RE: Annoying Cars Confiscated!
Monday 28th January 2002
Annoying Cars Confiscated!
The Police Reform Bill will give police the powers to confiscate annoying cars. What's your definition of annoying then constable?
Discussion
So the rule now seems to be, we can take your car if you're annoying us. Nanny, or should that be Nazi, state.
As for the samples off the unconcious, I thought that had been happening for years as they did that to my father when he had a quite serious accident (albeit his fault and no one else was injured) back in the 80's.
Matt.
As for the samples off the unconcious, I thought that had been happening for years as they did that to my father when he had a quite serious accident (albeit his fault and no one else was injured) back in the 80's.
Matt.
SMiles - this is done quite deliberately. Under the same policy we also have an education minister who left school at 15 and a sports minister who has been publicly embarrassed on several occasions over his complete lack of knowledge of anything to do with sport.
It's called political correctness. What this boils down to is that anybody who has any ability or ambition should feel ashamed of themselves and ultimate decisions should lie in the hand of the lowest common denominator.
They say you get the Government you deserve - this is what we all deserve for not getting off our arses and voting in the last election.
It's called political correctness. What this boils down to is that anybody who has any ability or ambition should feel ashamed of themselves and ultimate decisions should lie in the hand of the lowest common denominator.
They say you get the Government you deserve - this is what we all deserve for not getting off our arses and voting in the last election.
The last commemt sums it up, we get what we deserve for apathy. It is by pandering to the lowest intellect that labour has always ended up hitting someone to apease the press and its "labour roots". Before anyone asks I am a disapointed supporter. The problem is that we do not ask questions or make a real fuss and laws just slip through which can be used for a purpose they were not intended for. Now whilst this captures the sound bite of the day it is not good law. How many of you reading this understood that when they banned hand
guns it was just to react to the mood of the day, it has had no effect on the gun crime which rise,s steadily, but for the day it worked and made law abiding citizens into devils.
Now taking this a step forward, crime rises, the chances of detection falls, so create a "Dads Army" police force of people who would fail to reach the standard for the real police and give them power. By giving them tasks to deal with annoying cars and litter etc the crime statistics climb and the goverment can say they have increased detection to an all time high. And just for good measure if your car happens to be say a noisy Westfield or an expensive make even better as it appeals to the policy of conforming to what the nanny state deems best for us. If they ever succeed in abolishing the house of lords with all it,s inbred faults we will need to be very afraid, George Orwell only got the date wrong in his book 1984!
guns it was just to react to the mood of the day, it has had no effect on the gun crime which rise,s steadily, but for the day it worked and made law abiding citizens into devils.
Now taking this a step forward, crime rises, the chances of detection falls, so create a "Dads Army" police force of people who would fail to reach the standard for the real police and give them power. By giving them tasks to deal with annoying cars and litter etc the crime statistics climb and the goverment can say they have increased detection to an all time high. And just for good measure if your car happens to be say a noisy Westfield or an expensive make even better as it appeals to the policy of conforming to what the nanny state deems best for us. If they ever succeed in abolishing the house of lords with all it,s inbred faults we will need to be very afraid, George Orwell only got the date wrong in his book 1984!
quote:
It's not politically correct to say this but, why do we have a bloke who doesn't drive (for obvious reasons) dishing out rules on driving. I have nothing to do with goverment payroll but I'm starting to come up with a few ideas.
But look what happened when we had a bloke with two Jags as transport minister, he put a bus lane down a bloody motorway! Shooting's too good for all of them.
Steve
Steve, I am currently designing a website to take petition entries to get that b@stard f*cking bus lane converted into a HOV (High occupancy vehicle) lane as the amount of buses that I have seen in it are negligible at best.
That is the single most ridiculous decision in the history of transport. Why is that cabbies and bus companies get to protect their income when millions of commuters every day have to sit in ever increasing traffic and risk getting to work late and consequently losing their income.
It gets my goat!
I'll let you all know the URL when its done!
Matt.
That is the single most ridiculous decision in the history of transport. Why is that cabbies and bus companies get to protect their income when millions of commuters every day have to sit in ever increasing traffic and risk getting to work late and consequently losing their income.
It gets my goat!
I'll let you all know the URL when its done!
Matt.
quote:
Steve, I am currently designing a website to take petition entries to get that b@stard f*cking bus lane converted into a HOV (High occupancy vehicle) lane as the amount of buses that I have seen in it are negligible at best.
That is the single most ridiculous decision in the history of transport. Why is that cabbies and bus companies get to protect their income when millions of commuters every day have to sit in ever increasing traffic and risk getting to work late and consequently losing their income.
It gets my goat!
I'll let you all know the URL when its done!
Matt.
Hey, why not a "percentage utilisation" lane. Eg, 2 seater car, with 1 person = more right than 4 seater car with one person !!!!
I know that'll keep you sporty car drivers happy, AND me with my Smart or bike !
heh. "you sir, have been charged with having too many horsepower! your car will now be confiscated because someone in power is jealous".
Ummmmmm. Or, "you annoyed Gran by doing a wheelspin".
Or, "your car is an particulary offensive colour".
Could go on. Who's going to do this confiscation? I think that a lot of people are going to get hurt when this law comes into force.
I imagine that it won't be old Bill knocking on your door, the GOv is likely to franchaise this one out ?
Ummmmmm. Or, "you annoyed Gran by doing a wheelspin".
Or, "your car is an particulary offensive colour".
Could go on. Who's going to do this confiscation? I think that a lot of people are going to get hurt when this law comes into force.
I imagine that it won't be old Bill knocking on your door, the GOv is likely to franchaise this one out ?
quote:
Not a bad idea at all, perhaps I will add an addendum!
In my opinion Bus Lanes everywhere, not just on motorways (still cant believe it) should allow bikers, its not like you are going to be in there long, or to stop and pick up passengers!
Matt.
FYI: www.bmf.co.uk/press/2001/press169.html
So why will it take the tossers until summer to add a bloody bike shaped sticker to the existing signage?!?!?!?
Its absolutely disgusting isnt it.
Added to which, why are buses and taxis allowed to do 60mph in a single carriageway bus lane when the rest of us have to do 50mph on a dual carriageway?
If the petition doesnt work I have a back up plan of selling out of commision black cabs to commuters.
GRRR!
Matt.
Added to which, why are buses and taxis allowed to do 60mph in a single carriageway bus lane when the rest of us have to do 50mph on a dual carriageway?
If the petition doesnt work I have a back up plan of selling out of commision black cabs to commuters.
GRRR!
Matt.
It appears that there is a widespread misconception about what exactly the additional powers of the police will mean under the new Police Reform Bill. Firstly this has yet to become law so nothing to worry about for the time-being. Secondly we are talking here about the law of nuisance so any fears that vehicles will be confiscated for 'wheelspinning' etc are, for the most-part unfounded. That the vehicle was causing what amounted to a ‘nuisance’ would first have to be demonstrated, as is the case at the moment under the 1990 Environmental Protection Act.
If we look at the statutory definition of 'nuisance' under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 it is likely that the only tenet of the definition under which ‘cars’ will fall is 'noise' as defined by the Noise and Statutory Nuisance Act 1993 which amended the 1990 EPA.
As such, nuisance in this context is defined as ‘noise that is prejudicial to health or a nuisance and is emitted from or caused by a vehicle, machinery or equipment in a street’ (excluding simple ‘traffic’ noise s3(a))
What all this means is that if indeed the aforementioned provisions of the Reform Bill make it to Statute and the police then choose to apply their new powers (it is well know that the Police Federation are not exactly 'in-bed' with Mr Blunkett regarding the provisions of the Bill) then the situation is not as bleak, nor as contentious as the media may have made it out to be.
The police would only be able to confiscate a vehicle causing a nuisance under the law's understanding of 'statutory nuisance'. The only additional power conferred here is the right of confiscation as opposed to simply issuing an order for abatement, a power which the police currently have.
In reality the police would issue a warning and are unlikely to insist upon immediate confiscation of a vehicle without at least giving the owner a chance to end the nuisance – whatever that may be.
Furthermore, being a ‘nuisance’ would require a third-party to issue a complaint against the owner – repeated car alarm false alarms over a period of time may generate a complaint. If the situation were not then addressed after the police had brought the issue to the attention of the owner then the car could be confiscated.
Let’s try and keep things in perspective – it is unlikely that this provision is likely to affect anyone who would not already be in bother. This Bill, if it does find favour with Statute is not extending the remit of the police it is merely looking at making the way that they are able to police more practicable. Consider this: A car alarm is constantly going off at all hours – this has been going on for some time. At the present time it would take 3 independent complaints to invoke the ‘90 EPA at which point an abatement order would be issued. Obviously all this takes time during which no-one is getting any sleep. Under the new proposals the police would have the additional power to threaten the owner with confiscation of the vehicle. Facing this measure the owner is much more likely to comply sooner rather than later.
If we look at the statutory definition of 'nuisance' under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 it is likely that the only tenet of the definition under which ‘cars’ will fall is 'noise' as defined by the Noise and Statutory Nuisance Act 1993 which amended the 1990 EPA.
As such, nuisance in this context is defined as ‘noise that is prejudicial to health or a nuisance and is emitted from or caused by a vehicle, machinery or equipment in a street’ (excluding simple ‘traffic’ noise s3(a))
What all this means is that if indeed the aforementioned provisions of the Reform Bill make it to Statute and the police then choose to apply their new powers (it is well know that the Police Federation are not exactly 'in-bed' with Mr Blunkett regarding the provisions of the Bill) then the situation is not as bleak, nor as contentious as the media may have made it out to be.
The police would only be able to confiscate a vehicle causing a nuisance under the law's understanding of 'statutory nuisance'. The only additional power conferred here is the right of confiscation as opposed to simply issuing an order for abatement, a power which the police currently have.
In reality the police would issue a warning and are unlikely to insist upon immediate confiscation of a vehicle without at least giving the owner a chance to end the nuisance – whatever that may be.
Furthermore, being a ‘nuisance’ would require a third-party to issue a complaint against the owner – repeated car alarm false alarms over a period of time may generate a complaint. If the situation were not then addressed after the police had brought the issue to the attention of the owner then the car could be confiscated.
Let’s try and keep things in perspective – it is unlikely that this provision is likely to affect anyone who would not already be in bother. This Bill, if it does find favour with Statute is not extending the remit of the police it is merely looking at making the way that they are able to police more practicable. Consider this: A car alarm is constantly going off at all hours – this has been going on for some time. At the present time it would take 3 independent complaints to invoke the ‘90 EPA at which point an abatement order would be issued. Obviously all this takes time during which no-one is getting any sleep. Under the new proposals the police would have the additional power to threaten the owner with confiscation of the vehicle. Facing this measure the owner is much more likely to comply sooner rather than later.
The powers of confiscation are already enschrined in law. I knew a very keen fisherman who had his car confiscated by water bailiffs as he used it to transport his rods and nets to the beach and to take away his illegally caught sea salmon. Customs and Excise will take away your car if you use it to smuggle and a Chepstow rapist had his car taken away as he used it to entrap and comitted the rapes inside the car.
I look with interest for a watertight definition of nuisance, I hope it includes the Renault 4 driver who thinks its okay to block my drive whilst he goes to the pub.
I look with interest for a watertight definition of nuisance, I hope it includes the Renault 4 driver who thinks its okay to block my drive whilst he goes to the pub.
quote:
It appears that there is a widespread misconception about what exactly the additional powers of the police will mean under the new Police Reform Bill. Firstly this has yet to become law so nothing to worry about for the time-being.
Westfieldseven,
Were you also one of those that said no-one should worry about the European Arrest Warrant or that it was good to see New Labour using the expertise of Andersen Consulting again?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff