lol, back that up with some fact?
Seriously, the most they can do is issue with a vehicle defect ticket which is a £30 fine iirc... they certainly won't crush your car for it
Where to get 3/4 size front numberplate?
- Thread starter ironman
- Start date
lol, back that up with some fact?
Seriously, the most they can do is issue with a vehicle defect ticket which is a £30 fine iirc... they certainly won't crush your car for it
Only twice have I ever had a problem with having the smaller font on my car.
Once when I was doing a job at a police station, one of the officers claimed it was illegal. I said it wasn't because the car was an import. He insisted that it was. I asked him to show me the bit of law that made it illegal. He said he'd email it to me when he found it. That was in 2007 and he hasn't contacted me yet.
Second time was a senior inspector at a VOSA enforcement centre. I was there because the previous MOT had the wrong mileage recorded (28000 miles vs 28000 kilometers) he gave me a photocopy of the relevant section of the MOT testers manual as proof that my plates were illegal, at which point I pointed out the specific exemption for imported non-EU cars where a standard plate wouldn't fit, at which point he sulked and walked off.
Interestingly according to that manual, they will only fail you for illegal backgrounds and graphics if your car was first used on or after March 2001, likewise with the font, on or after March 2001 it has to be the exact font or "substantially similar", before March 2001 it just has to be readable. The same is also true for the need for suppliers details, BSAU marking and so on.
Note that passing the MOT does not mean your numberplate is legal.
eatcustard: If your MOT tester is failing all cars with non standard plates it might be worth printing out that manual (it can be found online) and pointing out that he shouldn't be failing them.
Once when I was doing a job at a police station, one of the officers claimed it was illegal. I said it wasn't because the car was an import. He insisted that it was. I asked him to show me the bit of law that made it illegal. He said he'd email it to me when he found it. That was in 2007 and he hasn't contacted me yet.
Second time was a senior inspector at a VOSA enforcement centre. I was there because the previous MOT had the wrong mileage recorded (28000 miles vs 28000 kilometers) he gave me a photocopy of the relevant section of the MOT testers manual as proof that my plates were illegal, at which point I pointed out the specific exemption for imported non-EU cars where a standard plate wouldn't fit, at which point he sulked and walked off.
Interestingly according to that manual, they will only fail you for illegal backgrounds and graphics if your car was first used on or after March 2001, likewise with the font, on or after March 2001 it has to be the exact font or "substantially similar", before March 2001 it just has to be readable. The same is also true for the need for suppliers details, BSAU marking and so on.
Note that passing the MOT does not mean your numberplate is legal.
eatcustard: If your MOT tester is failing all cars with non standard plates it might be worth printing out that manual (it can be found online) and pointing out that he shouldn't be failing them.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 4,503
- Location
- Darkest Worcestershire
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 4,503
- Location
- Darkest Worcestershire
SECTION 59 POWERS:-
Seizure of motor vehicles
59 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,
he shall have the powers set out in subsection (3).
(2) A constable in uniform shall also have the powers set out in subsection (3) where he has reasonable grounds for believing that a motor vehicle has been used on any occasion in a manner falling within subsection (1).
(3) Those powers are-
(a) power, if the motor vehicle is moving, to order the person driving it to stop the vehicle;
(b) power to seize and remove the motor vehicle;
(c) power, for the purposes of exercising a power falling within paragraph (a) or (b), to enter any premises on which he has reasonable grounds for believing the motor vehicle to be;
(d) power to use reasonable force, if necessary, in the exercise of any power conferred by any of paragraphs to (a) to (c).
(4) A constable shall not seize a motor vehicle in the exercise of the powers conferred on him by this section unless-
(a) he has warned the person appearing to him to be the person whose use falls within subsection (1) that he will seize it, if that use continues or is repeated; and
(b) it appears to him that the use has continued or been repeated after the the warning.
(5) Subsection (4) does not require a warning to be given by a constable on any occasion on which he would otherwise have the power to seize a motor vehicle under this section if-
(a) the circumstances make it impracticable for him to give the warning;
(b) the constable has already on that occasion given a warning under that subsection in respect of any use of that motor vehicle or of another motor vehicle by that person or any other person;
(c) the constable has reasonable grounds for believing that such a warning has been given on that occasion otherwise than by him; or
(d) the constable has reasonable grounds for believing that the person whose use of that motor vehicle on that occasion would justify the seizure is a person to whom a warning under that subsection has been given (whether or not by that constable or in respect the same vehicle or the same or a similar use) on a previous occasion in the previous twelve months.
(6) A person who fails to comply with an order under subsection (3)(a) is guilty of an offence and shall be liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.
(7) Subsection (3)(c) does not authorise entry into a private dwelling house.
(8) The powers conferred on a constable by this section shall be exercisable only at a time when regulations under section 60 are in force.
(9) In this section-
"driving" has the same meaning as in the Road Traffic Act 1988 (c. 52);
"motor vehicle" means any mechanically propelled vehicle, whether or not it is intended or adapted for use on roads; and
"private dwelling house" does not include any garage or other structure occupied with the dwelling house, or any land appurtenant to the dwelling house.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 4,503
- Location
- Darkest Worcestershire
You are correct it has been recently changed, until it does though parliament for ratification.
They can if they put a couple of section 59 notices in it, which requires no real evidence, and has no real appeal process.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Seriously West, dont sprout opinion as fact, especially when its wrong opinion. There are numerous things they can do - firstly the DVLA can withdraw the vehicle registration mark, and secondly as already mentioned under a Section 59 they can take the car.
59 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,
he shall have the powers set out in subsection (3).
They can only be given for (careless and inconsiderate driving and prohibition of off-road driving) Illegal plates are not that.
Do you know how they decide whether your driving is inappropriate? Here's a hint, it doesn't involve objective evidence, independent parties or anything of the sort...
You categorically stated the 'most' they can do about a small plate is issue a £30 FPN. This is wrong.
Sorry but if you post wrong or misleading information, then I will correct it if I know the real answer. If you dont like this its easily avoidable by not offering opinion on legal matters if you don't actually know the answer.
It is unlikely you will get S59's for a numberplate offenec so whilst not impossible car crushing is hugely unlikely. Withdrawl of the VRM, however, is used in numberplate offences.
In reality a Section 59 can be issued purely because the officer doesn't like your face, perhaps because it contains too much melanin, they make up some spurious claim, do not have to ever prove it and there is no appeals process.
It's a terrible law that risks bringing us back to the days of Constable Savage
It's a terrible law that risks bringing us back to the days of Constable Savage
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 4,503
- Location
- Darkest Worcestershire
If you upset uncle rozzer enough he can get your car crushed, end of.
So if he says no to your plate, put it right.
In this day and age, you will not win.
The laws are there, even if they are F.O.B.A.R
So if he says no to your plate, put it right.
In this day and age, you will not win.
The laws are there, even if they are F.O.B.A.R