A crushing blow

[C C]

I just come across this. Anyone know if they crushed the guy's bike.

From the Hertfordshire Mercury:

Man's anger at police threat to crush bike

AN East Herts man who lent his £3,000 motocross bike to his nephew is furious that police confiscated the vehicle and plan to crush it.

Lee Pearse, 27, is still paying for the Yamaha bike — but it's about to be turned into a cube of metal.

His nephew, Lee Lawrence, 17, of Fanhams Road, Ware, was stopped by police when he rode the bike onto a bridleway near the gravel pits at Chapmore End, where he and his friends were riding.

Although he was unaware that the gravel path was a public highway, and there were no signs to warn him, an officer confiscated the vehicle and one ridden by his friend, on the spot.

Now, in a case that will serve as a warning to trail bikers across the county, Herts police will crush the bikes, as they are designed only for track use and cannot be insured on the roads.

Lee, who uses the YZF 250 legally on a track in Harlow, said: "They didn't even get a warning. It's so heavy-handed. I think it's disgusting.

"What's so annoying is that it's my bike — I'm getting punished. Fair enough if it was me. I'm 27 and should know better. But they didn't even realise.

"The officer said just because it doesn't have a white line down the middle doesn't mean it's not a road."

Lee, a lorry driver from Bishop's Stortford, has seen a solicitor and enlisted the help of county councillor David Beatty (Con, Ware North) to persuade police to relent before they crush the bike in a week's time.

But yesterday (Thursday, 27 July), the force was sticking by its use of a law which the county's chief constable, Frank Whiteley, was instrumental in introducing to the statute book.

A spokeswoman said: "These bikes are manufactured for use in motocross.

"They are not for use on bridleways and they are not roadworthy. You cannot register and insure them.

"Section 152 of the Serious and Organised Crime Act 2005 gives police the power to seize bikes used on public highways without insurance and without an appropriate licence.

"If the bike had hit somebody, there could have been a compensation claim for hundreds of thousands of pounds.

"Since August 2005, we have seized 4,400 bikes under this legislation. We were alerted to this one by a complaint from a member of the public."

The hard-line stance has won backing from Hertfordshire's Country Land and Business Association.

Lending support to Operation Agrarian, Herts police's crackdown on trail biking in rural areas, chairman David de Boinville said: "These motorcyclists are a menace. They are a danger to walkers and horse- riders, cut up paths and ruin the peace of the countryside."

  28 July 2006

[/i]

[tomcat]

ho,ra at last a law that works should put the riders in three years nat service for good measure. [-o<  :D

[Terminus]

I agree the bike should be crushed (but then I would wouldn't I?)

There are groups of the 'general public' who don't discern between muppets driving off road illegally and those who are law abiding and considerate.  The kind of people who would see a set of tyre tracks in any part of the country and be heard to say things such as" ooh those environmental vandals..." or "They shouldn't be allowed to drive...." and "Those off road people should be banned, pass the flask of tea ... oh and do you like my nice new red socks?"

So anyone driving where they shouldn't should rightfully get their vehicle crushed.

If the owner loaned the bike to his nephew then He should have KNOWN where and how it was going to be used this is his responsibility - just like if you loan your car to a mate and he/she turns out to not be insured to drive it - you would get charged with causing and permitting the driver to drive without insurance because it is your responsibility to check this prior to lending the car.

*steps off soap box*

So anyone like a nice cuppa??  :lol:  :shock:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

[att]

Heavy handed and out of order.
Thats the trouble with this bloody country.
Get caught burgling a house and you get a slap on the wrists.

In each and every case I now take the law into my own hands.
<EDIT> :roll:

The tide will soon turn and unfortunately the Police will bear the brunt of the publics anger.

I am usually a law biding citizen, but the many new laws coming in make me want to break them more and more.

Totalitarian State is here.

I just hope all the folks who agree with this sort of heavy handed response agree with it when they are on the end of it through no fault of their own, just a simple mistake can lead to this....We are not all perfect and do not know all the laws of the land.

Do we really want the UK to be homogonised?.....The spirit of the people controlled completely.....I don`t think so, but we are going down the path at an alarming rate of knots.

[floyd fan]

Heavy handed and out of order.
Thats the trouble with this bloody country.
Get caught burgling a house and you get a slap on the wrists.

In each and every case I now take the law into my own hands.
The Police have their hands tied by legislation......And quite often their own low IQ. :roll:

The tide will soon turn and unfortunately the Police will bear the brunt of the publics anger.

I am usually a law biding citizen, but the many new laws coming in make me want to break them more and more.

Totalitarian State is here.

I just hope all the folks who agree with this sort of heavy handed response agree with it when they are on the end of it through no fault of their own, just a simple mistake can lead to this....We are not all perfect and do not know all the laws of the land.

Do we really want the UK to be homogonised?.....The spirit of the people controlled completely.....I don`t think so, but we are going down the path at an alarming rate of knots.

Couldnt have put it better myself, the guy has never even had a warning before.

[V8MoneyPit]

I have to lean towards att on this one.

I would suggest the rider should have been warned, maybe even fined. But, to go as far as to take the bike and crush it is just heavy handed. If it was a repeat offence, then the rider can be proven to know better. Then heavier action is more acceptable.

Not sure I would condone breaking any law though. Whether you concider it to be wrong or not. It is still the law and you are obliged to live within it or suffer the consequences if caught. That is a judgement each person has to make for themselves.

[Rangie3.0LtrDan]

Th rider was 17 years old, legally an adult, so therefore should have known better, if he knew how to ride the bike then he should have known where he was allowed to ride it, judging by the fact a passer by called the police then they were riding it in a public area which therefore is against the law.  

I agree the punishments in this country need looking at, but at the end of the day he knew he was riding somewhere he shouldnt have been.  We as off roaders have a known rule which may or may not be written down, if you dont know the status of a lane/byway or similar then you dont drive/ride it.

On top of that, there is the point of a 17 year old being on a bike he is too young for (as far as i can remember until your a certain age the size of bike is restricted) and therefore he would have had to be on private land for him not to be breaking any laws.

[Rich_P]

On top of that, there is the point of a 17 year old being on a bike he is too young for (as far as i can remember until your a certain age the size of bike is restricted) and therefore he would have had to be on private land for him not to be breaking any laws.

Having looked into motorcycles for myself, you're restricted to 33hp (or 37? as it is different on two gov websites!  :shock: ) for the first two years of your full motorcycle licence.  After these two years you then become unrestricted in how powerful the motorcycle is.  You are not allowed above 125cc while you are still learning how to ride a motorcycle for the full licence, and if you are 16 you are restricted to 50cc until you are 17 when you can go for 125cc.

[Bulli]

sadly it is the actions of these idiots that have helped the pressure groups get laning all but banned.
i have ridden bikes forever and feel saddened when people flount the law, they simply shouldnt have been on that bike in that place. good on the police for taking a hard line.....maybe people will think twice.
That bike cant be ridden on anything but private land so why did their uncle let them borrow it? If they had borrowed it did they have helmets and other protective clothing?? How would he feel if his nephew had died....unfortunatly it happens.

[rangerider]

An unlawful rider

on an unlawful bike

in an unlawful place


Sorry thats 3 strikes, he should be out!

Are we not the first to moan that illegal offroaders make our hobby more difficult to enjoy????

[drmike]

Hmm, but if it was a genuine mistake then it seems harsh. How mnay here haven't made a genuine mistake? I know I have got muddled in the past and found myself where I didn't want to be - I'd feel aggrieved if my ride was crushed.

As I understand it there is no appeal against such a decision, it's one of those situations where the police are judge and jury which doesn't seem at all right.

Mike

[Rangie3.0LtrDan]

But it does seem right, cos if let off he is going to go and do it again!  He is 17 which means he needs to be shown the full force of the law so that he doesnt become another chav, and as for the uncle who lent him the bike, he is just as much as fault cos he was stupid enough to lend the 17 year old who shouldnt have had the bike in any circumstance apart from fully private land the he deserves to not have the bike either.

