Two new little bits of law (well actually the same law Police Reform Act 2002).
1. Police Officer no longer needs to be in uniform or to find the Offender committing the offence for him/her to arrest for an offence of Driving Whilst Disqualified.
2. Police can now confiscate vehicles that the driver causes annoyance, alarm or distress to others. Owner can reclaim it for a fixed fee (I think in the region of £100) and the Police can charge £15.00 a day for storage.
|
Pugugly,
2. Police can now confiscate vehicles that the driver causes annoyance, alarm or distress to others. Owner can reclaim it for a fixed fee (I think in the region of £100) and the Police can charge £15.00 a day for storage.
>>
Essex Police have been stating that they fully intend to use this power to impound the cars of the 'cruisers' who race up and down Southend seafront at the weekends with loud 'music'(and, by God, it is loud) blaring and doing their handbrake turns and donuts etc. While not condoning what these drivers get up to, they do this well into the early hours and make the local residents life hell, what is the legal test as to what constitutes 'annoyance, alarm or distress to others.' Is it the opinion of the the Police, the resident or another road-user?
Sounds like this might be a good little earner for your learned friends! I can see a few nice juicy precedence cases coming up!
Incidentally, I believe Essex Police were quoting a figure of around £350 to have your vehicle returned, a quick bit of inflation!
Cockle
|
"Is it the opinion of the the Police"
That will do for me anyway!
|
|
|
|
Could well be. I,m not saying its flawed law but I would like to see the caselaw on this in a couple of years. There are issues to this bit of law that I can see being challanged under HR law if nothing else. Time will tell.
|
There has been something similar to this around for several years.
I can't remember all the details, but a chap in Wales (I think) was done for excessive noise from his stereo system under the Motor Vehicles (Construction & Use) Act.
It was the first time it had been used in that way, and he might have got away with it, but he entered a guilty plea which was accepted, and the precedent was set.
Why Southend (& Yarmouth etc.) plod haven't used this is quite a mystery to me.
|
|
The courts have had the power to send 3rd offence burglars to prison for life for the last 2 years. In that time it has been handed out to just 6 of them! I don't see much effort being expended chasing people for having mobile boogie boxes however annoying they are.
|
|
Isnt't that because Burglars are much more difficult to catch than Johnny "basehead" on the southend sea front (the smoke from wheels of said donuts may also give your position away).
|
Thanks PU.
Read about this coming into force on 1.1.03 but have as yet to see the Act.
Quick thought is that there will be a need for Plod to get a statement from Joe Public to prove the alarm,distress, annoyance otherwise your profession will have a field day.
DVD
|
|
|
|
Well Yes! Police activities are skewed towards meeting 'targets' - now know as 'performance indicators'. 10 speeders look better on the lists and are easier to deal with than one burglar. Not the police's fault - they work within guidelines laid down by dotty politicians!
|
|
|
Isnt't that because Burglars are much more difficult to catch than Johnny "basehead" on the southend sea front (the smoke from wheels of said donuts may also give your position away).
No, it's just that sending someone down for life term is a very serious thing and if sentencing is done badly the law looks stupid, or draconian, or otherwise disproportionate. Having it available for real hard cases is probably ok, but regularly inviting the comparison between burglary and crimes like murder is rather foolish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not trying to change the tack of this interesting thread PU but since you mentioned this on another thread, could you clarify a point about the DPA.
If a member of the public were to witness a criminal offence in a public place and film or photograph the events would this itself be illegal and the eveidence gained be inadmissible in Court ? If so, what's the logic in that ?
Thanks.
Ps - quite like the confiscation idea but can't help thinking the Police are gonna need very large compounds !!!
|
Pugugly -
This is probably a query in the realms of fantasy but how would I know that a man in plain clothes who says he is police officer in mufti, flashes some possibly fake ID and then asks me to get out of my car so that he arrest me and then confiscates the car on some fake legal pretext.
Personally I wouldn't believe him, I wouldn't get out of my car but would drive to the nearest police station (to find it closed, no doubt) in order to check his bona fides. Could I be charged with resisting arrest if he was in fact a genuine police officer?.
Rita
|
I can't see any London copper in plain clothes & off duty stopping a car for driving offences. Few reasons for this:
1- Too much hassle, he/she will not get paid for it as off duty.
2- Security, no back up available. Also with the number of firearms in circulation (read the news today) it is not worth it. Two policemen got shot in London in the last two weeks!!! Stopping a car without doing a check on it first is suicidal.
Because of this it will not work. It is just another "spin" from the Home Office/Politicians.
Old Bill
|
|
|
Good point Rita, I would not stop for someone in plain clothes either, I may drive a Volvo but I ain't stupid, unlike the present government!!
Cheers
VD5D.
|
|
|
Nothing to worry about Rita. Power crazed luny Dictator Blair is totally obsessed with statistics and admin. Burglars aren't being sent to prison. (The latest one is becoming a poet instead), but if you use your mobile phone at the side of the road to phone home to say you'll be late because you're tried and want to sleep, then you might be.
The name of the game is getting convictions, the more the merrier, and they want the cheapest ones possible. So they find something that is easily detectable, and make it a crime. Clearly te easiest people to convict are the ones who have never been in trouble with the law before. (Most of the new lower speed limits are really aimed at more convictions and revenue collection rather than road safety).
So in a few years time, the only safe place for decent folk will be in prison - which is where many more of them will be, while the butglars ransack their empty houses, and mug each other.
What's the difference between Tony Blair and Saddam Hussein? Saddam has a moustache.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like the idea.Now if they confiscate a vehicle for no insurance,no road tax,no M.O.T.as well I would like it even more.
|
Just an update.
The Section (for DVD) is S59 of the PRA 2002.
There is a power to seize vehicles being used off road
A power to seize from premises and on private land.
Intrestingly the power allows seizure when a vehicle is being "is likely to cause distress" so you don't need a MoP to make a statement etc etc. I include a linke throught to the Statutory Instrument that controls
//http://www.hmso.gov.uk/cgi-bin/htm_hl3?URL=www.hmso.gov.uk/si
/si2002/20023049.htm&STEMMER=en&WORDS=statutori+instrument+motor+vehic
l+publish+2002+&COLOUR=Red&STYLE=s#muscat_highlighter_first_match
this.
|
Pugugly,
I see you took notice of my tip for compressing long links then :o(
Using tinyurl.com
Creates this. tinyurl.com/pixg
|
|
|
|
|
tinyurl.com/pi9w
|
|
Pleased to see it includes the ones with megawatt stereos...
|
JBJ
Sorry to disappoint you but my old Force has it wrong.
They cannot seize a vehicle which is stationary or being driven normally with music at full blast:
S59 PRA
Vehicles used in manner causing alarm, distress or annoyance
(1) Where a constable in uniform has reasonable grounds for believing that a motor vehicle is being used on any occasion in a manner which-
(a) contravenes section 3 or 34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (c. 52) (careless and inconsiderate driving and prohibition of off-road driving), and
(b) is causing, or is likely to cause, alarm, distress or annoyance to members of the public,
he shall have the powers set out in subsection (3).
Got to be some bad driving or off roading with it.
Incidentally, Ploddaughter tells me she did one just after the Act came in. Cost the owner into three fiqures. No Court case, no files. Plod will use this.
DVD
|
|
Agree with DVD on this......although you could spin a megabasser into the inconsiderate driving hat i he/he/it was driving at the time. Like to see them try that ! No cases locally to report on this.
|
|
Someone had better tell North Yorks police that they've got it wrong then .....
|
On reflection they probably got it right and the Press have misquoted........happens all the time.
DVD
|
|
It's a press release from N Yorks police on the N Yorks police website tinyurl.com/pp1t
|
Mrcur
Message sent to PC Roberts to either pull the article or give case law as to how they can do it.
DVD
|
I notice on the same thread that they are expanding thier very successful cycle squad.
Something to do with it being cheaper than a car and more effective because they are in and amongst everything and able to respond quickly.
Brilliant. And I really do think its a good idea.
Makes me wonder why they didn\'t have police on cycles years ago cycling around their patch.
If they keep expanding their \"police on cycles\" squad then I hope we won\'t have to worry that they could have their cycles taken away because it is old-fashioned, inefficient and wasteful. Like last time.
|
Oh Mark, you make me realise the passing of the years.
South Bank, Middlesbrough 1958 first posting on the beat i.e. foot patrols. Area divided up into beats and allocated to be paddled by shoe leather. There was a 'distant beat' up towards Eston for which luxury - use of a sit up and beg Raleigh pedal cycle (no radio). The only time we were allowed in one of them new fangled things called moaty kars (Ford Pop) was in the middle of the night accompanying the Sergeant (God 1) to visit beat men on three Sections, South Bank, Grangetown and Eston.
Heater on full and quick chance to ease the crubbins and a quick nod.
Country beatmen were simiularly equipped with a pedal cycle or Swallow gadabout.
As to new innovation, York City have over the years had cycle patrols as, as you say they can respond and get about quicker than an Emergency vehicle. Latest are fully equipped all-terrain mountain bikes with blues and one and half.
Number of Forces have similar schemes.
DVD
|
They sent a couple of guys out on bikes when we reported illegal traders at a car boot sale we (Air Training Corps) were hosting a few weeks ago in South Manchester.
Excellent idea. Far more approachable than when in cars. Don't live too far from the police horse stables either, and gives real sense of security to see them pass by the house each day.
|
Excellent idea. Far more approachable than when in cars. Don't live too far from the police horse stables either, and gives real sense of security to see them pass by the house each day.
Sadly, here in Essex the police have disbanded the motorcycle section and the mounted section, I believe that the diving section has either been disbanded or is about to be. There are also mutterings that the Marine section is also under threat, in a county with the longest coastline in the country!
IMHO these were worthwhile sections just for their PR value alone as we very rarely see a police officer on the beat outside of the town centres. A PC in a car appears unapproachable even if he/she isn't, therefore the police seem to be insular, just one of the contributary factors to our problems today.
Cockle
|
|
