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

[Red Herring]

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

I dunno I reckon trying to sting someone for £150 PLUS telling them they need to spend £200 on getting their already restricted bike restricted goes beyond blatant dishonesty and well into "just a proper c*nt" territory.

Especially when the alternative is just a slightly red face and probably a rollocking from a superior.

There is a whole world of difference between making a mistake and then not being prepared to admit it, and making a mistake and then altering the facts so that you cover it up.

At the moment I'm fairly convinced the officer should not have seized the bike under the circumstance, and had no power to actually test it on a dyno, but I await their explanation if and when they eventually give it.
There is nothing to suggest that the officers have behaved dishonestly. They clearly thought they could do what they did and it will now be a question of checking to see who is right.

Personally I've made plenty of mistakes over the years and I've always found that the sooner I admit it and put it right the less issues I have. The problem, as I think I said several days ago, is realizing you're made a mistake. I think the latest comments made by the Inspector to the Op tend to suggest they realize their error, so I'm a little disappointed by their attempts to put it right.

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by Red Herring

There is a whole world of difference between making a mistake and then not being prepared to admit it, and making a mistake and then altering the facts so that you cover it up.

At the moment I'm fairly convinced the officer should not have seized the bike under the circumstance, and had no power to actually test it on a dyno, but I await their explanation if and when they eventually give it.
There is nothing to suggest that the officers have behaved dishonestly. They clearly thought they could do what they did and it will now be a question of checking to see who is right.

Personally I've made plenty of mistakes over the years and I've always found that the sooner I admit it and put it right the less issues I have. The problem, as I think I said several days ago, is realizing you're made a mistake. I think the latest comments made by the Inspector to the Op tend to suggest they realize their error, so I'm a little disappointed by their attempts to put it right.

The latest attempts to "put it right" are what makes them a bunch of c*nts. No way that bike is 7bhp over.
As you say, if it was then they wouldn't be able to let him ride it.

I'd almost be willing to bet the dyno guy stuck the temp probe next to the engine to make it read high. IF they bothered testing it at all.

If anyone else was holding someones property saying "just pay us £150 and it will all go away" you'd bloody nick them for extortion!

A little update today, I went to the garage to collect my bike and it turns out the actual results for the dyno but my bike at 35bhp and guess what, There's also more damage on the bike now than when it went, A tear in the seat a melted right indicator an a burnt exhaust, From what the guys at the garage told me, the first rolling road that i was told "broke"... well in actual fact there was a fire there that the officer failed to mention, this to me is starting to turn into a horror story, They also said that the testers said the extra bhp might be from the "aviation fuel" that is apparently in the tank, last i checked 95 unleaded isnt aviation fuel.

It seems like they're fighting me in every way they can, well i'll be fighting back along with getting my £220 back for 7 days holing and 150 tow away.

Originally Posted by Flameboy

A little update today, I went to the garage to collect my bike and it turns out the actual results for the dyno but my bike at 35bhp and guess what, There's also more damage on the bike now than when it went, A tear in the seat a melted right indicator an a burnt exhaust, From what the guys at the garage told me, the first rolling road that i was told "broke"... well in actual fact there was a fire there that the officer failed to mention, this to me is starting to turn into a horror story, They also said that the testers said the extra bhp might be from the "aviation fule" that is apparently in the tank, last i checked 95 unleaded isnt aviation fule.

I'm sorry - but have you paid and accepted the bike in that condition?

[yorkie_chris]

you paid it?

I have just posted the following on the Madlanders thread.
The content of FBs 12.33 post was not known, and HE was not aware of what I have now posted.

Hi ALL,

No doubt most Madlanders are following the 33bhp?" Yes "i dont believe you, I'll seize your bike and take you to court, thread, one of our local members.

As it has a potential of becoming a major problem to most riders who "believe" they are riding to their licensing conditions, 33bhp.
Dependant on what action the police take (if any) could become very costly and have massive implications to a very large number of riders.

There seems to be a gathering number of SV650.org members that are prepared make donations to aid legal support.
With this in mind if it is possible within the rules of the ORG?? I am prepared along with other/s to organise the collection and receipt of a fighting fund, although I think the BMF would also be interested, along no doubt with other representative bodies.

Sadly or luckily? for me I am away to the Plan-O-Man ride on the 6th-11th next, however before and after those dates I would be fully commited.
As yet we are not aware what the OP,FB, will do or want to do therfore my thinking may be a little premature.
Your thoughts/ideas/observations welcome
JOHN

I paid it yes, but I intend to take it as far as possible and hopefully i'll get my money back if they're not prosecuting

[yorkie_chris]

That makes things more difficult. You should have listened to the Herring.

Best of luck with it.

[Kalessin]

Originally Posted by Flameboy

I paid it yes, but I intend to take it as far as possible and hopefully i'll get my money back if they're not prosecuting

I presume you paid it before you were aware of any damage done to your bike? And because you didn't see Red Herring's post in time?

Please consult this thread before making any big decisions in future!

Seriously though, we're all rooting for you. Did you ask your insurance company if you have legal cover with your policy which will allow you to engage a solicitor?

[Moustachio]

Originally Posted by Flameboy

A little update today, I went to the garage to collect my bike and it turns out the actual results for the dyno but my bike at 35bhp and guess what, There's also more damage on the bike now than when it went, A tear in the seat a melted right indicator an a burnt exhaust, From what the guys at the garage told me, the first rolling road that i was told "broke"... well in actual fact there was a fire there that the officer failed to mention, this to me is starting to turn into a horror story, They also said that the testers said the extra bhp might be from the "aviation fuel" that is apparently in the tank, last i checked 95 unleaded isnt aviation fuel.

F**k me!