Section 59

Dominic-Toretto · 19 Sep 2021 at 14:18

Dis86 said:
Nothing there about everyone being given an s59 for just being at a meet. Did you bother to read it?

Read through the entire thread. It includes examples of people being given S59s for just attending a car meet. Thus blanket S59 for attendance.

Dis86 · 19 Sep 2021 at 14:25

Dominic-Toretto said:
Read through the entire thread. It includes examples of people being given S59s for just attending a car meet. Thus blanket S59 for attendance.

It gives one example of "my mate".

Dominic-Toretto · 19 Sep 2021 at 18:49

Dis86 said:
It gives one example of "my mate".

I can't tell if you are just trolling at this point. Here are a few examples from that thread quoted below:

I got one in my impreza for literally parked up idling outside a school waiting for my brother... If i was revving etc then fair enough but nothing you can do. Just a piece of broken legislation that police use when they're feeling especially lazy/can't prove you done anything.

A female police officer then approached me as I was sat in my car, and started to threaten me with a Section 59 offence, saying that I could have my car siezed and be fined. Bear in mind I was sat in a car with the engine turned off, had not done anything silly, or illegal.
So I said I was leaving, and drove to another carpark, just with my 1 other friend so we could have a chat. This officer approached me AGAIN, threatening both of us with Section 59's and our cars would be siezed.

A mate of mine got an S59 for being parked up eating a McDonalds after work in his modified Golf because there was a car meet going on and they were dishing them out to everyone, he was on the other side of the car park on his own.
There's a lot of examples of S59 abuse by the police and I think it's a badly thought out piece of legislation.
FWIW, I attend a lot of car meets in a modified car and my interactions with the police have been 99% very positive.

Dis86 · 19 Sep 2021 at 18:51

Dominic-Toretto said:
I can't tell if you are just trolling at this point. Here are a few examples from that thread quoted below:

I mean the first one literally goes along with what I said "my mate" and he then goes on to say 99% of his interactions have been positive.

The other two have nothing to do with car meets.

So...keep trying buddy!

Dominic-Toretto · 19 Sep 2021 at 18:56

Dis86 said:
I mean the first one literally goes along with what I said "my mate" and he then goes on to say 99% of his interactions have been positive.

The other two have nothing to do with car meets.

So...keep trying buddy!

Hah, how can you say the mcdonalds example above is nothing to do with car meets? The guy literally got an S59 because he was parked in the same carpark where a car meet was occurring. It is irrelevant if it was "his mate".

A mate of mine got an S59 for being parked up eating a McDonalds after work in his modified Golf because there was a car meet going on and they were dishing them out to everyone, he was on the other side of the car park on his own.
There's a lot of examples of S59 abuse by the police and I think it's a badly thought out piece of legislation.
FWIW, I attend a lot of car meets in a modified car and my interactions with the police have been 99% very positive.

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=10&t=809309&i=0
Does this one have nothing to do with car meets too? Guy goes shopping, car meet occurs in the same car park. Get's S59

Well I had a fantastic evening last night. Went down to the local Tescos to do the shopping with the other half. Took the Clio cause it needed a bit of a run out. Parked up as normal and noticed a panda car cruising around but thought nothing of it. Came out about an hour later, noticed a small gathering of chav wagons at the other end of the car park which is nothing out of the ordinary so again I though nothing of it. Shopping in the away we went but didn't get out before the panda car we saw before came belting across the car park with the full show going. Naturally I stopped thinking it was just a routine check.

Got the tap on the window 'would you mind stepping out sir' (at least I was addressed properly but thats where the pleasantries ended) 'Would you mind telling me why you are driving around a car park at this time of night'? Slightly bemused I explained that I'd been shopping with the missus which we do a bit later than normal to miss the crowds (it was still only 8.30 though) to which I received a disbelieving look. I had to produce the receipt!

'We've had reports of loud music and engines being revved, nothing to do with you was it'? Showed the pc the scaffolding in the boot and then the switch panel where the stereo should be and reiterated the fact we'd been in the shop for the past hour.

'Your exhaust is quite loud though isn't it'. 'Not massively, no. It was measured at 89dB last time the car was scrutineered' Arguing was probably not the best thing to do seeing as the pc was determined to get me for something.

'Ah competition car is it then'? 'Yes I use it for road rallying (thinking he was taking an interest)'
'Well i'll have to do some checks then' He proceeded to check absolutely everything getting redder faced by the minute. Goes to have a word with his partner.

'Right sir, im issuing you a section 59 notice blah blah blah'.
'Umm whats that for then'?
'Using a competition vehicle on the road'
'Thats not illegal though is it, especially as said vehicle is used in open road events and scrutineered as such'
'That is a competition exhaust and is causing a disturbance'
'Fantastic. Is this going to cost me anything'?
'Not at the moment but if you get caught again blah blah blah'
'Well there we are, there will be a strongly worded letter on its way to your chief constable tomorrow morning, goodnight'

So there we are. Section 59'd for going shopping. Still only a year left at uni then we're off to whatever county will take us, thank god.

I guess its highly likely that if my letter falls on deaf ears then if I meet the same pc again, I'll have my car confiscated at which point I think I'll get the MSA involved.

Rant over. Sorry for the length, got a bit carried away. The law really is an ass.....

Dis86 · 19 Sep 2021 at 19:27

Dominic-Toretto said:
Hah, how can you say the mcdonalds example above is nothing to do with car meets? The guy literally got an S59 because he was parked in the same carpark where a car meet was occurring. It is irrelevant if it was "his mate".

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=10&t=809309&i=0
Does this one have nothing to do with car meets too? Guy goes shopping, car meet occurs in the same car park. Get's S59

You are assuming that 3rd hand information is correct.

The shopping guy...his exhaust was quite clearly loud so yeah, understandable. Probably failed the attitude test.

Dominic-Toretto · 19 Sep 2021 at 19:47

Dis86 said:
You are assuming that 3rd hand information is correct.
The shopping guy...his exhaust was quite clearly loud so yeah, understandable. Probably failed the attitude test.

You cannot dismiss the account purely because it is 3rd hand. It contains sufficient information and is inline with other 1st hand reports.

The shopping guy...his exhaust was quite clearly loud so yeah, understandable. Probably failed the attitude test.

Erm no, this is not a reason no matter how loud his exhaust is. The S59 legislation clearly states:

Vehicles used in manner causing alarm, distress or annoyance
(1)Where a constable in uniform has reasonable grounds for believing that a motor vehicle is being used on any occasion in a manner which—

(a)contravenes section 3 or 34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (c. 52) (careless and inconsiderate driving and prohibition of off-road driving), and
(b)is causing, or is likely to cause, alarm, distress or annoyance to members of the public,

Keyword is "and", both condition A and B must be met for issuing of a section 59. Explain to me how a loud exhaust constitutes "Careless and inconsiderate driving".

The "attitude test" is irrelevant, he should not have been S59'ed for the above as he does not meet the criteria set out in the legislation.

Diddums · 19 Sep 2021 at 21:55

Dominic-Toretto said:
I am not going to sit here and spoon feed you information.

Well that worked well then

As for OP, my spidey senses are tingling. This is either pure fantasy, or the OP is known by the cops rather well, and apparently not for the right reasons. I suspect that if this story is true, that the crushing is well deserved.

GinG · 19 Sep 2021 at 21:59

Still think there is more to it...

Whilst a S59 is simple paperwork it's still paperwork to do...

Guaranteed that there is a massive bit of information missing to this little story, especially when a seizure is organised...justification is needed to higher pay grades in order for the vehicle to be seized and impounded.

bJN · 20 Sep 2021 at 10:06

I don't see what there is to get huffy about? If you've genuinely done nothing wrong and dispute the Officer's interpretation then take it with with the local force's Chief. Not a lot to it; they need to prove both parts of the conditions being met, which if you've done nothing wrong, will be impossible. If that's too much hard work then clearly there's more to the Tory and you've likely received it for the right reason.

