Oh goody, I've got myself a section 59.

[Marf]

^Slider^ said:

355spiderguy said:

all wrong that! feeling prssured by plod to remove the exhuast so you dont get more hassle.

next time you get stopped, ask the office what 'too loud' is... not in a cheecky manner, mind.... just to educate you in the actual legal max db level is..... and if he quotes some 'makeyupper' figure, ask him to get his recently calibrated decible meter out to check yours becuase you really don't want to fall foul of the law.

my sporty car currently puts out about 106db, but i get almost a nod of approval from BiB, and they overlook my squished up numberplate also!

If its kitemarked its legal, remove the cats or anything else and if they really wanted to then possible exhaust not conforming.

Kitemarks is bike exhausts only AFAIK

[hman]

Its illegal to make your car louder than when manufactured - as I understand it.

[^Slider^]

Reg 54 C&U regs.

Every exhaust system and silencer shall be maintained in good and eficient working order and shall not after the date of manufacture be altered so as to increase the noise made by the escape of exhaust gasses.

[Marf]

hman said:

Its illegal to make your car louder than when manufactured - as I understand it.

Its illegal to modify an exhaust to make it louder. Its not illegal to fit an aftermarket exhaust that is louder AIUI.

edit: slider beat me to it

Edited by Marf on Wednesday 10th February 16:46

[^Slider^]

I read it as your altering the exhaust system by fitting aftermarket parts to make it louder. Unless said part is type approved for that vehicle as in kite marked.

As well as removing the cat etc.

Edited by ^Slider^ on Wednesday 10th February 16:48

[hman]

So you take a standard exhaust system, remove a part of it and replace it with something which is not as per the original (ie. louder aftermarket silencer) - this is now a system which has been altered so as to increase the noise made by the escape of exhaust gasses no?

The reg also covers the modifcation of the standard silencer to make it louder AS WELL.


Anyone care to clarify.

Edited by hman on Wednesday 10th February 16:52

[Bri957]

Would that include removing the middle box on my exhaust system (to make progress over speedbumps easier)?

[hman]

thast altering the exhaust system (and probably made it louder) so illegal no?

[TTwiggy]

I look forward to the BIB out in force with S59 notices at this year's Rally of Wales

Rally cars have 'aftermarket' exhausts that are louder than standard, but they are road registered so they can travel between stages - what's the deal there then?...

[herewego]

It must be inconsiderate to make an exhaust intentionally loud, so if you're driving a car that has a louder than original exhaust, it would meet the S59 requirements of inconsiderate driving as well causing offence would it not? This is in addition to the offence of modifying the exhaust.

[saaby93]

Red Devil said:

I beg to differ. It wasn't a waste of time if said officer got a shot across his bows. It should be no different from any other job. If you upset work colleagues or, worse, customers by boorish/overbearing behaviour you can expect to be taken to one side and have it explained to you where your deficiencies lie - aka retraining. Failure to take it on board can have further consequences. I used to work with a guy who got his P45 for continued inability/refusal to shape up.

Know what youre saying but this guy had been shopping!
If it was one of those playing about in the car park it might just be ok, but it's hardly likely to improve relations as much as going across and having an interested chat about their cars.

It takes us back to the days of 'I'm bored, let's stop an interesting car'.
I hope thats not what these section59s are creating.

Still its only one event and we mustnt presume this is going on everywhere

[Red Devil]

Marf said:

^Slider^ said:

355spiderguy said:

all wrong that! feeling prssured by plod to remove the exhuast so you dont get more hassle.

next time you get stopped, ask the office what 'too loud' is... not in a cheecky manner, mind.... just to educate you in the actual legal max db level is..... and if he quotes some 'makeyupper' figure, ask him to get his recently calibrated decible meter out to check yours becuase you really don't want to fall foul of the law.

my sporty car currently puts out about 106db, but i get almost a nod of approval from BiB, and they overlook my squished up numberplate also!

If its kitemarked its legal, remove the cats or anything else and if they really wanted to then possible exhaust not conforming.

