Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: S59
FightBack Forums > Discussion > The Flame Pit
Dwain
There is a topic on another site where a driver was going a bit quickly and two officers in an unmarked vehicle travelling in the opposite direction turned around and pulled him over. As they had no record of his speed they issued a S59.

Is this a legitimate use of this option, is it what was intended when it was brought in?

https://forums.m3cutters.co.uk/threads/gah-...weekend.213318/

cp8759
Depending on the circumstances excess speed may well justify a section 59 warning, nothing wrong in principle with that. There might be grounds to dispute it if the speed was 35 in a 30 but I don't imagine that's the scenario.
peodude
It's telling that he dodges the question of how fast he was going. Given that it's an M4 as well, there may be an element of noise aggravation in there as well.
Dwain
QUOTE (peodude @ Tue, 4 Jun 2019 - 11:31) *
It's telling that he dodges the question of how fast he was going. Given that it's an M4 as well, there may be an element of noise aggravation in there as well.


A noisey M4.........as if smile.gif I get out of our cul-de-sac ASAP just to reduce the annoyance.
TonyS
Legislations appears to say that a vehicle can be only be seized under S59 for some specific offences ..

QUOTE
(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,


It is not completely clear (to me) whether the same definition applies to giving a warning. It would make sense if it did, because otherwise it sort of allows a vehicle to be seized on a first alleged offence.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.