FPN for Small Number Plate, some advice please...
FPN for Small Number Plate, some advice please...
Author
Discussion

tvradict

Original Poster:

3,829 posts

300 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
Got pulled today on my way up to Knockhill for my Number Plate on my bike being too small. I knew it was too small but I dont think it was ridiculous, compared with some of the plates I saw today its Huge! Its 7x5, which is smaller, but the police have never made an issue of it before and its gone through at least its last 2 MOTs like that (Plate was that size when I got the bike).



Received a Notice of Condition Offer of Fixed Penalty, pay £60(eek) in 28days or were Telling. Fair enough. 2 Nice pleasent coppers in what I have to say was a pretty fcensoredg Hi Tech V70 Estate. And at least it was 2 TrafPol and not some sneaky fcensoredg camera!

Anyway, my question.

Obviously if I continue to ride about with that plate on I will likely get pulled again and given another pink slip. But, is there a period of time where if I get pulled I CAN'T get another FPN??

The reason I ask is that I'm going back to Knockhill tomorrow, and I havent had a chance to get the plate changed. Today I got pulled at 10.00am, by the only car I saw between Ayrshire and Knockhill, but tomorrow that place is going to be fcensoredg swarming with TrafPol, and I dont really fancy ANOTHER £60 going to the Central Scotland Police Christmas Ball!

Cheers
Stuart.

14-7

6,233 posts

217 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
tvradict said:
But, is there a period of time where if I get pulled I CAN'T get another FPN??
No there isn't. Surprised they bothered to be honest. Normally only plates that are really taking the piss seem to get an FPN.

fluffnik

20,156 posts

253 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
tvradict said:
And at least it was 2 TrafPol and not some sneaky fcensoredg camera!
...though just as pointless in this instance.

We really must sack these gouging ccensoredts.

Mr_annie_vxr

9,270 posts

237 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
fluffnik said:
tvradict said:
And at least it was 2 TrafPol and not some sneaky fcensoredg camera!
...though just as pointless in this instance.

We really must sack these gouging ccensoredts.
Or we could all just not go out of our way to break the law.


Altrezia

8,736 posts

237 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
Mr_annie_vxr said:
fluffnik said:
tvradict said:
And at least it was 2 TrafPol and not some sneaky fcensoredg camera!
...though just as pointless in this instance.

We really must sack these gouging ccensoredts.
Or we could all just not go out of our way to break the law.
He's already said it was on the bike when he got it, so the only 'going out of the way' would be to put it back to normal. I wouldn't have bothered either, as its so trivial.

Mr_annie_vxr

9,270 posts

237 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
Altrezia said:
Mr_annie_vxr said:
fluffnik said:
tvradict said:
And at least it was 2 TrafPol and not some sneaky fcensoredg camera!
...though just as pointless in this instance.

We really must sack these gouging ccensoredts.
Or we could all just not go out of our way to break the law.
He's already said it was on the bike when he got it, so the only 'going out of the way' would be to put it back to normal. I wouldn't have bothered either, as its so trivial.
I'd have got the person selling to change it. Someone went out their way to change it at some point.

A trivial attitude to some laws has been shown to quite often equate to a trivial attitude to others.

Alfa_75_Steve

7,489 posts

226 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
Hmmm, I wouldn't have thought they'd pull you just for that.

Had you been misbehaving in any other way? - it's possible they gave you a ticket for the plate because you'd been taking the piss in other ways, but had no usable evidence of it?

rs1952

5,247 posts

285 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
Mr_annie_vxr said:
A trivial attitude to some laws has been shown to quite often equate to a trivial attitude to others.
I might exceed the speed limit on the odd occasion, but I've never murdered anybody.

Am I unusual in your experience, then? rolleyes

Mr_annie_vxr

9,270 posts

237 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
rs1952 said:
Mr_annie_vxr said:
A trivial attitude to some laws has been shown to quite often equate to a trivial attitude to others.
I might exceed the speed limit on the odd occasion, but I've never murdered anybody.

Am I unusual in your experience, then? rolleyes
Wow you really miss the point don't you... equating what I said with saying someone is a murderer....

