Author Topic: Southwark CEO parks on the pavement...  (Read 6168 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline «THÖMÅS®©™»

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 115
    • Dohlman.net
Re: Southwark CEO parks on the pavement...
« Reply #30 on: 07 January, 2014, 05:28:00 AM »
All perfectly true but first of all a Police Officer has to actually see the Offence being committed, and to seize a vehicle under s.59 PRA a warning has to be given first.

No DD, you are incorrect, it clearly states "reasonable grounds to believe" not that a police officer has to see it happen...  I quote:

Quote
59 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).

(2)A constable in uniform shall also have the powers set out in subsection (3) where he has reasonable grounds for believing that a motor vehicle has been used on any occasion in a manner falling within subsection (1).

(3)Those powers are—

(a)power, if the motor vehicle is moving, to order the person driving it to stop the vehicle;

(b)power to seize and remove the motor vehicle;

(c)power, for the purposes of exercising a power falling within paragraph (a) or (b), to enter any premises on which he has reasonable grounds for believing the motor vehicle to be;

(d)power to use reasonable force, if necessary, in the exercise of any power conferred by any of paragraphs to (a) to (c).

(4)A constable shall not seize a motor vehicle in the exercise of the powers conferred on him by this section unless—

(a)he has warned the person appearing to him to be the person whose use falls within subsection (1) that he will seize it, if that use continues or is repeated; and

(b)it appears to him that the use has continued or been repeated after the the warning.

(5)Subsection (4) does not require a warning to be given by a constable on any occasion on which he would otherwise have the power to seize a motor vehicle under this section if—

(a)the circumstances make it impracticable for him to give the warning;

(b)the constable has already on that occasion given a warning under that subsection in respect of any use of that motor vehicle or of another motor vehicle by that person or any other person;

(c)the constable has reasonable grounds for believing that such a warning has been given on that occasion otherwise than by him; or

(d)the constable has reasonable grounds for believing that the person whose use of that motor vehicle on that occasion would justify the seizure is a person to whom a warning under that subsection has been given (whether or not by that constable or in respect the same vehicle or the same or a similar use) on a previous occasion in the previous twelve months.

(6)A person who fails to comply with an order under subsection (3)(a) is guilty of an offence and shall be liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

Need I say more?  I know that the rider/driver has to be given a warning first, but as stated, sometimes it is impractical for an officer to do so.  Never the less, an officer can issue a section 59 warning pursuant to subsection 1 as above.   In short, he does not have to see the offence in action to act on it.
« Last Edit: 07 January, 2014, 05:48:29 AM by «THÖMÅS®©™» »
It's not "enforcement", it's "extortionate"!

Offline DastardlyDick

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 1697
Re: Southwark CEO parks on the pavement...
« Reply #31 on: 07 January, 2014, 09:32:09 AM »
Yes, that's the Law, but policy is that the Officer has to see the Offence otherwise CPS won't take it to Court.

If you take the example of this CEO in Southwark, how do you prove beyond reasonable doubt that the Offence has actually been comitted? After all, it is perfectly possible that the rider got off his/her scooter on the carriageway and then wheeled it to where it is seen in the picture which is not an Offence.

Contrary to some opinion, we do not live in a Police State and, IMO, seizing a vehicle under the circumstances seen in these pictures would lead to the Police being sued which doesn't go down well with the Cheif Officer, and could also lead to the Officer who seized it being subject to Disiplinary procedures or even Criminal Charges.
« Last Edit: 07 January, 2014, 09:58:46 AM by DastardlyDick »

Offline «THÖMÅS®©™»

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 115
    • Dohlman.net
Re: Southwark CEO parks on the pavement...
« Reply #32 on: 10 January, 2014, 10:05:37 AM »
Perhaps...

The point I am making is that it's NOT what the law says.   Thus I believe that the police are not doing thier job correctly.
It's not "enforcement", it's "extortionate"!

Offline DastardlyDick

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 1697
Re: Southwark CEO parks on the pavement...
« Reply #33 on: 10 January, 2014, 11:42:01 AM »
Thus I believe that the police are not doing thier job correctly.

Do I take it that you're advocating that the Police are to issue tickets which basically accuse people of Criminal Offences with absolutley no justification, let alone evidence, whatsoever?

Having a conviction against your name can seriously wreck your life - the US Authorities will view a conviction for Drink Driving as "moral turpitude" and can use it to bar you from entering the US.

« Last Edit: 11 January, 2014, 12:19:46 AM by DastardlyDick »

Offline «THÖMÅS®©™»

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 115
    • Dohlman.net
Re: Southwark CEO parks on the pavement...
« Reply #34 on: 12 January, 2014, 12:01:51 AM »
I never said that and section 59 offences are not a criminal offence per say.  It is a way to prevent fools riding thier bikes on the pavements and on bridle ways and if reported enough, caught on camera, or seen by a police officer, first you get a warning and then if you are seen again, your vehicle is seized.  In Norfolk, I believe the recovery of the vehicle is £150 plus £12 per day storage.  This is how the police deal with these offences all over the country.

What I meant by the police "not doing thier job properly" was that I have reported 5 bikes, repeatedly for 7 months, and they have taken no action at all.  I have dates and times down to the minute in my diary.  This is evidence and can be used in court, especially when I have the number plates and recently the names of the fools riding the bikes in the manner described.  I do try to catch them on video doing it and if I do, I pay a visit to my local police station - less than 500 yards from my address and show them the video.  I did manage to get one on video in 2011 and I showed it to the police and they paid him a visit and gave him a section 59 warning...

That occasion was a good outcome.  But the 5 I am reporting repeatedly here is a much more complicated issue.  I hear them coming, literally.  But by the time I get my camera and get it running, they have pulled a wheelie past my address and are gone.  So, the only thing I can do is report them to the police, which I do, but they don't do anything despite section 59 (1) of the Police Reform Act 2002.

On November 18th 2013, one of the riders of these bikes (name is known as well as his address) gave me a load of verbal abuse on one of the roads near my address.  This happened at 12:40 after I left college GCSE maths lesson.  Of course, he wasn't expecting me to have a witness, who gave his details to the police when I reported the rider of the bike going past giving me verbal abuse.  He was given a £90 fixed penalty notice for a section 5 Public Order Offence and a PIN (Harassment Warning), but he still continues to harass me although much less often.  I have plans to write to he 2 brothers parents demanding that they cease and desist thier actions or I will be left with no choice but to apply to the county courts for an injunction preventing them from continuing thier conduct,  this will include power of arrest.  The reasons for this is that the police seem to be letting them get away with it, and all it is doing is causing me to go into depression.  Yet the police do nothing.

I am not sure what your problem is DD.
It's not "enforcement", it's "extortionate"!

 


Supporters of the NoToMob

In order to view this object you need Flash Player 9+ support!

Get Adobe Flash player