3 points and £60 fine for brake lights

Chippy_Minton_2

sebastianj wrote: »

I never said that, but the punishment must be within the law, there is a difference between faulty brakes and electrical failure.
seb

It is, the FPN was written for YOU failing to maintain your braking system. It is therefore for you to present to a court the fact that the brake lights are not part of the brake system.

Out of interest, what licence do you have and how long have you had it?

steveo3002

think yourself lucky you didnt have a HGV roared into the back of your car with no brake lights

id issue fines for people that spell it breaks

dizzybuff

sebastianj wrote: »

Not sure if I am supposed to respond to all this, but here we go,
Hintza-
There is an exemption clause which allowed me to drive home maximum time granted 'one' Hr, I was asked to have my hazard lights on and drive no more than 20 miles PH.
Scotsman4th.
The DVLA guidelines are faulty brakes, not an electrical failure which I had. I will come back with the results, may be I will pay the fine and accept the points instead of endangering police reputation.
Quentin
Trust me, there was no patronising going on.
Dizzybuff
Who is 'peaofiles' needing internet access.
Chippy Minton
Calm down, it's only a forum.;)

peadophiles - that better for you .. sorry "officer" im dyslexic

Chippy_Minton_2

dizzybuff wrote: »

peadophiles - that better for you .. sorry "officer" im dyslexic

We knew what you meant.;)

dizzybuff

Okay this thread has just got boring .. no clarification on what was said .. blar blar ...

Like getting blood out of a stone..

Oh and if you do see an officer breaking the law , report it , take a mobile picture ( if your in the passenger seat). Dont complain on here..

BTW - just for clarrification Police officers take breaks when they can , some go without a drink and food for a whole 12 hour shift .. Not because they want to they have to ., they eat in their cars because they have to be ready if god help us we have to phone 999 and need their help.

There end of rant ... I wont be coming back .. im now officially bored.

Chippy_Minton_2

dizzybuff wrote: »

some go without a drink for a whole 12 hour shift ..

Not a good one.:rotfl:

dizzybuff

Chippy_Minton wrote: »

Not a good one.:rotfl:

I know i know . cuppa tea .. lol . No but seriously if they are response or tactical they may not ..

Chippy_Minton_2

dizzybuff wrote: »

I know i know . cuppa tea .. lol . No but seriously if they are response or tactical they may not ..

In that case they ought to be recording the theft of the kettle.:rotfl:

Strider590

Due to a number of forumites who think that we don't need brake lights to tell us the car in front is stopping, im bumping this rather ironic thread up from the abyss.

So removing brake lights from all cars would not be dangerous because...........

Go!

vax2002

Would need to prove intent in court, that the vehicle was intentionally driven with a defective braking system. As the lights are not part of the braking system and the defendant had taken all reasonable steps to rectify and maintain the vehicle the Clark of the court would most likely have to dismiss the charge on the grounds it could not be reasonable proven the defendant was knowingly driving a defective vehicle .