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

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

Author
Discussion

rypt

2,548 posts

191 months

Tuesday 23rd February 2010
quotequote all
saaby93 said:
skwdenyer said:
Why? Democracy implies that, if the majority are happy with decreased road safety, they may have decreased road safety. There is a balance to be struck, and it doesn't have to converge to a point of greatest safety.
I'm trying to think of a parallel where the majority would vote to do something more dangerous than before, which could adversly affect the minority.

Luckily this isnt the case here
War ... smile

s2art

18,938 posts

254 months

Wednesday 24th February 2010
quotequote all
rypt said:
saaby93 said:
skwdenyer said:
Why? Democracy implies that, if the majority are happy with decreased road safety, they may have decreased road safety. There is a balance to be struck, and it doesn't have to converge to a point of greatest safety.
I'm trying to think of a parallel where the majority would vote to do something more dangerous than before, which could adversly affect the minority.

Luckily this isnt the case here
War ... smile
Green taxes.

gopher44

Original Poster:

68 posts

172 months

Friday 5th March 2010
quotequote all
Seeing as this topic has died down now (not like a ph topic to go miles o/t now is it) I thought I'd let you guys know a bit more.

Just over a week after I sent the letter I received a reply from the Chief constable. To his credit he was most apologetic, saying, 'having reviewed the notes made by the officer in question, it would appear he acted in a unprofessional manner' and 'section 59 warnings are to be used if the vehicle is being driven in a manner likely to cause alarm, distress or annoyance. The officer noted that you provided proof that the car was stationary and unattended at the time of the alleged incident therefore a section 59 warning should not have been issued, and in this case It will be removed from both your personal and vehicles records'.

'South wales police have a good relationship with motor sport organisations in the area and are keen to support events and competitors blah blah blah ad nauseam'

So there we are. Another numpty officer made to look stupid by his CC.

Now all thats left is to find out where he lives and kick his back doors in, or however the saying goes hehe

Drederick Tatum

1,033 posts

186 months

Friday 5th March 2010
quotequote all
gopher44 said:
Seeing as this topic has died down now (not like a ph topic to go miles o/t now is it) I thought I'd let you guys know a bit more.

Just over a week after I sent the letter I received a reply from the Chief constable. To his credit he was most apologetic, saying, 'having reviewed the notes made by the officer in question, it would appear he acted in a unprofessional manner' and 'section 59 warnings are to be used if the vehicle is being driven in a manner likely to cause alarm, distress or annoyance. The officer noted that you provided proof that the car was stationary and unattended at the time of the alleged incident therefore a section 59 warning should not have been issued, and in this case It will be removed from both your personal and vehicles records'.

'South wales police have a good relationship with motor sport organisations in the area and are keen to support events and competitors blah blah blah ad nauseam'

So there we are. Another numpty officer made to look stupid by his CC.

Now all thats left is to find out where he lives and kick his back doors in, or however the saying goes hehe
Well done

clapclapclapclap

andrewrob

2,913 posts

191 months

Friday 5th March 2010
quotequote all
gopher44 said:
Seeing as this topic has died down now (not like a ph topic to go miles o/t now is it) I thought I'd let you guys know a bit more.

Just over a week after I sent the letter I received a reply from the Chief constable. To his credit he was most apologetic, saying, 'having reviewed the notes made by the officer in question, it would appear he acted in a unprofessional manner' and 'section 59 warnings are to be used if the vehicle is being driven in a manner likely to cause alarm, distress or annoyance. The officer noted that you provided proof that the car was stationary and unattended at the time of the alleged incident therefore a section 59 warning should not have been issued, and in this case It will be removed from both your personal and vehicles records'.

'South wales police have a good relationship with motor sport organisations in the area and are keen to support events and competitors blah blah blah ad nauseam'

So there we are. Another numpty officer made to look stupid by his CC.

Now all thats left is to find out where he lives and kick his back doors in, or however the saying goes hehe
Glad to hear it was all sorted out for you. This thread will probably go on another 30 pages now smile

Jesus TF Christ

5,740 posts

232 months

Friday 5th March 2010
quotequote all
Glad you got it sorted and cheers for the update. smile

F i F

44,226 posts

252 months

Friday 5th March 2010
quotequote all
Well done also to the system, flawed though it is, for reviewing and dealing with an inappropriate use of the legislation.

No mention of the officer receiving advice or training? Pity, extra points available for that, missed PR opportunity imo.

Jesus TF Christ

5,740 posts

232 months

Friday 5th March 2010
quotequote all
F i F said:
Well done also to the system
I was waiting for von to say something along those lines but there is no way in hell the above can be described as a "system".

badboyburt

2,043 posts

178 months

Wednesday 13th October 2010
quotequote all
hmm interesting thread.

voyds9

8,489 posts

284 months

Wednesday 13th October 2010
quotequote all
badboyburt said:
hmm interesting thread.
I know it's a long thread but did it really take 7 months to read. wink

Paul Dishman

4,725 posts

238 months

Wednesday 13th October 2010
quotequote all
The police officer involved was same arrogant individual who was involved with the Irishman on the repeat of Traffic Cops 2010 last night

RB Will

9,666 posts

241 months

Wednesday 13th October 2010
quotequote all
^Slider^ said:
rypt said:
^Slider^ said:
IF YOU FIT IT TO MAKE IT LOUDER then i think that offence is committed.
Loudness is often a by-product of how good an exhaust is - and police never bother to find out if the exhaust is loud because it is loud, or if it is loud because it is good.
Rubbish, Loud is Loud.

As i keep saying if you fit it and it makes it louder then i think the offence is committed. The law doesnt say make it louder unless its a good loud.

I am now going to stop feeding the troll, which is exactly what you did last time you were here.

Please actually read what is posted.
I have not read all the topic but what about people like me who have changed the exhaust system (entire system from the engine back) to one which allows better flow of gasses and more power to be developed. I did not modify it or buy it to make my car louder, I intentionally found one that was quieter than most as I want to be able to get on track days. The new system is slightly louder than stock but that is a by product of the function it was put on for. It was not put on with the purpose of making it louder.
The original system was not altered at all just replaced/ upgraded to better materials and better for performance it just happens to be a bit louder.

voyds9

8,489 posts

284 months

Wednesday 13th October 2010
quotequote all
The real kicker is a non standard exhaust may fall foul of section 59, whereas a louder standard exhaust may not, ie a modded mini get 'done' but a stock Ferrari is ok even though significantly louder

TTwiggy

11,552 posts

205 months

Wednesday 13th October 2010
quotequote all
voyds9 said:
The real kicker is a non standard exhaust may fall foul of section 59, whereas a louder standard exhaust may not, ie a modded mini get 'done' but a stock Ferrari is ok even though significantly louder
unless said Ferrari is taking part in a charity event and the local nimbies complain about it...