The problem with this country is the judges and the jury dont act like judge and jury, so someone needs to.

[HotShot]

Ignorance is no defence in law.
Crush the bike - sends a message to other unlawful users.
Happy with that!

:shock:

[drmike]

I think that Dave2a has summed it up well.

The police in this case did seem to know the status of the right of way the lad was on and in this case it seems he may well have been flouting the law.

There are ROW that are vehicular but the signs used imply that they are bridleways by using blue roundels. In fact they are legal ORPA but would a policeman know this? So he impounds your vehicle, you seem to have no right of appeal and the vehicle is crushed. Great.

I'm sorry but granting the police powers to act in this way does not seem to be justice to me. The mistake can be genuine. Indeed why not grant the police the same powers if you drive up a one way street the wrong way? There's a street locally where someone does this in all innocence every week because the signs are confusing.

Mike

[C C]

I certainly disagree with the police having powers to destroy what is in effect private property. It should be up to a magistrate at least to make these decisions. Apparently crushing bikes was their Chief Constable’s baby so little hope there.

It might have one more good giving the lad some community service clearing Footpaths or Bridleways.

[tomcat]

I can't believe that anyone can agree with this! What is wrong with you people?

Different situation, I know, but the punishment is the same for example In the current situation with greenlaning and the confusion that is NERC etc. anyone of you (supposing you do go greenlaning) could accidentally end up somewhere you shouldn't. And before anyone bleats on about checking routes first, there are local authorities and the Police who cannot even tell you the status of some lanes at the present time.

So if you do go somewhere you shouldn't and are caught you will presumably hand over the keys to the Police officer with a smile saying "It's a fair cop" as they crush your several thousands of pounds worth of pride and joy?

Thought not.     i think you are missing the point,when the police take the bike or bikes ect, the law states that, that bike has no place on public land ie, no tax,test,or insurance.where as if you were stoped on a green lane in ya landy taxed,tested and insured you would only be done for the laning offence. if its not taxed,tested or insured crush the f***er. pint any one. :D

Fools.

[Skibum346]

Heavy handed and out of order.
Thats the trouble with this bloody country.
Get caught burgling a house and you get a slap on the wrists.

In each and every case I now take the law into my own hands.
The Police have their hands tied by legislation......And quite often their own low IQ. :roll:

The tide will soon turn and unfortunately the Police will bear the brunt of the publics anger.

I am usually a law biding citizen, but the many new laws coming in make me want to break them more and more.

Totalitarian State is here.

I just hope all the folks who agree with this sort of heavy handed response agree with it when they are on the end of it through no fault of their own, just a simple mistake can lead to this....We are not all perfect and do not know all the laws of the land.

Do we really want the UK to be homogonised?.....The spirit of the people controlled completely.....I don`t think so, but we are going down the path at an alarming rate of knots.

Glad to seee the "Clydeside Reds" are still alive and well.....

 :P  :P

[Terminus]

The Police have their hands tied by legislation......And quite often their own low IQ. :roll:

I take exception to that, everyone has a point of view but if you can't make it without such insults perhaps its not worth making.

Cheers

[Terminus]

I can't believe that anyone can agree with this! What is wrong with you people?

Different situation, I know, but the punishment is the same for example In the current situation with greenlaning and the confusion that is NERC etc. anyone of you (supposing you do go greenlaning) could accidentally end up somewhere you shouldn't. And before anyone bleats on about checking routes first, there are local authorities and the Police who cannot even tell you the status of some lanes at the present time.

So if you do go somewhere you shouldn't and are caught you will presumably hand over the keys to the Police officer with a smile saying "It's a fair cop" as they crush your several thousands of pounds worth of pride and joy?

Thought not.

Fools.

The issue here is not simply where he was **he was 17 riding a 250 (not legal) as a result he would not be insured or covered in any way to ride it Oh its good to slate the law until this poor lost **thought he was on a dirt track individual** crashes into your car or a member of your family and you pay because he's not covered.

So in essence the above comments are exagerated and based simply on the fact of where he was and not the laws he was breaking - it's a trails bike was it taxed (doubtful) another legislative issue, was it MOT'd and verified as safe to be on a road (again doubtful as his uncle only uses it on tracks) - Where he was is only a small part of the greater picture.

People are often quick to shout injustice but is it really? well I refuse to debate the finer points of law (with which I am fully aquainted with my not low IQ) but in this instance theres a lot more to it than just being in the wrong place.  :shock:

[Eeyore]

Just stepping in a moment.

Please be a bit more carefull with some your replies. Everyone has the right to disagree with you, just as you have the right to disagree with them. However, further posts containing personal or general insults will be removed and words had with the postee.

Cheers
 8)
Eeyore

[Cheggs]

THe Law is the Law!
         If the police used zero tolerance to all offences of any kind then the worlsd would be better for it,
          Illegal Parkers towed - Less congestion
          Jay Walkers Fined     - Less risk of Killing some Idiot who steps out in front of you

     That's just a couple of example's, if that lad had hit some one they would have no recourse under law to gain compensation, due to the lack of insurance, the 17tr old is only able to ride abike of this type on private Land, would you take a drive a car with out  Mot, no headlights down a public road ? I do agree that the Police shouldn't be able to crush the Bike without further research, they are there to enforce the Law the Judges pass the sentence, perhaps ahefty storage charge and afine would be more appropirate, then crush it if you can't pay.
    A Vechile is a Lethal weapon if used incorrectly, would you have any problems with the Police if he had been using a 12 bore in a public place.
    If you don't understand the law you pay the price. :)
The law is double edged it works for you and against you but where would we be with out it?

[waveydavey]

I think that one of the critical lines has been missed; the Police in this case got involved after a complaint from somebody, this would imply to me that it's not the first time (people moan the first time not phone the police), if he does it regually that is flounting te law not misunderstanding the law.

Valid comments regarding taking your vehicle if greenlaning but major differences:
I am taxed, MOT'd and insured; if I hurt somebody teh insurance will pay then if they find I was illegally there will reclaim the payout from me.

If this kid had hit somebody there was no insurance; the victim would have had to claim from the 17 year old!

If I am caught where I shouldn't be in a legal vehicle would it be crushed? Even if one of the documents have recently run out I would not expect that.

If I am in an old LR that's not roadworthy, or especially not insured then I deserve to have it crushed; and to pay to have it done!

The big issue is insurance; if the kid had 3rd party insurance fair enough but I'll bet money he didn't.

[rangerider]

Hmm, but if it was a genuine mistake then it seems harsh. How mnay here haven't made a genuine mistake? I know I have got muddled in the past and found myself where I didn't want to be - I'd feel aggrieved if my ride was crushed.

As I understand it there is no appeal against such a decision, it's one of those situations where the police are judge and jury which doesn't seem at all right.

Mike

A genuine mistake fair enough, but there were 3 here, only one of which I could possibly find it in my heart to excuse.

I assume that the rider had gained permission from the owner to ride on what he assumed was private land???? Somehow I doubt it.

I agree with terminus in that this was more than likely this had happened previously, if not by this particular rider & bike then by others, tough luck that this particular person has been used to serve as an example.

How many people opposed to this enforcement of the law are the first to complain when some toerag puts a window thru on their house/truck and nothing happens????????

[johnniep]

im sorry, but has anyone atcually checked the bhp of a yzf250? what year is it, because i would be supprised if it did excel 33bhp! as you can get up to 400/450/500cc bikes still only just crossing the 33bhp mark!
and also, down here many bridleways merge into byways and so on and so forth! quite often without clear signs! and what would they rather, they where terroriseing people ina shopping mall, settig light to cars, or riding a bike up and down a lane! thats my view on it! it keeps them out the way most of the time!
How many people on here con honestly say they have never broekn the law regarding not driveing/rideing somewhere they shouldnt? or driveing something they where not licensed to? be it forklift truck or 1000cc superbike?

thats my stick to stir up the hornets nest!
cheers now!

[rangerider]

If the rider thought genuinely thought they were on private land with permission of the owner fair enough. Otherwise all points are Null & void.

even if the bridleway was a boat the bike & rider were still illegal!

there is however still a big but as regards the private land issue. the presence of a track implies public access, hence the road traffice act still applies.

Doubtless terminus (please do) will happily correct me should I be wrong on this point.

I can appreciate and forgive that genuine mistakes can and do happen, but in this case the bike was known to be not road legal, that allone renders any mistake argument pointless when it comes to any highway, be it a bridleway, boat, orpa or the M1.

[johnniep]

If the rider thought genuinely thought they were on private land with permission of the owner fair enough. Otherwise all points are Null & void.

even with that, you would think that was o.k, but recently a local farmer had the police aroundhis farm tracking down his son for driving around his feild, this was at 3pm in the afternoon, his son was driving a metro round the feild, and the police said he couldnt do it!

that puts that out of the window as well then!

[Terminus]

im sorry, but has anyone atcually checked the bhp of a yzf250? what year is it, because i would be supprised if it did excel 33bhp! as you can get up to 400/450/500cc bikes still only just crossing the 33bhp mark!
and also, down here many bridleways merge into byways and so on and so forth! quite often without clear signs! and what would they rather, they where terroriseing people ina shopping mall, settig light to cars, or riding a bike up and down a lane! thats my view on it! it keeps them out the way most of the time!
How many people on here con honestly say they have never broekn the law regarding not driveing/rideing somewhere they shouldnt? or driveing something they where not licensed to? be it forklift truck or 1000cc superbike?

thats my stick to stir up the hornets nest!
cheers now!

Whatever the BHP it still doesn't make the bike insured or taxed or roadworthy.

Terrorising people in shopping malls or setting light to cars erm.. ok no more TV for you today  :lol:  are you really trying to say if someone wasn't out on their uninsured untaxed bike where they shouldn't be they'd be burning cars and terrorising people?  There are already tracks for these bikes to be used by sensible people - after all in the initial article the owner often uses such tracks so there really isn't an excuse.

Oh and erm as to the last point *hate me if you want* but ...... Raises hand to the "never broekn the law regarding not driveing/rideing somewhere they shouldnt? or driveing something they where not licensed to? be it forklift truck or 1000cc superbike?"  :)

[Rich_P]

If the rider thought genuinely thought they were on private land with permission of the owner fair enough. Otherwise all points are Null & void.

even with that, you would think that was o.k, but recently a local farmer had the police aroundhis farm tracking down his son for driving around his feild, this was at 3pm in the afternoon, his son was driving a metro round the feild, and the police said he couldnt do it!

that puts that out of the window as well then!

Someone had to have complained to have the Police there though.  

[Terminus]

If the rider thought genuinely thought they were on private land with permission of the owner fair enough. Otherwise all points are Null & void.

even if the bridleway was a boat the bike & rider were still illegal!

there is however still a big but as regards the private land issue. the presence of a track implies public access, hence the road traffice act still applies.

Doubtless terminus (please do) will happily correct me should I be wrong on this point.

I can appreciate and forgive that genuine mistakes can and do happen, but in this case the bike was known to be not road legal, that allone renders any mistake argument pointless when it comes to any highway, be it a bridleway, boat, orpa or the M1.

You're basically correct if it has right of access to the public then it is covered by the road traffic act .. if it is private with no right of access then it's not.

A road or any place to which the public have a right of access.

You can be charged with driving on a place other than a public road - e.g through a town park or on a field to which the public have a right of access.

Edit - just to clarify my last point i'm not saying you'll get charged for driving in a field you have permission to be in if the public can access it I am saying the road traffic laws still apply where the public have a right of access.