Police confiscation of mini motorbike. Advice please.
Discussion
Sorry to bother you all.
I'm well aware of peoples thoughts and feelings toward nuisance riders (it's a regular occurrence around my area for stripped down and stolen bikes to be ridden stupidly), but I would like, if possible, some advice to pass on to the person in question.
Yesterday, the police followed up a report from a member of the public. Oddly enough, the report was acted on in around 30 minutes from the bikes start up.
The bike was started up for the first time since purchase. It was ridden carefully, a distance of approximately 15 meters, twice. The ground used was a large green at the front of four houses, all of which face said green. It was clear of people, the bike user was supervised by several adults and no members of the public ventured near the green area. It is rarely used at all. This is obviously NO EXCUSE.
After the two trips back and forth, they decided to turn it off and moved it to their front garden.
Approximately 20 - 30 minutes later, the police arrived at their house. The owners and their neighbours were sat in their gardens chatting. The police went through the usual speeches and issued a S59. The bike was parked up in the garden but the engine was cold, no one was riding it or near it.
This stated inconsiderate manner and common land, footpath, bridleway.
He is adamant that the bike was not used on the road or footpath. The police confiscated the bike and told him they were doing so because there was no MOT or VED. They also told him that in order to get the bike back, he had to provide proof of ownership and/or a receipt of purchase. Apparently, if he had had the text messages off the seller, that would have been enough?.
He purchased the bike privately around a week ago and has deleted the messages and phone number of the seller. He obviously has the persons address but they live a considerable distance away and the bike was purchased as he drove through from a holiday trip.
There are no previous complaints and this was the first reporting on what was the only test ride of the bike. He has asked appropriate people for advice on where to ride legally off road and was informed of a place that caters for them. It would appear that he's thought "right, lets check it works so we can go". Obviously he knows he shouldn't have ridden the bike but as there were no MOP on foot and it was brief, perhaps 50 seconds between engine switch on/off, he didn't think he would have bothered anybody.
Is there anything he can do, other than travel all the way back to the seller, for a written receipt?.
Thank you all.
I'm well aware of peoples thoughts and feelings toward nuisance riders (it's a regular occurrence around my area for stripped down and stolen bikes to be ridden stupidly), but I would like, if possible, some advice to pass on to the person in question.
Yesterday, the police followed up a report from a member of the public. Oddly enough, the report was acted on in around 30 minutes from the bikes start up.
The bike was started up for the first time since purchase. It was ridden carefully, a distance of approximately 15 meters, twice. The ground used was a large green at the front of four houses, all of which face said green. It was clear of people, the bike user was supervised by several adults and no members of the public ventured near the green area. It is rarely used at all. This is obviously NO EXCUSE.
After the two trips back and forth, they decided to turn it off and moved it to their front garden.
Approximately 20 - 30 minutes later, the police arrived at their house. The owners and their neighbours were sat in their gardens chatting. The police went through the usual speeches and issued a S59. The bike was parked up in the garden but the engine was cold, no one was riding it or near it.
This stated inconsiderate manner and common land, footpath, bridleway.
He is adamant that the bike was not used on the road or footpath. The police confiscated the bike and told him they were doing so because there was no MOT or VED. They also told him that in order to get the bike back, he had to provide proof of ownership and/or a receipt of purchase. Apparently, if he had had the text messages off the seller, that would have been enough?.
He purchased the bike privately around a week ago and has deleted the messages and phone number of the seller. He obviously has the persons address but they live a considerable distance away and the bike was purchased as he drove through from a holiday trip.
There are no previous complaints and this was the first reporting on what was the only test ride of the bike. He has asked appropriate people for advice on where to ride legally off road and was informed of a place that caters for them. It would appear that he's thought "right, lets check it works so we can go". Obviously he knows he shouldn't have ridden the bike but as there were no MOP on foot and it was brief, perhaps 50 seconds between engine switch on/off, he didn't think he would have bothered anybody.
