Visors! BEWARE! - SV650.org

17-10-04, 10:26 AM

After my little ding, the police returned my helmet to my parents minus the visor.

My helmet was a Takai Terror with a slightly smoked visor which had both an E stamp, and "For day use only" stampped on the side. As the accident happened at 9:30ish in the morning, I was abiding by the statement on the helmet.

Anyway, the police removed the visor as it was deemed to be illegal and be too dark for the road, even though it had both these stamps. As a result I have warned Hein Gericke to check it out (where I bought mine from).

SO a word of warning to those who have tinted visors, you may just want to confirm with an independant party that your visors are legal, because depending on what mood the rozzers are in, if you are wearing on of these and you have an accident, they may hold you liable simply because of this, even though you helmet states different.

17-10-04, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sincs

...and you have an accident, they may hold you liable simply because of this, even though you helmet states different.

They may want to (even try to) but do remember that they would need to prove that this was the contributing factor in a court of law and with a decent solictor/barrister (armed with the facts) you should be able to prove otherwise.

.

17-10-04, 12:24 PM

On the T1 (accident report) there are boxes that you have to circle which ask the time of day, weather conditions, road conditions, light conditions even what day of the week it is....so that would stand out if you visor was indicated as a contributry factor.

17-10-04, 03:12 PM

Mate, I'm not sure that the police have the legal right to retain your visor - particularly if it's road legal. I'd check it out if I were you.

17-10-04, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svsk2

Mate, I'm not sure that the police have the legal right to retain your visor - particularly if it's road legal. I'd check it out if I were you.

If it relates to evidence of an offence....

17-10-04, 07:55 PM

The visor is not contributable evidence if the visor manufacturer and its user are abiding by laws which the visor manufacturer appears to have aheared to.

The user was abiding by the manufacturers usage guidelines. If these guidelines are illegal there is a clear case for sueing the manufacturer. If not, then you can sue the police for theft of property.

17-10-04, 08:10 PM

I remember the police bloke gave mine a good checking over in A&E, so they do look at them if you have a smash.

17-10-04, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcharnley

The visor is not contributable evidence if the visor manufacturer and its user are abiding by laws which the visor manufacturer appears to have aheared to.

The user was abiding by the manufacturers usage guidelines. If these guidelines are illegal there is a clear case for sueing the manufacturer. If not, then you can sue the police for theft of property.

Nonsense.

.

17-10-04, 08:23 PM

How is it nonsense? The visor company have told him its legal to wear during the day?

17-10-04, 08:24 PM

I think it may be a case of ****ed up communication in standards. Rozzers use one lot, and the manufacturers use another.

From personal experience it really does depend on the mood of the cop what he deems to be legal & illegal

17-10-04, 10:26 AM	#1
Sincs Guest Posts: n/a	Visors! BEWARE! After my little ding, the police returned my helmet to my parents minus the visor. My helmet was a Takai Terror with a slightly smoked visor which had both an E stamp, and "For day use only" stampped on the side. As the accident happened at 9:30ish in the morning, I was abiding by the statement on the helmet. Anyway, the police removed the visor as it was deemed to be illegal and be too dark for the road, even though it had both these stamps. As a result I have warned Hein Gericke to check it out (where I bought mine from). SO a word of warning to those who have tinted visors, you may just want to confirm with an independant party that your visors are legal, because depending on what mood the rozzers are in, if you are wearing on of these and you have an accident, they may hold you liable simply because of this, even though you helmet states different.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Clear visors	Binky	Bikes - Talk & Issues	13	17-03-09 08:03 PM
Visors	suzsv650	Bikes - Talk & Issues	3	17-09-06 10:20 PM
Visors?	WALRUS	Bikes - Talk & Issues	2	10-06-06 11:33 AM
anti-fog visors	jim@55	Bikes - Talk & Issues	19	16-02-06 05:05 PM
anti-fog visors	Saracen	Idle Banter	4	06-01-70 01:40 PM

17-10-04, 12:24 PM	#3
fraser01 Guest Posts: n/a	On the T1 (accident report) there are boxes that you have to circle which ask the time of day, weather conditions, road conditions, light conditions even what day of the week it is....so that would stand out if you visor was indicated as a contributry factor.

17-10-04, 03:12 PM	#4
svsk2 Guest Posts: n/a	Mate, I'm not sure that the police have the legal right to retain your visor - particularly if it's road legal. I'd check it out if I were you.

17-10-04, 07:55 PM	#6
snoopy Guest Posts: n/a	The visor is not contributable evidence if the visor manufacturer and its user are abiding by laws which the visor manufacturer appears to have aheared to. The user was abiding by the manufacturers usage guidelines. If these guidelines are illegal there is a clear case for sueing the manufacturer. If not, then you can sue the police for theft of property.

17-10-04, 08:10 PM	#7
Ed Guest Posts: n/a	I remember the police bloke gave mine a good checking over in A&E, so they do look at them if you have a smash.

17-10-04, 08:23 PM	#9
snoopy Guest Posts: n/a	How is it nonsense? The visor company have told him its legal to wear during the day?

17-10-04, 08:24 PM	#10
Sincs Guest Posts: n/a	I think it may be a case of ****ed up communication in standards. Rozzers use one lot, and the manufacturers use another. From personal experience it really does depend on the mood of the cop what he deems to be legal & illegal