Police threaten to take my bike.
Discussion
Hi everyone, i am in need of some advice as i do not know alot about this subject. this is what happened.
I own a Kawasaki KX 85 motocross/off road motorbike bike which i used in a field near my home last year. At the begining of this year I could no longer use the feild as the farmer had put horses in and put up gates in the feild. Around 2 days ago someone else who i do not know started using the field to play in on a bike which is very similar to mine (as the horses are not there just now). Last night two policemen came to my home ( i was not in it was my dad who spoke to them, ). My dad doesnt keep very well and has a long list of illnesses and as soon as you talk to him you notice this. They asked did i have a motorbike ? my dad told them i did, they then asked to see it, my dad showed them it. The police then said that they had recieved a complaint about my motorbike being in the feild i hadnt been in all year, It had ovously been the bike that was similar to mine and one of my neighbours had said to the police that it was me.(My dad didnt know if i had been out on my bike that day or not) the police then said that if they recieve another complaint about a motorbike being in the feild they will come and remove MY motorbike. The police told all of this to my dad
I would apreciate it if someone could tell me if they have the right to just come and remove my motorbike if that other person comes back in to the feild or would they have to come and see me on my actual motorbike?
Many thanks,
Grant
>> Edited by grant-kx-kid on Saturday 6th August 12:37
I own a Kawasaki KX 85 motocross/off road motorbike bike which i used in a field near my home last year. At the begining of this year I could no longer use the feild as the farmer had put horses in and put up gates in the feild. Around 2 days ago someone else who i do not know started using the field to play in on a bike which is very similar to mine (as the horses are not there just now). Last night two policemen came to my home ( i was not in it was my dad who spoke to them, ). My dad doesnt keep very well and has a long list of illnesses and as soon as you talk to him you notice this. They asked did i have a motorbike ? my dad told them i did, they then asked to see it, my dad showed them it. The police then said that they had recieved a complaint about my motorbike being in the feild i hadnt been in all year, It had ovously been the bike that was similar to mine and one of my neighbours had said to the police that it was me.(My dad didnt know if i had been out on my bike that day or not) the police then said that if they recieve another complaint about a motorbike being in the feild they will come and remove MY motorbike. The police told all of this to my dad
I would apreciate it if someone could tell me if they have the right to just come and remove my motorbike if that other person comes back in to the feild or would they have to come and see me on my actual motorbike?
Many thanks,
Grant
>> Edited by grant-kx-kid on Saturday 6th August 12:37
Don' know the law but as a layman I would be surprised if they had the right to do this without going through the court (which would require them to prove it was you).
In any case it would be very difficult in practice for them to take the bike if it was locked to a ground anchor or other immovable object. Given that the actual guilty party haven't been warned, it seems reasonably likely that they will do it again so if I was you I'd take steps to hide or secure the bike 'just in case'.
In any case it would be very difficult in practice for them to take the bike if it was locked to a ground anchor or other immovable object. Given that the actual guilty party haven't been warned, it seems reasonably likely that they will do it again so if I was you I'd take steps to hide or secure the bike 'just in case'.
One point - did you have permission to use this field? If you did, then you would be on firmer ground. Whether it's you riding the bike or someone else, the Police can seize any motor vehicle in certain circumstances. I think it was the Crime and Disorder Act 2004. (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong - I sat my Inspectors exam 2 years ago and this is new legislation). I believe that if the vehicle is being driven without due care/attention and/or in a manner which may cause a nuisance to residents, the Poice can issue a warning on the first occassion. A second occassion and the vehicle can be seized.
The Officer would need to be certain it was the same vehicle, e.g in the case of an off road vehicle I would suggest taking engine/frame numbers.
So, my advice for what it is worth is only ride on land where you have permission, and preferably ride at orgainised offroad tracks etc... That way you enjoy your hobby and don't upset anyone.
The Officer would need to be certain it was the same vehicle, e.g in the case of an off road vehicle I would suggest taking engine/frame numbers.
So, my advice for what it is worth is only ride on land where you have permission, and preferably ride at orgainised offroad tracks etc... That way you enjoy your hobby and don't upset anyone.
Grant
The relevant legislation is Section 59 Police Reform Act 2002 - see
http://tinyurl.com/a6qog
The identity of the vehicle involved in my opinion is a crutial ingredient. I note that a neighbour identifies to plod the vehicle involved as yours. How? Down to you to disprove?
Finally heed the wise words of xxplod.
DVD
The relevant legislation is Section 59 Police Reform Act 2002 - see
http://tinyurl.com/a6qog
The identity of the vehicle involved in my opinion is a crutial ingredient. I note that a neighbour identifies to plod the vehicle involved as yours. How? Down to you to disprove?
Finally heed the wise words of xxplod.
DVD
Dwight VanDriver said:
Grant
The relevant legislation is Section 59 Police Reform Act 2002 - see
http://tinyurl.com/a6qog
The identity of the vehicle involved in my opinion is a crutial ingredient. I note that a neighbour identifies to plod the vehicle involved as yours. How? Down to you to disprove?
Finally heed the wise words of xxplod.
DVD
Hi DVD, How should i prove that it wasnt my bike as the bike that was in the field was very similar to mine the only difference was that it had a bigger engine. Mines is an 85cc and that was a 250cc bike
Many thanks,
Grant
Given that you have only heard this through your dad so far, it might be worth contacting your local police station to get the full story first hand. You can use this as your excuse to go talk to them, but while you're there it would be worth making clear your position that neither you nor your bike were in the field. I don't know what the legal process would be leading up to confiscation of your bike, but it may be that from the police' point of view your dad has admitted on your behalf that it is your bike and they may consider that you've accepted the warning. In fact the position is that they don't know who's bike it was, and it remains to be proved whether it was yours.
There's some considerable doubt that such seizures are legal, irrespective of modern legislation.
There's an ancient principle enshrined in Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights Act 1689 which states that 'criminal penalties may not be applied without trial'. If a seizure amounts to a criminal penalty then it's likely to be illegal. Clearly this will need to be tested in court.
See this Google: www.google.com/search?q=%2B%22bill+of+rights+act+1689%22
Then there's ample room for challenge under European Convention of Human Rights.
Some Police forces have tried to work around this by inviting surrender of a vehicle. I say: We will never surrender."
There's an ancient principle enshrined in Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights Act 1689 which states that 'criminal penalties may not be applied without trial'. If a seizure amounts to a criminal penalty then it's likely to be illegal. Clearly this will need to be tested in court.
See this Google: www.google.com/search?q=%2B%22bill+of+rights+act+1689%22
Then there's ample room for challenge under European Convention of Human Rights.
Some Police forces have tried to work around this by inviting surrender of a vehicle. I say: We will never surrender."
Dwight VanDriver said:
Grant
The relevant legislation is Section 59 Police Reform Act 2002 - see
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/a6qog">http://tinyurl.com/a6qog</a>
The identity of the vehicle involved in my opinion is a crutial ingredient. I note that a neighbour identifies to plod the vehicle involved as yours. How? Down to you to disprove?
Finally heed the wise words of xxplod.
DVD
However close, this is not yet a police state. The opposite is true, its down to plod to prove it is. Or are plod going to take hearsay evidence to court? As "reasonable cause"? That'd be funny.
Oh, and:
the act said:
(7) Subsection (3)(c) does not authorise entry into a private dwelling house.
Relax.
>> Edited by victormeldrew on Saturday 6th August 17:11
Safespeed - on this occassion I think you're viewpoint is on wafer thin ice. The Police have various powers of seizure. The powers excercised under S59 would ultimately be tested in Court, so this notion of no penalty without trial is nonsense. The Court would decide whether or not any vehicle seized should be forfeited. I've no knowledge of the Police ever "inviting people to surrender" anything. There is either a power of seizure or there isn't.
In anycase, pre all this legislation, I have seized loud stereos under Common Law - Public Nuisance offence, on the basis the stereo is evidence of the offence. Nothing unlawful, so long as I can show that the conduct, i.e the noise cannot be avoided by a reasonable cross section of the public. I cannnot see why the same cannot be used for noisy scramble bikes.
In anycase, pre all this legislation, I have seized loud stereos under Common Law - Public Nuisance offence, on the basis the stereo is evidence of the offence. Nothing unlawful, so long as I can show that the conduct, i.e the noise cannot be avoided by a reasonable cross section of the public. I cannnot see why the same cannot be used for noisy scramble bikes.
xxplod said:
Safespeed - on this occassion I think you're viewpoint is on wafer thin ice. The Police have various powers of seizure.
I haven't really expressed an opinion on the matter. I'm just reporting.
There's a very interesting round of correspondence going on between Idris Francis and South Yorkshire police where they have effectively admitted to illegal seizures.
One thing I am sure of is that we haven't heard the last of it.
However, if you would like my opinion, I do think it's a step too far to give Police officers the right to seize goods (not evidence) without court sanction. Sooner or later the power will be abused and society will be much poorer for it. It's the court process that provides the fundamental protection from sinking into a Police state. Removing that protection is a dangerous move that puts power in hands far better suited to other duties.
Grant
It comes across at one stage or another you have incurred the wrath of a neighbour in your offroad activites to such an extent that on one of these occasions he has reported the matter to the Police and identified you as the culprit. As to how and what method he uses to do this I cannot say. Faced with the complaint, and there may have been others at the same time, plod has acted with the information to hand.
You obviously can assure Plod that you were not there at that time with possible others to back this up and that the bike involved was not yours and can ask Plod how it was identified as yours.
All this of course is pure supposition as one cannot pronounce on an individual case without all the facts.
More good advice from greenv8s.
Be aware that wrinklies absolutely hate their peace and tranquility being disturbed hour upon hour by a noise akin to the buzzing of a bee in a treacle tin magnified a hundred fold. You will not appreciate this now but say 50 years time you might.
Go for girls, they are quiter and more fun....
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Saturday 6th August 20:54
It comes across at one stage or another you have incurred the wrath of a neighbour in your offroad activites to such an extent that on one of these occasions he has reported the matter to the Police and identified you as the culprit. As to how and what method he uses to do this I cannot say. Faced with the complaint, and there may have been others at the same time, plod has acted with the information to hand.
You obviously can assure Plod that you were not there at that time with possible others to back this up and that the bike involved was not yours and can ask Plod how it was identified as yours.
All this of course is pure supposition as one cannot pronounce on an individual case without all the facts.
More good advice from greenv8s.
Be aware that wrinklies absolutely hate their peace and tranquility being disturbed hour upon hour by a noise akin to the buzzing of a bee in a treacle tin magnified a hundred fold. You will not appreciate this now but say 50 years time you might.
Go for girls, they are quiter and more fun....
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Saturday 6th August 20:54
This reminds me of a friend of my parents who used to have a doberman. This doberman was fine with humans but couldn't stand other dogs. Anyway doberman had two goes at a labrador so the owner went to the police. Ploce phoned the dog owner and could they come round with the complainant to discuss the issue.
So the owner said yes, can see you in around half an hour. He gets off the phone to the police, and phones a friend, also with a doberman and says can I borrow Fred (or whatever the dog was called). Freds owner asks why and he says never mind just want to borrow him. So Freds owner agrees, so his own dog is locked up upstairs, and he sits on sofa talking to Fred. Police arrive with complainant and talk about the problem, and the police ask the complainant if Fred is the dog that attacked her Labrador. She says yes, few more points are discussed and police go to leave. Friend asks police officer if he can have a word in private so Officer says yes so they go to one side and friend says "You know that is not my dog?". Needless to say the policeman was furious and he had to ensure his dog was kept under strict control from then on!
Which doesn't really help the person concerned, however I would suggest that he does discuss the problem with the local Police, particulalrly as not responsible
So the owner said yes, can see you in around half an hour. He gets off the phone to the police, and phones a friend, also with a doberman and says can I borrow Fred (or whatever the dog was called). Freds owner asks why and he says never mind just want to borrow him. So Freds owner agrees, so his own dog is locked up upstairs, and he sits on sofa talking to Fred. Police arrive with complainant and talk about the problem, and the police ask the complainant if Fred is the dog that attacked her Labrador. She says yes, few more points are discussed and police go to leave. Friend asks police officer if he can have a word in private so Officer says yes so they go to one side and friend says "You know that is not my dog?". Needless to say the policeman was furious and he had to ensure his dog was kept under strict control from then on!
Which doesn't really help the person concerned, however I would suggest that he does discuss the problem with the local Police, particulalrly as not responsible
hehe or is that just america..OP said:
How should i prove that it wasnt my bike as the bike that was in the field was very similar to mine the only difference was that it had a bigger engine. Mines is an 85cc and that was a 250cc bike
How do you know this? Is there more information you're not sharing with the illustrious PHeads here? I'd guess that if you know it was a 250cc bike, using the same field you used previously, you could probably give the police the name of the rider concerned when you pop round there for your chat.
OP said:
How should i prove that it wasnt my bike as the bike that was in the field was very similar to mine the only difference was that it had a bigger engine. Mines is an 85cc and that was a 250cc bike
How do you know this? Is there more information you're not sharing with the illustrious PHeads here? I'd guess that if you know it was a 250cc bike, using the same field you used previously, you could probably give the police the name of the rider concerned when you pop round there for your chat.
henrycrun said:
When a Thug Scumbag is driving on a public road without insurance then I would more than happy to see his vehicle siezed.....
So would I, but it isn't going to help.
With 1.4 million uninsured drivers, the Police will be able to seize 200,000 per year as an absolute max. That means the average uninsured driver will lose a £300 throw-away once in 7 years. And the bugger will be back on the road in a month for another 7 years. He got 6 points and a £200 fixed penalty. He won't even get banned because on average when he's next pulled his points will have expired years before.
With one month out of 7 years spent off the road we have reduced the problem by 1.2% - which is probably less than the annual growth.
This is what you get when policy makers are innumerate...
safespeed said:
With 1.4 million uninsured drivers, the Police will be able to seize 200,000 per year as an absolute max. That means the average uninsured driver will lose a £300 throw-away once in 7 years. And the bugger will be back on the road in a month for another 7 years. He got 6 points and a £200 fixed penalty. He won't even get banned because on average when he's next pulled his points will have expired years before.
Yeah Paul but what you're missing is that with points on his licence his insurance will go through the roof ... ah ... oh. So the only people who will be significantly affected by this are the ones that are basically law abiding?
Still, surely it is better to try to catch uninsured drivers rather than let them drive around with impugnity?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff