Schönebeck / Calbe l “We all know what a 19-year-old VW Polo is worth – namely absolutely nothing,” clarifies the public prosecutor in the Schönebeck district court. And it is precisely this circumstance that means that 32-year-old Laura K. (name changed) from Halberstadt has to answer in the dock before criminal judge Eike Bruns.
Laurs K. is accused of illegally disposing of an old vehicle – specifically that 19-year-old VW Polo. The car had been left to its own devices in Calbe, Damaschkeplan. This is a negligent handling of waste, since liquids leaking from the vehicle could contaminate the environment, according to the public prosecutor. The disposal of an end-of-life vehicle may only be carried out by certified companies.
Car without TÜV
The 32-year-old, however, is not aware of any guilt. What happened? The defendant describes the court: “I sold the car on eBay classifieds for 50 euros. The buyer came, screwed on license plates and drove away. ”As the Halberstadt resident explains, the car no longer even had a valid Tüv sticker. “Why didn’t you have the Tüv rebuilt if you had the intention to sell the vehicle?” Asks Judge Bruns. “Then you could certainly have asked for more than 50 euros.”
“It was just a transition vehicle until I bought a new car. I don’t have to do the Tüv again, “says Laura K.
Car parked in Calbe
The buyer – a man from Calbe who is well known to the court – then apparently parked the vehicle as it is on a piece of land on Damaschkeplan. The problem for Laura K .: She did not deregister the car before it was sold.
“You should have realized that you were selling a junk vehicle. After all, it no longer even had a valid TÜV sticker. And you are only allowed to trade in waste if you are certified for it, ”says Bruns. Laura K.’s lawyer, however, holds: “The car was still roadworthy. It was not recognizable to my client as ‘waste’. “Bruns:” When you look at a vehicle, you have to see whether it is still suitable for traffic or whether it is junk. If the latter is the case, then it must not be sold, but must be disposed of by a qualified company. Quite simple. ”Meanwhile, Laura K. emphasizes again:“ That wasn’t rubbish for me! ”However, the public prosecutor sees it differently.
Disposal would have cost money
“The fact is that the defendant wanted to get rid of the car. And she decided to sell the car for a few euros instead of paying money for its disposal, ”argues the prosecutor.
Judge Eike Bruns says to the defendant: “I believe you that you did not foresee the consequences. But you shouldn’t have sold the car in this condition. That is negligent, environmentally hazardous waste disposal. “
Proposal from the judge
But Bruns tries to meet Laura K. For a payment of 500 euros to a non-profit organization, the proceedings would be discontinued, he suggests. Laura K. seems offended. The judge gives her a few minutes of consultation with her lawyer. After a few minutes, the latter turns to the criminal judge: “The 500 euros are a lot of money for my client. Can’t you go down a bit? “
“I am already very much towards you. It can also be paid off in installments, ”says Bruns. He also calculates that this offense is usually punished with a penalty order in the amount of 30 daily rates – which would cost Laura K. more than double his proposal if convicted.
Offer turned down
Bruns gives the defendant and her lawyer consultation time again. When Laura K. and her lawyer come back into the courtroom a few minutes later, the face of the accused speaks volumes. She is defiant. She turns down Bruns’ offer. The procedure will therefore have to be renegotiated. An appointment was made for mid-December.
–
