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

Yeah I can completely see where you're coming from, absolutely.

They haven't enforced a failure to produce a restriction certificate... Even if the OP had produced one they could seize it and still require a dyno test to prove one way or the other. If the OP had shown documentary evidence the bike is restricted at the roadside then the bike probably wouldn't have been seized.

I do think that producing it now will be seen as too little too late unfortunately. My advice would be for restricted riders to carry some proof of restriction with them when riding. First question will be "Is it restricted?", guarentee the second question will be "Can you prove it?".

The law doesn't say you have to, but for the sake of a piece of paper under your seat it might make you life a little easier if you come across an arsey Copper who doesn't want to give you a break.

It may well come back to bite them, I certainly look forward to hearing the outcome one way or the other!!

[Bibio]

i'm off as i'm getting a bit antisocial...

hope it all works out for you m8..

[Speedy]

Originally Posted by Bibio

oooohhhh and what happens if the bike comes back as 36bhp then the plod have won and seize his bike then charge him.

Then, if it's a OEM restriction kit, the owner of the bike is surely mitigated because as far as he knows, the bike has been restricted, it's not making full power and the fault lies with the manufacturer/fitter of the restriction device.

I doubt that would stand up in court, but I'd bloody fight with that.

Originally Posted by Bibio

so the plod have the right to seize any motorcycle if the owner is on a restricted licence and they 'think' the bike is de-restricted. even though the owner can produce an MOT, Insurance and a licence.

i'm sorry but in this case i think there is something very very smelly going on and it smells of pork and pizz.

i'd be in the cells by now screaming the roof off and generally making a complete nuisance of myself .

oooohhhh and what happens if the bike comes back as 36bhp then the plod have won and seize his bike then charge him.

lets face it the police can do what they want and we are expected to just sit back and let them.... **** that.

I've tried to post sensible and balanced posts to try and inform people how it works and the possible reasons behind why this might have happened.

No the Police cannot seize every restricted bike they 'think' is unrestricted. They can however seize every bike they 'believe' is unrestricted and being ridden by a restricted license holder. The fact you have insured, taxed and MOT'd is irrelevant, as is the license. You're believed driving other than in accordance.

And yeah, if the bike comes back to 36bhp the OP gets done... whats wrong with that? The restriction limit is 33, not 36..? But that won't be an issue if as the OP says it's correctly restricted.

As for your other constructive comments about the Police.... They the best you can do? *yawn*

Originally Posted by Speedy

Then, if it's a OEM restriction kit, the owner of the bike is surely mitigated because as far as he knows, the bike has been restricted, it's not making full power and the fault lies with the manufacturer/fitter of the restriction device.

I doubt that would stand up in court, but I'd bloody fight with that.

Spot on, he'd get off if he believed the bike was correctly restricted. It's not his fault.

(Though the Court could say it's his responsibility to ensure it is correctly restricted as the rider. Can't see it being in the public interest to pursue though.)

[Speedy]

Originally Posted by Fishtits

Yeah I can completely see where you're coming from, absolutely.

They haven't enforced a failure to produce a restriction certificate... Even if the OP had produced one they could seize it and still require a dyno test to prove one way or the other. If the OP had shown documentary evidence the bike is restricted at the roadside then the bike probably wouldn't have been seized.

I do think that producing it now will be seen as too little too late unfortunately. My advice would be for restricted riders to carry some proof of restriction with them when riding. First question will be "Is it restricted?", guarentee the second question will be "Can you prove it?".

The law doesn't say you have to, but for the sake of a piece of paper under your seat it might make you life a little easier if you come across an arsey Copper who doesn't want to give you a break.

It may well come back to bite them, I certainly look forward to hearing the outcome one way or the other!!

Yes, me too!

Must admit, I think knowing what I know, I'd probably carry a copy of certificate of restriction. Especially if it were to help stop my bike being taken away.

It would almost be better to have DVLA notified by law whether a bike was restricted or not. Might help.

Though it will never stop people taking their restrictors off and riding illegally.

[jonny.boyd]

So Fish in your professional opinion IF OP had said "yes I can prove it, I have a cert at home" do you think they would have given him the chance to follow him back to said location to produce it, or still seized bike?

(I'm asking because I have cert and don't carry it around, and don't want to be penalised for simply not carrying it around, especially when by law im not required to carry a certificate stating my bike has been restricted)

[Speedy]

I think, the lesson to be learnt here to save yourself agro, is keep a copy of it on you. You may still get a "problem" copper, but may get to ride your bike home.

[embee]

I don't know anything about the law, but I do know all about testing engines.

If I were you I'd want every detail of the dyno, when it was calibrated, by whom, where, what the dyno manufacturer claims for accuracy, the calibration of the atmospheric instruments (temperature and pressure correction), the details of where the temp and pressure were measured relative to the engine intake (was the combustion air conditioned or was it "ambient"), was relative humidity measured and what correction was made for it, exit pressure at the exhaust outlet (was extraction applied, if so what airflow/depression was applied and what correction was made to allow for this), tyre pressures before and after test, coolant and oil temperatures before and after test, number of repeat tests, mathematical methodology for determining the "average" and what confidence level resulted from this treatment, date and time of test. I'd also want details of the tester, qualifications, what sort of certification they and the facility have for evidential standard testing.

I'd also want chapter and verse on the correction method applied and the specification of the standard requiring the 25kW (=33.5255 BHP, or is it actually specified as 33.0 BHP? I guess it's 25kW being an EU directive). Somewhere in the rules/regs it should state unambiguously exactly how this power should be determined. If they don't do it strictly in accordance with that standard then it should not be admissable (IMO).

After all that I'd require a new rear tyre if it's been on a roller dyno. Get a statement from the tyre manufacturer regarding this, I bet they wouldn't warrant their tyres after dyno use, in industry we painted all the dyno tyres bright yellow so they never got used on the road.

I'm sure I could think of more questions/data requirements given the incentive.

I still find it difficult to believe that the Police have the authority to unilaterally subject the bike to a dyno test, it must be specifically written somewhere. However, nothing really surprises me these days, sadly. Hope it works out for you.

Originally Posted by jonny.boyd

So Fish in your professional opinion IF OP had said "yes I can prove it, I have a cert at home" do you think they would have given him the chance to follow him back to said location to produce it, or still seized bike?

(I'm asking because I have cert and don't carry it around, and don't want to be penalised for simply not carrying it around, especially when by law im not required to carry a certificate stating my bike has been restricted)

I can't answer for the Officer's involved. If it were me personally - and if the rider had been co-operative, polite, and upfront with me, not rude and arrogant - then yes I would give them the opportunity - providing they don't live a ridiculous distance away!

But from what you've asked me, circumstances permitting i'd always give someone the opportunity to prove their story before I take such a drastic step as seizing their vehicle. As everyone has alluded to, it's not just a bike... It's transport to work, transport to family, for kids, for nipping to the shops, and the repurcussions and costs could be huge. It's a big deal, and not one I take lightly.

My advice would be carry some proof. Why sit on your high horse and state it's not a legal requirement just to be awkward? It may cost you your bike one day.