- This topic has 10 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated April 27, 2009 at 5:10 pm by acidmunky.
April 25, 2009 at 7:13 pm #1047130
Guess what turned up in my boyfriends letterbox today?
It is the first warning so we have to be careful next time in case they impound the car etc etc. I have looked very briefly online about the legislation and I would like to know what they class as “a reason to believe that the person is causing a nuisance or disturbing the public” would they have to have had a number of complaints for this? Or can they just think this?
I’m in utter shock and don’t know what to think! Is it really because they “care” so much about us they don’t want us to party? Or is it because they are not getting a cut?
I actually find it quite irresponsible of the authorities because surely this is going to encourage possibly drugged up/drunk people on the roads when the police turn up.
We were NOT being irresponsible we where in the car sleeping waiting for all that stuff to wear off before we made are way home. We picked up our rubbish and were not by any means causing any problems apart from perhaps doing the fundamental thing of this human existence and LIVING!
I can’t understand why they see this a fit deterrent? This makes me want to party even more to be honest, because this is exactly the type of thing I believe we are fighting against!
Anyone else had a section 59? Has this been going on for long?
Something MUST be done.April 25, 2009 at 7:25 pm #1197693joshd96320Participant
ah thats fuckin bollocks 🙁
that aint causing a public nuisance… o_OApril 25, 2009 at 7:33 pm #1197686
I no I didn’t have any loud music coming from my car!
Cunts! We’ll just have to park on road next wknd and walk!April 25, 2009 at 7:35 pm #1197687
@skattyasfuk 322368 wrote:
I no I didn’t have any loud music coming from my car!
Cunts! We’ll just have to park on road next wknd and walk!
well thats asuming its on a bit of grass your not suppose to drive on again! My have to park on a road anyway, but i’m sure they’ll have some sort of legislation for that to! But at least it’ll be the first one, then we’ll have park somewhere else again!April 25, 2009 at 8:01 pm #1197694acidmunkyParticipant
very naughty…shouldnt go to illegal doooos.i would never go too such a thing:weee::weee::group_hug:bounce_fl:bounce_g:April 25, 2009 at 8:11 pm #1197688
@acidmunky 322372 wrote:
very naughty…shouldnt go to illegal doooos.i would never go too such a thing:weee::weee::group_hug:bounce_fl:bounce_g:
I’ve never done anything illegal in my life mate!April 25, 2009 at 8:12 pm #1197691p0lyParticipant
never downloaded a song or watched a film not paid for?April 25, 2009 at 8:15 pm #1197689
@p0lygon-Window 322377 wrote:
never downloaded a song or watched a film not paid for?
Okay okay! I’ll admit it! I’m a terrorist! 😉April 25, 2009 at 8:28 pm #1197692p0lyParticipant
i knew it!! the bucks terrorist finally reveals themselfApril 25, 2009 at 9:17 pm #1197685Techno VikingParticipant
‘Section 59’ vehicle seizures
An opinion compiled from several sources…
Section 59 Police Reform Act 2002 states that –
Where an officer has reasonable grounds for believing that a motor vehicle is being used in a manner which contravenes Road Traffic Act Section 3 (Careless Driving) OR Section 34 (Driving elsewhere than on a road) AND also the manner of use of the vehicle is causing or has been causing or is likely to cause, alarm distress or annoyance to members of the public, Section 59 can be used to:-
initially give a written warning (valid for twelve months)
(commonly called a Section 59 Notice)
and on a subsequent occasion to seize the vehicle.
(it will probably end up in the crusher, or may be ransomed back to the owner)
A constable in uniform has the power to order the person driving to stop the vehicle, to seize and remove the vehicle, to enter any premises on which the officer has reasonable grounds for believing the motor vehicle to be and to use reasonable force. Seizure can made only if a warning has been given, or believed to have been given, or if a warning is clearly being ignored.
So, usually it’s a two-stage process – a warning or notice first, seizure if you persist or repeat.
Section 3 Road Traffic Act:
3. If a person drives a motor vehicle on a road without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road, he is guilty of an offense.
(Examples are: wheel spinning, skidding, revving engine excessively, handbrake turns etc).
Section 34 Road Traffic Act (extract):
34. (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, if without lawful authority a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle
(a) on to or upon any common land, moorland or land of any other description, not being land forming part of a road, or
(b) on any road being a footpath, bridleway or restricted byway,
he is guilty of an offense.
(So you may only drive on a ‘road’ – including boats. Note that using a Private road without permission is NOT a s.34 offense, it is a trespass, unless it happens to also be a Public Footpath etc.)
(2) It is not an offense under this section to drive a motor vehicle on any land within fifteen yards of a road, being a road on which a motor vehicle may lawfully be driven, for the purpose only of parking the vehicle on that land.
(For younger readers that’s about 15m, but ONLY for parking)
This legislation includes mechanically propelled vehicles, not intended or adapted for use on the road (mini-motos etc.), as well as road-legal motors.
Section 3 RTA will include car parks that are open to the public; and other areas where the public would be expected to have access.
The powers cannot be exercised unless the driver is BOTH using the vehicle anti-socially AND is committing either the section 3 or the section 34 offense. Someone driving in a way that might be considered anti-social but not committing either of these offenses is not liable to having his vehicle seized, nor is someone committing a different motoring offense.
Nor is someone driving sensibly on a footpath – though of course they are still liable to ‘ordinary’ prosecution under s.34
Note that the officer at the time of the warning only has to have reasonable grounds for believing that one of the offenses has been committed, e.g. a believable report. It may transpire later that this is or was not the case, hence the guidelines below.
The warning is given to both the driver and the vehicle. This means that if either are subsequently stopped then a seizure may take place even if another driver is in the original vehicle, or the original driver is another vehicle; be warned! The warning may be verbal, with paperwork to follow, or forms filled in on the spot. In either case the constable must make it clear what is happening.
At the scene:
Firstly remain calm and polite. Getting hot under the collar may only lead to further offenses (Public Order Act or Obstruction ).
Establish what offence you have committed for the officer to initiate a Section 59 Warning or Seizure. It may be prudent to carry a print of the above legislation to discuss with the officer; many officers give out warnings because they have had a report of nuisance vehicles but do not understand the legislation in its entirety.
Ask if the officer intends to prosecute for the offense committed (some forces have a local policy to prosecute). Remember s.59 only applies if you may have already committed an offense, which could be prosecuted for anyway.
Ask the officer for his force number/collar number, name, station and name of his area Commander.
Ask for a copy of any paperwork you are asked to sign.
Do not be argumentative! But do know your onions – are you on a BOAT, UCR, private road etc and is the officer aware of its status?
If you have clearly done something wrong and are being prosecuted get a solicitor.
If you have received a Section 59 warning and are unsure why, or feel that it was unjust or issued inappropriately then you need to establish your position.
Write to the Area Commander at the police station/area that the warning was issued and establish exactly what offense you committed (ie. Section 3 or 34) and what action is being taken. If you know they are prosecuting you then ask for Disclosure (this may be best done through a solicitor). Disclosure will be a pack of documents outlining the Prosecution case and should include witness statements, the officers statement, video copies and such like. This will give you a picture of the case against you in order to fight your corner.
Often at this stage a correctly worded letter or defense statement may negate any summons or court appearance if the warning was issued incorrectly or inappropriately. Keep to the facts and do not rant and rave about your thoughts on the local constabularyApril 27, 2009 at 5:10 pm #1197690
AND also the manner of use of the vehicle is causing or has been causing or is likely to cause, alarm distress or annoyance to members of the public, Section 59 can be used to:-
But do the authorities have to have had complaints to prove this? It doesn’t seem to go into that much detail and I can’t find anywhere that does.
I thought we’d be able to get away with it after reading section 39 for a second!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.