|
push bike
can they give your driving licence points for being naughty on your push
bike?... |
push bike
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
can they give your driving licence points for being naughty on your push bike?... No. Cyclists are above the law. |
push bike
Well, that depends on whether they can prove it was you. If you caused an
accident then I'd not want to lay any bets. Brian -- ----- -- This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from... The Sofa of Brian Gaff... Blind user, so no pictures please Note this Signature is meaningless.! "Mr Pounder Esquire" wrote in message ... Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: can they give your driving licence points for being naughty on your push bike?... No. Cyclists are above the law. |
push bike
On 01/09/2019 19:38, Brian Gaff wrote:
Well, that depends on whether they can prove it was you. If you caused an accident then I'd not want to lay any bets. Brian Wrong NG. Covered a little while ago in legal.moderated following a fatal accident, IIRC there is still something from the 19th century like "Furious and wanton cycling". But a driving license is specifically for *motorin*. |
push bike
On 01/09/2019 20:08, newshound wrote:
On 01/09/2019 19:38, Brian Gaff wrote: Well, that depends on whether they can prove it was you. If you caused an accident then I'd not want to lay any bets. Â* Brian Wrong NG. Covered a little while ago in legal.moderated following a fatal accident, IIRC there is still something from the 19th century like "Furious and wanton cycling". But a driving license is specifically for *motorin*. what about my legal electric moped?..... |
push bike
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
On 01/09/2019 20:08, newshound wrote: On 01/09/2019 19:38, Brian Gaff wrote: Well, that depends on whether they can prove it was you. If you caused an accident then I'd not want to lay any bets. Brian Wrong NG. Covered a little while ago in legal.moderated following a fatal accident, IIRC there is still something from the 19th century like "Furious and wanton cycling". But a driving license is specifically for *motorin*. what about my legal electric moped?..... **** off, pikey Jock troll. |
push bike
On 01/09/2019 20:29, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: On 01/09/2019 20:08, newshound wrote: On 01/09/2019 19:38, Brian Gaff wrote: Well, that depends on whether they can prove it was you. If you caused an accident then I'd not want to lay any bets. Brian Wrong NG. Covered a little while ago in legal.moderated following a fatal accident, IIRC there is still something from the 19th century like "Furious and wanton cycling". But a driving license is specifically for *motorin*. what about my legal electric moped?..... **** off, pikey Jock troll. WHS |
push bike
On 01/09/2019 20:46, mm0fmf wrote:
On 01/09/2019 20:29, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: On 01/09/2019 20:08, newshound wrote: On 01/09/2019 19:38, Brian Gaff wrote: Well, that depends on whether they can prove it was you. If you caused an accident then I'd not want to lay any bets. Brian Wrong NG. Covered a little while ago in legal.moderated following a fatal accident, IIRC there is still something from the 19th century like "Furious and wanton cycling". But a driving license is specifically for *motorin*. what about my legal electric moped?..... **** off, pikey Jock troll. WHS nothing to say about soiled gussets today chebs?....... |
push bike
On 01/09/2019 20:08, newshound wrote:
On 01/09/2019 19:38, Brian Gaff wrote: Well, that depends on whether they can prove it was you. If you caused an accident then I'd not want to lay any bets. Â* Brian Wrong NG. Covered a little while ago in legal.moderated following a fatal accident, IIRC there is still something from the 19th century like "Furious and wanton cycling". But a driving license is specifically for *motorin*. Rather more up to date are The Road Traffic Act 1988 offences of dangerous cycling (S28) and careless cycling (S29). However, the penalties for those are limited to fines of up to £1000 or £2500 respectively. The 1861 Offences Against the Person Act is used if those penalties are deemed inadequate, as in the case of a cyclist killing a pedestrian. That can result in a custodial sentence of up to two years and an unlimited fine. As you say, none of these offences would affect a driving licence. -- Colin Bignell |
push bike
On Monday, September 2, 2019 at 9:13:15 AM UTC+1, nightjar wrote:
On 01/09/2019 20:08, newshound wrote: On 01/09/2019 19:38, Brian Gaff wrote: Well, that depends on whether they can prove it was you. If you caused an accident then I'd not want to lay any bets. Â* Brian Wrong NG. Covered a little while ago in legal.moderated following a fatal accident, IIRC there is still something from the 19th century like "Furious and wanton cycling". But a driving license is specifically for *motorin*. Rather more up to date are The Road Traffic Act 1988 offences of dangerous cycling (S28) and careless cycling (S29). However, the penalties for those are limited to fines of up to £1000 or £2500 respectively. The 1861 Offences Against the Person Act is used if those penalties are deemed inadequate, as in the case of a cyclist killing a pedestrian. That can result in a custodial sentence of up to two years and an unlimited fine. As you say, none of these offences would affect a driving licence. -- Colin Bignell As its not compulsory to have a driving license it might be difficult to have one suspended. |
push bike
wrote:
On Monday, September 2, 2019 at 9:13:15 AM UTC+1, nightjar wrote: On 01/09/2019 20:08, newshound wrote: On 01/09/2019 19:38, Brian Gaff wrote: Well, that depends on whether they can prove it was you. If you caused an accident then I'd not want to lay any bets. Brian Wrong NG. Covered a little while ago in legal.moderated following a fatal accident, IIRC there is still something from the 19th century like "Furious and wanton cycling". But a driving license is specifically for *motorin*. Rather more up to date are The Road Traffic Act 1988 offences of dangerous cycling (S28) and careless cycling (S29). However, the penalties for those are limited to fines of up to £1000 or £2500 respectively. The 1861 Offences Against the Person Act is used if those penalties are deemed inadequate, as in the case of a cyclist killing a pedestrian. That can result in a custodial sentence of up to two years and an unlimited fine. As you say, none of these offences would affect a driving licence. -- Colin Bignell As its not compulsory to have a driving license it might be difficult to have one suspended. I believe magistates can disqualify people from driiving as a punishment for almost any offence, not necessarily a road related one, if they feel it is an appropriate punishment. Furthermore, many of those they disqualify, even for driving offences, do not have licences. The disqualification makes it impossible for them to get a licence, and also makes the penalties more severe if they drive again. So it is not actually far-fetched disqualifying a non licence holder. Although a bit pointless if they don't actually want to drive a car. -- Roger Hayter |
push bike
On 02/09/2019 23:49, Roger Hayter wrote:
wrote: On Monday, September 2, 2019 at 9:13:15 AM UTC+1, nightjar wrote: On 01/09/2019 20:08, newshound wrote: On 01/09/2019 19:38, Brian Gaff wrote: Well, that depends on whether they can prove it was you. If you caused an accident then I'd not want to lay any bets. Brian Wrong NG. Covered a little while ago in legal.moderated following a fatal accident, IIRC there is still something from the 19th century like "Furious and wanton cycling". But a driving license is specifically for *motorin*. Rather more up to date are The Road Traffic Act 1988 offences of dangerous cycling (S28) and careless cycling (S29). However, the penalties for those are limited to fines of up to £1000 or £2500 respectively. The 1861 Offences Against the Person Act is used if those penalties are deemed inadequate, as in the case of a cyclist killing a pedestrian. That can result in a custodial sentence of up to two years and an unlimited fine. As you say, none of these offences would affect a driving licence. -- Colin Bignell As its not compulsory to have a driving license it might be difficult to have one suspended. I believe magistates can disqualify people from driiving as a punishment for almost any offence, not necessarily a road related one, if they feel it is an appropriate punishment. Furthermore, many of those they disqualify, even for driving offences, do not have licences. The disqualification makes it impossible for them to get a licence, and also makes the penalties more severe if they drive again. So it is not actually far-fetched disqualifying a non licence holder. Although a bit pointless if they don't actually want to drive a car. I'm a "doubting Thomas" who would need evidence to support your belief - i.e. I'd want to know what legislation provides the power for a court to "disqualify people for almost any offence". AFAIK it's only a discretionary option if the legislation for the offence provides for it (see section 34 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (as amended)). And those are "endorsable offences" plus TWOC. -- Robin reply-to address is (intended to be) valid |
push bike
Roger Hayter wrote:
wrote: On Monday, September 2, 2019 at 9:13:15 AM UTC+1, nightjar wrote: On 01/09/2019 20:08, newshound wrote: On 01/09/2019 19:38, Brian Gaff wrote: Well, that depends on whether they can prove it was you. If you caused an accident then I'd not want to lay any bets. Brian Wrong NG. Covered a little while ago in legal.moderated following a fatal accident, IIRC there is still something from the 19th century like "Furious and wanton cycling". But a driving license is specifically for *motorin*. Rather more up to date are The Road Traffic Act 1988 offences of dangerous cycling (S28) and careless cycling (S29). However, the penalties for those are limited to fines of up to £1000 or £2500 respectively. The 1861 Offences Against the Person Act is used if those penalties are deemed inadequate, as in the case of a cyclist killing a pedestrian. That can result in a custodial sentence of up to two years and an unlimited fine. As you say, none of these offences would affect a driving licence. -- Colin Bignell As its not compulsory to have a driving license it might be difficult to have one suspended. I believe magistates can disqualify people from driiving as a punishment for almost any offence, not necessarily a road related one, if they feel it is an appropriate punishment. Furthermore, many of those they disqualify, even for driving offences, do not have licences. The disqualification makes it impossible for them to get a licence, and also makes the penalties more severe if they drive again. So it is not actually far-fetched disqualifying a non licence holder. Although a bit pointless if they don't actually want to drive a car. In Australia they have taken car license for dog offenses indirectly, people who have not paid fines |
