonymous individual. I guess you must get your legal advice from Nebraska?? Makes as much sense.
I can see from your sig line what the problem is..people that talk to themselves and think it is god are always confused.

Oh. yeah..get a sense of humor...

 

[irish2themax]

You are truly someone who cannot admit when he is wrong. Sad

 

[woodz428]

You are truly someone who cannot admit when he is wrong. Sad

anyone that "talks" with god,should have first hand experience

 

[irish2themax]

anyone that "talks" with god,should have first hand experience

Aye...and as said in Braveheart, He tells me you're f---ed

 

[woodz428]

First, you are ridiculous. I do not have to admit I am incorrect to you. Because, if advising someone to check with their local authorities is wrong well so be it. But it's not. However, on the other hand if I was some a$$ voicalizing from a state 3000 miles away what the laws are, I'd hide my head in the sand. Braveheart,you crack me up, I guess you have a little sense of humor....very little.
In case you don't grasp it, the DMV website should have a little more authority than any driver's handbook since they are printed for long periods and don't always reflect the changes in the LAW. Now ,really , THAT is the question What the LAW says, not WHAT you may THINK the law is...actually what it is. If you reside in Ca.( currently, not some nebulous time in the past),which you don't, I would acknowledge that you MAY know what you are tallking about. I will, however, wait for someone that actually does reside in Ca., with actual( not presumed) knowledge of the laws.
Just reading the DMV website it is obvious that there is some vagueness that will be interpreted by a judge or already has been by their elected representatives. I just think it is absolutely irresponsible of anyone to give legal advice when they are far removed. The poster didn't even give enough info for an accurate assessment of what transpired. The Spyder is "new" what does that mean?? He was told "he didn't need a motorcycle license", but I don't believe he said whether he even held a license or whether it had been suspended. All these things could play into the situation, yet you feel superior enough, safe away from having to deal with the issue personally, that you will tell someone "The COP is WRONG". It is apparent you have little understanding of the legal system, I don't. 20 years ago, motorcycle plate renewal in this state was the same as cars, the same month you first registered it.Now it is March. I had renewed my plate, and didn't ride it until I had the paperwork showing it was coming. It was the day after I ordered and paid for it but the day before it came. I was pulled over for expired plates and the officer said bluntly "I don't want to see it" when I explained that I had the receipt in my pocket. I,of course,contested it, because it wasn't an attempt to violate the law. When I presented the evidence to the judge, he cut the fine in half,because I was legal, but let the charge stand because he didn't want the officer to be incorrect. That is what the guy will have to deal with, I have many police officers for friends in a dozen states and they
acknowledge that the court favors the officer in traffic cases. It is much different than a criminal case.
I also think it's against the law to practice law without a license,un;ess it's yourself,which this isn't.
I'll tell you what,If you agree to pay any fine that may be generated from this, I'll apologize. Otherwise shut up.

 

[irish2themax]

First, you are ridiculous. I do not have to admit I am incorrect to you. Because, if advising someone to check with their local authorities is wrong well so be it. But it's not. However, on the other hand if I was some a$$ voicalizing from a state 3000 miles away what the laws are, I'd hide my head in the sand. Braveheart,you crack me up, I guess you have a little sense of humor....very little.
In case you don't grasp it, the DMV website should have a little more authority than any driver's handbook since they are printed for long periods and don't always reflect the changes in the LAW. Now ,really , THAT is the question What the LAW says, not WHAT you may THINK the law is...actually what it is. If you reside in Ca.( currently, not some nebulous time in the past),which you don't, I would acknowledge that you MAY know what you are tallking about. I will, however, wait for someone that actually does reside in Ca., with actual( not presumed) knowledge of the laws.
Just reading the DMV website it is obvious that there is some vagueness that will be interpreted by a judge or already has been by their elected representatives. I just think it is absolutely irresponsible of anyone to give legal advice when they are far removed. The poster didn't even give enough info for an accurate assessment of what transpired. The Spyder is "new" what does that mean?? He was told "he didn't need a motorcycle license", but I don't believe he said whether he even held a license or whether it had been suspended. All these things could play into the situation, yet you feel superior enough, safe away from having to deal with the issue personally, that you will tell someone "The COP is WRONG". It is apparent you have little understanding of the legal system, I don't. 20 years ago, motorcycle plate renewal in this state was the same as cars, the same month you first registered it.Now it is March. I had renewed my plate, and didn't ride it until I had the paperwork showing it was coming. It was the day after I ordered and paid for it but the day before it came. I was pulled over for expired plates and the officer said bluntly "I don't want to see it" when I explained that I had the receipt in my pocket. I,of course,contested it, because it wasn't an attempt to violate the law. When I presented the evidence to the judge, he cut the fine in half,because I was legal, but let the charge stand because he didn't want the officer to be incorrect. That is what the guy will have to deal with, I have many police officers for friends in a dozen states and they
acknowledge that the court favors the officer in traffic cases. It is much different than a criminal case.
I also think it's against the law to practice law without a license,un;ess it's yourself,which this isn't.
I'll tell you what,If you agree to pay any fine that may be generated from this, I'll apologize. Otherwise shut up.

Piss off gobshite

 

[woodz428]

Piss off gobshite

 

[Spyderman]

In a class I once took they said "Deal with the issue or behavior, not the person". In this case..... CA's confusing regulation, OK?

Anyway, I gotta say a few things, one, I'm about to move to CA, and many of the comments about CA in last post are what scare me the most about the move. But what scares me more is the ambiguity of the regulations, this one shows pretty clearly the laws are not written to be understood. The more I read the regulation, the more I felt whoever wrote it did not have a drivers license, nor did they know what they were trying to define. There is no question that the Spyder is a three axle vehicle and under six thousand pounds. I was pondering what other meaning they could have intended, and the only one I came up with was a big motor home, with three axle/six wheels. but no way that would be under 6000 pounds. So to me, a three wheeled vehicle could be the only logical outcome. But, in the time I have spent in CA so far, logic is applicable in the work place, but not necessarily in anything relating to the government?

The upcoming Aptera has three axles/three wheels..... I doubt it will need a motorcycle endorsement.

My Dad had a BMW Isetta... three axles, but four wheels! the reality is definition of a vehicle class is much more complicated, and as written, the CA statute is unclear... ie. dually diesel truck technically has three axles (two front, one rear) but six tires!

I did take the time tonight to go down to the Sunnyvale, CA police station to ask for clarification, and they said the DMV was the proper organization to ask. I told them I was asking them as a CA police officer had ticketed a friend for not having the proper license and asked in a nice subtle way if they could not tell me what class license was required, how could they have written a ticket? They then asked for the specific vehicle code violation on the ticket, which I did not know... so if you could post it, I'll gladly talk to the DMV and police here to get their legal opinions. Overall they were very nice when asked for clarification, unfortunately, they could not answer my question.

The reason this is of such interest to me is I was told very specifically that the reason for the single foot brake design controlling all wheels was so a cycle endorsement would not be required in CA and I guess I'd like to know if that statement was correct.

 

[Spyderman]

I had renewed my plate, and didn't ride it until I had the paperwork showing it was coming. It was the day after I ordered and paid for it but the day before it came. I was pulled over for expired plates and the officer said bluntly "I don't want to see it" when I explained that I had the receipt in my pocket. I,of course,contested it, because it wasn't an attempt to violate the law. When I presented the evidence to the judge, he cut the fine in half,because I was legal, but let the charge stand because he didn't want the officer to be incorrect.

I had a similar thing happen to me, I had expired car tags... my fault (I guess). I never received the renewal paperwork and did not know they were expired... I had six cars at the time, so I sort of depended on the renewals to let me know when they needed re-upping, and that car was my spouses, so I rarely drove it.

Anyway, by the time it was all said and done, my total fines for a NON-MOVING violation, exceeded what my friend was fined a week later for going 20 over the speed limit. I had to pay court costs, even if I just paid the ticket (why pay for something I did not "Use"?). To add insult to injury, the registration fees were 100% higher because I had let the tags expire.... and got a ticket. If I had not got a ticket, they would have been the same! It is all about the money, it is not about fairness. Government seems to be in business to keep itself in business, at the expense of those not "on the government payroll", and voting different people in office, just puts different people on that payroll

In my day job I use six sigma and lean techniques to eliminate waste in manufacturing.... I'd LOVE to do the same for government

Anyway, as I said, I'll at least try to find out if a cycle endorsement (in addition to a class C license) is required by CA regulations to drive a Spyder in CA.