Are toads considered trailers?

[awol50]

Not under Washington State law. See RCW 46.04.620 which reads as follows:

Trailer includes every vehicle without motive power designed for being drawn by or used in conjunction with a motor vehicle constructed so that no appreciable part of its weight rests upon or is carried by such motor vehicle.

Under Washington State law it appears toads, since they have motive power (an engine, transmission, etc) are not trailers. I checked Idaho also and they have the same definition of what a trailer is. Not sure about other states.

So it appears, at least in Washington State and Idaho, there are no weight laws on toads having brakes and breakaway installed, since they are not defined as trailers under state law, which is what governs. See RCW 46.37.340

Just to get the facts straight as there is a lot of confusion out there on toads and toad braking laws. Remember, it is each state's state law that controls this issue and applicable laws.

I am not advocating against toad brakes, only pointing out applicable law as I indicated.

[Florida Rang]

Good luck convincing a DOT official or a Trooper of this while on the side of the road . It will be easier to just un-hook toad and have wife drive it until you have gone down the road a few miles. Never try to educate a Trooper or DOT,, they know it all...

[Winemaker2]

Originally Posted by awol50

Not under Washington State law. See RCW 46.04.620 which reads as follows:

Trailer includes every vehicle without motive power designed for being drawn by or used in conjunction with a motor vehicle constructed so that no appreciable part of its weight rests upon or is carried by such motor vehicle.

Under Washington State law it appears toads, since they have motive power (an engine, transmission, etc) are not trailers. I checked Idaho also and they have the same definition of what a trailer is. Not sure about other states.

So it appears, at least in Washington State and Idaho, there are no weight laws on toads having brakes and breakaway installed, since they are not defined as trailers under state law, which is what governs. See RCW 46.37.340

Just to get the facts straight as there is a lot of confusion out there on toads and toad braking laws. Remember, it is each state's state law that controls this issue and applicable laws.

I am not advocating against toad brakes, only pointing out applicable law as I indicated.

"designed for being drawn by or used in conjunction with a motor vehicle constructed so that no appreciable part of its weight rests upon or is carried by such motor vehicle."

It seems that only applies to 4 wheel trailers with no tongue weight bearing on the tow vehicle... not even a semi trailer?

[groswald]

Interesting.

I wouldn’t bet on your interpretation though. As soon as you attach it to your coach and start dragging it down the highway it has become, “a vehicle without motive power.” The fact that it has an engine is kinda irrelevant as long as it’s being towed.

As for this bit,

“designed for being drawn by or used in conjunction with a motor vehicle constructed so that no appreciable part of its weight rests upon or is carried by such motor vehicle."

This is true of all trailers. The tongue weight is always (supposed to be) much less than the load carried by the trailer’s axles. The load on the pin box of a 5-er may be several thousand pounds, but it’s still much less than the total weight of the RV making it, “not an appreciable part” of the trailer’s weight from a legal perspective.

I believe the key here is making it clear that, other than the tongue weight, a trailer’s load is carried on its own axles, not on the tow vehicles’s.

Regards,

Randy

[MarvinG]

In Alabama, the ladies in the county clerk’s office thought probably not, but weren’t sure. I paid the tax and bought the tag just to keep my trips more trooper free. Once I paid the initial tax, the annual tag fee is under $20. For me that is good insurance against being pulled over on a pretext. However, having purchased it, each year, my dolly has no where to hang it so I keep it, and all applicable papers in the bin over my drivers seat.

[awol50]

Originally Posted by groswald

Interesting.

I wouldn’t bet on your interpretation though. As soon as you attach it to your coach and start dragging it down the highway it has become, “a vehicle without motive power.” The fact that it has an engine is kinda irrelevant as long as it’s being towed.

As for this bit,

“designed for being drawn by or used in conjunction with a motor vehicle constructed so that no appreciable part of its weight rests upon or is carried by such motor vehicle."

This is true of all trailers. The tongue weight is always (supposed to be) much less than the load carried by the trailer’s axles. The load on the pin box of a 5-er may be several thousand pounds, but it’s still much less than the total weight of the RV making it, “not an appreciable part” of the trailer’s weight from a legal perspective.

I believe the key here is making it clear that, other than the tongue weight, a trailer’s load is carried on its own axles, not on the tow vehicles’s.

Regards,

Randy

Before i wrote my original comment i played devils advocate and considered your argument of "not under motive power while towing".
Then why even have "without motive power" in the statute? If the intent was to define a toad as a trailer?
Since semi trailers, 5th wheels, trailers, boat trailers, etc. already have no motive power, if the intent of the statute was to have toads defined as trailers there would be no reason to have those words "without motive power".

[groswald]

Brian,

Honestly, I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. I just enjoy thought puzzles.

That said, from my perspective, you're putting too much emphasis on the fact that a toad has a motor. It does, no argument there, but when being towed the engine is irrelevant - it's not providing propulsion to the vehicle. It's no different from a crate engine sitting on a utility trailer. In either case, the towed vehicle does not "have" it's own motive power even though both "have" an engine.

The law doesn't have any problem with one "thing" being considered two or more different "things" depending on the circumstances. A screwdriver is an innocuous hand tool or a deadly weapon depending on the circumstances. Your toad is an automobile when under it's own power and it's a trailer when you hook it to the hitch on your coach.

From a purely practical perspective, any competent opposing lawyer will be able to make a compelling case for negligence on your part were you at fault in an accident where your toad should have but didn't have brakes. Your lawyer would have a heck of a hard time convincing a bunch of random folks that the thing hanging off the trailer hitch behind your coach is not a trailer.

All opinions expressed here are mine alone, and expressed solely for entertainment purposes...



Regards,

Randy

[artman1913]

Sweet I just need to have the engine running and in gear so it is powered.
Now I can put a trailer behind it!!

Thanks

[Ljwt330]

California Vehicle Code defines a trailer as “a vehicle designed for carrying persons or property on its own structure and for being drawn by a motor vehicle and so constructed that no part of its weight rests upon any other vehicle. “ CVC 630
It is designed to be pulled. Automobiles are not.

CVC defines “motor vehicle” as a vehicle that is self propelled.

Further, CVC 26454 (a), states service brakes on every motor vehicle or combination of vehicles must be able to come to a stop within designated distances.

CVC 26458 (a), “The braking system on every motor vehicle used to tow another vehicle shall be so arranged that one control on the towing vehicle shall, when applied, operate all the service brakes on the power unit and combination of vehicles when either or both of the following conditions exist: (11007)

(1) The towing vehicle is required to be equipped with power brakes. (11008)

(2) The towed vehicle is required to be equipped with brakes and is equipped with power brakes“

HOWEVER, further down, it states,”Subdivision (a) does not apply to any of the following combinations of vehicles, if the combination of vehicles meets the stopping distance requirements of Section 26454: (11011)

(1) Vehicles engaged in driveaway-towaway operations. (11012)

(2) Disabled vehicles, while being towed. (11013)

(3) Towed motor vehicles. (11014

Number 3 clearly identifies a towed motor vehicle, an automobile, as being exempt from brake laws that apply to other vehicles in the provision, as long as stopping distances are maintained. Because it is identified specifically, a motor vehicle is still a motor vehicle while being towed. It has not become a trailer.

Long way around, but in Cal., towed motor vehicles, “toads,” are not trailers, are not required to have supplemental brake systems, but must be able to stop within the distances designated in the Vehicle Code.

California Law - Vehicle Code - Chapter 3. Brakes

Law section

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...sectionNum=415

It may take a similar search to clarify the issue in other states.

Same disclaimer as groswold. Pure academic entertainment.

[TXiceman]

If yo are trying to justify not installing brakes in the dinghy, no matter how you read the law, the law of physics still apply. The motorhome cannot tell it you have 4000# of dinghy or 4000# of trailer loaded with rocks. It takes additional brakes to stop the added weight. It also needs break away brakes as well incase it comes loose from the coach.

Ken

[Ljwt330]

Originally Posted by TXiceman

If yo are trying to justify not installing brakes in the dinghy, no matter how you read the law, the law of physics still apply. The motorhome cannot tell it you have 4000# of dinghy or 4000# of trailer loaded with rocks. It takes additional brakes to stop the added weight. It also needs break away brakes as well incase it comes loose from the coach.

Ken

If this is in response to my post, no, absolutely not. The thread is about whether or not a toad is a trailer and if brakes are subsequently required based on the identity as a trailer.

I always recommend supplemental systems and have always employed them myself.

[TXiceman]

Originally Posted by Ljwt330

If this is in response to my post, no, absolutely not. The thread is about whether or not a toad is a trailer and if brakes are subsequently required based on the identity as a trailer.

I always recommend supplemental systems and have always employed them myself.

I was responding to awol50, the OP. When we had a motorhome and towed a dinghy, it was equipped with brakes and a break away system. I also added a signal back to the cockpit to indicate anytime the dingy brakes were applied.

Ken

[NXR]

Long way around, but in Cal., towed motor vehicles, “toads,” are not trailers, are not required to have supplemental brake systems, but must be able to stop within the distances designated in the Vehicle Code.

I suspect that the intent of the law is to allow tow trucks to move vehicles without the vehicle needing to have its braking system active. Because maybe it's being towed because its brakes do not work.

Ray

[NXR]

I am not advocating against toad brakes, only pointing out applicable law as I indicated.

I figure it's like the law saying that you can be cited for obeying the posted speed limit because in the officer's professional opinion you were driving too fast for the prevailing conditions. You likely will not get cited unless you're involved in an accident or incident, even if it's not your fault, and then you will.

I'd like to see someone plead in court that they had adequate stopping power without toad brakes after they just ran into someone or their car broke loose and pleading that their unpowered car was not a "trailer".

Laws as written usually don't mean squat until there is a court case that interprets the meaning. And "negligence" covers a lot of things not specifically defined. And civil suits also cover a lot of incidents that criminal law did not.

Ray