Warning Notice

superstylin

a section 59 warning can be applied to driver and/or vehicle and pcso's, unless the power is removed by the force chief, can stop vehicles to issue the warnings.
I'd contest it. if it went to court then the pcso would be asked how they knew it was that car since no reg mark was taken. if the car is standard then they'd be hard pressed to prove it was that vehicle without a reg.
if the pcso has recognised your son, ie he is known to police, then the case may be different, but if you say your son is a well behaved lad then this shouldn't be true, so again the pcso would find it difficult to add weight to the idea that it was your son doing the driving.
the anomaly of wrong model would only help your case

Jakg

I also saw the same piece about a section 59 on Road Wars - the guy was doing nothing wrong, however ONE resident had reported his car before as being anti-social (i.e. his word versus the other guys). They got another complaint from the same guy and they took his car away!

He protested his innocence but they did little to explain and acted as if he was some sort of sick horrible person, based on what well of been a grudge between friends...

Based on this I did a little research and came up with this - http://www.glass-uk.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=267&Itemid=492 - It's for green-laners (so not quite the same) but gives you a good guide of what to say.

The whole thing seems beyond stupid imo, though, although I must admit i'd call the police and report the police cars registration as driving in an antisocial manner to prove a point...

Gordon861

I would put all the problems with this 'ticket' in writing and go to the local police station and ask to see the officer in charge.

If this PCSO can't write down the correct details when standing next to the car with your son how can any other evidence they give be reliable. It sounds to me like they need more training.

marbella

Thanks for the positive replies. I have telephoned the local station and left a message for the Local Neighbourhood Inspector to call me back, this was on Tuesday and still no-one has called me. I have hept trying but cannot get hold of this person. I am going to call down to the station with all the info I have and ask to see someone face-to-face.

rev_henry

marbella wrote: »

Well I didn't mention, that at the time that is written on the warning notice, he was actually with his friends bowling. Also, apart from being 17 he doesn't drive like an idiot. He is a careful driver with a really nice car, paying £4000 a year insurance and obviously taking the blame for some other idiot. I may just leave well alone as it seems that I might make things worse and just get him to put it down to experience.

You're obviously giving him too much money if he can afford to buy and insure a renault 5 GT turbo (if that's what you meant).
I'm pretty sure the PCSO didn't make a mistake with the car as they're so unusual to see these days. For anyone that doesn't know its the car that Ali G drives in his films. Although of course not all of them look quite as distinctive as his, but almost.
And I honestly don't see how a 17 year old lad could resist the temptation to drive a car like that a bit stupidly from time to time. Tell him to take it as a slap on the wrist and to drive a bit more sensibly in future. Even if the whole thing was a mistake (which I seriously doubt) then it doesn't really matter as it has no real consequence as long as he drives sensibly.

Glitzkiss

rev_henry wrote: »

You're obviously giving him too much money if he can afford to buy and insure a renault 5 GT turbo (if that's what you meant).
I'm pretty sure the PCSO didn't make a mistake with the car as they're so unusual to see these days. For anyone that doesn't know its the car that Ali G drives in his films. Although of course not all of them look quite as distinctive as his, but almost.
And I honestly don't see how a 17 year old lad could resist the temptation to drive a car like that a bit stupidly from time to time. Tell him to take it as a slap on the wrist and to drive a bit more sensibly in future. Even if the whole thing was a mistake (which I seriously doubt) then it doesn't really matter as it has no real consequence as long as he drives sensibly.

Except the PCSO wrote the wrong make of car on the notice, didn't get the reg number and didn't stop him at the time - stopped him 3 days later. Perhaps they were told by someone else it was a GT car in which case it could also have been a peugeot. Tenuous? maybe. possible? maybe

Something is definitely not quite right here but it's too murky to work out what. If I was the OP I would also be following it up to find out what's going on. If her son was at fault then fair enough he should accept it and apologise. But if it's mistaken identity then why should her son be given the notice?

marbella wrote: »

My son was stopped by a PCSO on the street in his car and given a warning notice for 'Driving in an anti social manner'. The incident supposedly happened on the Tuesday and he was given this 3 days later on the Friday. My first query is: as he is only 17 should they have contacted me as he is a juvenile? Secondly: the PCSO said that they did not get his registration number so they could not give him the warning notice earlier and thirdly my main concern is that they have written the wrong car make on the notice. I hope this makes sense as I have tried to keep it short but I was just wondering if anyone can advise me whether I should take this further as I think he has been mistaken for someone else who is driving the same colour car and is a young male driver. thanks for any advice.

datostar

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

OP, there is a chance that it was your son who did it but doesn't want to admit that to you. He tells you that he was bowling so you're not disappointed in him. He could have been egged on by mates, etc. Even good boys make mistakes sometimes. And it was only a warning so not like it was a serious mistake.

I think you need to have a think about it, and maybe a chat with your son. If you are happy that he didn't do anything wrong then challenge it.

When I used to investigate complaints against police we had one from from a young fellow and his mother alleging that he had been unjustifiably ejected from a football ground and barred from the ground for a month. His mother wasn't with him at the game. CCTV zoomed in on him clearly showed him ranting and raving up in the stand and you didn't need to be much of a lipreader to make out some of the words he was using. I took a copy of the videotape to their house and we all watched it together. After a short period of silence the complaint was withdrawn. Very nice family and the lad was basically a decent sort but Mum didn't look too happy with him after seeing that. I think the complaint had been her idea and she hadn't got the full story. Young men can get carried away at times.

Gordon861

With the number of posts in this thread stating that 'the kid must have done something', despite the PCSOs eveidence being shown to be screwed up.

Is it any wonder that kids now feel that they are targetted even when they have done nothing wrong?

Facts
1. The details on the ticket don't match the details of the car that it was given to.
2. We have a mother that choses to take an interest in what her kids are doing (for a change).

She should follow it up with the Police and find out what the hell is going on (and give the kid more stick if it later proves to be him after all). But until eveidence shows otherwise she has the right (and responsibilty) to defend her child.

/sarcasm on
Because we all know that none of the Police or PCSOs seem to make up the law as they go along and just pin offences on whoever happens to fit.

Halloway

marbella wrote: »

Its a Renault GT

Says it all.

zappahey

rev_henry wrote: »

You're obviously giving him too much money if he can afford to buy and insure a renault 5 GT turbo (if that's what you meant).
I'm pretty sure the PCSO didn't make a mistake with the car as they're so unusual to see these days....
And I honestly don't see how a 17 year old lad could resist the temptation to drive a car like that a bit stupidly from time to time.

So, you have guessed what the car might be and, based upon that guess, you've drawn the conclusion that the plastic plod can't have made a mistake because the car you have guessed is so distinctive.

Then you draw the further conclusion that, since the lad is only 17, he must be guilty.

The mind boggles.