what like this post? yeah nothing to do with my response..... i really dont give a fook whether you listen, want to listen, read, or throw shit insults ill leave it with you and your little fantasy world!
I'm loving your contributions here, honestly eye opening, I really can't believe how badly you are being treated, a letter from the Police, you bad bad boy, and surely if you are 100% certain no speed detection device was used then surely your immense powers of direct and periphery observation means you MUST have seen whoever it was that reported you, surely, just a twitch or a curtain or a squeak of a gate ... then you can go 'sort him out' ..... please upload the YouTube video when you do .....
oh yeah ... and this from you post 34...my response post 36... your riding anything like your observation demonstrated here? You really do need to raise your vision a bit!
You come across as a bully Andy which is why I and others might have reasonable concern that you been given excess powers without the requirement to go through the courts. Which is far from perfect but does at least give some semblance of checks an balances against those that may abuse those powers. Section 59 Vehicles used in manner causing alarm, distress or annoyance (1)Where a constable in uniform has reasonable grounds for believing that a motor vehicle is being used on any occasion in a manner which— (a)contravenes section 3 or 34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (c. 52) (careless and inconsiderate driving and prohibition of off-road driving), and (b)is causing, or is likely to cause, alarm, distress or annoyance to members of the public, he shall have the powers set out in subsection (3). (2)A constable in uniform shall also have the powers set out in subsection (3) where he has reasonable grounds for believing that a motor vehicle has been used on any occasion in a manner falling within subsection (1). (3)Those powers are— (a)power, if the motor vehicle is moving, to order the person driving it to stop the vehicle; (b)power to seize and remove the motor vehicle; (c)power, for the purposes of exercising a power falling within paragraph (a) or (b), to enter any premises on which he has reasonable grounds for believing the motor vehicle to be; (d)power to use reasonable force, if necessary, in the exercise of any power conferred by any of paragraphs to (a) to (c). (4)A constable shall not seize a motor vehicle in the exercise of the powers conferred on him by this section unless— (a)he has warned the person appearing to him to be the person whose use falls within subsection (1) that he will seize it, if that use continues or is repeated; and (b)it appears to him that the use has continued or been repeated after the the warning. (5)Subsection (4) does not require a warning to be given by a constable on any occasion on which he would otherwise have the power to seize a motor vehicle under this section if— (a)the circumstances make it impracticable for him to give the warning; (b)the constable has already on that occasion given a warning under that subsection in respect of any use of that motor vehicle or of another motor vehicle by that person or any other person; (c)the constable has reasonable grounds for believing that such a warning has been given on that occasion otherwise than by him; or (d)the constable has reasonable grounds for believing that the person whose use of that motor vehicle on that occasion would justify the seizure is a person to whom a warning under that subsection has been given (whether or not by that constable or in respect the same vehicle or the same or a similar use) on a previous occasion in the previous twelve months. (6)A person who fails to comply with an order under subsection (3)(a) is guilty of an offence and shall be liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale. (7)Subsection (3)(c) does not authorise entry into a private dwelling house. (8)The powers conferred on a constable by this section shall be exercisable only at a time when regulations under section 60 are in force. (9)In this section— “driving” has the same meaning as in the Road Traffic Act 1988 (c. 52); “motor vehicle” means any mechanically propelled vehicle, whether or not it is intended or adapted for use on roads; and “private dwelling house” does not include any garage or other structure occupied with the dwelling house, or any land appurtenant to the dwelling house.
I remember many moons ago that an article in one of the bike mags stated that catching someone for speeding and then sending them a fine in the post is in contravention of civil rights. The article stated that if you were followed for the set distance and read your rights then the officer was right to issue a ticket, but to be clocked by a speed device then sent a notice of intended prosecution without being read your rights is the bit that is wrong. A letter was printed in which you filled in the gaps, sent it off, it mentioned all the legal jargon, you put in your name, then nothing more was heard. Perhaps they just got pissed off receiving these, but they worked, I'm sure that we would know about it if it was still current. There's enough legal minds on here, just wondered what the stance is today. By the way, don't shoot the fucking messenger.
Thanks for that, so it did happen, the number plate sizing was another thing, not illegal but a MOT infringement and a fix it notice, is that still the same?
Folk drying their hair? Yep, someone is bound to tell them to hold it the right way at some point, bless them.
If you don’t give a fuck then why respond? Have a day off, fuck that have a month off. As for fantasy, given the poorly worded and thoughtless shit you’ve posted my thinking is your the one in a fantasy. Anyho - your on block now as that’s the best place for fools. As said before -1/10, Andy could do better if he applied a little thought before posting. Andy needs to take time to think things through before stomping out replies on the keyboard.
Just met the chap who was stopped on his Panigale with his friends on that day, gave me the whole story. Seems they were not breaking any laws... apart from the guy with no licence. He knew his number plate was too small and accepts that he got £100 fine for it. A pleasant chap.
