Rex93

Dj
Glad your son was ok

From our local paper: Crackdown on tinted windows
Officers from the policing department at Polegate, together with officers from the vehicle operator services agency (VOSA), conducted a vehicle safety check in Eastbourne on Monday August 16. Particular attention was paid to vehicles with tinted windows, supporting a national campaign by VOSA to crack down on excessively darkened windscreens, and using a device which reads how much light is allowed to pass through glass. All front windows must allow at least 70 per cent of light to pass through and windscreens of cars used after April 1985 must allow 75 per cent. Excessively tinted glass restricts drivers vision, particularly in the dark, hindering the ability of the driver to see pedestrians, cyclists and other road users. Out of 10 vehicles checked, seven were immediately prohibited as too dangerous to be allowed to continue and three were given delayed prohibitions. Other offences including defective tyres, excessive corrosion, illegal number plates and no tax were also found and dealt with. Police Inspector Mark Armstrong said, "the issue of road safety is one that should concern us all. `It is important that pedestrians, cyclists and other drivers feel secure using the roads and confident that motorists can at least see properly. `It is also a reminder that drivers must make sure that their vehicles are safe to use and owners need to be carefull that tinting windows or other modifications could not only be illegal and dangerous but may well affect their insurance cover.`

You may feel better for not giving the local bobbies the food and drinks and thats your privalige but this may help to show you that they are not just after you, and have the local boys done anything that should stop there little perk (which i,m sure they are greatful for) probably not. The copper was only doing his job which he has been asked to do and to suggest that they/he should be out stopping real crimes , well perhaps hes has done just this. He may have prevented you pulling out on a cyclist in your haste to get home.

Yes you was stopped, yes you had to remove your tint, yes you was driving an illegally modified car. The only thing I personally do not understand is that they can let some cars drive off to take the tint of later, if it has to be removed then why not there and then for all illegal shades, its either dangerous or not.

Jamescsti

There is a special machine to check the % of light through windows, I've never seen it but when you see Vehicle Inspectorate officers doing road side checks on petrol etc they have them

paulwrxboro

I know mine are illegal has anyone got a pic of there car with legal tints or is standard
the legal limit ?

corradoboy

AFAIK most cars standard windows allow a minimum of 72% of light through, so is a 2% tint really worth it ?

fastfit

can't ave been that dark a tint, you saw the plod when he pulled you, just another pain in the backside, jobsworth git! if you ask me. gladf you kids fine

chris's scooby

DJ, u say u were concerned about your family but if your driving round with obviously illegal tints u must have been expecting to get pulled at some point?

How do u think the family of the biker are feeling after he was killed by someone who blamed the accident on limo tints?

At least yours have gone before anything like this happened.

That said I think it was a bit unfair u weren't able to go and see your son although i don't know how much discretion the police are allowed to show.

Nathan L

Ron,

Depending on what level of tint the car has depends on whether the car is prohibited immediately or after a set number of days to allow you to remove the film.

I.E. Less than 30% VLT would be an immediate prohibition, so in DJ's case above they gave him the option to remove the film rather than prohibit his car entirely. Probably as he need to get home.

More than 30% but less than 70% the driver would be abe to continue but would need to remove the tints within say 14 days, as per the vehicle defect rectification scheme.

There is a massive difference between the view from within a car when the tint level is say 50% and 25%. Less than 30% on the fronts is dangerous.

asagi

To me it's the copper being a jobsworth.

If the tint is affecting your vision then fine give you a producer. Why force you to tear it off at the road side which no doubt would have left residue on the glass also impairing your vision!

In the real world where safety is the issue whats the difference. If your visibility is impaired it's impaired either by tinted glass or residue.

In his hast to show you who is boss I think this officer has failed in his duty to promote a safe highway.

Nathan L

A producer is really going to encourage the owner to take the film off.














Not!




Lol.

asagi

[QUOTE=Nathan L]A producer is really going to encourage the owner to take the film off

Not!



So ok. Forcing someone to make a car with potentially impaired visibilty into a car with a different visiblity problem is the answer. Sorry fail to see the logic.




Not!

Rex93

Nath,

I understand the prohibition part,
but if they are saying that a tint between say the 30% - 70% is illegal (possibly as far as to say dangerous) then why let the vehicle continue to be used on the road for another 14 days, its like say a defective number plate gets 7 - 14 days to be replaced, but thats not going to possibly cause an accident. surely it would have been easier all round to just be able to give the option to remove the tint or prohibit the car from the road irrispective of the tint %,

Would just like to point out though, if I should get stopped by any officers (lovely people that they are )for a defect on my car, please let me drive home

WRXPete

DJ Watts....i'm not a traffic cop....the problem they have image is wise is that yes part of their job is traffic law....sure they go after the disquals, the drunks and clean up the accidents, but the majority of the time it's stop checks....for the record a lot of them go for the petty stuff, a brake light here, a side light there. But the reason they do is that it gives them a reason to talk to the driver, and you never know what else you'll uncover.....put it another way...when Billy Burglar breaks in and nicks your 42" plasma screen tv, does he walk it home or shove it in the back of a ****ty car/van that he doesn't care about getting trashed, doesn't bother to MoT or insure....or worse and all to commonly, he nicks and uses a scooby cos he knows no traffic car can catch it.
We get on very well with our traffic boys, but local policy is much more concentrated on car crime, intel gathering on cars used by criminals, and accident prevention...hence the crack down on seat belts and phones etc.
I've only read your initial reply to my comments, seems like you are a very level headed guy, not the usual cop hater.
Gonna read the rest of the posts now, laugh and probably not waste my time replying...
Glad the boy is okay, hope he's groomed to keep it Scooby!!!

Nathan L

I agree mate, it would be more simplified but it's the same for tyres. We can prohibit immediately or VDRS. Depends a lot on the approach of the person driving the car.

AFAIK the VOSA and Government have set the levels for which a prohibition and delayed prohibition are set with regards for window tints. We just enforce their guidelines. As I said mate there is a mahooosive difference between 50% VLT and 30%. 50% is not too bad 30% is really dark.

WRXPete

This raises a very good point....not so slowly and very surely, our discretion, which what traditionally sets us apart from the sodding yanks, is being taken away....some forces don't even allow use of Breach of the Peace anymore, even though it is still law, and the magic solution for a lot of situations, especially a domestic argument.
But believe me, if you think British Traffic Cops (or the Road Policing Unit as they now are) are nitpicking jobsworths, you'd hate America...they show no discretion at all and arrest for everything!!!!

Nathan L

To close a quote use [*/quote] without the *


The officer has given someone with an illegal car the option to drive the car home or he could have prohibited it's movement. There is the potential that it could have left a few sticky marks but the last time I removed window film it peeled off without a trace.

So you do see the logic?

WRXPete

Are you serious!!!....a producer has nothing to do with vehicle defects...and in his "hast to be boss" by removing the very thing that may cause an accident (note this is not a pop at you or your driving DJ)he has utterly triumphed in his duty to promote road safety!!
Give me a break....

chris's scooby

I won't rush over to Vegas to see my aunty too soon then!

I would think the traffic job is quite a tricky one to do (flame suit on ). You have to decide when and where to use your discretion and what the consequences of that may lead to.

My step dad is a retired firefighter who has spent more than his fair share of time at RTA's over the years. I'm sure some of these could have been averted if people hadn't had the attitude of some on this thread.

theotherphil

I'm a Paramedic by trade. I'd say 80-90% of the population are totally oblivious to their surroundings when out driving. They don't see me in their rear view mirrors when I am driving a mahoosive fluro yellow Ambulance with flashing headlights and blue strobes. All we need is their vision cut down further with window tints. Tinting the front widows is effectively cutting rear vision also as you have to look through the side windows into the wing mirrors.

Don't even get me started on loud stereo's!

[/vent]

(Sorry, had a bad day at work).

Jamescsti

Having worked with the Traffic dept very recently they are all really sound guys where I was most of them car enthusiasts or bikers themselves.
I can see where they are coming from entirely I was there for 2 days and went to 4 Road traffic accidents in that time, one with serious injuries.
When you see a few of these first hand it gives you a very different view of driving, so if dealing with vehicle defects can prevent just one accident then I think it's worth it!
No doubt people will disagree with me though!

I'll also agree with the post above, how some drivers fail to see flashing blue lights and hear the siren on a police car is still a mystery to me??

Johnny WR1

I wonder if there would be this much support if he'd been allowed to continue and had an accident? I can't fathom the logic to this thread at all. If you'd seen a Nova driver pulled over at the side of the road being made to strip his tints off you'd all be wetting yourselves.

DJ WATTS

As for the family i would feel cheated that he got away with what he did by using the tints as an excuse for the incident.
I for one minute do not believe the fault was with the tints but was the fault of the driver not watching the road and realised that time in jail could be avoided by passing the buck so to speak.

Some good words Nathan there and 50% is in fact what has been suggested to have re-done to the front windows.

New To Scoob

Mmmmm yeah f'ing right when was the last time anybody heard of a copper actually catching a burglar my parents and two of my aunts were done over, never heard a thing yet and it was over two years ago. Still seems to be a lot of people driving about on their phones so that laws worked a lot NOT!!!!
The Mrs got pulled for the tinted windows on our Scoob, on the hard shoulder of the A9 ( not the safest place IMO ) bright sunny day etc etc, the coppers were the most arrogant a'holes she had ever met & she meets a lot of arrogant coppers being a nurse. The car got tested using the tintman machine and failed at about 37% IIRC, she got a warning told to do what she likes with the tints but they proceeded to fine her £30, they also tried it on with the No plates including getting a ruler out to measure the gaps (which are spot on) they then said the plates failed on a technicallity cause they do not have a BS mark !!! FFS how petty can you get, BTW she was in the car with her parents and driving sensibly. Oh and another thing the coppers decided that even though our windows were illegal they would stand there and lecture her on them whilst wearing black sunglasses and not even having the decency to take them off so she could see their eyes.

John.

marky1

No offence but tey're only doing their job, 17% is taking the pi$$.

Nathan L

John I can answer two of your points above.

Caught a burglar still inside an ATS tyre centre stealing the computers a week ago. Handed out 3 mobile phone tickets yesterday. The law hasn't worked as well as the Goverment had hoped so lets hope they up the penalty for it soon. However it's the fault of drivers if they continue to break the law, not the Goverment or police.

Nathan L

Oh and DJ, the guy who killed the biker still went to prison IIRC for causing death by dangerous driving.

Speak to Pentagon Supaglass AFAIK they now do a very light range of tints that comply with the law.

LiamWR1

I caught (and 'restrained with extreme enthuiasim') a heroin dealer robbing a neighbours house, he went down for 5 years (scumbag) & I ain't even a rozzer

Took ages to wash the blood out of my batman cape

TDT

err....caught 2 last night

With a little help from my friend (far right)



Do not mess with hairy land sharks!

Scrappydoo2003

I'm a paramedic too and agree that most drivers aren't very observant at all, I had a 72 year old recently turn right into me as I was overtaking him on the way to an emergency call... he's been cautioned for driving without due care, but his windows weren't tinted..
I think with most tints it all boils down to how much attention and observation a driver is using at the end of the day..

And yes, my windows are tinted..

New To Scoob

Well at least there are some police forces doing their bit.
Nathan, I doubt the stuff your talking about will contain any tint, most manufacturers run around 28% tint from the factory, the stuff your probably thinking about is the security film, it acts like a laminated glass so if any chav tries to break in it holds together but if it needs to be kicked out in the event of an accident it can be. TBH the law on this is a farce due to the variation in the policing of it, IIRC the law states that the VTL has to be 70%, so no more than 30% tint forward of the B-post, how come after independant test certain cars have found to be over that form the factory, also the law states IIRC that any sun-strip fitted to the car must not be more that 6" deep once again there are several cars from the factory fitted with sunstrips deeper due to the rake of the windscreen, then to add more fuel to the fire how come I've seen a traffic car fitted with what seemed to be a blue tint to the windows including the ones forward of the B-post.
Ehh bit of a contradiction there is it not??? it is the fault of the goverment for not making the law tougher, then this would help people think twice about using their phone whilst driving, say a on-the -spot fine of £100 and a couple of penalty points thrown in for good measure.

John.

New To Scoob

Agree with what ScrappyDoo 2003 says.

John.