"33bhp?" Yes "i dont believe you, I'll seize your bike and take you to court"

[Dave20046]

Originally Posted by Flameboy

“He now says, a certificate or plate is not required by law but if stopped by the police you should be able to prove that the bike is restricted”.

How the feck do you do that? "Just sit on the back officer and tell me if I manage to get it over 95mph"

[Messie]

Just my opinion, but I think they thought you were trying to ride off and get away when you got going again just prior to pulling in at a safe place. They jumped to conclusions but when you then did stop and were clearly not a joyriding illegal plonker they had to do something to save face.
His attitude then and subsequently, stinks.

Still doesn't sound right to me. Don't understand where the grounds to suspect its not restricted are coming from. I would defo speak to an Inspector tonight and contact a solicitor tomorrow.

The reason behind stopping you is - in my opinion - a fair one. You were stopped in the middle of a road having a chat. On speaking to you it's reasonable to suspect you may be under-age for the size of the bike. Baring in mind any vehicle on a road can be stopped.

And the burden of proof IS on you to prove the restriction. Same way the burden of proof is on a driver to prove insurance and a license. Traffic law works differently to criminal-type offences where the burden of proof is on the prosecution.

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by Fishtits

I would guess the reason for seizure is DOTIAWL, and to prove the offence it needs dyno testing. It's just all these added extras to the story which just seem so peculiar!

Mind you, I'm only comparing it to where I work, it might be SOP where the OP is.

Can they dyno it? "oh yes, we take your bike and run it flat out with the risk of tyre damage".


Surely "riding other than in accordance with a license" IS a criminal offence, so the burden of proof is on the law? Since there is no legal requirement for the certificate unlike and insurance certificate, V5, MOT cert and license!

[Bibio]

something stinks of pork

[Geodude]

My local bike pc's and blue knights members dont understand this either and think is also a bit odd? Told them to have a look on here for info.

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Can they dyno it? "oh yes, we take your bike and run it flat out with the risk of tyre damage".


Surely "riding other than in accordance with a license" IS a criminal offence, so the burden of proof is on the law? Since there is no legal requirement for the certificate unlike and insurance certificate, V5, MOT cert and license!

No, Traffic offences are not crimes....a criminal offence is something like theft, breach of the peace, assault, rape etc.

Any breach of traffic law is an offence, yes, but not criminal...

I wouldn't stake my pension on it, but I'm fairly certain it's up to the driver/rider to prove they have insurance and a license, and not for the Police to prove they don't.

[Bibio]

i have to ask the question again.

have you sought legal representation?