In November 2024, somehow unnoticed, amid the parliamentary unrest for the election of the chairman of the 51st National Assembly, the negotiations for a regular government and the threats of new early elections, changes came into force in Ordinance No. I-45 on the registration of cars from 2000 in connection with the restoration of the license plates of vehicles that were officially deregistered due to the expiration of the "Civil Liability" insurance.
Until now and for years, the so-called "reverse automatic registration" had worked without problems in the Traffic Police system of a vehicle deregistered in the above order, when a new “Civil Liability“ is concluded for it.
At one point, some “smart“ (and perhaps financially-entrepreneurial – b.a.) head in the leadership of the Ministry of Interior thought of changing Regulation No. I-45 issued by the Minister of Interior, by writing in Art. 15 that if more than 12 months have passed from the moment of official deregistration to the moment of concluding a new civil liability insurance, then a Protocol from a technical service that has a vehicle testing laboratory accredited by the Executive Agency “Bulgarian Accreditation Service“ is also required. Or simply put - the so-called “technotest“ is required as a document from a new test will be required for any case of more than 12 months since deregistration due to expired “Civil Liability“, even if it concerns the same road vehicle (PPP).
A careful reading of the above changes shows that thousands, if not tens of thousands of owners and users of vehicles are affected - including seasonal vehicles, trailers, caravans, campers, motorcycles, retro cars - in general, any vehicle that is not used constantly and for a certain period of the year due to its non-use does not require active “Civil Liability“ insurance to be maintained. Here are a few simple examples:
You own a motorcycle that you last drove on the national road network in mid-June, when its “Civil Liability“ insurance expired. At the end of June this year – 2025 you decide to ride it again and – surprise, regardless of the new “Civil Liability“, the motorcycle remains deregistered in the Traffic Police system and in order to restore your registration you should first go and pay for the “technical test“, then with a full set of documents go to the Traffic Police and submit the relevant application.
The same will happen to you if you own a trailer or caravan that you traditionally use seasonally and if 12 months have passed since the “Civil Liability‘ insurance expired;
Especially affected are the owners of collector or retro cars that are only put into service for certain events over the years – exhibitions, rallies and others and if more than 12 months have passed between two such events.
The above-described changes in Regulation No. I-45 and the requirement for a “technical test“ if 12 or more months have passed since deregistration due to expired “Civil Liability“ insurance in no way exempt you from the obligation to pass (and pay for) an annual technical inspection (ATI) in accordance with Regulation N-32. In the latter, by the way, and as part of the ATI, the requirement for the so-called “eco-sticker“, which was canceled in the first instance by the Supreme Administrative Court and the final decision on the case is currently awaited.
The senselessness and outright lobbying in favor of certain private interests is evident both in the “eco-sticker“ in question, and in the changes in Regulation No. I-45 and the requirement for “technotest“. And if in the “eco-sticker“ they absolutely unreasonably obliged us to pay an additional 20-25 BGN annually for the GTP, then for the “technotest“, according to the most optimistic forecasts, the amount of 350-400 BGN will be needed. Then another 100 BGN for the GGP and “eco-sticker“.
The good news in this case is that the scandalous changes in Regulation No. I-45 have already been appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court and a hearing on the case is expected to be scheduled. The changes are clearly illegal, as they contradict both the Road Traffic Act – see Art. 143, para. 10 of the Road Traffic Act, in which in 2015. in the 43rd National Assembly we specifically wrote down for cases of deregistration due to lack of a vehicle registration certificate that: “Officially terminated registration of a road vehicle is restored ex officio upon submission of data on concluded insurance from the Guarantee Fund.“ They also contradict the Insurance Code, since it is inadmissible to introduce additional requirements by regulation that are different from or missing from those listed in a law or code.
Last but not least, the changes in the regulation also contradict community law – e.g. Regulation (EU) No. 168/2013, since once a vehicle has been approved for movement on the territory of the EU, it is inadmissible to be re-tested for its compatibility, as long as no technological or other interventions have been performed on it – which in the case of deregistration “by documents“, obviously have not been done!
In conclusion, usually in such absurd situations we ask ourselves “why“ and who will bear responsibility for this costly indiscretion. And since the reasons for the draft amendments to the regulation lack justification as to why these changes are being made and the absolutely unnecessary and even contrary to common sense requirement for a "technical test" when a vehicle's "Civil Liability" has expired is being introduced, these are some good questions for the Minister and his team at the Ministry of Interior, responsible for adopting these amendments in 2023. And to the other question - who will compensate the affected citizens and businesses for the extraordinary expenses and restore their frayed nerves if the Supreme Administrative Court repeals these scandalous provisions, I think the answer is clear to all of us. Nobody. The same answer is given to the question of who, or all of us as taxpayers, will pay the costs of this case!
*The author is a lawyer, Doctor of Constitutional Law and a member of the 43rd National Assembly (2014-2017). He is also the author of the complaints to the Supreme Administrative Court against the “eco-sticker“ and the amendments to Regulation No. I-45 in connection with the mandatory “technical test“ introduced.