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

Originally Posted by tommo891

The truth can really hurt sometimes......lol

Well it isn't going on filling pot holes is it!

Originally Posted by Red Herring

That's quite a read that is, and it seems most things have been said.
I think there are two different issues here, the first thing being can the police do what they did, the second being should they have done it.

With regard to the first it rather depends on what legislation they elected to use. Certain police officers (read "most") are authorized to test and inspect vehicles on a road but this power only extends to test certain things. The power produced by the engine isn't one of them so if they did use this legislation (Sect 67 RTA) they might be on a sticky wicket, especially as they don't have a power to seize it to examine it.

If on the other hand they have reasonable grounds to suspect the OP has committed an offence (for example he's driving other than in accordance with a driving licence) they could have used their powers under PACE (The Police and Criminal Evidence Act) to seize anything that is evidence of that offence. The main problem here is that they will need to show that they had a reasonable suspicion before they seized the bike, they can't seize it, examine it, and then form their suspicion from the examination. Incidentally if you do seize a vehicle under PACE then there is no requirement to issue a receipt or other paperwork.

Up here that would be classed as seizing it as a production. Again need to have reasonable suspicion a crime has taken place and to be honest, we only seize vehicles in extreme circumstances...like the case I reported at the back end of last year which included 7 S2 charges.

There has been some mention of the powers under Sect.165 (the no insurance/driving licence legislation). Here there is a requirement for the officer to have a belief rather than a reasonable suspicion of the offence so it is actually a higher expectation, and if the officer believes he is committing the offence what evidence is that belief based on?
Sect165 also requires the officer to serve the form, he can't with-hold it to prevent the vehicle being reclaimed, they have no power to retain the vehicle.

I think our rules on this differ slightly. EG, we cannot seize a car for no insurance based solely on PNC. We must either contact MIB or issue an HORT/1.

If the officer did seize the bike on a belief it would have to be a helluva lot more belief than "you look too young".

Incidentally the Op mentions the officers were in an unmarked car. Were they in uniform? Powers to stop vehicles and to test inspect them on a road are restricted to officers in uniform...

On the second point should the officers have done what they did even if they did have the authority to do so, well that would very much depend on the circumstance. I've got a fair bit of experience in this area and I've never known a bike to be seized for a power check, unless it had been involved in a serious crash. As some have alluded to I suspect there may be a bit more to this story than has been disclosed.

I also suspect there is a fair bit more to this story. I find it astonishing that any cop would seize a bike to test it for restriction on merely a hunch. You would get your behind kicked for the bill for a start! Like I said earlier on, our Force would never authorise us to seize a bike to put on a dyno unless involved in a serious incident. As in, someone is dead or nearly dead serious.

[Ch00]

Originally Posted by tommo891

Summer times here, who wants to be stuck in an office when you can be out and about harrassing the local population.....lol

Would be nice for the office people to see what the streets are like if they could find them from there irvory towers

I'm surprised the OP has gone all day without posting back... He was supposed to be seeing the Duty Insp yesterday afternoon and the dyno test was today. I can only guess one of two things happened...

1) He got his bike back today and is out making up for lost time, or;
2) He absolutely lost it at the nick this morning and is in a cell waiting for Court tomorrow!

[yorkie_chris]

Thought #2 did cross my mind.

Originally Posted by Fishtits

I'm surprised the OP has gone all day without posting back... He was supposed to be seeing the Duty Insp yesterday afternoon and the dyno test was today. I can only guess one of two things happened...

1) He got his bike back today and is out making up for lost time, or;
2) He absolutely lost it at the nick this morning and is in a cell waiting for Court tomorrow!

or he thinks we have realised there is more to the story and is keep schtum....or am I being cynical?

[embee]

I think it was Constable Savage


(how do you get the embedded youtube thing to work?)

Originally Posted by Milky Bar Kid

or he thinks we have realised there is more to the story and is keep schtum....or am I being cynical?

Cynical... Stating the obvious.... It's a fine line sometimes!

Originally Posted by Milky Bar Kid

or he thinks we have realised there is more to the story and is keep schtum....or am I being cynical?

Well its part of the ABC I shall revert to my cynical state of mind on this as there is much info lacking here on exactly what happened, there is no chance he got no paper work. There is also something on paper when a vehicle is taken.

I don't have anything like this, just a certificate somewhere, and a slower bike.