YMMV but I never received an S59 when I had the Integra and attended several different meets, and was in the vicinity of some, where people were being dicks and they were dealt with appropriately by the attending officers. As the old saying goes, "chat **** get banged".

Temujin · 20 Sep 2021 at 10:22

Dominic-Toretto said:
Unfortunately S59 legislation is abused by police, and is difficult to defend your self against.

Think the jury is still undecided regarding your S59 is it not, squiddy?

TheVoice · 20 Sep 2021 at 11:01

Temujin said:
Think the jury is still undecided regarding your S59 is it not, squiddy?

Ah so that's who this is. Suddenly it all makes a bit more sense.

Burnsy2023 · 20 Sep 2021 at 11:34

GinG said:
Guaranteed that there is a massive bit of information missing to this little story, especially when a seizure is organised...justification is needed to higher pay grades in order for the vehicle to be seized and impounded.

Whilst justification is needed if asked for, depending on the force, I'm not sure the process is as robust as most people would hope. Seizure where I am requires specific training but doesn't require any check by anyone else.

Dis86 · 20 Sep 2021 at 15:46

Dominic-Toretto said:
You cannot dismiss the account purely because it is 3rd hand. It contains sufficient information and is inline with other 1st hand reports.

Erm no, this is not a reason no matter how loud his exhaust is. The S59 legislation clearly states:

Keyword is "and", both condition A and B must be met for issuing of a section 59. Explain to me how a loud exhaust constitutes "Careless and inconsiderate driving".

The "attitude test" is irrelevant, he should not have been S59'ed for the above as he does not meet the criteria set out in the legislation.

Does seem a bit iffy on the first count if the guy was stationary and had always been.
However, again this is a second hand account by someone who is clearly aggrieved. It's not very often that someone turns around and goes "yup, I was driving like a penis, my bad".

A classic example of this was a sting set up at a rail crossing a few years back where drivers were frequently going through the lights. When pulled over every single one denied it until they were shown the video evidence.

Silent_Scone · 22 Sep 2021 at 11:32

http://emergency-services.news/met-police-seize-21-vehicle-in-one-night-during-car-meet-operation/

Croydon, what an incredible surprise

There you go Dis, Operation Crosshair. Now you know lol

Relevant:
"Police seize vehicles that have received two warnings in 12 months. "

Dis86 · 22 Sep 2021 at 11:58

Silent_Scone said:
http://emergency-services.news/met-police-seize-21-vehicle-in-one-night-during-car-meet-operation/

Croydon, what an incredible surprise

There you go Dis, Operation Crosshair. Now you know lol

Relevant:
"Police seize vehicles that have received two warnings in 12 months. "

"There were approximately 300 vehicles involved in the meet."

So they're not just giving everyone an s59!

Silent_Scone · 22 Sep 2021 at 12:05

Dis86 said:
"There were approximately 300 vehicles involved in the meet."

So they're not just giving everyone an s59!

Nah. Bet it felt like they were, though. :cry:

Temujin · 22 Sep 2021 at 12:15

But those facts do not support the claims made by some in the thread, obviously the facts are wrong!!111

Diddums · 22 Sep 2021 at 13:22

Temujin said:
But those facts do not support the claims made by some in the thread, obviously the facts are wrong!!111

Well, you're familiar with Squidward right? Sorry, "Dominic Toretto" LOL

grudas · 22 Sep 2021 at 13:28

Silent_Scone said:
http://emergency-services.news/met-police-seize-21-vehicle-in-one-night-during-car-meet-operation/

Croydon, what an incredible surprise

There you go Dis, Operation Crosshair. Now you know lol

Relevant:
"Police seize vehicles that have received two warnings in 12 months. "

That spot has been going to poo for a while. I moved out of the area just before the meets started there.. racing on the wrong side of the road, pedestrians injured etc all happened often. Not sure who goes there but no one I know do. And I know a lot of regular meet goers.