section 59 ?

[tonyts50]

can you appeal ?

as i was just given one for my rear light not working i said to the officer that i checked it before i left the house and hed just slapped a section 59 against it

can i do anything about it as this is my second 1 my bike now been seised ! and the first werent my fault either

please help thanks
____________________
tony ts50 gone from off road to on road to back off road cat c write off

why am i such a prick !!!! im such a fucking soppy bollocks

[MaybeGuy]

unlucky.
at least get one for doing something excellent.

does a rear light even fall under section 59? i thought it was just antisocial behaviour. ie: loud zorsts etc.

was it at night?
you dont even need one for a daytime MOT.

and what was the other one for?
____________________
Blue_SV650S wrote: it was a sh1te wheelie, but it proves that he can get it up in 3rd and can do angles. In summery, mattsprattuk is a gobby little sh1tebag, dopehead tw4t, but sadly for all of us, he probably isn't THAT full of sh1te!!
Kickstart wrote: Hi I tend to agree with Matt. All the best Keith

[tonyts50]

[chris-red]

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.

(7) Subsection (3)(c) does not authorise entry into a private dwelling house.

(8) The powers conferred on a constable by this section shall be exercisable only at a time when regulations under section 60 are in force.

(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.
____________________
Well, you know what they say. If you want to save the world, you have to push a few old ladies down the stairs.
Skudd:- Perhaps she just thinks you are a window licker and is being nice just in case she becomes another Jill Dando.
WANTED:- Fujinon (Fuji) M42 (Screw on) lenses, let me know if you have anything.

[chris-red]

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.

(7) Subsection (3)(c) does not authorise entry into a private dwelling house.

(8) The powers conferred on a constable by this section shall be exercisable only at a time when regulations under section 60 are in force.

(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.
____________________
Well, you know what they say. If you want to save the world, you have to push a few old ladies down the stairs.
Skudd:- Perhaps she just thinks you are a window licker and is being nice just in case she becomes another Jill Dando.
WANTED:- Fujinon (Fuji) M42 (Screw on) lenses, let me know if you have anything.

[Paulington]

I think that's stretching the section 59 definition a little bit.
____________________
"Four wheels move the body, two wheels move the soul."
Current Vehicles: '89 Kawasaki KDX200, '99 Yamaha XV535, '00 Honda ST1100 Pan-European, '08 Suzuki GSX-R1000, '08 Mitsubishi Lancer GS4 2.0 TDCi, '15 BMW 1 Series 116d Sport Turbo.
CBT: 27/08/08. Theory: 04/09/09. Module 1: 16/09/09. Module 2: 01/10/09.

[Ste]

What was your previous section 59 for? Might have some bearing on how they treated you.

Would agree that a broken tail light isn't a section 59 offence, it's something that would be dealt with with one of those vehicle defect rectification form (fix within 2 weeks and take it to an MOT place to have a form stamped)

And you didn't check it before you left home did you?

[stinkwheel]

Were you riding like a dick?

A blown tail light in itself doesn't fall under the rules for issuing a section 59 although they can insist that a bike is ridden no further with no taillight (pretty sure they can't seize it for that though).

Trouble is, you have no right of appeal and there is no mechanism in place to challenge a section 59 notice so you're pretty much fucked.

Welcome to the police state.

Re: Daylight MOTs. You can only have one on a vehicle primarily designed for off road use and which only has one seat. A TS50 is offroad but they usually have pillion pegs so they don't come under that rule.

In any case, to count under the daylight only rule, the lights have to be either removed or taped/painted over and you can't ride it within an hour of lighting up time.
____________________
“Rule one: Always stick around for one more drink. That's when things happen. That's when you find out everything you want to know.”
I did the 2010 Round Britain Rally on my 350 Bullet. 89 landmarks, 3 months, 9,500 miles.

[tonyts50]

no i did check it

my prechecks are chain
lights
and revving right ( ie not boggy ect )

i wasnt being a loon it was a 40mph limit i was doing 40 my little yellow slip thing he gave me say rear light failure as the reson

and my previous sec 59 was for going over a red light ( i had been there for a good few mins and it was late not many cars i tought the lights hd lost it so i took it cautiously and went through i did obey the officer then as yeah i shouldnt of done it

but this time nah bang out of order !
____________________
tony ts50 gone from off road to on road to back off road cat c write off

why am i such a prick !!!! im such a fucking soppy bollocks

[Ste]

Did they say anything about if they're holding your bike to ransom or if they just intend to crush it?

I'd start with a letter to the chief cuntstable of whatever area it was where your bike was taken. Explaining clearly what happened along with quotes from the Police Reform Act Section 59 which illustrate how their use of section 59 was wrong.

I assume you've got paperwork with the officers badge numbers on? Did you sign anything at the scene?

[tonyts50]

yeah part of th 59 i had to sign and yeah i get my bike back for £300 but i have to pay itwithin a week of tommorrow otherwise they charge a late fee of £20 a day
____________________
tony ts50 gone from off road to on road to back off road cat c write off

why am i such a prick !!!! im such a fucking soppy bollocks

[MattEMulsion]

Anything else that you want to tell us about your dealings with the police, your manner of riding and other circumstances that surround these section 59 warnings? They don't normally just hand them out like sweets, you have have got to have done something to deserve them...
____________________
Yamaha YZF-R6

[truslack]

[JAMSXR]

Tony there must be more to this? There is no way I would let the police take my bike for having a light out!

Mr Policeman on another forum wrote:

[stinkwheel]

[G]

As above, I suggest you get a letter written out to the chief constable of the police force. Do it now, then post it on here for people to read before using it.
Leave your phone number as well as email address and request a prompt reply. Ideally take it to the station tomorrow and get a receipt for it's delivery, else send it recorded delivery so there's a record they received it. Follow up with a phone call presuming they don't contact you.

[Jamie S]

I got a Section 59 for being parked on a path with my engine running. I was stood next to the bike at the time putting my gloves on ,this was outside my mates house.
The path is directly outside his house and even has a lowered kirb for his drive way.
The day after I was out off roading on moorland on my TLR200 (yes I know I shouldn't of been on there) the North wales police helicopter chased me for an hour and a half, before a "member of the public as they told me" phoned them telling them who I was. In other words some one had recognized me and grassed me up. When I arrived home to see 2 coppers sitting on my drive was a surprise to say the least, one of them being the one who issued the section 59 to me on my TS the day before !
Ended up with them taking my TLR off me, I had to pay £150 to get it back + it would of been £12 a day storage if left for more than 24 hours, (I payed the next day)
The rules around section 59's are stupid, there is almost NO appeal procedure , so basicaly they can hand them out when ever they want.

[Mudskipper]

They would have to forcefully arrest me before they took a bike off me unjustly on a S59.

I think it needs a mature, respected member of the public to be targeted under it before any awareness of the abuse of the section can be raised.

As it is, it seems they are targetting younger riders who are less likely to complain/be believed if they kicked up a fuss, so this is unlikely to happen anytime soon.
____________________
CBR125|||GSXR400|||CBR400|||CBR400|||CB250RS|||GSXR750|||CB250RS
"You're clumsy, you eat too much and you behave like a 12 year old boy. But you know what? Every once in a while, you find a thumb."

[Mister James]

[MattEMulsion]

[G]

[MattEMulsion]

I liked this part of Jamie Stokes story:

"The day after I was out off roading on moorland on my TLR200 (yes I know I shouldn't of been on there) the North wales police helicopter chased me for an hour and a half..."

I dare say that after that they were going to seize that bike off him regardless of the fact that he had had a Section 59 the day before. There would have been a couple of different powers that they could have used to achieve it, it just so happened that the second Section 59 was probably the most convenient at the time to get the result that they wanted.
____________________
Yamaha YZF-R6

[map]

It is worth remembering that there is a difference between your normal police and those in traffic.

Your normal police are indeed human with all the positive aspects and negative flaws that go with that.

Those in traffic however are a sub-species that have no moral, ethical or common sense and have the social skills of a barbary ape (apologies to the apes). However, on a positive note, and contrary to popular belief, some of them do actually know who their fathers are. BTW this is not only IMO but also I've found the view of majority of those normal police.

One final point on the handing out of thse Section 59 notices. I've often said "rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men". IMO I guess the police should rectify their shortage of wise men.


____________________
...and the whirlwind is in the thorn trees, it's hard for thee to kick against the pricks...
Gibbs, what did Duckie look like when he was younger?

[JAMSXR]

[Mister James]

They call them Rats because apparently black rats are one of the few species of animal to eat their own young - giving you an idea of the average Response copper's opinion on them.......

In fairness I don't think they're as bad as all that, although traffic law is often so boring and weary I do wonder as to their mental state.