De-registering Vehicles

This is the place for posts that don't fit into any other category.

Moderator: RichardW

Chlorate
Posts: 612
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 00:55

De-registering Vehicles

Post by Chlorate »

Whilst browsing around Youtube I came across a series of videos of someone getting shirty with a copper who was apparently infringing upon his right to travel.

The chap in question had de-registered his car and rescinded his driving license under the pretense that he wasn't a "driver" but he was conveying his privately owned vehicle.

It seems that a number of people are doing this thinking they've screwed the system, but surely it can't be as simple as that. Yes everyone has the right to travel, but not the right to own a car let alone drive the thing unhindered.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8dPcLf8 ... ature=plcp
Here's one of the videos.

He concludes that there's nothing wrong with driving this way, so long as you're willing to take full liability for your actions.

What a load of dingo's kidneys!

Edit:
Interesting to note that the rest of this chap's videos are to do with bedini motors and chemtrails.
I smell a conspiracy theorist.

User avatar
Xaccers
Posts: 7653
Joined: 08 Feb 2007, 00:46
x 3

Re: De-registering Vehicles

Post by Xaccers »

"Dave" has made a fatal mistake of looking up the "legal definition of driving" on Google without specifying it being the UK legal definition. The US definition returned makes mention of commercial, the UK doesn't.
He, like many of his ilk, are trying word games, where they demand a specific word is defined legally when there is no need.
For instance, the definition of murder is:
"Murder is when a man of sound memory and of the age of discretion, unlawfully killeth within any county of the realm any reasonable creature in rerum natura under the King's peace, with malice aforthought, either expressed by the party or implied by law, so as the party wounded, or hurt, etc. die of the wound or hurt, etc. within a year and a day of the same"

However "killeth" is not defined, so using Dave's logic you can't be found guilty of murdering someone because there is no legal definition for it. Or murdering someone while on a boat sailing through the Solent would be legal because you're not in a County of the realm.

Chlorate
Posts: 612
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 00:55

Re: De-registering Vehicles

Post by Chlorate »

I quite like the idea of a game of legal Scrabble; and arguing with a man in a funny wig what is or isn't in the dictionary :twisted:
Although methinks that won't be a game that lasts very long.

Yes we have the right to travel, but we don't have the right to drive a car. And I should imagine when people pulling this silly trick get pulled up for driving an unregistered car, unlicenced, uninsured, untaxed and without MOT they'll find themselves with the right to remain silent. :lol:

User avatar
Xaccers
Posts: 7653
Joined: 08 Feb 2007, 00:46
x 3

Re: De-registering Vehicles

Post by Xaccers »

I've used the law against the police successfully twice before in relation to notice of intended prosecution. They were unable to show that they sent the NIP within the 14 days required and decided to waste the court's time which did them no favours. When I asked for photographic evidence they'd cropped it to only show the driver and it wasn't clear enough to see if it was me or even my car (they're supposed to provide unedited photos at least, especially when there are road markings as these can be used to confirm the speed of the vehicle and in the past have been used to show that accused drivers were not at the time speeding). Apart from giving incorrect information on their statement to the court, when asked by the CPS regarding proof that the original NIP was sent within 14 days the police responded as though asked about a totally different question resulting in the CPS to say "if the police are not interested in this case then neither are we" I had driven up from Portsmouth to Grimsby for the hearing for which I could have claimed expenses.
Basically the first I new of the NIP was a reminder letter stating I hadn't replied. I pointed out that I hadn't received the NIP and if they could send me a copy of it or proof of postage (in line with the Road Traffic Offences act) of the original I would inform them of who was driving. Instead they just sent me a new NIP, which was over the 14 day limit of serving it. So I contacted them again requesting proof of postage of the original and also the photographic evidence. They tried to rail road me into admitting I was driving and paying £60 without them having to follow the legal procedure requiring me to tell them or being able to show they'd gotten the right vehicle.
Bedford tried the same thing, sending out only the reminder which mentioned the incident took place on a road that I don't drive down, so again I asked for proof of postage for the NIP, heard nothing more so it could be they'd misread the number plate from the photos, realised their mistake and found the right vehicle (this is the police force that when my car was hit parked outside my house while I slept in my bed, I was threatened with prosecution if I didn't show my documents to the local station), or they didn't have proof of postage so dropped the matter.

User avatar
waynedance
Posts: 973
Joined: 29 May 2011, 22:56
x 8

Re: De-registering Vehicles

Post by waynedance »

I like his freedom to travel argument and invoicing the police for 20k, how about who owns the roads? and invoice him 20k per mile.

User avatar
CitroJim
A very naughty boy
Posts: 42663
Joined: 30 Apr 2005, 23:33
x 1370

Re: De-registering Vehicles

Post by CitroJim »

Surely it's a hell of a lot easier to play the game by the rules. I just couldn't be bothered with all that malarky...