We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Vehicle Incorrectly Seized
Comments
-
Only if they've done something wrong and I'm not sure they have. The vehicle was shown as having no insurance and the driver hasn't produce any evidence at the time of a policy being in force.
He would have been warned about the prospect of seizure so why didn't he use his phone to produce a certificate to refer to the mib online.
OP says he tried to and they wouldn't let him/ignored his requests to do so?0 -
OP says he tried to and they wouldn't let him/ignored his requests to do so?
The article goes on to say"A spokesman for the West Midlands Police said: "The car was seized for having no insurance after a number plate on the vehicle was not registered on police systems at the time the driver was stopped.
"This was done lawfully and in accordance with S165 (a) Road Traffic Act 1988."0 -
THANK YOU!!!!!
The truth of the matter is, regardless what anybody believes on here. People are picking out issues with the spacing of the plate and what the plate means. What is the point of this forum? I came here for help. I didn’t show any attitude to the officers, I didn’t know The Sun would result in such comments or alter my quotes because it’s my first time i didn’t know any of this, i am telling the truth and asking for help and people are picking out on the shoes i’m wearing or the wording from an article or the price of the plate.
I appreciate everybody that gave me a good answer but everyone else will be ignoredOP says he tried to and they wouldn't let him/ignored his requests to do so?0 -
You do realise, i was insured otherwise i wouldn’t be here? I have a written legal document from my insurer with time stamps of events and everything that they did to show they didn’t actually make a mistake and my logbook to show that neither did DVLA?
Road Traffic Act 1988 you seize a vehicle if the member cannot show documentation he is insured. I wasn’t allowed to because they said my documents didn’t matter
My documents didn’t matter when i was at the police station the following day trying to retrieve the vehicleThe article goes on to say"A spokesman for the West Midlands Police said: "The car was seized for having no insurance after a number plate on the vehicle was not registered on police systems at the time the driver was stopped.
"This was done lawfully and in accordance with S165 (a) Road Traffic Act 1988."0 -
No, documents aren't proof in themselves. There's lots of forged documents, as well as genuine documents from cancelled policies. The primary record is the MIB database - but, yes, it can take time for changes to propagate through.If i clearly have stated i didn’t have the opportunity to show documents then maybe go from that? Officer said to me it didn’t matter about the documents i had on my phone as they have to go by their database.
The police should be forming a view of the likelihood of the MIB database being inaccurate. Within working hours, they can easily contact the insurer and ask. Outside working hours, that's obviously more difficult - so they have to go with gut feel.
They were faced with, I suspect, a double-whammy - a plate that didn't show as being valid on DVLA, and which wasn't showing as being insured. Then stir that with the car itself being highly conspicuous, in use late at night, with a young driver... You were legitimate and legal - but you can see why the police may have been sceptical. You think that ethnicity was key, I suspect it was actually the least important factor here, and that the same would happen to anybody or similar age and presentation from any other background. I'm sure you'll say that your roadside demeanour was impeccable when stopped, but it's a simple fact that the "attitude test" forms a very large part of how they'll deal with the incident.
Now imagine the headlines if they'd simply taken your claims at face value and let you drive off - only to then attend a serious collision later that night, and find that the car was actually on false plates and uninsured...
Frankly, I'm happy that they lean on the side of caution in such a small number of edge cases, even if it does bring substantial inconvenience in those cases.
Ultimately, the whole point of "private" plates is as a vanity exercise. They have zero other raison d'etre. And when you stick your head up to say "LOOK AT ME!" in such a way, you can't complain when people DO look at you. And not everybody will agree with you.People are picking out issues with the spacing of the plate and what the plate means.
The plate doesn't "mean" anything. It simply says that the registration mark of your vehicle is E17 GNR.
There are laws on how that's displayed, and you have to go to some lengths to buy plates which do not conform to those laws - the supplier is themselves breaking the law in making and selling them.0 -
Only if they've done something wrong and I'm not sure they have. The vehicle was shown as having no insurance and the driver hasn't produce any evidence at the time of a policy being in force.
He would have been warned about the prospect of seizure so why didn't he use his phone to produce a certificate to refer to the mib online.
His choice to go to the press later.
That is correct and I should have added that. A court may consider it entirely reasonable for the police to rely on their database. It may further consider that it's not unreasonable for police not to place reliance on any documentation the driver has, as I understand that certificates have been known to be presented that relate to insurance which has been subsequently cancelled.
Whether that makes it OK to seize the car I don't know. In the circumstances, perhaps it was.0 -
sevenhills wrote: »You could try a solicitor or may be your first step could be your local Police and crime commissioner, each area has a different one.
https://www.police.uk/information-and-advice/police-and-crime-commissioners/
https://www.hnksolicitors.com/our-services/civil-actions-against-the-police/?gclid=CjwKCAiA_MPuBRB5EiwAHTTvMaQImeKksPAwkQGOMuwDjNy_TACmrUk7-WSW_TKd-mtIfejWq9gjuRoCf-oQAvD_BwE
Personally if I had a complaint I would go straight to the professional standards dept or the independent office for police conduct as they're to teo that can actually investigate the complaint.0 -
See now i understand this viewpoint of things. Thank you for your answerNo, documents aren't proof in themselves. There's lots of forged documents, as well as genuine documents from cancelled policies. The primary record is the MIB database - but, yes, it can take time for changes to propagate through.
The police should be forming a view of the likelihood of the MIB database being inaccurate. Within working hours, they can easily contact the insurer and ask. Outside working hours, that's obviously more difficult - so they have to go with gut feel.
They were faced with, I suspect, a double-whammy - a plate that didn't show as being valid on DVLA, and which wasn't showing as being insured. Then stir that with the car itself being highly conspicuous, in use late at night, with a young driver... You were legitimate and legal - but you can see why the police may have been sceptical. You think that ethnicity was key, I suspect it was actually the least important factor here, and that the same would happen to anybody or similar age and presentation from any other background. I'm sure you'll say that your roadside demeanour was impeccable when stopped, but it's a simple fact that the "attitude test" forms a very large part of how they'll deal with the incident.
Now imagine the headlines if they'd simply taken your claims at face value and let you drive off - only to then attend a serious collision later that night, and find that the car was actually on false plates and uninsured...
Frankly, I'm happy that they lean on the side of caution in such a small number of edge cases, even if it does bring substantial inconvenience in those cases.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards