|
my neigbour has aquired a monkey bike , unfortunately his pleasure is my nightmare ,when he runs up and down the street on it ,it plays havoc with my telly should i shoot him? the swine
|
TWICE, just to be sure!
MD
|
|
|
If he's doing anything illegal (which I suspect he is) report him to the police. Also, I think it's an offence to have something which causes interference with television/radio. See tinyurl.com/dhoml
--
L\'escargot.
|
>I think it's an offence to have something which causes interference with television/radio.
In that case, I should probably grass up my neighbour for his blinking Christmas lights. Then I should grass up myself for my 35-year-old food mixer that interferes even with FM radio.
As for monkey bikes, I (and, I suspect, the police) would be more interested in the legal position concerning what's probably an unlicensed, uninsured motor vehicle.
|
|
The driver/rider is probably unlicensed, the vehicle is unregistered with DVLA, the vehicle is not roadworthy - the list goes on. Plod will take an interest I can assure you.
|
|
|
|
Is it a true Minkey bike ? (as in "ave you got a licence for that Minkey" - Peter Sellers). If it is an unregistred mini moto thing, Section 59 Police Reform Act (seizure of Anti Social stuff) cannot be applied by the Police and neither can the no documents angle. Much as it stuck in my craw I had to challange our local constabulary when they seized a skip full of the things under S59 and No insurance powers. Very difficult for the Police to act on it.
|
|
Not for me to comment, but if they're seizing unregistered bikes under S59 Police Reform Act or Road Traffic Act (for no insurance) they may be acting unlawfully. Read the Acts they are quite clear. Doesn't make the yobs that ride them good people and as I said didn't make mee feel good when I was instructed to challange the local Constabulary.
|
|
Its not obvious that such machines have to be registered, merely that they have to be satisfy : "motor vehicle" means any mechanically propelled vehicle, whether or not it is intended or adapted for use on roads;" This meaning is applied only to s59, so may be tailored to dodgy vehicles of all sorts. But I may have missed something!
|
Ah: my mistake! The insurance aspect is dealt with separetley to the powers under S59 - so they can be seized, but not under S59 powers for lack of insurance. As we were, then!
|
|
I'd still argue the S59 with you as well, my local Force's Legal advice agreed with me !
|
|
Go on then PU: where is the flaw? Q for enlightenment only:)
|
|
I'm off to work in a minute, I'll dig out their climbdown. Resulted in a monkey getting his bike back though :-(
|
Right back now......
S59 Police Reform Act refers to"Motor Vehicles" my argument was based on the fact that Mini Motos are not Motor Vehicles as they are not intended and in 99.99999999999999% of cases are not adapted for use on a road so they are and remain "mechanically propelled vehicles" and Police Reform Act fails to differneciate netween the two classes, to my knowledge this has not been tested in any Court,and it was my submission to the local Police Force that this made seizures under S59 potentially unlawful, their legal people agreed and chose not to fight it. Again a loophole in a badly drafted bit of law.
and laws were most numerous when the commonwealth was most corrupt. Tacitus, Annals
|
|
Appreciate filling out the point. The section seems to have been drafted exactly to catch improvised heaps like the mini-motos - hence the definition sub-section I quoted. "motor vehicle" means any mechanically propelled vehicle, whether or not it is intended or adapted for use on roads;" The courts are there to sort out issues of this sort. If one police force is diffident, they thwart the intent of the legislation and should test the issue, with a view to amendment if need be. But, I still fail to see a snag: these things might be OK for use on the owners own land but 59(9) catches them when used on-road.
|
|
This Force's publicity material was originally factually incorrect in insurance and documentation issues, they subsequently pulled it, they have now re-printed and along with the ammendments for the insurance is the subtle inclusion of the word "may" in front of the "be seized under S59 Police etc...." As I said I have no pleasure in acting on instructions of this nature....
|
|
Mind you the OP;s question refers to a Monkey bike which is genuine Honda product intended for use on a road.
|
So what is allowed on the public road (pavement) without licence, road tax or insurance?
These people you see riding electric scooters on the footpath - are they legal?
|
So what is allowed on the public road (pavement) without licence road tax or insurance? These people you see riding electric scooters on the footpath - are they legal?
and another variation of machine. We have a young lad racing around our local shops on a rather rapid electric bike that looks and is styled a bit like a trials motor bike.
Almost silent and in my view very dangerous.l
I can see it ending badly. There are lots of older folk "sharing" the pavement.
|
|
There is specific legistlation about electric bikes, I'm off now for another fun filled night in Custody. Will dig it out and post tomorrow or Monday.
|
|
Isn't the oldie electric scooter a 'pedestrian-operated vehicle', as I believe the Highway Code calls them? They're questionable on the pavement - occasionally alarming if you're managing a toddler as one approaches - but there's an old boy round here who prefers to drive his in the road, where he's the equivalent of a rather wide and very slow cyclist.
|
|
I can't find the reference, but 14 mph springs to mind with ref to electric bikes. More than that and it's a powered road vehicle, less than that and it's a push-bike in the eyes of the law.
|
I'm off now for another fun filled night in Custody.
Oh dear! I spent the evening at a St George's Day Dinner at my rugby club. I know which I would prefer.
Yes - I know it isn't St George's Day until Monday, we use the Friday nearest.
|
So what is allowed on the public road (pavement) without licence road tax or insurance? These people you see riding electric scooters on the footpath - are they legal?
Those limited to 4 mph are legal on pavements but those limited to 8 mph aren't. See tinyurl.com/yoxgvx
--
L\'escargot.
|
Those limited to 4 mph are legal on pavements but those limited to 8 mph aren't. See tinyurl.com/yoxgvx
Not strictly true. Providing there is mechanism in place to change the speed from 8mph to 4mph, then the ones capable of doing 8mph can be used on pavements.
|
|
|
If he's doing anything illegal (which I suspect he is) report him to the police. Also I think it's an offence to have something which causes interference with television/radio. See tinyurl.com/dhoml -- L\'escargot.
What a nice person you must be!
|
|
Indeed he may well be, and public spirited too! Its apathy that lets the ferals have free reign.
|
|
|
What a nice person you must be!
Duh!
--
L\'escargot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ask Plod to arrest for breach of the peace, might help if a few neighbours are seen remonstrating with the rider when (if) plod arrive.
|
|
What model is it Honda ST 50 OR 70 prehaps? Ask him fit an in line capacitor (condensor type thingy for motorheads) on the coil output.
|
According to the PNLDB under section 59 Police Reform Act 2002
MOTOR VEHICLE: means any mechanically propelled vehicle, whether or not it is intended or adapted for use on roads.
However my interpretation of Motor Vehicle is as per the Road Traffic Act - ' A mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on a road' and I cannot see how section 59 can alter the existing interpretation of the definition.
Nevertheless in DPP v SADDINGTON 2000 the Go-Ped was found to be a motor vehicle based on:
1. The roadworthiness of a vehicle was not decisive on whether it was contemplated for use on the road;
2. There was no obvious terrain other than a road on which the 'Go-Ped' could be used.;
3. Notice was taken of the large number of similar motorised scooters of this kind in circulation actually being used on roads.;
4. The correct test was whether a reasonable person would say that one of the 'Go-Ped's' uses would be some general use on the road which would be more than an isolated or emergency use (Burns v Currell 1963);
5. The 'Go-Ped's' specific design had to be considered in the context of the wish to beat traffic and time pressures.
Tis a grey area that perhaps need simplifying by substituting MOTOR VEHICLE with MPV.
Seems PU got a result!!
--
Fullchat
|
The PRA S59 sets its own definition, but only for the purposes of S59. If it had wished the issue to be bound by other motor vehicle definitions it would say so, as it does for "driving".
From the PRA S59 viz: "(9) In this section-
"driving" has the same meaning as in the Road Traffic Act 1988 (c. 52);
"motor vehicle" means any mechanically propelled vehicle, whether or not it is intended or adapted for use on roads; and
"private dwelling house" does not include any garage or other structure occupied with the dwelling house, or any land appurtenant to the dwelling house."
So, I disagree. S59 is not in any way bound by other Acts' defintions of motor vehicle. Not a grey area at all.
|
|
Ultimately, the definition needs testing in court.
|
|
|
OK. So when PU challenged whichever Police force it was did they back down? Interesting. Perhaps their interpretation of sec 59 was the same as mine.
--
Fullchat
|
|
Yes they backed down and handed the little Monkey his bike back with no charges (cost that is). As I say it stuck in my craw and natural justice intervened later on......I'm almost sure it's now Force Policy locally, I should have asked last night after 6 hours in their "custody" sans mobile phone :-(
|
Keep you out of mischief ;-)
--
Fullchat
|
|
|
|
|
|