push bike
Robin wrote:
On 02/09/2019 23:49, Roger Hayter wrote: wrote: On Monday, September 2, 2019 at 9:13:15 AM UTC+1, nightjar wrote: On 01/09/2019 20:08, newshound wrote: On 01/09/2019 19:38, Brian Gaff wrote: Well, that depends on whether they can prove it was you. If you caused an accident then I'd not want to lay any bets. Brian Wrong NG. Covered a little while ago in legal.moderated following a fatal accident, IIRC there is still something from the 19th century like "Furious and wanton cycling". But a driving license is specifically for *motorin*. Rather more up to date are The Road Traffic Act 1988 offences of dangerous cycling (S28) and careless cycling (S29). However, the penalties for those are limited to fines of up to £1000 or £2500 respectively. The 1861 Offences Against the Person Act is used if those penalties are deemed inadequate, as in the case of a cyclist killing a pedestrian. That can result in a custodial sentence of up to two years and an unlimited fine. As you say, none of these offences would affect a driving licence. -- Colin Bignell As its not compulsory to have a driving license it might be difficult to have one suspended. I believe magistates can disqualify people from driiving as a punishment for almost any offence, not necessarily a road related one, if they feel it is an appropriate punishment. Furthermore, many of those they disqualify, even for driving offences, do not have licences. The disqualification makes it impossible for them to get a licence, and also makes the penalties more severe if they drive again. So it is not actually far-fetched disqualifying a non licence holder. Although a bit pointless if they don't actually want to drive a car. I'm a "doubting Thomas" who would need evidence to support your belief - i.e. I'd want to know what legislation provides the power for a court to "disqualify people for almost any offence". AFAIK it's only a discretionary option if the legislation for the offence provides for it (see section 34 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (as amended)). And those are "endorsable offences" plus TWOC. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/6/section/146 I must admit I thought it a little draconian at the time it was passed. Mainly because it sets people up for further offences if they are weak-willed even though there is not a driving element to their crime. -- Roger Hayter |
push bike
On 03/09/2019 09:22, Roger Hayter wrote:
Robin wrote: On 02/09/2019 23:49, Roger Hayter wrote: snip I believe magistates can disqualify people from driiving as a punishment for almost any offence, not necessarily a road related one, if they feel it is an appropriate punishment. Furthermore, many of those they disqualify, even for driving offences, do not have licences. The disqualification makes it impossible for them to get a licence, and also makes the penalties more severe if they drive again. So it is not actually far-fetched disqualifying a non licence holder. Although a bit pointless if they don't actually want to drive a car. I'm a "doubting Thomas" who would need evidence to support your belief - i.e. I'd want to know what legislation provides the power for a court to "disqualify people for almost any offence". AFAIK it's only a discretionary option if the legislation for the offence provides for it (see section 34 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (as amended)). And those are "endorsable offences" plus TWOC. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/6/section/146 I must admit I thought it a little draconian at the time it was passed. Mainly because it sets people up for further offences if they are weak-willed even though there is not a driving element to their crime. Thanks. That had patently passed me by. No excuse. And I see now that sentencing guidelines require it to be considered in fly-tipping cases. -- Robin reply-to address is (intended to be) valid |
push bike
I believe magistates can disqualify people from driiving as a punishment for almost any offence, not necessarily a road related one, if they feel it is an appropriate punishment. Furthermore, many of those they disqualify, even for driving offences, do not have licences. The disqualification makes it impossible for them to get a licence, and also makes the penalties more severe if they drive again. So it is not actually far-fetched disqualifying a non licence holder. Although a bit pointless if they don't actually want to drive a car. Roger Hayter that is what I thought .....and why I asked ... |
push bike
|
push bike
On 01/09/2019 19:22, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
can they give your driving licence points for being naughty on your push bike?... Or even a pedal bike ?. Mind you, most bikes need to be pushed in Scotland with all those hills. |
push bike
"Andrew" wrote in message ... On 01/09/2019 19:22, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: can they give your driving licence points for being naughty on your push bike?... Or even a pedal bike ?. Mind you, most bikes need to be pushed in Scotland with all those hills. nah.....lecy power |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:27 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter