hyperthethical legal question

[timwilky]

To the best of my knowledge the law does not require that riders on restricted licences must have a certificate to prove the bikes power and simply states that they are restricted to riding a motorcycle of less than 33BHP.

The basis of English law is that guilt must be proven. Therefore for a successful prosecution for breaching a restricted licence. The police/ CPS etc. must prove that the bike was in excess of 33BHP.

Therefore why do people worry about certificates/dyno prints etc.? Plod isn't going to go to the expense of testing a restricted bike just in case, unless there has been a serious incident involving the bike.

Secondly at what point is this mythical power outage to be measured. crank or back wheel?.

[tomjones2]

Its the insurance companies that demand the proof isn't it?

[Lozzo]

Its the insurance companies that demand the proof isn't it?

Very few of them do, and they're usually the crap and expensive ones.

[yorkie_chris]

crank or back wheel?.

I think its on the DVLA site they specify net power output, so back wheel.
They wouldn't be able to measure at the crank anyway, other than by guessing it as some dodgy dyno's do, and even I could pick that to bits in court.

Also, do the police have the power to sieze your bike to test it? Is it VOSA do the power checks?

[northwind]

Then, what sort of dyno? 33bhp on a Dynapro isn't the same as 33bp on a Factory Pro or 33bhp on a DJ200. In fact, 33bhp isn't the same on any 2 DJ100s ;) And then, what if it's some fragile bike, frinstance you're riding a 19xx Rudge, putting it on the dyno might explode it.

But, what I suspect they would do is rather than dynoing the bike is check it for restriction, ie check carbs for restrictor washers etc, or part numbers on ECUs- well within their abilities. This is how insurance assessors do it, that's why you're not safe just because your bike's a wreck.

[yorkie_chris]

So if you have some homemade restrictor? Then what?

[Luckypants]

So if you have some homemade restrictor? Then what?

you are too clever for your own good? :rolleyes:

[arenalife]

If the DVLA says net power then wouldn't that be at the crank? Would the back wheel be Gross power, like net weight and gross weight or am I talking crap now?

[yorkie_chris]

Net = "remaining after all deductions"

I see that as power getting down to the wheel

[tomjones2]

Basically the way I see this law is you are very unlikely to get pulled for riding a unrestricted bike with a restricted licence. Even with a farily switched on copper I think they only way they would start asking real questions is if you were pulled much over 100 or you caused a big accident and the insurance company were worming there way out of paying.

[shonadoll]

That's the reason my bike is restricted - in case I have an accident and my bike gets examined by insurers. And also cos it's illegal not to of course.

[timwilky]

Basically the way I see this law is you are very unlikely to get pulled for riding a unrestricted bike with a restricted licence. Even with a farily switched on copper I think they only way they would start asking real questions is if you were pulled much over 100 or you caused a big accident and the insurance company were worming there way out of paying.



That is what I would have thought. My question on this was inspired by the post by plowsie (http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?t=102419)where he said the cops had said "i notice your on a restricted licence also, do you have the relevant docs on you?".


WTF is relevant docs. The law does not actually require any docs.

[neio79]

That's the reason my bike is restricted - in case I have an accident and my bike gets examined by insurers. And also cos it's illegal not to of course.

Cos you wouldent have time to change the ECU or get someone to do it for you after it had been recoverd to your house would you :rolleyes:;)

[yorkie_chris]

WTF is relevant docs. The law does not actually require any docs.

Exactly.

I think the coppers have been reading FI internationals literature too. :rolleyes:

Thing is, the certificate doesn't mean the restrictors haven't accidentally fallen out either...

[tomjones2]

Cos you wouldent have time to change the ECU or get someone to do it for you after it had been recoverd to your house would you :rolleyes:;)

If it were a big enough accident to get the insurers interested in examining the bike personally in detail it will have probably been taken away by the police as evidence.

For instance someone killed/seriously injured I think the police tow involved vehicles for further examination/evidence? I'm assuming that if you uninsured you are personally liable for payments?

[ASM-Forever]

Cos you wouldent have time to change the ECU or get someone to do it for you after it had been recoverd to your house would you :rolleyes:;)

What happens to your masterplan if you are unable to change the ECU yourself, or ask a friend to do it, as you're knocked out?

Or if you have noone available to collect the bike?

I'll tell you what happens, the police will call a recovery company and they'll collect it(at vast expense).

Sure you might get away with it some of the time, but if you're at fault, then you may be found out.

At the end of the day, i personally frown upon people ignoring their restriction period, but its their choice to make.

It just seems that advice from the majority of people on the net is to ignore the restriction regs. People seem to think that noone ever gets done, but i personally know a few who have been.

i guess all i'm saying is let people understand that there are risks and then let them make an informed decision. I'm sure if you asked friends who are now banned, they would tell you the same thing.

[MeridiaNx]

WTF is relevant docs. The law does not actually require any docs.

Couldn't tell you about what is legally required, but I certainly had an official certificate stamped when I had mine restricted. Kinda like an MOT doc to show that it has been approved by a trusted/recognised place.

Also, in response to your comment that 'plod isn't going to go to the expense of testing a bike', I don't see why not? Seeing as breaking the restriction rule invalidates your insurance, this makes it quite a serious motor offence. Granted, an accident may not have occurred but the possibility is still there - a crap analogy would be that you'd get done for drugs or firearm offences if you had either on you, even if you never intended to use it/sell it/whatever with it. Pushing the point a bit I know but you know what I'm getting at.

[yorkie_chris]

I certainly had an official certificate

Official according to who?

They're profiteering w4nkers, a couple of hours dyno time to find what size hole to use in the washers, 4p worth of steel to make them, 0.001p to print the "official legal document" :rolleyes:, 10p for p&p and a load of scaremongering advertising.... £150 ... somebody's added a zero on for a laugh there IMO.

No legal requirement for it, they're not regulated so its not at all like an MOT which is heavily controlled by VOSA.

It doesn't "prove" a thing either, just like an MOT only says your vehicle was roadworthy the second before it rolled out of the test station door.