Is there anything he can do, other than travel all the way back to the seller, for a written receipt?.
Thank you all.
Thank you for that helpful advice.
The bike as far as I'm aware was checked before money changed hands. Either way, I'm sure this reported ride, was to test it.
The person in question is not disrespectful, inconsiderate or pond life, just to be clear. If it was a case of him going out on it and causing chaos and havoc, then I wouldn't have posted this.
The ride was not recreational or for fun otherwise I'm sure he'd have had the police catching him in the act.
Like I say, I have only his word and that of a neighbour to go on but he and his neighbours are adamant it was less than a minute.
Sorry for any confusion.
The bike as far as I'm aware was checked before money changed hands. Either way, I'm sure this reported ride, was to test it.
The person in question is not disrespectful, inconsiderate or pond life, just to be clear. If it was a case of him going out on it and causing chaos and havoc, then I wouldn't have posted this.
The ride was not recreational or for fun otherwise I'm sure he'd have had the police catching him in the act.
Like I say, I have only his word and that of a neighbour to go on but he and his neighbours are adamant it was less than a minute.
Sorry for any confusion.
Two separate issues here :
Proof of purchase - tell him to check backups for the texts he deleted, check his bill (online) for the number of the previous owner, or start his car to go and get the receipt.
s59 - it was on common land, and it was causing enough distress for someone to call the police. Bang to rights. He obviously passed the attitude test, or I would have thought being reported for no insurance would have been an easy hit.
Proof of purchase - tell him to check backups for the texts he deleted, check his bill (online) for the number of the previous owner, or start his car to go and get the receipt.
s59 - it was on common land, and it was causing enough distress for someone to call the police. Bang to rights. He obviously passed the attitude test, or I would have thought being reported for no insurance would have been an easy hit.
Absolutely.
I'm not defending him, merely putting forth the events from what I've been told and wondered how he would proceed.
It does serve him right, I've told him that too. Again, sorry if the post seems stupid and wasteful, I just wanted to find any form of suitable advice for him to take.
Suggestions put forth already in these responses seem adequate enough.
Thank you all.
I'm not defending him, merely putting forth the events from what I've been told and wondered how he would proceed.
It does serve him right, I've told him that too. Again, sorry if the post seems stupid and wasteful, I just wanted to find any form of suitable advice for him to take.
Suggestions put forth already in these responses seem adequate enough.
Thank you all.
Using the bike On Private land which includes your Garden or Drive is not an issue. Most MX and Trials M/C's are not registered, Taxed or MOT''d. Using it on land without permission can bring an S59 and generally a quick trip across a road is usually tolerated. With the info given I would be thinking the BIB was being a bit zealous to confiscate the Bike. If the Bike is for a Child then maybe an OSET would be better. They tend to be ignored by BIB and neighbours.
randlemarcus said:
Two separate issues here :
Proof of purchase - tell him to check backups for the texts he deleted, check his bill (online) for the number of the previous owner, or start his car to go and get the receipt.
s59 - it was on common land, and it was causing enough distress for someone to call the police. Bang to rights. He obviously passed the attitude test, or I would have thought being reported for no insurance would have been an easy hit.
I'd have thought this.Proof of purchase - tell him to check backups for the texts he deleted, check his bill (online) for the number of the previous owner, or start his car to go and get the receipt.
s59 - it was on common land, and it was causing enough distress for someone to call the police. Bang to rights. He obviously passed the attitude test, or I would have thought being reported for no insurance would have been an easy hit.
If he only has to prove ownership to get the bike back, the Police have been more than fair. No insurance could easily have been added to the issue.
I can't believe that he has no paperwork available or contact details. It does smell fishy which is why they may have confiscated the bike.
TooMany2cvs said:
So, just to clarify and precis the OP...
Somebody doesn't deny using an unregistered, uninsured motor vehicle in a public place.
The Police were called, attended, confiscated it - and are happy to release it on proof of ownership.
This somebody can't prove they own it.
Right?
Disco.Somebody doesn't deny using an unregistered, uninsured motor vehicle in a public place.
The Police were called, attended, confiscated it - and are happy to release it on proof of ownership.
This somebody can't prove they own it.
Right?
Soov535 said:
TooMany2cvs said:
So, just to clarify and precis the OP...
Somebody doesn't deny using an unregistered, uninsured motor vehicle in a public place.
The Police were called, attended, confiscated it - and are happy to release it on proof of ownership.
This somebody can't prove they own it.
Right?
Disco.Somebody doesn't deny using an unregistered, uninsured motor vehicle in a public place.
The Police were called, attended, confiscated it - and are happy to release it on proof of ownership.
This somebody can't prove they own it.
Right?
read5458 said:
He obviously has the persons address but they live a considerable distance away and the bike was purchased as he drove through from a holiday trip.
If he has the persons address then he could create a suitable document. I don't suggest doing this if enquiries would reveal that the transaction never took place.What kind of value is the bike?
read5458 said:
Cheers all, again
I've told him to check his online phone bill.
As for receipts ect, he said it was a cash sale but hasn't disclosed the amount and that he didn't bother with a receipt as it was working.
He has passed on his appreciation to you all for your advice.
Mobile phone/Home phone will have records of who was called and texted. Ring the number, explain the situation ask for a quick e-mailing confirming the case.I've told him to check his online phone bill.
As for receipts ect, he said it was a cash sale but hasn't disclosed the amount and that he didn't bother with a receipt as it was working.
He has passed on his appreciation to you all for your advice.
Heck, doesn't even need to tell them the police are involved (might scare them off confirming anything?), just say you need it for evidence of adding it to the home insurance/value of it /whatever.
So is the bike a motor vehicle i.e. has a registration plate and requires insurance, VEL and an MOT, as oppose to an off-road bike that is solely designed for off-road i.e. has no registration plate and other things absent like no indicators?
If so, where's the V5? It's not proof of ownership, but it helps.
A S.59 seizure nearly always requires a warning first. I don't believe the police can seize for no MOT / no VED, but I'm not 100% sure.
I think you need to 100% clarify why it's been seized. It's usually for no insurance (and other things under S.165 like failing to stop), S.59, PACE (suspect stolen etc), obstruction and if in a dangerous position.
This will determine how much you need to do to get it back. I'd call them, clarify it and see what they require. You're generally not obligated to prove ownership to the police, it's usually the other way around i.e. they need to prove it's stolen / you don't own it.
If so, where's the V5? It's not proof of ownership, but it helps.
A S.59 seizure nearly always requires a warning first. I don't believe the police can seize for no MOT / no VED, but I'm not 100% sure.
I think you need to 100% clarify why it's been seized. It's usually for no insurance (and other things under S.165 like failing to stop), S.59, PACE (suspect stolen etc), obstruction and if in a dangerous position.
This will determine how much you need to do to get it back. I'd call them, clarify it and see what they require. You're generally not obligated to prove ownership to the police, it's usually the other way around i.e. they need to prove it's stolen / you don't own it.
La Liga said:
So is the bike a motor vehicle i.e. has a registration plate and requires insurance, VEL and an MOT, as oppose to an off-road bike that is solely designed for off-road i.e. has no registration plate and other things absent like no indicators?
He says "mini-motorbike". So I think everybody's assuming he means exactly that - a motor vehicle, but one with no type approval, no registration etc.
The kind of thing which is or has been a bane in many communities, and which the Police take _VERY_ seriously.
La Liga said:
It was the mention of MOT / VED which makes it unclear, since ones like in that picture don't need them.
Only because even having a ticket wouldn't make 'em road-legal, since they're unregisterable so untaxable.And, where the OP's "friend's" bike was being used, it would have needed to be registered, insured, taxed, tested to be legal. Having tax would require it to be insured and registered.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff