exhaust levels and fine
Discussion
Carl, you've hit the nail on the head.
Far be it from me to question the integrity of *any* policeman
, but every walk of life has it's chancers and the force cannot be any different..
Are they really going to get to court only to have their prosecution thrown out for a procedural schoolboy error? I imagine at the very least, they'd be in for a proper kicking from their inspector...
So they'll tell the beak that of course they gave the standard caution.
Cynical frame of mind? Me? With my reputation?
Far be it from me to question the integrity of *any* policeman
, but every walk of life has it's chancers and the force cannot be any different.. Are they really going to get to court only to have their prosecution thrown out for a procedural schoolboy error? I imagine at the very least, they'd be in for a proper kicking from their inspector...
So they'll tell the beak that of course they gave the standard caution.
Cynical frame of mind? Me? With my reputation?
followed by the scream of the passengers.
(When I was stopped 4.5 years ago, I got a FPN, but NO CAUTION. Unknowingly I took the FPN. Had I known of the need for a caution, I would have contested it.)
rgds.
Ideally you should be cautioned. However, as Carzee pointed out, for an offence such as speeding where there is material evidence (detection device etc), and a reply or explanation is not required, then the court would still accept the evidence offered. Any verbal evidence offered would be ruled inadmissable.
If you're reported at roadside and a brief interview is carried out, the caution then becomes essential because you're begining to rely on verbal evidence and admissions.....
If I follow the letter of the law, I should caution everytime I issue a HO/RT/1 producer, but I don't because it often scares the wits out of people.
Regards
Rob
>> Edited by relaxitscool on Thursday 24th October 18:02
>> Edited by relaxitscool on Thursday 24th October 18:03
If I follow the letter of the law, I should caution everytime I issue a HO/RT/1 producer, but I don't because it often scares the wits out of people.
Regards
Rob
Rob
I am surprised that you don't. As soon as I ask for documents, if they are not produced on demand, I always caution the person.
My verbals are " Listen carefully to what I am going to say. It is an offence to fail to produce licence, insurance and MOT on demand. That means now. This is an offence 'CAUTION'. However, the law states that should you produce them within 7 (or 5 days as is the circumstances)at a Police stationof your choice, ten you will not be proceeded with for those offences."
I then issue the form and in conclusion tell them that they will be reported for the offences of failing to produce the required documents or the alternatives of NO documents.
The reason being, having done that, if they fail to produce, it saves me the bother of chasing all the way around the country to have tem reported at a late date.
Thanks Carzee.
Ive known about contemporaneous notes for a long time. I don't know why I referred to them as something else!
edited to say that actually, contemporaneous notes are those that are made in question and answer form at the time the questions are asked and the answers are replied.
Notes that are not contemporaneous are still allowed if they were made at the time or soon afterwards (including dialogue)
>> Edited by madcop on Thursday 24th October 18:57
Am I right in thinking the spirit of the law regarding exhaust noise is to prevent antisocial behaviour, hence the officers discretion on the matter? If this is the case then that seems reasonable to me....though I guess an officer could be overzealous on the matter if he/she wanted which could be unfortunate....
edited for spelling
>> Edited by dimmadan on Thursday 24th October 19:08
edited for spelling
>> Edited by dimmadan on Thursday 24th October 19:08
CarZee said: Carl, you've hit the nail on the head.
Far be it from me to question the integrity of *any* policeman
Are they really going to get to court only to have their prosecution thrown out for a procedural schoolboy error? I imagine at the very least, they'd be in for a proper kicking from their inspector...
So they'll tell the beak that of course they gave the standard caution.
Cynical frame of mind? Me? With my reputation?
Mate, we have reached the same conclusion.....
Just a thought this is a reply from someone that that has a Jap import as I do just wondering what the law says about this??
"I have a jap import, which says on the log bog "2 axle rigid body saloon" Therefore had to pass SVA upon import to UK.
SVA noise limit is 101db. And car has obviously passed this to gain log book for UK.
Therefore as the car is not recognised as a Subaru Impreza, but is recognised as 2axle etc.. the car does not have a standard exhaust system as technicaly the car is a "kit car" single vehicle. That is why it had to take a SVA test.
So my Magnex or your chosen system "is" the system that the car was imported with and has passed the SVA test(legal requirement) So Mr.policeman would be treading a very fine line in trying to prosicute if you have an import."
"I have a jap import, which says on the log bog "2 axle rigid body saloon" Therefore had to pass SVA upon import to UK.
SVA noise limit is 101db. And car has obviously passed this to gain log book for UK.
Therefore as the car is not recognised as a Subaru Impreza, but is recognised as 2axle etc.. the car does not have a standard exhaust system as technicaly the car is a "kit car" single vehicle. That is why it had to take a SVA test.
So my Magnex or your chosen system "is" the system that the car was imported with and has passed the SVA test(legal requirement) So Mr.policeman would be treading a very fine line in trying to prosicute if you have an import."
MadCop - of courseI knew you knew...
madcop said:Thanks Carzee.
Ive known about contemporaneous notes for a long time. I don't know why I referred to them as something else!
edited to say that actually, contemporaneous notes are those that are made in question and answer form at the time the questions are asked and the answers are replied.
Notes that are not contemporaneous are still allowed if they were made at the time or soon afterwards (including dialogue)
I can't help being a sarcastic git.. You have, however, highlighted that the police/legal/techincal term 'contemporaneous' is different from the laypersons' or OED definition.
On the matter of producers (HORT1s), can you tell me what the situation is if your license is at DVLA for address change or whatever? Will DVLA issue an acceptable covernote?
[quote
On the matter of producers (HORT1s), can you tell me what the situation is if your license is at DVLA for address change or whatever? Will DVLA issue an acceptable covernote?
No DVLA won't do anything of the sort. What happens is that you go to te police station wit your producer and not being able to produce the licence, will be cautioned and reported for the offences of No licence and failing to produce it.
The law recognises though that you cannot produce something which you do not have and the reply you give After Caution is very important as it will be written on the HORT2 form which is a statement regarding the visit to te Police station.
"I have lost the licence, I have applied for a new one or the licence is with the court for the time being", will be mittigation for not having it to produce.
The admin enquiry section will send an enquiry off to DVLA who in turn will supply a copy of the complete driver record on computer paper. If you have a licence which is valid and covers you for the class of vehicle you were stopped in/on at the time of the producer, then normally that is where the process ends. A letter is normally sent to you telling you that no further actio will be taken, provided that all the other requested documents are correct.
I read in one of Outlaws posts that it pays to have two licences. It may do on occasions to have a duplicate as well as the original. But to dodge the system, you would need to have two licences in different names. That could be very dodgy indeed if you were rumbled.
On the matter of producers (HORT1s), can you tell me what the situation is if your license is at DVLA for address change or whatever? Will DVLA issue an acceptable covernote?
No DVLA won't do anything of the sort. What happens is that you go to te police station wit your producer and not being able to produce the licence, will be cautioned and reported for the offences of No licence and failing to produce it.
The law recognises though that you cannot produce something which you do not have and the reply you give After Caution is very important as it will be written on the HORT2 form which is a statement regarding the visit to te Police station.
"I have lost the licence, I have applied for a new one or the licence is with the court for the time being", will be mittigation for not having it to produce.
The admin enquiry section will send an enquiry off to DVLA who in turn will supply a copy of the complete driver record on computer paper. If you have a licence which is valid and covers you for the class of vehicle you were stopped in/on at the time of the producer, then normally that is where the process ends. A letter is normally sent to you telling you that no further actio will be taken, provided that all the other requested documents are correct.
I read in one of Outlaws posts that it pays to have two licences. It may do on occasions to have a duplicate as well as the original. But to dodge the system, you would need to have two licences in different names. That could be very dodgy indeed if you were rumbled.
dimmadan said: Am I right in thinking the spirit of the law regarding exhaust noise is to prevent antisocial behaviour, hence the officers discretion on the matter? If this is the case then that seems reasonable to me....though I guess an officer could be overzealous on the matter if he/she wanted which could be unfortunate....
You have hit the nail right on top of its head
..... So Mr.policeman would be treading a very fine line in trying to prosicute if you have an import."
No he wouldn't. He only has to have the opinion that it is too loud, regardless of the technical situation regarding what sort of equipment was fitted to what specification. CPS would then issue a summons if the defendant pleaded not guilty and it would be down to the court to decide if it was too noisy. Again they do not have to measure it in decibels, just hear it and make a decision.
), relax and the other Bib's. The quality of info that we get here is worth its weight in gold.Still thinking about it !!
If you're telling the whole story, go to court and challenge it, I would. I've yet to have a cop witness with calibrated ears. How do they prove how noisy it was ? It all becomes farcical if they proceed, with cops standing in court blowing raspberries at the bench, doing sweet fanny adams to their credibilty. CPS know this and usually drop the case quicker than a pair of Ulrika's knickers at a Blue Peter presenter's party, but this time with consent (allegedly and all that other legal stuff)
You on the other hand have the car, you swear it wasn't modified since you bought it, has the standard kwik-fit or whatever exhaust, and has since been checked at an MOT station and passed, don't you ??
It's not principal, it's bullying. The cops have more chance of making diahorrea stick to a teflon saucepan, than this type of charge. It relies on you pleading guilty. Just say NO.
If you're telling the whole story, go to court and challenge it, I would. I've yet to have a cop witness with calibrated ears. How do they prove how noisy it was ? It all becomes farcical if they proceed, with cops standing in court blowing raspberries at the bench, doing sweet fanny adams to their credibilty. CPS know this and usually drop the case quicker than a pair of Ulrika's knickers at a Blue Peter presenter's party, but this time with consent (allegedly and all that other legal stuff)
You on the other hand have the car, you swear it wasn't modified since you bought it, has the standard kwik-fit or whatever exhaust, and has since been checked at an MOT station and passed, don't you ??
It's not principal, it's bullying. The cops have more chance of making diahorrea stick to a teflon saucepan, than this type of charge. It relies on you pleading guilty. Just say NO.
bobthebench said: Still thinking about it !!
If you're telling the whole story, go to court and challenge it, I would. I've yet to have a cop witness with calibrated ears. How do they prove how noisy it was ? It all becomes farcical if they proceed, with cops standing in court blowing raspberries at the bench, doing sweet fanny adams to their credibilty. CPS know this and usually drop the case quicker than a pair of Ulrika's knickers at a Blue Peter presenter's party, but this time with consent (allegedly and all that other legal stuff)
You on the other hand have the car, you swear it wasn't modified since you bought it, has the standard kwik-fit or whatever exhaust, and has since been checked at an MOT station and passed, don't you ??
It's not principal, it's bullying. The cops have more chance of making diahorrea stick to a teflon saucepan, than this type of charge. It relies on you pleading guilty. Just say NO.
Nice to hear the perspective from the other side of the fence. Seems to me like there are a few "laws" around that rely on joe publics ignorance of the law to be enforceable - as you say, bullying. Not a pleasant side to hear about really.
bobthebench those were my sentiments initially as everything you have stated concerning the incident is true although its is not a "kwik Fit" but a "Blue Flame" exhaust system. My only Hang up on perusing that course of action is what the general consensus with in a court is concerning as you put it "police bullying" i.e. would the judge side with the police officers opinion or exercise some common sense and concern him/her self with FACTUAL evidence. If the latter than what evidence would be scrutinised?? (I.e. technicalities of the car and exhausts suited to it)
Regards
Andy
Regards
Andy
All I can say Andy is, send the ticket back to the FPT office requesting a court hearing. Take the car to the court and ask the Magistrates to listen (bear in mind that some will probably be from the blue rinse brigade)and find out if the exhaust is conmmitting an offence. That is the only way you will know. You may be lucky and be acquitted. You may end up paying a fine which is double the FPT plus costs. The choice as they say is yours.
(Thanks to the West Midlands Crime Squad).
i remember them, when i was about 16 me and my mates used to regularly get a lift back from the pub from one of their main men... he was always totaly pissed minging, one night we even to a slightly unsheduled trip through a hedge.. on being unable to extract said car, he simply radioed for a new one !!!!!!!! are those were the days....
i remember them, when i was about 16 me and my mates used to regularly get a lift back from the pub from one of their main men... he was always totaly pissed minging, one night we even to a slightly unsheduled trip through a hedge.. on being unable to extract said car, he simply radioed for a new one !!!!!!!! are those were the days....
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff