Law Changes

[Demonz]

Are these true:

My dealer was told by a couple of motorcycle coppers that loud cans are now legal so long as they dont have the Not For Road Use stamp. They dont need to have any of the required stamps anymore. Aparantly loud cans save lives - Can anyone confirm this??

I haven't got a MCN mag for months...

Also Mobile phone users will now get 3 points and a fine up from £30. This I heard on the news last week with immanent law changes - yipee.

[jonboy]

It's a grey area. It's not that cans without a marking are legal, it's that they definitely aren't illegal — if that makes sense. There are basically two camps: the MOT boys, who will usually pass a can that isn't specifically marked as being illegal providing it's not so loud it's daft, and Plod, who will likely give you a ticket for a loud can if they can't specifically determine that it's legal.

Now that means you have to engage a solicitor if you wish to fight it, and the whole thing becomes a long, drawn-out, and expensive affair.

The situation is pitiful — two sets of rules, both apparently quite legal.

As for "Loud cans saves lives", um, that most definitely ain't something that you'll ever hear Plod utter.


.

[northwind]

You can literally get your MOT, get stopped right outside, be given a rectificatin notice, ride back into the testing station, get approved, ride to the police station and present your succesful rectification notice, then get stopped again outside the police station... Not that it's ever happened, I think, but it could. The system works :roll:

Still, it's only the daft ambiguity that means I can get my bike easily through an MOT, so I chouldn't complain.

[glade]

May I direct you to...

Association of Chief Police Officer of England, Wales & Northern Ireland

Motorcycle Enforcement Strategy For England, Wales & Northern Ireland

http://www.acpo.police.uk/asp/policies/Data/motorcycle_enforcement_strategy_website_22x06x06.d oc

Particularly section 3 - "Principles of Enforcement", subsection "Illegal exhausts"

In cases with no noise annoyance, consider the use of the Vehicle Defect Rectification Scheme and appropriate advice.

Where noise annoyance is a factor, prosecution is recommended, with consideration to be given to the use of Section 59 Police Reform Act 2002 for persistent offenders or excessive noise nuisance.

This issue affects the wider public and in many cases serves to alienate them from motorcyclists in general by reinforcing stereotypes. The Police have a duty to protect all road users and communities, it is therefore necessary to take proactive action against the illegal use of exhausts on motorcycles.

It is accepted that not all forces use the PNC to record and administer Section 59 warnings and seizure notices. It is recommended that the PNC should be used for this purpose

[Spiderman]

I asked the last place where i did my MOT if they had a problem with after market cans, the reponse was simply "does it say NOT FOR ROAD USE ON IT? " No, says i and he has no problem with it.

But bike cops have had a polite word about the baffle missing from what is otherwise a road legal can and i cant blame em for that. Touch wood, no fines or notices have followed.

As for mobiles, they wre talking about points a while ago but the last i read they seemed to be in favour of higher fines instead. Yeh suprise suprise, if the govt can find a way to earn out if it then they'll get the boys in blue to collect the cash for them. :roll:
And today i read that they want harsher sentances for drivers who kill... Those targeted under the crackdown could include motorists who cause fatalities while using their mobile phones (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23378097-details/Drivers+who+kill+face+tougher+jail+sentences/article.do)

Personaly i think more driver education before they kill somone rather than punishment after they do.

[Paws]

Both my bikes (sv and zx9) get through a mot with the race cans on as long as the "Not for road use" stamp is showing, bit of black tape just before i take them in does the trick. 8)

[Demonz]

The cans issue was a recent update I believe - didnt want to bring up the old thread on it but thought maybe some new updates may have been released internally to the plod.

The phone points was spoken by Mr Ladyman himself on the news - with immenent law changes to be passed. So from the horses mouth so to speak :wink:

[andy]

Personaly i think more driver education before they kill somone rather than punishment after they do.

I agree, but sadly it wouldn't work so I think the best route is the threat of severe punishment if they choose to ignore all the advice and laws......

[rob13]

Theres no law change, again its the cops discretion as to the disposal to which he wishes to use to address the offence. not too many 24/7 cops would be able to penalise bikers with exhausts because they dont know that area of the law or because its a grey area, they'll not approach it. The more informed 24/7 or Traffic might stop you and issue you with a VDRS. Once issues, intelligence is usually put on the vehicle to say that that has been given. This means that if you're stopped twice, then the cop may decide to warn you again with another VDRS or he may decide to issue a ticket. The harsher penalty would be to issue a S59 warning which basically is a 2 strike rule. The warning is issued and recorded and if the vehicle is seen to be causing a nuisance again then they can confiscate. I would be surprised if it were used on Mr general Public however its more effective on Mr public nuisance e.g the kid down the road driving scramblers on areas theyre not supposed to.

At the end of the day, and i cant stress this enough its the attitude to which you approach the situation, despite the attitude of the cop (and some stink) just be as polite as possible. Starting an argument is likely to land you in more bother

[dirtydog]

i tought this was a thread about Gary :oops: :oops:

[valleyboy]

:lol: