Watch out FiF and others, they're after you....
Discussion
Just had a quick scan of new Act that received Royal assent 7th April, 2005, namely The Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005.
The bad news in the motoring field:
Some big changes in that PACE condition of arrest has been extended to include any repeat ANY offence (used to be Arrestable).Sect 110.
Using a vehicle on a road with incorrect details on the Register as Registered Keeper - an offence. Section 150
Driving a motor vehicle not only without Insurance but a Driving Licence then Plod is given power to seize.. Sect 152
Power to Plod to fingerprint you without consent if he catches you committing an offence and doesn't think you have given correct details. Sect 117
Vehicle Registration document added to list that have to be produced on demand but can be delayed for 7 days to Police Station Section 151.
The good news is that , of the above, only the fingerprint comes into force on the date of the Act, the rest awaiting a Commencement Order.
Serving Bibs, if it hasn't already been circulated/training day its at
http://tinyurl.com/agttc
DVD
>>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Tuesday 19th April 14:27
The bad news in the motoring field:
Some big changes in that PACE condition of arrest has been extended to include any repeat ANY offence (used to be Arrestable).Sect 110.
Using a vehicle on a road with incorrect details on the Register as Registered Keeper - an offence. Section 150
Driving a motor vehicle not only without Insurance but a Driving Licence then Plod is given power to seize.. Sect 152
Power to Plod to fingerprint you without consent if he catches you committing an offence and doesn't think you have given correct details. Sect 117
Vehicle Registration document added to list that have to be produced on demand but can be delayed for 7 days to Police Station Section 151.
The good news is that , of the above, only the fingerprint comes into force on the date of the Act, the rest awaiting a Commencement Order.
Serving Bibs, if it hasn't already been circulated/training day its at
http://tinyurl.com/agttc
DVD
>>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Tuesday 19th April 14:27
Accurate vehicle registration, insurance and giving correct details when stopped by BiB are all perfectly sensible, this new legislation appears to give the BiB the ability to clamp down on those motorists who insist on driving outside the law, i.e. those without insurance/tax and those driving someones else P&J.
Dwight VanDriver said:And wearing my paranoid hat (you know, the beanie hat with the tin-foil on the inside) I wonder how frequently that will be used ... to further populate the database. I do fear that some police 'services' will implement it as the default condition - Streaky
Power to Plod to fingerprint you without consent if he catches you committing an offence and doesn't think you have given correct details. Sect 117
The 'definition' of SOCA staff is given thus:
43 (1) The Director General of SOCA may designate a member of the staff of SOCA as one or more of the following-
(a) a person having the powers of a constable;
(b) a person having the customs powers of an officer of Revenue and Customs;
(c) a person having the powers of an immigration officer.
Be afraid! Be very afraid!
Streaky
43 (1) The Director General of SOCA may designate a member of the staff of SOCA as one or more of the following-
(a) a person having the powers of a constable;
(b) a person having the customs powers of an officer of Revenue and Customs;
(c) a person having the powers of an immigration officer.
Be afraid! Be very afraid!
Streaky
wanty1974 said:
Driving a motor vehicle not only without Insurance but a Driving Licence then Plod is given power to seize.. Sect 152
That will get half the cars of the roads of South Wales, then. Well done! Might open up a car storage & crushing business...
I may be wrong -- it has been known -- but isn't it the case that a thief, when convicted, does not have to give up his ill-gotten gains? And an assaulter, when convicted, does not have to pay his victim? In both cases it is up to the victim to sue the scrote to get reparation.
So why should it be that a thief doesn't lose his booty while a driver loses his car? There seems to be a lack of balance here?
Peter Ward said:And you're surprised? - Streaky
Dwight VanDriver said:
Driving a motor vehicle not only without Insurance but a Driving Licence then Plod is given power to seize.. Sect 152
That will get half the cars of the roads of South Wales, then. Well done! Might open up a car storage & crushing business...
I may be wrong -- it has been known -- but isn't it the case that a thief, when convicted, does not have to give up his ill-gotten gains? And an assaulter, when convicted, does not have to pay his victim? In both cases it is up to the victim to sue the scrote to get reparation.
So why should it be that a thief doesn't lose his booty while a driver loses his car? There seems to be a lack of balance here?
Peter, the main reason is the difference between civil and criminal law. The sentence passed on a criminal is a punishment e.g. send a thief to prison (I wish), remove the driver's car etc. In civil law the focus is on restitution, therefore the claimant if winning receives an award of damages or similar.
MilnerR said:
Accurate vehicle registration, insurance and giving correct details when stopped by BiB are all perfectly sensible, this new legislation appears to give the BiB the ability to clamp down on those motorists who insist on driving outside the law, i.e. those without insurance/tax and those driving someones else P&J.
This exists now.
It's typical cr*p. Instead of enforcing the laws that exist, a new raft of powers will come up that will be (as usual) roundly abused.
So why should it be that a thief doesn't lose his booty while a driver loses his car? There seems to be a lack of balance here?
streaky said:
And you're surprised? - Streaky
A thief if he uses his motor for part of the theft - i.e. shoplifters usin the car to transport goods or a burglar using the car to get away , may have the car seized by police and a court can order disposal
It exists Streaky! Stop being so car law paranoid
>> Edited by gemini on Thursday 21st April 10:53
gemini said:gemini - I should appreciate it if you would attribute the quote (and allegation of "car law paranoia") correctly. It was "Peter Ward" who made the statement. Your editing of the quote (by deleting the "Peter Ward" references) incorrectly attributes it entirely to me! All I did was comment on what "Peter Ward" said. A correction would be appreciated.
So why should it be that a thief doesn't lose his booty while a driver loses his car? There seems to be a lack of balance here?
And you're surprised? - Streaky
It exists Streaky! Stop being so car law paranoid
Streaky
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff