Section 59 Warnings

Post Reply
User avatar
howe1601
New kid on the block
New kid on the block
Reactions:
Posts: 15
Joined: 21 Jan 2008, 17:50
Section 59 Warnings

Post by howe1601 » 25 Apr 2008, 16:41

I have posted a reply to an earlier forum but thought this needed its own.

Section 59 Warnings are bad news. In this nanny state that we live there is the potential for many of us to have our bikes seized by the police. I am a criminal lawyer and will be looking into this piece of legislation a bit more closely and see what can be done should anyone get one.

Any of you guys need some advice just get in contact.

Read this and be warned:

http://www.glass-uk.org/index.php?optio ... Itemid=492

User avatar
sparky
Visitor
Visitor
Reactions:
Posts: 54
Joined: 06 Apr 2008, 19:09
Location: nuneaton
Re: Section 59 Warnings

Post by sparky » 25 Apr 2008, 22:27

i got one a few weeks ago for giving my ccm to much throttle on the gear change and slightly lifting the front wheel :mrgreen:
they said the 59 warning is in place on my bike so if anyone else gets caught on it it can still be taken
and also the warning is on me aswell so if i get caught on someones elses bike doin somethin naughty that bike can be taken with no further warnings
is this right?
crm250 mk2 designed by a genius, built by craftsmen, ridden by a plonker

User avatar
Gwyn
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Reactions:
Posts: 783
Joined: 30 Oct 2006, 18:27
Location: All over , WALES.
Re: Section 59 Warnings

Post by Gwyn » 25 Apr 2008, 23:37

howe1601 wrote:I have posted a reply to an earlier forum but thought this needed its own.

Section 59 Warnings are bad news. In this nanny state that we live there is the potential for many of us to have our bikes seized by the police. I am a criminal lawyer and will be looking into this piece of legislation a bit more closely and see what can be done should anyone get one.

Any of you guys need some advice just get in contact.

Read this and be warned:

http://www.glass-uk.org/index.php?optio ... Itemid=492
Thanks for the info Howe, and welcome 8) :D
Mud, Sweat and Fear


91-MK2

kernow krusty
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Reactions:
Posts: 191
Joined: 04 Jan 2008, 22:56
Location: Liskeard, Cornwall
Re: Section 59 Warnings

Post by kernow krusty » 26 Apr 2008, 19:22

Good grief!
Id missed out on the relevance of this whole Section 59 stuff!
Thanks Howe1601 for your input. It looks initially like something they dreamt up to clamp down on the Nova/Max Power brigade, but as usual with government, it quite conveniently can be applied across a wide range of vehicle users. Us well mannered, 'pillar of the community' type green laners/TRF members are as vulnerable to whatever mood the nice person with the warrant card is in, as the 'croozers'.
Forewarned is forearmed!
Thanks for taking the time to advise us! :bow:
Regards KK
I phoned the Ramblers today, but the bloke on the phone just went on and on....

fallenmikethebike
NWAA Supporter
NWAA Supporter
Reactions:
Posts: 3520
Joined: 02 Dec 2007, 16:02
Bike Owned: MK3
Location: Mid Surrey
Re: Section 59 Warnings

Post by fallenmikethebike » 27 Apr 2008, 21:15

:? Surely, that as the basis for an offence the criteria is so loosely worded that the mere act of actually starting a vehicle in a public place would be enough to qualify on all three charges[ distress alarm annoyance ].
In which case if the Section 59 can be issued against the person ,can i request the i issuing of one against a certain class of activist Rambliar who see it as their solemn duty to vigour sly wave those viscous
looking lethally sharp , impaling implements at me from time to time.
I would have thought that any law biding activity carried out by any group ,could ,in the eyes of a vehemently opposed group easily meet the terms of a section 59 order.
Any one ever been alarmed by a police siren?
Any one been annoyed by a police helicopter hovering noisily at night?
Any one been distressed at the sight of a high speed police vehicle ?
The charges could be levelled at any one or any activity.
VFORCE REEDS-MUGEN HEAD AND BARREL-WHITE POWER-ALL ON MY WISH LIST!!

User avatar
clayton8798
New kid on the block
New kid on the block
Reactions:
Posts: 13
Joined: 21 May 2008, 22:16
Location: Redruth, Cornwall
Re: Section 59 Warnings

Post by clayton8798 » 20 Jul 2008, 12:12

fallenmikethebike wrote::? Surely, that as the basis for an offence the criteria is so loosely worded that the mere act of actually starting a vehicle in a public place would be enough to qualify on all three charges[ distress alarm annoyance ].
In which case if the Section 59 can be issued against the person ,can i request the i issuing of one against a certain class of activist Rambliar who see it as their solemn duty to vigour sly wave those viscous
looking lethally sharp , impaling implements at me from time to time.
I would have thought that any law biding activity carried out by any group ,could ,in the eyes of a vehemently opposed group easily meet the terms of a section 59 order.
Any one ever been alarmed by a police siren?
Any one been annoyed by a police helicopter hovering noisily at night?
Any one been distressed at the sight of a high speed police vehicle ?
The charges could be levelled at any one or any activity.
This is so true. Good call mate. :wink:
Pasty Muncher!


Post Reply