Car Exhaust Noise
Discussion
I have no idea about the "E" markings. The whole issue is not whether the exhaust is legal or illegal. It's about the Police issuing FPN's in information which is incorrect.
Anyway, the local CAB put me in touch with a Solicitor who had a look through all my paperwork and said that, "It's clear as day that the Police have dropped a clanger" He also said that" the chances were if you opt for the magistrates court then the Police woupld in all probablity drop the case as they have, so far not looked deep enough into their paperwork contradiciting the ISO spec they quote".
So looking positive for a result, but who knows !!!
Anyway, the local CAB put me in touch with a Solicitor who had a look through all my paperwork and said that, "It's clear as day that the Police have dropped a clanger" He also said that" the chances were if you opt for the magistrates court then the Police woupld in all probablity drop the case as they have, so far not looked deep enough into their paperwork contradiciting the ISO spec they quote".
So looking positive for a result, but who knows !!!
Monkey boy 1 said:
I have no idea about the "E" markings. The whole issue is not whether the exhaust is legal or illegal. It's about the Police issuing FPN's in information which is incorrect.
I am aware of that, and that you have an extremely good case. But, it would add extra strength to your case to be able to show it is a legal exhaust system.daz3210 said:
RtdRacer said:
Proving this to the Mag's satisfaction should be easy. Take along a copy of the regs, and highlight the relevant parts. Take along the car specification - a photocopy of hte manual.
Imagine you were explaining it to your mum, highlight and copy out the relevant parts onto a fresh clean sheet of paper and take that along with the original docs.
State that you are pleading Not Guilty, and the basis of your defence is that the police carried out the wrong procedure.
Do you get any opportunity to do this before appearance? I'm thinking to avoid a waste of the courts time?Imagine you were explaining it to your mum, highlight and copy out the relevant parts onto a fresh clean sheet of paper and take that along with the original docs.
State that you are pleading Not Guilty, and the basis of your defence is that the police carried out the wrong procedure.
If it did end up in court, it would be for a very, very short period of time, IMO.
Monkey boy 1 said:
KevinA4quattro said:
I am aware of that, and that you have an extremely good case. But, it would add extra strength to your case to be able to show it is a legal exhaust system.
I'll go and have a look under the car Seems short and sweet, simple and effective...
A friend of mine, (who has also been stopped by Norfolk Police for exhaust noise but was allowed to continue on his way after the test) had a chat with the guy who wrote the test procedure and training manual for Norfolk Police this afternoon. The guy said he stands by his method, though my friend did point out the way he saw things and the errors in their procedures. Just goes to prove how idiotic they are.
Still, a week has gone by since I informed them I wanted to go to court, Not heard a thing from them.
Still, a week has gone by since I informed them I wanted to go to court, Not heard a thing from them.
Monkey boy 1 said:
A friend of mine, (who has also been stopped by Norfolk Police for exhaust noise but was allowed to continue on his way after the test) had a chat with the guy who wrote the test procedure and training manual for Norfolk Police this afternoon. The guy said he stands by his method, though my friend did point out the way he saw things and the errors in their procedures. Just goes to prove how idiotic they are.
Still, a week has gone by since I informed them I wanted to go to court, Not heard a thing from them.
A week can be a short time in police matters.Still, a week has gone by since I informed them I wanted to go to court, Not heard a thing from them.
They have up to six months to lay an information before a Magistrate. Thereafter up to two years can reasonably (according to the ECHR) elapse before the summons is served.
Streaky
something else to look into which could also make the test invalid
the iso stataes
"The measurements shall be made using the frequency-weighting A, and the time-weighting F."
They have stated on the ticket that the test was conducted in accordance with iso 5130, yet the result has not been recorded in accordance with it, as it states the result should be reported as an A-weighted sound pressure level, this would be written as either dBA or dB(A) not just dB.
This may seem like a very trivial insignificant difference and unfortunately a court might also see it that way, but if the measurements taken were in-fact not A-weighted it could have a significant effect on the result.
the iso stataes
"The measurements shall be made using the frequency-weighting A, and the time-weighting F."
They have stated on the ticket that the test was conducted in accordance with iso 5130, yet the result has not been recorded in accordance with it, as it states the result should be reported as an A-weighted sound pressure level, this would be written as either dBA or dB(A) not just dB.
This may seem like a very trivial insignificant difference and unfortunately a court might also see it that way, but if the measurements taken were in-fact not A-weighted it could have a significant effect on the result.
Don't know whether this - http://www.sengpielaudio.com/TableOfSoundPressureL... - would be of any use to the OP, but I was interested to see the expected noise of a diesel truck at 10m in the table on there.
Also further down is an interesting comment re the db and dbA comparison.
Also further down is an interesting comment re the db and dbA comparison.
KevinA4quattro said:
Does the exhaust have the relevant E markings which makes it road legal?
Does a non-type approved vehicle need an E marked exhaust? It certainly doesnt need one in order to be registered, MOTd and used legally on the road. Whether a replacement has to be E marked is a question that I cant answer.I have the world's quietest TVR, and on the test the OP mentioned registered 90 dB at Cadwell Park. 110 TVR owners drove around central London last weekend, some of the cars were over 125 dB, not one got stopped for noise.
I would write to the Chief Constable immediately, quote the rules and ask him to quash the fine.
I would write to the Chief Constable immediately, quote the rules and ask him to quash the fine.
ging84 said:
something else to look into which could also make the test invalid
the iso stataes
"The measurements shall be made using the frequency-weighting A, and the time-weighting F."
They have stated on the ticket that the test was conducted in accordance with iso 5130, yet the result has not been recorded in accordance with it, as it states the result should be reported as an A-weighted sound pressure level, this would be written as either dBA or dB(A) not just dB.
This may seem like a very trivial insignificant difference and unfortunately a court might also see it that way, but if the measurements taken were in-fact not A-weighted it could have a significant effect on the result.
How accurate was the noise level meter too, even if the correct weighting was selected? Even an accuracy of 1 dB(A) equates to a massive degree of inaccuracy, if you see what I mean? 3dB(A) covers a doubling of the sound pressure and when this sort of testing started and enterprising traffic officers were buying meters from Maplin*, some of the results were comical (but still prosecuted!).the iso stataes
"The measurements shall be made using the frequency-weighting A, and the time-weighting F."
They have stated on the ticket that the test was conducted in accordance with iso 5130, yet the result has not been recorded in accordance with it, as it states the result should be reported as an A-weighted sound pressure level, this would be written as either dBA or dB(A) not just dB.
This may seem like a very trivial insignificant difference and unfortunately a court might also see it that way, but if the measurements taken were in-fact not A-weighted it could have a significant effect on the result.
GC8 said:
How accurate was the noise level meter too, even if the correct weighting was selected? Even an accuracy of 1 dB(A) equates to a massive degree of inaccuracy, if you see what I mean? 3dB(A) covers a doubling of the sound pressure and when this sort of testing started and enterprising traffic officers were buying meters from Maplin*, some of the results were comical (but still prosecuted!).
The iso has quite a lot of details on requirements on the equipment and calibration i would like to believe they at-least have the correct equipment these days even if they don't know the procedures to use them, the iso also has quite a lot of detail on how to deal with inaccuracy and suggest less than 5dB above the limit should not be considered significant, which gives you a fair amount of leeway, not 91 when it should be 82 leeway, but the 80-84 that the exhaust place measured would be fine.I'm also not sure where the 82 figure came from, is that the type approval figure for that model? the log book for my car says 88
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff