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

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Just because you got a sticker does NOT mean it is in any way a legal requirement.

FI international been giving these stickers out for at least 3 years.

Agreed, I didn't imply it was, I implied that the officer might have thought it was.

I didn't get one for my SV, and nobody I know who is restricted did either, until myself, now.

But why put a sticker on the chassis anyway? It could easily be ripped off or the bike derestricted anyway.
I was still under the impression there was still no enforcement of any kind around having a certificate or documentation regarding the restriction?!

Yeah, I read a thing about it not stating in the law at all that proof is needed, let alone from FI International... It just.. needs to be...

I have a feeling someone is going to quote and attack me

Originally Posted by allantheboss

I have a feeling someone is going to quote and attack me

Think i remember reading earlier in this thread (not gna try and find it as by the time i have done we will have been proven right or wrong numerous times) that no proof is required when asked, or that no certificate is needed

As stated many times, no certificate or sticker is required by law.

I concur that no sticker required but a certificate will make for an easier life...I asked the local West Mercia force direct

Like I said, still no legal requirement for one.

Originally Posted by Milky Bar Kid

Like I said, still no legal requirement for one.

MBK, can you look at the FI internationals home page, and read what they have said about the restriction please? apparently they have written proof stating that the 'burden of proof is on the rider to prove the bike is restriced'.

i know you have said its not, we all know its not and i know its not but can you give your professional opionion/interpritation of what they have said on their website please?

i cant see how its guilty until proven inncoent? even if you murder someone its still innocent until proven guilty....

the help would be much apprciated.

thanks

The burden of proof is on the rider, as has been stated by RH and others in this thread. It's the same with any other traffic regulation, the burden of proof is on the driver/rider of the vehicle.

However, as has been said on here many times too, not all of us would take a certificate at face value as they can be easily purchased from ebay and the likes.

It's a catch 22 really.

[embee]

It's a fundamentally flawed law when the burden of proof is on the rider to prove that the machine produces "not more than 25kW net" (note - it cannot be a requirement to prove that it is "restricted" since the licence does not require it to be restricted, just a maximum power limit), but there is no practical means by which the rider can actually prove it (ref. all our discussions regarding the testing to an appropriate standard). No previously drafted piece of paper will prove it, therefore any piece of paper or sticker or whatever is totally worthless and should carry no weight whatsoever with any Police Officer challenging the rider.

One could argue that a statement under oath by the rider that the machine produces not more than 25kW should be sufficient, I have stated it, it is true, therefore I have proved my case, QED.

It should then be up to powers-that-be to prove (to whatever standard they decide is necessary) that the statement is not true. Then again I'm not a lawyer.