Kitemarks is bike exhausts only AFAIK

The Kitemark is merely logo/smbol - you need more than that. AFAIK all bike exhausts (01/02/1996 onwards) must have:

1. Trade name or mark of the manufacturer, and
2. Trade name given by the manufacturer, and
3. EU e mark or UNECE E mark (e.g. e11 or E11 for UK), together with the silencer/exhaust system approval number.
4. All to be clearly legible, even when fitted, & indelible

There is no such requirement for car exhausts AFAIK. I would expect any OEM parts sold in the EU to have an E mark though. Aftermarket may be a different matter.

saaby93 said:

Red Devil said:

I beg to differ. It wasn't a waste of time if said officer got a shot across his bows. It should be no different from any other job. If you upset work colleagues or, worse, customers by boorish/overbearing behaviour you can expect to be taken to one side and have it explained to you where your deficiencies lie - aka retraining. Failure to take it on board can have further consequences. I used to work with a guy who got his P45 for continued inability/refusal to shape up.

Know what youre saying but this guy had been shopping!
If it was one of those playing about in the car park it might just be ok, but it's hardly likely to improve relations as much as going across and having an interested chat about their cars.

It takes us back to the days of 'I'm bored, let's stop an interesting car'.
I hope thats not what these section59s are creating.

Still its only one event and we mustnt presume this is going on everywhere

Excatly. Go to the supermarket, load up, drive a few yards and get an S59! Unless he was wheelspinning out of the parking space it would seem a case of 'guilty by association' because his car bore some resemblance to the chav wagons at the other end of the car park. It may be one event, but quite a few 'one events' have surfaced on here lately. At what point does a collection of them become indicative of a wider problem? The issue is S59 being used incorrectly. Usually as a tool of convenience when the relevent criteria are not satisfied. BiB are given very wide-ranging powers. Using them wrongly and/or insensitively is unhelpful and not calculated to win the respect and support of the public. When this happens the victim should complain assertively otherwise the problem will continue to fester. This process is not assisted by the current flawed means of redress.

If BiB are bored enough to want to stop me for a chat/random check I'm not that bothered. Trying to stick me on for something when I have committed no offence would be a very different matter.

Another thing that concerns me is if I unkowingly bought a car that already had an S59 marker on it. What redress would I have if I was the victim of circumstances as described by the OP and my car was wrongly seized? Should everybody now be asking the S59 question when buying a second hand car?

[Marf]

Red Devil said:

Another thing that concerns me is if I unkowingly bought a car that already had an S59 marker on it. What redress would I have if I was the victim of circumstances as described by the OP and my car was wrongly seized? Should everybody now be asking the S59 question when buying a second hand car?

I've wondered that too. What mechanism is there if any for buyers to know. Who holds the information, DVLA or Police?

[fluffnik]

oldsoak said:

^Slider^ said:

This in no way falls into misconduct in a public office.

Oh I don't know...it doesn't take much imagination to get a score of two out of four so far....
Just the 'wilfully' and Reasonable bits to determine and it's in tomorrows Daily Wail....

CPS guidelines said:

1. A public officer acting as such.
2. Wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconducts himself.
3. To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder.[4]
4. Without reasonable excuse or justification.

I think it's arguable that the current instance provides 4 of 4.

I'd be more inclined to convict this PC than Tony Martin...

oldsoak said:

^Slider^ said:

People need to get a grip.

I agree

Yes, a grip on the reigns of power.

[rypt]

^Slider^ said:

oldsoak said:

^Slider^ said:

oldsoak said:

^Slider^ said:

fluffnik said:

GC8 said:

In your position Id be inclined to make a formal complaint about the PC in question. Id also let it be known that Id accept an informal resolution (or even let it drop) if the mistake was corrected. Id be extremely surprised if everything didnt sort itself out.

Push for prosecution for abuse of power; the police need to understand that the S59 is not acceptable.

Please, at best this would be local resolution and advice to the officer.

Im at a loss why people think you can be prosecuted for abuse of power.

That would be 'Malfeasance in Public Office' IIRC...

Ahh misconduct in a public office.

This in no way falls into misconduct in a public office.

Oh I don't know...it doesn't take much imagination to get a score of two out of four so far....
Just the 'wilfully' and Reasonable bits to determine and it's in tomorrows Daily Wail....

CPS guidelines said:

1. A public officer acting as such.
2. Wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconducts himself.
3. To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder.[4]
4. Without reasonable excuse or justification.

^Slider^ said:

People need to get a grip.

I agree

Neglect of duty or wilfully misconducts himself is a very serious offence, triable at crown court. I dont think an incorrectly issued S59 warning falls anywhere near that.

At the end of the day a word with the duty inspector to review what evidence there is will resolve the issue. And then suitable re-education of the officer concerned.

Sadly S59 is seen as the anti social use of motor vehicles legislation, and there are officers that see it as such and forget the Careless driving aspect.

All the training or information we had was a A4 poster on the briefing room walls IIRC.

The police are public servants
The officers wilfully (intentionally) misconducts (abuses his position of power in a manner similar to what Dizaei has done) himself by issuing a Section 59 when no offence has occurred (much like Dizaei had someone arrested and fabricated evidence when no offence has occured).
As such, due to the fact that the officer has lied and made up "evidence" to justify issuing the S59 the trust in the police has been damaged.
And there can be no justification for the actions.

The amount of training you've had is irrespective of the law, the officer can use the lack of training as a mitigating circumstance at trial to have the punishment reduced, but an offence has occurred none the less and the law is the law (funny, how that only works from BiB to MoP and never from BiB to BiB).
I've not had any training telling me it is wrong/illegal to kill someone, and yet I'm expected to know that I cannot just go and kill people.

[rypt]

^Slider^ said:

I read it as your altering the exhaust system by fitting aftermarket parts to make it louder. Unless said part is type approved for that vehicle as in kite marked.

As well as removing the cat etc.

Edited by ^Slider^ on Wednesday 10th February 16:48

Nothing wrong with aftermarket parts as often for older cars it is not possible to get OEM stuff

[voyds9]

herewego said:

It must be inconsiderate to make an exhaust intentionally loud, so if you're driving a car that has a louder than original exhaust, it would meet the S59 requirements of inconsiderate driving as well causing offence would it not? This is in addition to the offence of modifying the exhaust.

I disagree, a louder than standard exhaust is not necessarily a loud exhaust. An aftermarket exhaust on say a Ka is still quieter than a standard exhaust on say a Ferrari.
What happens if the police car (Subaru Wrx) has a louder exhaust than the modified boy racer(1.0 Corsa).

[f1rob]

I live in port talbot an do a lot of off rd dirt biking (all legal lanes)an the police (some,not all of them) just love 59,s and have gone power crazy with them trying to stamp out illegal off rd use but you dont have to be doing anything illegal to get 1.One friend was threatened with a 59 as has was at a petrol station fueling up cos "your bikes muddy" another got a 59 sitting having a smoke sitting on the verge of a legal trail
They can be removed alough there is no real legal process to do it but you complain to a senior officer an things should get sorted
Kick up a fuss it would make a good story on the evening post

[skwdenyer]

Marf said:

Red Devil said:

Another thing that concerns me is if I unkowingly bought a car that already had an S59 marker on it. What redress would I have if I was the victim of circumstances as described by the OP and my car was wrongly seized? Should everybody now be asking the S59 question when buying a second hand car?

I've wondered that too. What mechanism is there if any for buyers to know. Who holds the information, DVLA or Police?

This is nothing new, just properly-codified. A friend of mine, many years ago, bought a new (to him) car and thereafter was stopped for "routine checks" at least twice a week. Eventually he got fed up and complained, only to be told "oh, sorry, wrong person - we hadn't realised the car had been sold". Lo and behold, the "routine checks" stopped.

As to your question: AFAIK there is no mechanism for removing the marker upon sale. That must be a considerable comfort for, say, car hire companies

[dudleybloke]

if this doesn't go away find out what car this officer owns and get a friend to report it being driven in a way that he gets his very own s59.

then get several other friends to report him again so he gets his car taken for a while.

work with S59 not against it!