Good luck. Most people would give up before then. I know with my old boss he challenged it but the police said it was sound as he had caused a nuisance to a member of the public would had made a claim and he didn't fancy all the time and money taking it to a high court where he still might end up losing.
The Cryptolambo had gone to the moon... Time for Cryptolambo 2!!!
- Thread starter kindai
- Start date
Good luck. Most people would give up before then. I know with my old boss he challenged it but the police said it was sound as he had caused a nuisance to a member of the public would had made a claim and he didn't fancy all the time and money taking it to a high court where he still might end up losing.
They have have a choice, they are accountable for their actions and I have legal access to any videos they have of me or my property.
Of course he will lose - the first question will be:
And his answer will be "yes" and then the court will lose interest in any further allegations.At which point Kindai will be asked under oath
'did you nail the throttle whilst leaving Sainsburys'
I was in full control of the car at all times, well within its capabilities (didnt even make it into peak torque powerband) and my own, and posed no danger to anyone including myself.
Soldato
For argument's sake. I(and many other forum members) could be fully in control of any of my/there cars and still be considered any of the following: considered to be too loud, speeding, "dangerous driving" (yeah taking a roundabout at 50mph+ would seem dangerous in a 90's micra maybe not a modern performance car etc). But they all fall under your umbrella definition of "within the cars capabilities and your definition of "in control". Which I'm sure joe public and mr concerned police officer will strongly disagree.
Years ago when I was 21 I lost control of my (1st) Supra in the wet at 50mph in a 60mph zone. One of the homeowners came out and said to the police "I heard him coming from miles away, he must have been speeding!". I hadn't been speeding, I just had a loud straight through exhaust. I lost control in the wet as I was driving a car from the 90's with no aids and had only had my license a few months. Totally beyond my skill level, and yet people quickly try and latch onto the "speed" and "noise" factor, especially when its packaged in a fast, shouty car with an unlikely driver (in my case a young long haired bloke).
This can be argued until the cows come home. If they can't do you on speed, they will argue on something else: noise, "dangerous driving" etc. I personally don't think you will get anywhere. But whatever, it's not my life.
Im not sure a 2 second blip of the throttle on a straight bit of empty road leading in and out of a carpark is ever going to pass for, well anything really.
Thats why they had to peddle backwards until they got all the way to "inconsiderate driving". Which even that fails to meet the standard to apply.
So far ive spent more time talking about it in this thread than actual time and effort spent on holding them to account.
There has to be an alleged offense in order to issue a defense.
There is no law on how quickly you can accelerate your vehicle to the speed limit as long as you are complying with all other relevant driving laws. So its an entirely moot point. If there was every single tesla owner and every single motorbike owner would be in trouble.
Caporegime
I'm loving that you're not backing down on those clowns.
I'd say blipping the throttle on a lambo with an 'illegal' (louder than stock exhaust) is sufficient to fall below the standard of a careful and competent driver.
Sounds from your second paragraph the story has evolved though and you were mashing the throttle to accelerate?
Your story doesn't pass the straight face test. Best of luck
Soldato
There isn’t no but I’ve clocked a sub 3s 0-60 in the NSX. I’m sure if the plod were watching they would have something to say, legal or not.
Soldato
Question 1. Could kindai have driven differently in order to reduce the chance of distress, accident or unexpected reactions from other road users. Answer yes. Sudden noise will cause some people to brake, move unexpectedly.
Question 2. Do we want to live in a world devoid of fun and pleasure to minimise all risk. Answer no.
Conclusion. Guilty of something if the police really want to make something stick? Yes.
Should he be? No, I'd rather listen to a lambo at full chat than lots of other totally non contentious things.
Good luck mate, hoping sense prevails....
Question 2. Do we want to live in a world devoid of fun and pleasure to minimise all risk. Answer no.
Conclusion. Guilty of something if the police really want to make something stick? Yes.
Should he be? No, I'd rather listen to a lambo at full chat than lots of other totally non contentious things.
Good luck mate, hoping sense prevails....
100% - sense prevailing would be moving on with life though. I guess he's just concerned as S59 stays with the car and will impact the resale of his Lambo.
Edit: thinking back, aren't s59 only for a year?
In what way, or are you conflating my account which has remained the same throughout because its what happened, with another statement about the validity of the manner of acceleration?
Not at all, but im not going to lie down because some officer with a stick up his backside one day wants to be difficult.
A S59 cant be used as a generic "catch all for everything". They have standards to uphold and in this case, they got it grossly wrong and then have been caught lying about it. I will hold them to account for it, which is what everyone should do if they believe they have been unjustly dealt with.
The difference is, most people dont have the means (£££) to do so, however I do.
Genuinely wish you the very best with this, as you say, most people would just take it. Fair play for seeing it through.
Loving the courtroom commentary from our barristers…
Good luck, you feel you have a case and are using the power of the law to dispute the application of the law by those asked to uphold it. Just because a few faceless people don’t agree with that approach is irrelevant but you know that.
My opinion is that the police won’t fight you, likely not turn up as often happens on motoring stuff when they are questioned about the validity of their case in court. Chief will decide where to put his bets and investing time and money to fight this is I think unlikely. But that’s just another opinion but you’ve chosen to use the power of the law to challenge the police and that is something anyone can do if they can afford to or are willing to.
As an aside I know of a man who overturned a case on a man who was hung. To late for the man but he believed him to be falsely hung and proved it years later and he was just a bloke off the street annoyed that justice was not done. People told him he was stupid I’m sure too.
Good luck, you feel you have a case and are using the power of the law to dispute the application of the law by those asked to uphold it. Just because a few faceless people don’t agree with that approach is irrelevant but you know that.
My opinion is that the police won’t fight you, likely not turn up as often happens on motoring stuff when they are questioned about the validity of their case in court. Chief will decide where to put his bets and investing time and money to fight this is I think unlikely. But that’s just another opinion but you’ve chosen to use the power of the law to challenge the police and that is something anyone can do if they can afford to or are willing to.
As an aside I know of a man who overturned a case on a man who was hung. To late for the man but he believed him to be falsely hung and proved it years later and he was just a bloke off the street annoyed that justice was not done. People told him he was stupid I’m sure too.
Yikes, don't say the last part out aloud. The plod love using that one to issue self proclaimed trauma "omg, turning up to an RTA to find one sole male hanging limb by limb from his rear view mirror" or the old "yes, but we still have to identify your remains and tell your next of kin"...
Eh? Isn't it like £150 to file for judicial review? And, should it get further, which is unlikely, it can cost a bit more
The first hurdle is you have to apply to the court to get permission to file for the review.
And yes, its cheap.
However, if the police want to contest it, and put an opposition in, if the permission is refused you are potentially on the hook for their costs of preparing the opposition.
Which can be substantially more, potentially a few thousand, which is why most people would back down at the thought of potentially being liable for that amount, and why justice is not available to all.
Soldato
Faceless? This is the entire point of the forum. If you don’t want “faceless” opinions then maybe post on Facebook
Brown nosing gone too hard here.