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

[yorkie_chris]

Plod cannot try to scare folk. If I damaged someones bike and threatened them to avoid them claiming damages from me I would end up locked up!

I dunno what word is, extortion maybe? But it's definitely illegal and definitely not cricket.

Maybe the black box can be reprogrammed but that can easily be verified by sending the box to Suzuki (or others) for verification. But there should be security seals on it or something in the design to prevent tampering. Where is the part of the legislation that deals with this and how enforcement is dealt with.

The dyno test DID prove that it was restricted but getting a result of 11% over shows something is wrong.

Will the Police agree that something is wrong with how this legislation is enforced ?

[yorkie_chris]

What legislation? Go find bit of paper that says the rules! There isn't one to my knowledge (or these police either), and there is problem.
You can tamper with million things on bike, seals or not, there is a way around anything.

Dyno test didn't prove owt. It is well known by anyone who tunes bikes that dynos are only good for comparing one run to another and it is misleading to take their outputs as absolute because so much can change day to day.

If it was "proof" then he would be in court. Like has been said repeatedly, it is not reliable way of testing in the slightest. Anyway, until I see that dyno chart then bike was never on a dyno and police made figure up out of air!

Standard output for an unrestricted 650 is 69hp

According to FB the "Police test" was 11% over which is around 36hp.

So the "Police test" did prove that it was restricted. But as others have pointed out they DID NOT prove what the actual hp was for all the reasons that have previously been given.

I think that a restricted box would be designed to put out less than 33hp in all conditions. So it is probably set to say 30hp. So the "Police test" error is maybe nearer 20%.

You are right we do need to see what the legislation wording says regarding enforcement and measurement. It must be out there.

On the Police powers of seizure there is a useful link:

http://www.kent.police.uk/About%20Ke...es/m/m095.html

It is interesting to see that it is undergoiong full review.

Seems they do not need to provide any paperwork when seizing the vehicle. Which is an open door for any wanabee criminals posing as police officers. Try explaining that to your insurance.

I think the Police later changed their reasons for seizure to PACE. This link covers that but it is less clear how they used those powers.

http://www.leeds.ac.uk/law/hamlyn/searchp.htm

That what you have linked to is different that is for anti-social use of a vehicle, before it can be seized a warning should be issued first.

Second I would suggest had the bike been siezed under PACE 1984, then a different law would have been used.

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by Trixy750

I think that a restricted box would be designed to put out less than 33hp in all conditions. So it is probably set to say 30hp. So the "Police test" error is maybe nearer 20%.

That would not surprise me, have a read up on dynojets "correction" factors. They are based on a yamaha brochure

[Red Herring]

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

.....Anyway, until I see that dyno chart then bike was never on a dyno and police made figure up out of air!

I think that's a little rash YC. There seems to be plenty of evidence the bike was put on a dyno, including an account from the garage about how it was done and the damage sustained in the process....

[embee]

I understand RH has had some contact with the people involved in this case, so a couple of serious questions to RH.

Has any conclusion been arrived at as to what the value of the test was? Was it of any evidential value, would it have been used to decide whether to charge FB with an offence (irrespective of what answer it came up with)? Did the force involved actually consider what it would/could do with the answer before it decided to have the test done?

Ultimately I suppose I'm wondering how much it has cost me (the tax payer) to undertake this test, and whether it was money well spent or has it all been a complete waste of money and resource?

Will it have concentrated any minds on the question of how such an issue should be approached in future? Would they do exactly the same thing all over again in another case?

Originally Posted by Red Herring

I think that's a little rash YC. There seems to be plenty of evidence the bike was put on a dyno, including an account from the garage about how it was done and the damage sustained in the process....

Surely they need a dyno to prove any reading though...

[Red Herring]

All I did was try and help FB restore communications with the force involved.
I deliberately didn't get involved in any discussion with them over what should or should not have been done as that would not have been particularly professional given my limited knowledge of what happened and why. I do know FB is currently awaiting a decision and I'm sure all will become clear when it is reached.