My son got pulled over by the police last night for racing (he says he was doing just over 30). His mate was also behind him when they were pulled over. The officer said that he had been racing and that his car would be crushed. Surely they should provide at least video evidence from the in car camera. Can anyone supply any further information.

They can only crush the car if its got no tax i think

What/who did the officer say your son was your son racing?

Originally posted by Siân
What/who did the officer say your son was your son racing?


Yes
He said he was but he stopped him at the end of our road and for the distance travelled to be racing from the roundabout he would have had to stand on the brakes to stop.

Do you mean "racing" (trying to go faster than another car)?

OR do you just mean "speeding" (going faster than the speed limit)?

Was he given a fixed penalty notice?

Was he given any other paper?

Originally posted by cgksheff
Do you mean "racing" (trying to go faster than another car)?

OR do you just mean "speeding" (going faster than the speed limit)?

Was he given a fixed penalty notice?

Was he given any other paper?

Thats what they said. But when they said we are going to crush your car he said no you arn't. They backed down and warned that if they caught him again they would. No show of documents no warning ,no nothing. Whether that he is over 6ft and 26 had anything to do with it . Don't know?

they were probably jut trying toscare him into slowing down. unless they provide him with a producer or other paperwork nowt really will be done

Yes I know but they must have to provide proof. Thinking about it his ex works in the police control room. Wonder if she's said can you scare him.

Originally posted by desy
Thats what they said. But when they said we are going to crush your car he said no you arn't. They backed down and warned that if they caught him again they would. No show of documents no warning ,no nothing. Whether that he is over 6ft and 26 had anything to do with it . Don't know?

The whole thing sounds very unlikely. From police officers referring to speeding as racing, to the 'backing down'. As for someone in the control room having the sway to get your son pulled over on a whim - sounds like a storyline from The Bill ;)

Well I don't have many facts or info here but if the police stopped him for 'racing' then maybe they've done both of you a favour and scared him into sticking to the speed limit in future.

As a mother, like me, i'm sure you'd rather your son be given a harsh warning by the police than have the police come to your door to tell you he's been involved in an accident

:thumbsup:

He's 26, so not really a youngster and should have a reasonable amount of common sense, so apologies if i've mis-judged him.

Pretty sure you son was ragging the **** outa it!! ha ha ha

but surely they are just talking ******** and can't do that? As you say you want video evidence or its his +mates word against theirs. Also don't they need evidence to even give a ticket?

I don't know but it sounds unlikely!?

Under the Police Reform Act 2002, the Police have the power to seize vehicles which are being used to cause harrassment, fear or distress. Racing fits this criteria. The proviso is that a warning must first be issued. It sounds like the warning was issued. Your son will have to observe the law whilst driving and not cause harrassment, fear or distress, not too much to ask, surely.

If you think this is unfair, contact your MP, as it is the government who have introduced the law in a bid to bring peace to communities and cut road casualties.

is racing within the speed limits still illegal?

Originally posted by THCAyle
is racing within the speed limits still illegal?

Yes. I think the wording of the law (have to check to be exact) is something along the lines of 'the use of the vehicle for timed trial, competition and' ... something else.

Needless to say it also invalidates the insurance.

In theory, they could 'do' you for seeing who can parallel park in the shortest time...

Originally posted by THCAyle
is racing within the speed limits still illegal?

I guess Driving without due care and attention could be applied.

If your driving manner can be construed as 'racing', no matter what the speed, then your likely to get pulled/done. 'Racing' usually implies 'aggressive'.

Before they can stop anyone in a vehicle they must be in a marked police car. By rights even though they are in uniform they must carry their warrant card. If they have been stopped and searched they must be given the name / rank and name of police station they are attached to, and given a ticket that they have been stopped and searched with details of date time and location

Let’s face it. He has done wrong and he is trying to find a reason to justify it.

For gods sake admit it and let it go.

They don’t pull you without reason. (Or does he have one?)

Originally posted by Wattsy
Before they can stop anyone in a vehicle they must be in a marked police car. By rights even though they are in uniform they must carry their warrant card. If they have been stopped and searched they must be given the name / rank and name of police station they are attached to, and given a ticket that they have been stopped and searched with details of date time and location

???? there is no suggestion that they were not in a marked vehicle and out of uniform. There is no suggestion that they were searched. so what is the point of this comment?

Originally posted by desy
Thats what they said. But when they said we are going to crush your car he said no you arn't. They backed down and warned that if they caught him again they would. No show of documents no warning ,no nothing. Whether that he is over 6ft and 26 had anything to do with it . Don't know?

....Yes, he has had his warning!!! The details of the vehicle will be logged with the police pending any further incident. If they were satisfied that his documents were in order, they would not have issued a producer, and trust me, the fact that he is 26 oand over 6 foot has absolutely nothing to do with anything...the police do not allow offenders to escape justice based on age and size????!!!

I think you just have to accept that you are getting one side of the story, because if he was driving round like an idiot is he really going to admit it to you? I have already explained the powers with which the police were acting, and the resons behind the legislation. It is time you accepted that he has had a warning and if it curtails any future unsafe driving, be thankful. After all, the numbers of young men dying in road collisions is unacceptable.

This was unlikely to be the police acting in an arbitrary manner, but more likely they were doing their job, and quite well, from the information you have given us.

Originally posted by cloud
???? there is no suggestion that they were not in a marked vehicle and out of uniform. There is no suggestion that they were searched. so what is the point of this comment?


Sorry i'll keep my mouth shut in future, only making a general coment, so i dont think there is any need for you to relpy like this. However i was only speaking from first hand experience.

This is a sight where people can express their views without snotty comments like this.

Originally posted by cloud
Under the Police Reform Act 2002, the Police have the power to seize vehicles which are being used to cause harrassment, fear or distress. Racing fits this criteria. The proviso is that a warning must first be issued. It sounds like the warning was issued. Your son will have to observe the law whilst driving and not cause harrassment, fear or distress, not too much to ask, surely.

Could you tell me more about this act please? What section of the act does this power come under? And does it tie into the Road Traffic Act at all?

Originally posted by BoroughGal
Could you tell me more about this act please? What section of the act does this power come under? And does it tie into the Road Traffic Act at all?

Quite. Is 'distress' caused being 'beaten' at the lights by a more powerful/faster car? If so, my son is frequently 'distressed'!!

(He wishes we'd get a boy-racer car :( )

Originally posted by cloud
Under the Police Reform Act 2002, the Police have the power to seize vehicles which are being used to cause harrassment, fear or distress. Racing fits this criteria. The proviso is that a warning must first be issued. It sounds like the warning was issued. Your son will have to observe the law whilst driving and not cause harrassment, fear or distress, not too much to ask, surely.

If you think this is unfair, contact your MP, as it is the government who have introduced the law in a bid to bring peace to communities and cut road casualties.

is the word of a police officer sufficient proof that the car was being raced? And presumably they can't just confiscate the car but have to go to court in order to do so?

Seizure of vehicles (Sections 59 and 60)
44. Section 59 gives the police new powers to deal with the anti-social use of motor
vehicles on public roads or off-road. It includes powers to stop and to seize and to
remove motor vehicles where they are being driven off-road contrary to section 34 of
the Road Traffic Act 1988 or on the public road or other public place without due care
and attention or reasonable consideration for other road users, contrary to section 3 of
the 1988 Act. Section 60 allows the Secretary of State to make regulations relating to
the removal, retention, release or disposal of motor vehicles seized in accordance with
section 59

my emphasis in bold.
no mention of crushing in there, nor of racing. What there is, is a mention of an existing offence, if they thought he was guilty of driving without due care and attention then they would have given him a ticket. There is no requirement for them to give a warning before confiscation if they intend to give someone a nip for driving without due care.

So most likely they either weren't sure, or had some other reason for their behaviour.
You could make a complaint to the police complaints authority.

Originally posted by Cyclone
is the word of a police officer sufficient proof that the car was being raced? And presumably they can't just confiscate the car but have to go to court in order to do so?



my emphasis in bold.
no mention of crushing in there, nor of racing. What there is, is a mention of an existing offence, if they thought he was guilty of driving without due care and attention then they would have given him a ticket. There is no requirement for them to give a warning before confiscation if they intend to give someone a nip for driving without due care.

So most likely they either weren't sure, or had some other reason for their behaviour.
You could make a complaint to the police complaints authority.

The quote here is not from the original text, Section 59 Police Reform Act 2002. As the actual text not only refers to the exisiting requirements under the Road Traffic Act 1988 re due care, but also spells out the new powers to sieze. The Act does not mention crushing as this would be local force policy if certain requirements are not met. There is no such thing as a fixed penalty notice for due care and attention, this is report on summons only. The original post did not indicate that the driver was driving without due care and attention, but implied that the driver had been warned regarding using the vehicle to the alarm, distress or annoyance of the public.

You're not a copper are you cloud?

jus you seem to know a great deal about up to date traffic regs and I wouldn't have thought many member of the gen public would be as clued up.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong

Originally posted by cloud
The quote here is not from the original text, Section 59 Police Reform Act 2002. As the actual text not only refers to the exisiting requirements under the Road Traffic Act 1988 re due care, but also spells out the new powers to sieze. The Act does not mention crushing as this would be local force policy if certain requirements are not met. There is no such thing as a fixed penalty notice for due care and attention, this is report on summons only. The original post did not indicate that the driver was driving without due care and attention, but implied that the driver had been warned regarding using the vehicle to the alarm, distress or annoyance of the public.

the text is taken from the summary of powers available on policereform.gov.uk.

the relevant full text says this

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).



note that it says AND. So it must be being driven without due care and attention, which is an offence requiring prosecution.

So, if you are given a nip for driving with due care. Then you do it again (having been warned the first time) then your car may be impounded immediately.

If it were challenged in court the police would have to demonstrate how the vehicle was being used in a way that is causing, or is likely to cause, alarm, distress or annoyance to members of the public, I expect that would be difficult to do unless a member of the public had complained or it was an area where complains had been made before, although the measure of 'likely' would be down to the court to decide.

in addition

Seizure notice
As soon as practicable after a vehicle has been seized a seizure notice must be served on the person who is or appears to be the owner of the vehicle unless the vehicle has been released from their custody, Form of notice The notice must contain the following information.
• the place where the vehicle was seized;
• the place where it is now being kept;
• that the person to whom the notice is directed is required to claim the vehicle from the authority on or before the date specified in the notice. This date must not less than 21 days from the day when the notice is given;
• that unless the vehicle is claimed on or before that date the authority intend to dispose of it;
• that, subject to the exceptions below, charges are payable by the owner of the vehicle in respect of the removal and retention of the vehicle, and that the vehicle may be retained until such charges are paid.

so it could not be crushed unless the owner did not reclaim it.

Originally posted by adamd

They don’t pull you without reason. (Or does he have one?)

I think youll find they do

I think the Police have tried to put the friegtners on your Son. However do you not think rather than passing the blame back to the Police you should be asking your Son Why he was stopped by the Police as they do not just randomly waste time stopping cars as most people would like to believe.

Me and a friend have both got nice cars - alloys, Stereo etc. If we are ever driving about especially together we get pulled on the regular - get the threats from the pigs. You dont have to be racing but cos we drive nice cars (which are pride and joy by the way and dont want to risk damaging them by driving them dangerously) they always think your a boy racer and it does your head in after a while. If they cant do you for speeding they will check every part of the car. Think they need to start going after real criminals rather than pestering hard working tax payers

if that last bit is actually true (breaking your light cluster) make sure you catch them on video phone and then have them sacked and prosecuted for perverting the course of justice and criminal damage.

Mod. Note

Please try and remember this is a Family friendly forum.

Keep the language within reason.

Thanks,

Joe

Think the thraeds missing a few bits...but if your son gets convicted of racing - driving offence something like an ms50, im fairly sure he'll get a ban. It also loads insurance premiums by 100 - 160% similar to drink driving offences. But it'd have to be a fairly solid conviction

Originally posted by Sarah1982
Think the thraeds missing a few bits...but if your son gets convicted of racing - driving offence something like an ms50, im fairly sure he'll get a ban. It also loads insurance premiums by 100 - 160% similar to drink driving offences. But it'd have to be a fairly solid conviction

seems unlikely given that they didn't say that they were going to charge him and they didn't give him a NIP.

Originally posted by Cyclone
seems unlikely given that they didn't say that they were going to charge him and they didn't give him a NIP.

a 'notice of intended prosecution' is only issued for specific offences...'due care' (sic) not being one of them....there will not be a prosecution in this instance unless the subject was reported on summons and given a PACE 9 interview at the roadside which will have been recorded in written form and which he will have been invited to sign.

He was given a warning.

This sounds like another case of blood being thicker than water! Stop making excuses for your childrens' bad behaviour! The police say things to spook kids because they are fed up with the endless problems they cause and not having the powers or the time to deal with them!

Originally posted by kev21662
This sounds like another case of blood being thicker than water! Stop making excuses for your childrens' bad behaviour! The police say things to spook kids because they are fed up with the endless problems they cause and not having the powers or the time to deal with them!

Here Here....

When we start admitting we are doing wrong then we might understand why we are not doing as well as others

Originally posted by cloud
a 'notice of intended prosecution' is only issued for specific offences...'due care' (sic) not being one of them....there will not be a prosecution in this instance unless the subject was reported on summons and given a PACE 9 interview at the roadside which will have been recorded in written form and which he will have been invited to sign.

He was given a warning.

You think there's a spelling mistake in 'due care'??? How do you spell it?

As far as google can tell, driving without due care and attention is an offence that requires the police to tell the driver that he is being considered for prosecution, or if he isn't stopped at the scene, then a written notice of intended prosecution within 14 days.
Neither of which occured in this case.

If we are ever driving about especially together we get pulled on the regular - get the threats from the pigs.

Perhaps if your Max Power mates drove more responsibly then police wouldn't be as "prejudiced" against modded cars.

I haven't been stopped for at least seven years - my car is quite nice, in good nick, I take pride in it...I wonder why I don't get stopped?

Every single night there are cars racing each other or in convoy at speed along my road - at least 70mph - these all seem to be "nice cars" with alloys and nice loud stereos.

And to the original poster - it used to be that you wouldn't dare tell your parents you'd been stopped by the police or spoken to by a policeman, but now it seems de rigeur for the police to be at fault, harassing innocent drivers.

The coppers just 'try it on' sometimes to try and scare people....If its an unmarked car i dont stop for em although you can bet 2mins down the road theres a team of squad cars waiting for me

I think youll find they do
I agree there Spyro,To have a good grope is that a good enough reason to be pulled.However, im not complaining he was quite dishy himself:gag: