Hello all,

I am new to this forum and hope some of you will be able to help me. Just being curious and trying to get an explanation. Here it goes:

I was stopped by two police officers today afternoon. Reason for stopping me (as they stated) was the fact of my tax disc being covered with (!) a week old council parking ticket which I placed there. After I removed it, they`ve checked my tax disc, and surprisingly for them everything was fine with it. Then I was asked to provide my driving license and car insurance. When one of the officers was checking my driving license, the other one went back to their car and checked my car details using my reg number. He stated that everything was fine, but the guy checking my driving license (which was issued in Poland) still wanted me to show them my insurance certificate, what I did. I was also asked to provide my UK address first, and then to prove that Insurance Certificate was issued to the same address I have given him (what I did as well). Because up to now on everything was fine, and I didn't have any motoring offences before they`ve decided to take a closer look at my car. After a while they`e spotted that front left tyre is low on tread. I was asked to turn my wheels to one side, so one of them can measure the tread. Using some kind of a measuring tool, the depth they`ve measured was (what I was told) 0.6 mm. As far as I saw, this was measured in one place only. Tyre tread width was also measured using something that looked like a ruler.
I was told that tyre tread depth is less than minimal 1.6mm and therefore driving a car like this is illegal. I didn't now that one of the tyres is out of a limit, what I clearly stated to them. I was asked to change the wheel to a spare one, which unfortunately was too small when compared to the other 3. So they told me to drive straight to the nearest garage and replace the tyre (saying that if I am stopped by another patrol I will be done again for the same tyre).

Do they have right to advise me to do something that is contrary to the law?

What I was told is, that because I have a foreign driving license, summons will be issued and case will go to court, and there is no possibility to issue a FPN.

My question (apart from the one mensioned above) is, what options do I have now, and what fine should I expect to be given?


Thank you all in advance.

Best regards,
Simon

Rubbish. The provisions of the Road Safety Act 2006 mean that from April of this year, if you have a licence issued by an EU member state, you can participate in the points system.



Usually this is dealt with via a fixed penalty which gets you 60 pound fine + 3 points. In court, same points slightly higher fine.

keep the old tyre as evidence ang get it measured correctly as per the law.

I found the Road Safety Act, but because of a complicated "lawyer-ish language" I was unable to determine what is the correct action that should have been taken against me.

Obvious is, that I'd rather pay the FPN fine and avoid the court, than go for a court-ride.

I was wondering if it's worth going for a visit to my local Police station, telling them about my concerns and giving them some details (I took a note of police car reg plate), to see if I was treated fair?




I will go back to the garage that fitted new tyre and try to get the old tyre back (if it's still there).

Read this form - in particular Part B in the explanatory notes on the 2nd page.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/gr...dg_10030243.pdf


(Note: As a result of a change in legislation from April 2009,
European Community (EC) or European Economic Area (EEA)
licence holders will no longer be required to possess a GB
counterpart to take advantage of the fixed penalty system)

They could have dealt with it by fixed penalty. Not sure if you could try and get them to use that route now though? I suppose you could ask as you've nothing to lose.

Thank you for quick reply. I find note in Part B of D9 form very useful. What I want to do tomorrow, is go to my local Police Station with the document printed out. Hope I will receive satisfactory reply. Will keep the topic updated as soon I will have new information regarding my case. Thanks again!

Small off-topic. I know of many examples of non-British people driving without a driving license, car insurance or/and MOT cert. that were pulled over for a routine check and got away with a verbal warning only. How come is it possible?

 

Did you witness it personally?

Only once . It was a matter of MOT certificate being outdated by nearly a month. What friend replied to the officer was that he forgot about MOT being due, and was advised to book a test asap and get back to them with a valid one issued.

Rest of the things, like not having driving license etc. - I have only heard about them (mostly directly from the people involved). I do know, that this could have been lies.

No MoT is not a particularly serious offence, especially if it is only just out of date. No licence, no insurance are more serious offences and I can't think of any circumstances under which a warning would be the preferred option.

I totally agree with you. Therefore in my opinion, my case - which is only the tyre tread that does not meet the minimum requirements - should be treated in the same way that any other non-roadworthy (lack of MOT cert.) car owner is treated.

 
Good try but a faulty tyre is generally a more serious offence as it's safety related. No MoT might be overlooked but no MoT due to a bald tyre won't be - though only the tyre offence might be pursued.

I thought they could give you a notice to have the tyre replaced in 7 days instead of an FPN and points if they were feeling generous. But they probably didn't feel generous here because the tyre was not just under the limit but way under so would be very dangerous in wet weather.

Also New Labour's stupid targets for everything probably means the Police force gets some kind of kudos for issuing as many tyre FPNs/prosecutions as possible.

Allright, time for some picture story.

I am after work now and managed to recover my old tyre. What I did is, I asked a guy at the tyre centre to measure the depth of the grooves on the tyre. I was surprised when he took out a digital measuring tool , exactly this one:



in comparison to what officer used to measure tread depth, which was:





Device was calibrated in front of my eyes, then the tyre was measured by a guy from tyre centre and measurements were written down. Three grooves with the depth measured are shown on the photo below:


(click to enlarge)

Some other photos that you may want to see:


What do you think about that? Anybody knows if the depth of a tread needs to be measured on the inflated tyre? I am waiting for replies. Many thanks in advance!

Simon

I can't get your Imageshack print out to load so what were the actual measurements obtained? Were they over or under 1.6mm of tread as from the photos that looks like a pretty well worn tyre. I presume the tyre centre could tell you whether having the tyre on an inflated rim or not has any impact on the total measured tread depth. Clearly after serious accidents tyres quite often have to be measured when they are deflated by Police accident investigators.

If the tyre is legal then plead Not Guilty, submit the measurement report from the tyre centre in evidence and take the worn tyre with you to court along with a measuring device if the CPS still won't back off and drop the charge. Even then you would need to credible evidence under oath that this is the actual tyre that was on your car at the time of the stop.

Note it is actually recommended by Rospa and most of the manufacturers that you replace the tyres at 3mm of tread depth as stopping distances in the wet actually begin to rise dramatically and disproportionately from that point onwards. So 1.6mm is very much the last point at which you should replace the tyre for the sake of safety and legality rather than the first point at which you should think about doing so.

See http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/advice/mot...tread_depth.htm

I can not open the document from the tyre place but looking at the tyre itr is not legal with more the 25% of the tyre under 1.6 mm. What are the figures in the report. That make and size is the tyre. Pete D

For those who can't see, of the four central grooves only three have measurements. Left to right, these are 1.26, 1.62, 2.28.

No measurements for the left-most groove or the side grooves.

@OP: A digital display doesn't make one guage more accurate than another.

Thanks for the number. so the Left of the tyre and at least the first grove is down to 1.26 or less towards the edge. That is more that 25% of the width of the tyre. Note that all four wear markers are well worn although they are usually at 2mm. I would say the tyre is illegal. Did the type make comment to the legality on the report. Pete D

I agree

Tyre is KUMHO ECSTA SPT KU31 - 215/40ZR17 87W XL




I did not see the report, because there wasn't any report. Officer was writing things down on a small white notepad that he took out of his pocket. Nothing of what he wrote down was shown to me.

Re-uploaded pictures on different server for you:




















Regarding the measurements taken. Just got back from the MOT test centre. I spoke to the man working there (from his age - 50/60 yo - I can assume that he has been working there for years now and he know what he is saying). I asked him some more questions that I had. He was more than happy to help me, especially after I explained to him what has happened.

I was told that the tyre tread depth does not have to be measured whilist being on the alloy, or there's no need the tyre has to be inflated. This is in accordance with MOT testing guidelines. He then told me things that I already knew, like the area on the tyre that needs to have tread depth above 1.6mm etc.

He took the measurements of the old tyre and told me that two of the rows in central part of the tyre were out of spec, but were not less than 1.4mm deep. Therefore the tyre is illegal, but (he said) there's no way any part of tread on the tyre is close to 0.6mm. He advised me to take the tyre to the court.

Just to make it clear: I didn't ever hope that anybody will tell me that the tyre is good. Thing is, that I do not wish to plead guilty of driving with a tyre having 0.6mm tread (which is nearly bald). I would like to prove that the measurement taken by the officer were incorrect, and and as a result of that: if the proper and accurate measurements were carried out at the time I was stopped (+if they have knew of the fact that I can actually accept points on my license) a FPN might have been issued instead of summons.

Sounds like you ought to go to court, plead guilty but dispute the facts of the case. I doubt it'll get as far as a Newton hearing as I imagine the prosecutor will accept your measurements and you'll be sentenced on that basis.

This could mean what type of sentence? I am just curious of a possible sentences as I was unable to find any similar case to mine.

Three points and a fine commensurate with your income (somewhere around £100 to £150 I would imagine).

The outside edge , left, was totally bald never mind 0.6 mm I suspect the edge tread max did not exceed 0.6 mm and the first groove was below the spec and only just recovered before the second one well past 25% across the tyre. I do not think you have any defence here. Pete D

But if you know you are still guilty of the offence you want to be careful about making it sound too much like the Policeman was being unreasonable in giving you the ticket and in particular that you were actually aware the tyre was anywhere near or below the legal limit. However If you plead Guilty the Policeman won't be there in court so there will be no way to question on him his measurements so your only evidence would be the tyre and any report you have had done on it.

I suppose it might have a certain comedy value in a long and boring morning of Guilty pleas in court for the mags if you were able to haul the tyre in to court but I don't know if their security people would even let you take it through the door of the court building and I can't quite see how this huge hulking, dirty tyre gets passed over to the mags to look at via the Legal Adviser. You might need to confine yourself to a set of color photos and any report from a tyre centre if you want to make the point in mitigation that it must have only just become illegal lately and not a long time ago as the PC's 0.6cm reading on the tyre might appear to suggest.

Its probably best to concentrate on the angle of how you always keep your car in good order normally and unfortunately the tyre had just worn quickly between your regular services in this case due to being a soft high grip tyre type.

Its a Level 4, Band B fine with 3 points for a first time offender and both of these (the fine Level and Band within the fine Level) are higher than the bottom band for speeding offences which are at Level 3 and Band A for someone with a clean licence. But in reality I suspect sentencing varies a great deal according to how many tyres on the vehicle are illegal and if its only one and you convey that you are a conscientious maintainer of your vehicle and were genuinely shocked to find this one was illegal and are also dressed smartly yourself they should give you the minimum possible fine for your level of income.

OK, This is what I came up with regarding my defence:

"I plead guilty of driving my car with a tyre having a tread under legal limit of 1.6mm. To the best of my knowledge at the time I was stopped I was not aware of the tyre being faulty. I was very surprised when the Officer told me about a defect, as I always do my best to keep the car in the top working condition. What’s more, I was driving with my girlfriend as a passenger. I was angry at myself because I could have never forgive myself if anything happened to her or any other person as a result of my carelessness. Therefore, I fully understand seriousness of the offence I have unwillingly committed. I would like to show the Court that I treat the whole situation seriously and because of that I had the faulty front left tyre replaced straight after the incident (got the receipt as a proof). What's more, few days later I did replace front right tyre as well (got receipt as a proof). I could have replaced both tyres at the same time, but I did not have enough money to pay for two tyres on that day. Also, I would like to remark that recorded by the Officer 0.6mm tread depth could not be confirmed by the employee of ******** located in ******** in which I had my faulty tyre replaced straight after the incident. Measurements taken by the member of staff at ********** were wrote down for me (and I have them with me). Despite the fact that they do not indicate that the tyre was legal at that time, they do show that tyre must have worn out not long before the incident. This is different to the situation if the tread depth would be only 0.6mm. This particular model of a tyre is made of a soft, high-grip rubber, and I personally think this makes it more likely to wear quicker than others. Therefore I commit myself to carefully check condition of the tyres more regularly.

There is one more and last thing that I would like to present. After I was alleged by the Officer of committing an offence, I told him that I was not aware of the faulty tyre. I also accepted accusation and asked for a fine. I asked whether the Fixed Penalty Notice could be issued. The answer I got was that it cannot be applied in my case, as I am the holder of a non-British Driving Licence and therefore Penalty Points cannot be imposed on it. What I found out the next day was that according to changes made to the Road Safety Act 2006 (c.49, sections 8 and 9) that became effective on 1 April 2009, UK Police Officers are now able to issue Fixed Penalty Notices to the European Community or European Economic Area licence holders. It clearly means that I am allowed to take an advantage of a fixed penalty system and Penalty Points can be applied to my licence. Therefore I truly believe that I was given false information."

What do you think about it?

I would change the last paragraph so that you show that the officer was mistaken in his belief (rather than you were given false information - its less accusatory and is less likely to aggravate the bench) that he could not issue a EFPN but that the implication was that had you been able eligible he would have issued one to you. You could then invite the bench to consider not imposing any greater penalty than you would have incurred had the officer issued the EFPN i.e. £60 and 3 points.

I think you mean that the above is your statement of mitigation after pleading Guilty. Not your defence. The stuff about your girlfriend as a passenger and never forgiving yourself if anything happened to her all sounds like excellent remorse. I don't know if its wise to mention you also then almost immediately replaced another tyre on the car as it then rather sounds like you were in the habit of keeping tyres on the car until they were nearly worn out. Regarding the 0.6mm I don't know whether you should draw attention to it or not as otherwise the court may side with the PC's statement and it may draw more attention to some of the tread being a long way below 1.6mm. The main points you want to get across are that you normally maintain your car conscientiously and it came as a total shock to you to find the tyre was not legal.

QUOTE

While Hotel_Oscar 87's suggestion that you ask the court if they will only impose the Fixed Penalty fine on you if this gets to court because it appears the PC could have issued an FPN at the time but may not have known he could is a good one I wonder if you could also write now to the Chief Constable of the Police force in question asking why his officers are not issuing FPNs to nationals from other EU states with a driving licence from one of those states who commit a single offence that would normally qualify for 3 points and a CoFP notice and saying that you feel it is really very unfair to you to be summonsed to court as a result of his officers not being up to date with this information. You would then want to point out that you have already immediately replaced this defective tyre and include a copy of the invoice for doing so. What you then want to ask is if there is any way for the Police force to still make you a Conditional Fixed Penalty Offer since as you have demonstrated Police forces are now able to issue them for these single offences to EU nationals with an EU driving licence who live here. But I don't know enough about the FPN system to know if this works as you were stopped and told by the PC that the matter would be referred for prosecution and not given a Fixed Penalty Notice. But at the moment the Police have not summonsed you and probably won't do for months yet (at that point it would definitely be too late for the Police to change their mind). So if the Police have this power you are trying to persuade them to now issue you with an FPN with 3 points and £60 fine instead of summonsing you to court as you believe they do have this power. Also if you got really lucky and someone at the Police accepted they had not acted fairly they could certainly always decide not to summons you for the offence, although that is probably a long shot these days and unlikely to happen.

But may be there is something about being stopped by the roadside that means a Conditional Fixed Penalty can only be offered at the time at the roadside? However certainly with GATSO/Truvelo and mobile camera van offences they send you an NIP within 14 days (unless there is an exemption as to why they can't do), you then reply within 28 days identifying the driver and they then issue a CoFP as many times as they like for as long as they like as long as they don't go over the 6 months they have to provide an information to the court if you don't accept the Fixed Penalty Offer and they need to summons you for it instead.

Am I wrong here and is it the case that because no CoFP offer was made at the roadside the Police can now only summons for this offence or alternatively decide on No Further Action (NFA) or can they at any time issue a CoFP with a response required by a certain deadline as to whether it is accepted or not if they realise their officer could have issued a CoFP but did not do so purely due to not being up to date with the changed rules (and not because this was a more serious defective tyre offence).

Obviously what the OP is also suggesting to the Chief Constable here is that public money can be saved by the matter not being handled in court and that the officer only failed to issue an FPN due to the apparent lack of his being updated on the new procedure for EU nationals resident in the UK with a valid EU driving licence. The worst that could happen is that the Police tell you no it is definitely not possible to change and issue a Conditional Fixed Penalty Offer now and the matter still proceeds to court and you then plead Guilty and mitigate the offence as proposed above in court including mentioning that you believe you were not issued with a CoFP purely due to confusion about the status of EU nationals with an EU driving licence who are resident in the UK.

Thank you for your answer, it helped me a lot! Still waiting for some clues from you...

Out of context question: Is there any place I can get legal advice regarding my case, or where to get it cheap? (I am really struggling financially, but not as much to be eliglible for Community Legal Advice Legal Aid.

Do you really think that your tyre was in fact legal. Pete D

I just meant that if you admit that a few days later you replaced another tyre and only did not do it at the same time as the first tyre because you did not have enough money that day it makes it sound a little like you were actually putting off things like replacing tyres as long as possible due to lack of money. I know you hoped that by mentioning the second tyre it would look as though you did really care about maintaining your car but they way some of these magistrates think (that is the morally upright ones who could never possibly imagine making a mistake themselves) it might work against you as they would not consider lack of money as being a legitimate reason for postponing maintenance of items that are in a condition that means they appear to be in need repair of replacement.



The best place for free legal advice is on here as several of the regulars like southpaw and Glacier2 are qualified specialist road traffic solicitors. The main advantage of an experienced traffic solicitor is that they would immediately spot if any of the paperwork in the summons is not in order but so long as there is a written statement from the Police officer saying he took the measurements of the tyres and one was below the legal limit that is all they really need to prosecute you.

Wilkinson's Road Traffic Offences is what the court refers to on all these traffic law matters and some forum members recommend you read the part of it relating to your offence but unfotunately this publication is not found in any public libraries in the UK other than the Cambridge University Library. And in a case where you are pleading Guilty I don't think you really need to look at a copy as you are not going to argue complex points of law.

So far as writing to the Chief Constable of this constabulary and asking if they can review the fact the officer concerned ought to have been trained that he could now offer you a fixed penalty ticket as an EU national with a driving licence from another EU state who is UK resident you probably don't have much to lose as even if the rules do not now permit them to issue you a fixed penalty the staff in the Chief Constable's department (it won't obviously be the Chief Constable himself) or manager of the Fixed Penalty unit for traffic offences do have the discretion to ask for an Information not to be passed to the court that would cause you to then be Summonsed. But they would only do that if they thought there was a good reason and the fact you should really have been offered a fixed penalty for this simple offence might possibly be such a good reason.

It is very unlikely you will get a Summons for at least another 1 to 2 months and in the mean time any letter you write to the Chief Constable might (and I stress only might) help to cause them to decide not to Summons you for the offence at all.

I decided to write to the Chief Constable. This is what I came up with:

I like the discrimination angle - something that hadn't occurred to me beforehand. It was, after all, one of the reasons for the change in the law in the first place.

Let's just see how this is manoeuvred to show that the reasoning of the officer was not actually the fact that he didn't think he could issue you with a fixed penalty but that the matter was more serious and therefore needed to be dealt with at court.

Have I missed something. Why is the OP driving on a foreign licence when he has been resident in this country for 3 years ?

Yes - It's a licence from an EU member state

That in my opinion is a brilliantly written letter.

It is indeed.

If we are to be pedantic, though ...

"According to changes made to the Road Safety Act 2006 (c.49, sections 8 and 9) that became effective on 1 April 2009"

isn't exactly correct. The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 was amended by the Road Safety Act 2006 (rather than the Road Safety Act amending itself).

I'll get my coat ...

According to www.aboutimmigration.co.uk/driving-uk.html



But DVLA leaflet INF95 available at http://www.dvla.gov.uk/dvla/forms/~/media/...lets/INF95.ashx says:-



But then goes on to say:-

QUOTE

So why the need to exchange an EU licence at all for a UK one? Presumably only as and when it reaches its expiry date to save the bother of applying to your home licence issuing country? Also I would be fascinated to know why Japan and Republic of Korea, who have no British colonial past and are not part of the British Commonwealth, are part of the licence exchange scheme without needing to take a further test. Does this have to do with them driving on the left of the road or something?

I am not sure the DVLA leaflet has it right though and I was sure I had read elsewhere that an EU licence did have to be exchanged for a UK one after three years of residence in the UK? Also is the ability to issue FPNs instead of summonsing the driver to court perhaps restricted to those who have already actively applied for and obtained a DVLA counterpart for recording points etc on for their EU licence?

This is taken from the Explanatory Notes to the Road Safety Act 2006 itself at www.uk-legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/en/ukpgaen_20060049_en.pdf



I can't manage to find anything on the DVLA website which makes clear whether or not EU nationals resident here for more than three years must exchange their EU licence for a UK one.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/Drive...ence/DG_4022556

Please check Can you drive in GB - Direct.gov.uk or Direct.gov.uk




Thank you




If I wanted to have a cheaper car insurance quote I would exchange my licence for an UK one. Regarding the Counterpart licence, in my case it is no longer needed and not required. I am not sure if at the moment it applies to anybody and if it's longer in use...




Correct!

So majority of you do think and recommend me to send out this letter to the Chief Constable, am I right here?

Cheers,
MungoPL

It should also be noted that the tyre showed uneven wear over the surface and was legal at 1 side. This could be from a tracking problem from being curbed or knocked on traffic calming bumps. Were this the case it does not talke long to scuff the tyre to get a perfectly good tyre down to that state, perhaps just 100 miles or so. This could be included as mitigation as the driver would could indicate that the tyre was OK and deteriorated very quickly as opposed to having left it to wear over several months.

Yes send in your very well written letter and see how you get on. However in order to avoid any confusion by the Police I wonder if you should just say you are a Polish citizen who is currently a UK resident and not mention that you have been here for over three years. That way there is no chance for the person reading the letter at the Police to get confused (especially when they start looking up the requirements for EU citizens that are resident here on driving licences, which are very unclearly written on some of the various different websites) and wrongly think you should have converted your Polish licence to a British one after the first three years of you living here.

If the Chief Constable still ignores your complaint and does not either issue you with a Fixed Penalty or better still indicate that no further action will be taken in this case regarding the alleged tyre offence then for your own satisfaction you could always consider lodging a complaint with the Independent Police Complaints Commission about this clear cut case of discrimination by the Police against UK residents who are citizens of other EU member states. At least that way the Police in this constabulary area should eventually get the message about the new rules for resident EU citizens on the issue of fixed penalty offers for motoring offences. And of course you also always make a complaint to the EU commission like the Dutch lady did that then led to the change in the law.

The address of the Chief Constable should be given on the website of the Police force area concerned and/or they may list an email address on their website such as chief.constable@policeforcearea.pnn.police.uk (where policeforcearea is surrey, sussex or whatever police force area this alleged offence actually happened in). The bottom line is the officer concerned could also have given you a notice to have the tyre fixed within 7 days instead of saying you would be summonsed but I expect in the new unforgiving world of New Labour maximum driver punishment they have been wrongly led to believe that just giving you a notice to get the tyre fixed achieves less.

Thank you very much for your full and satisfying answer. I will send the letter today with a Recorded Delivery and we will see what happens next...

MungoPL

Allright,
So I finally received a reply saying:




I think this solves the matter for me. Thank you all for helping me!!!

Its good to see the Police reaching a sensible decision in this case and being prepared to underlyingly admit that their officer did not follow correct procedure. It seems that they perhaps did not fancy the idea of incurring the wrath of the EU Commission.

I suppose there is an outside chance that the officer in question may now consider the whole matter to be such hard work that he decides to let you off with a caution but more probably the Fixed Penalty offer will be on its way to you in due course.

It only goes to show that corresponding at senior level with the Police, rather than simply letting matters drop to a court summons, can pay off in some cases.