*1 forego- of law conclusions consistent with

ing opinion. relinquished.

Jurisdiction

Charles L. JONES Pennsylvania, DE-

COMMONWEALTH TRANSPORTATION,

PARTMENT OF VEHICLES, Ap-

BUREAU OF MOTOR pellant. Wile, Timothy In-Charge, P. Asst. Counsel Cramer, Counsel, H. Harold Asst. Chief Commonwealth Court of Harrisburg, appellant. Submitted on Briefs Nov. Í998. appearance appellee. No entered for Decided Jan. FRIEDMAN, J., KELLEY, J.,

JIULIANTE, FRIEDMAN, Judge. Pennsylvania, The Commonwealth of partment Transportation, Bureau of Motor (DOT) appeals from an order of Vehicles Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas of (trial court) sustaining statutory appeal (Jones) L. of Charles from a three- registration suspension month vehicle im- posed by DOT under section 1786 of the Code, §1786.1 Vehicle 75 Pa.C.S. We re- verse.

By official notice dated November that, pursuant DOT informed Jones to sec- Code, tion 1786 of the Vehicle registration on Ford sedan would Code, Moreover, penalize person 1. Section 75 Pa.C.S. §1786(d), responsibility coverage that DOT in financial if, (d) lapse, a vehicle for a of three months subsection at the time of the tration of required if it determines that the surrenders the required by was not secured as and card to to a full DOT or to Chapter agent appointed by of the sub- a decentralized service DOT. Vehicle §1786(g)(2). does not where the If surrenders responsibility coverage agent, was for a and card to a DOT the DOT receipt registrant or to issue a of less than 31 and the owner and card did not and send card with in financial responsibility. 75 Pa.C.S.

1091 operation months, operate permit the of suspended not for three effective does 9, lapse 1997, policy during period of in cember because the insurance the the (2) lapse In- responsibility; on had been the in that vehicle terminated. and financial deed, Company period Laurel responsibility Mountain Assurance for a of financial was poli- had DOT that Jones’ insurance thirty-one days. notified 75 than Pa.C.S. less 25, cy August on 1997 for was terminated premiums. a non-payment of Jones filed did acknowledges that Jones not DOT timely statutory appeal, court and the trial his Ford operate or the 5,1998. hearing February held a on during the in his insurance cov sedan hearing, At that his the Jones admitted However, points properly out erage. DOT Au- lapsed had from automobile insurance responsibility lapse in in that the financial gust 25, a 1997 until November 25, August was from 1997 until this case period ninety-three days. of Jones 1997, ninety-three a of November operate not stated that he did the vehicle 12a.) (R.R. ninety-three days. at Because during period of time. further testi- that He thirty-one days not less than the set is that, fied that he was unaware to avoid a 1786(d)(1) in of the Vehicle forth penalty ninety-three-day lapse in insur- Code, cannot im avoid the coverage, ance to he had surrender the vehi- by posed DOT that section. plate cle registration to under section DOT Accordingly, we reverse. 1786(g) of the Vehicle Code.2 The trial court accepted testimony Jones’ that he did not ORDER the vehicle in insur- the coverage appeal ance and sustained Jones’ NOW, day January, AND this 29th of regis- failure to

because Jones’ surrender his of of the order the Court Common consequence tration to DOT “was noof Allegheny County, February Pleas of dated (Trial to [DOT] under the circumstances.” 5,1998, reversed. is 12a-13a.) 1; op. court at at R.R. Dissenting Opinion by Judge KELLEY.

The sole issue before this court is whether the trial court matter of erred as a KELLEY, Judge, dissenting. statutory law in un appeal respectfully dissent. provisions der of the section 1786 of the Vehicle Code.3 DOT contends that the trial 1786(a) pro- of Code Section the Vehicle improperly ignored court the fact that Jones’ every “required that motor vehicle to vides coverage lapsed insurance had of a operat- is registered under this title which agree. ninety-three days. We currently registered ed or shall be covered responsibility.” (Emphasis by

Section of the Vehicle add- Code ed.) that all purpose of a The that vehi- DOT the to ensure highways vehicle for a of three months if it on the within this cles by accept- are some determines that covered Commonwealth in responsibility form of financial order secured. able §1786(d). However, general by protect public this not from loss subsection does to (1) by injury where: or death caused uninsured vehicles. owner of copy parked notary of that he at the and card with a Jones testified his vehicle sent (R.R. 13a-15a.) notary. at noted office of a As receipt to DOT. above, penalize a a coverage in if: insurance under subsection determining scope of 3. Our review is limited (1) surrendered findings of fact are whether the trial court’s (2) agent; and card to DOT tration by competent supported evidence whether (3) agent receipt; DOT DOT issued law or the trial court made an error of commit- plate, sent the card and a of Pray Department ted an abuse discretion. Here, receipt however, Vehicles, Transportation, Bureau Motor notary is no there evidence that (Pa.Cmwlth. 1998). A.2d 1315 notary issued an that the Jones a for the and card or that the purpose

This can be achieved one of two

ways: by either req- maintenance of the

uisite on by insurance a motor vehicle or

non-operation of an uninsured vehicle. See 1786(d)(1) 1786(f)

sections *3 us,

In the case before it is conclusive that question

the vehicle in dur-

ing Thus, coverage. of insurance spirit of the law has been satisfied. Fur-

thermore, DOT’s failure to advise Jones procedural steps

about the that must be tak-

en order to avoid of his

tration until simply it too late clashes objectives.1

with the law’s pursuit

DOT’s of this matter constitutes an oppressive

unreasonable and enforcement of Therefore, Vehicle Code. believe the

order of the trial court

appeal should be affirmed. COMPANY,

BANKERS TRUST as Trustee Pooling Servicing Agree-

Under the

ment, February 20, 1992, dated as of CTS Equity 1992-1, Appel-

Home Loan Trust

lants,

TAX CLAIM BUREAU OF DELAWARE Dell, Ronald

COUNTY and W. Sr.

Commonwealth Court

Argued Oct. 1998. Decided Feb. Marinos, Allentown, Douglas appel- M.

lants. Friedman, Media, appellee,

Joel Ronald Dell, Sr. COLINS, Judge, President

DOYLE, J.(P.), MIRARCHI, Jr., necessity registration plate 1. DOT did not advise Jones of the current and card until Novem- acquire days other insurance within 31 from the lapse. ber some 71 after the date of date of or the need to return to DOT his