How about in my experience those who alter their vehicles in such ways have also carried other intentional alterations that are illegal and may invalidate insurance policies, or often have tyres below the limit or similar defects as they have an attitude that rules of the road are for others.

It is most likely though that, since your being stupid about it all, people who murder also have sped at some point.

I do so enjoy people who get all outraged and massively emotive over a simple statement of experience and a comment about intentional alteration of number plates. You add so little to any discussion.


CommanderJameson

22,096 posts

252 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
fluffnik said:
tvradict said:
And at least it was 2 TrafPol and not some sneaky fcensoredg camera!
...though just as pointless in this instance.

We really must sack these gouging ccensoredts.
On the other hand...

tvradict said:
I knew it was too small
Yes, the law is silly. But knowing it's silly, and then breaking it anyway, when all that's going to happen is that you're going to be £60 out of pocket, is sillier.

cazzer

8,883 posts

274 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
Mr_annie_vxr said:
How about in my experience those who alter their vehicles in such ways have also carried other intentional alterations that are illegal and may invalidate insurance policies, or often have tyres below the limit or similar defects as they have an attitude that rules of the road are for others.
Nothing like generalising bks there.
I have illegal plates on my Plymouth. Just because they look right.
Thee car isn't modified. It's fully insured and I drive like an old lady in it.
And yes...I deliberately put the plates on it.

So basically, what you said was bks, in my case.

BertBert

21,056 posts

237 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
Mr_annie_vxr said:
rs1952 said:
Mr_annie_vxr said:
A trivial attitude to some laws has been shown to quite often equate to a trivial attitude to others.
I might exceed the speed limit on the odd occasion, but I've never murdered anybody.

Am I unusual in your experience, then? rolleyes
Wow you really miss the point don't you... equating what I said with saying someone is a murderer....

How about in my experience those who alter their vehicles in such ways have also carried other intentional alterations that are illegal and may invalidate insurance policies, or often have tyres below the limit or similar defects as they have an attitude that rules of the road are for others.

It is most likely though that, since your being stupid about it all, people who murder also have sped at some point.

I do so enjoy people who get all outraged and massively emotive over a simple statement of experience and a comment about intentional alteration of number plates. You add so little to any discussion.
Annie, you are normally very sensible, but you have missed basic logic here and are going all VH on us. The point is that the OP didn't seem to have invalidated ins policies, have tyres that were below the limit or other similar defects. He just had a plate that was a bit small, that the MoT didn't bother about.

The whole "the law is the law thing" doesn't wash.

In case you hadn't noticed, the people on this forum are pretty pissed off with the brigade that wants to go about enforcing the astonishingly huge and trite set of regulations that we have. Just *because* they are regs. No other reason (as ably shown by the OP).

So for me today...you would have thought that with two crutches and a broken foot, I could park quite close to the supermarket. Oh no, some jobsworth says, no blue badge, no parky here. But, but, but I have a broken foot...tough st mate, that's the regs.

Well that's where you are going if you don't watch out Annie...suckered in to "the regs".

Bert

peterguk M500

2,615 posts

243 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
BertBert said:
The whole "the law is the law thing" doesn't wash.
But in real life, in most situations, it does.

Whether i agree or disagree with the legislation surrounding number plates does not matter, the fact is, that they have to be presented in a certain manner.

I, and everyone else have two choices:

Abide by the law or break them and face the possible consequences. Everyone has the choice.

Same for speeding, parking and all the other restrictions on our daily lives.

Break the law by all means, but don't come crying on the forums.

ETA Not suggesting OP was moaning.

Edited by peterguk M500 on Saturday 4th July 22:43

Mad Dave

7,158 posts

289 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
Annie simply said that a casual attitude to trivial laws can indicate a casual attitude to other more serious offences - he didn't say that was the case in this instance. I'd be inclined to agree with Annie too; two of the most recent cars I've stopped for trivial offences have been: 1) unlicensed, uninsured and unroadworthy vehicle and 2) twice the legal alcohol limit.

Bert - you 'i' parked in a disabled bay; would a broken foot not invalidate your insurance?

tvradict

Original Poster:

3,829 posts

300 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
Alfa_75_Steve said:
Hmmm, I wouldn't have thought they'd pull you just for that.

Had you been misbehaving in any other way? - it's possible they gave you a ticket for the plate because you'd been taking the piss in other ways, but had no usable evidence of it?
No, but they did pull me very very quickly.

I came out of a petrol station onto a roundabout, 2nd exit is the sliproad onto the M876. Half way up the slip road the blues and twos came on. When I entered the roundabout they were on it, but they were on the other side if you like. I certainly didnt pull out in front of the police, thats just asking for trouble.

One thought that did cross my mind though. The petrol station 'faces' the roundabout, so when I was filling with petrol, my plate was facing the roundabout. Maybe they clocked the plate and circled round again and nabbed me when I came out.

Being BSB Weekend at Knockhill I wouldn't be at all surprised the Central Scotland Police are cracking down on bikes with tiny plates and load cans etc etc

tvradict

Original Poster:

3,829 posts

300 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
CommanderJameson said:
fluffnik said:
tvradict said:
And at least it was 2 TrafPol and not some sneaky fcensoredg camera!
...though just as pointless in this instance.

We really must sack these gouging ccensoredts.
On the other hand...

tvradict said:
I knew it was too small
Yes, the law is silly. But knowing it's silly, and then breaking it anyway, when all that's going to happen is that you're going to be £60 out of pocket, is sillier.
Like I said, the plate was on the bike when I got it 18 months ago. Its not stupidly small, its a normal font, perfectly readable. Didn't think it would be a problem its so trivial.

Even so, I'm not bothered I got the FPN. I'd rather not give them £60, but I could have changed it and I didn't. Entirely my own fault.

eldar

25,037 posts

222 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
Mr_annie_vxr said:
fluffnik said:
tvradict said:
And at least it was 2 TrafPol and not some sneaky fcensoredg camera!
...though just as pointless in this instance.

We really must sack these gouging ccensoredts.
Or we could all just not go out of our way to break the law.
A couple of years ago it may well have been legal, number plate regulations are retrospective. The plate in question looks sensible to me, clearly no attempt to deceive or obscure his reg no. No threat to other road users, or the stability of the state.

Did the PC in question go home feeling society was now safer, and they had played their part?

rs1952

5,247 posts

285 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
Mad Dave said:
Annie simply said that a casual attitude to trivial laws can indicate a casual attitude to other more serious offences.....
No he didn't - he said "a trivial attitude to some laws ...." (not specified) which is a quite different matter, and that is why I posted as I did.

If he actually meant what you say he said, then he has the "edit" faciity available like the rest of us, and perhaps by using it he could avoid the need to go off chucking his dummy out of the pram when I pick up on his questionable (to say the least) statement.

Edited by rs1952 on Saturday 4th July 23:07

s.m.h.

5,733 posts

241 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
Whats more of an issue is that on a different day with different coppers, they would have said Ok off you go.
There's no consistency, whats right by one is wrong by another. All my bikes have had small plates, not the size of a vin (like some) but still small. Been stopped quite a few times and never remarked about them. All passed MOT tests.
Out of curiosity, if the plate didn't have the GB sticker down the side, would the plate be closer to the correct size?? It doesn't look like its ridiculously undersized.
Maybe they were simply out ticketing anything they could. I don't care if the plate is a tiny bit undersized, its of no concern until the rider uses the machine in a way that the small plate makes it difficult to recognise or trace.

Don't see the French authorities making an issue of the size of bike plates, in fact don't scooters out there have no number plates? Ah, that's right, we must all be easily traceable for when we break the law..


Mad Dave

7,158 posts

289 months

Saturday 4th July 2009
quotequote all
rs1952 said:
Mad Dave said:
Annie simply said that a casual attitude to trivial laws can indicate a casual attitude to other more serious offences.....
No he didn't - he said "a trivial attitude to some laws ...." (not specified) which is a quite different matter, and that is why I posted as I did.

If he actually meant what you say he said, then he has the "edit" faciity available like the rest of us, and perhaps by using it he could avoid the need to go off chucking his dummy out of the pram when I pick up on his questionable (to say the least) statement.

Edited by rs1952 on Saturday 4th July 23:07
I'm struggling to see the difference between mine and Annie's comment?