just got a nip
#32
Opt for court and i doubt CPS will go forward with it. The law on this is a bit ambiguous. It goes something like "changing your exhaust for an after market system with the intent of making your vehicle louder than standard". There is no law saying you cant use after market parts inc exhausts. That would probably break monopoly laws.
For CPS to secure a conviction they would have to prove A. its louder than standard which would be difficult as your car is an import and B. the exact db tested in compliance with the VOSA test procedure. Even though you car is an import it would still have to be under 101 db i believe as it would of had to have passed the VOSA tests to obtain a British registration.
Fight the system with the system. If you receive a summons don't wait until the court hearing to state your case. CPS will have to give you a copy of there evidence. Read it then set out your case with fact and copy's of any documentation that supports your case. Send a copy to CPS and tell them you intend to challenge them. Don't be surprised if you get a letter from CPS stating the charges have been dropped. Then if you feel like revenge is the time to make an official complaint about police incompetence and / or harassment. Because then you will have a letter from CPS saying there was no charge to answer.
For CPS to secure a conviction they would have to prove A. its louder than standard which would be difficult as your car is an import and B. the exact db tested in compliance with the VOSA test procedure. Even though you car is an import it would still have to be under 101 db i believe as it would of had to have passed the VOSA tests to obtain a British registration.
Fight the system with the system. If you receive a summons don't wait until the court hearing to state your case. CPS will have to give you a copy of there evidence. Read it then set out your case with fact and copy's of any documentation that supports your case. Send a copy to CPS and tell them you intend to challenge them. Don't be surprised if you get a letter from CPS stating the charges have been dropped. Then if you feel like revenge is the time to make an official complaint about police incompetence and / or harassment. Because then you will have a letter from CPS saying there was no charge to answer.
#33
Unreal, how the hell have we been allowed to come into a situation where the police now have the ability to say if a cars road worthy or not? Yes most can spot obvious faults but without real knowledge most will just be guessing.
A mate of mine was stopped a few year back and issued with a notice to have his car taken in to a mot station as his multi fit wheels only had 4 bolts on them lmfao. The copper actually believed it should have 4 more bolts in the remaining 4 holes.
Anyway best of luck with the case mate
A mate of mine was stopped a few year back and issued with a notice to have his car taken in to a mot station as his multi fit wheels only had 4 bolts on them lmfao. The copper actually believed it should have 4 more bolts in the remaining 4 holes.
Anyway best of luck with the case mate
#34
Opt for court and i doubt CPS will go forward with it. The law on this is a bit ambiguous. It goes something like "changing your exhaust for an after market system with the intent of making your vehicle louder than standard". There is no law saying you cant use after market parts inc exhausts. That would probably break monopoly laws.
For CPS to secure a conviction they would have to prove A. its louder than standard which would be difficult as your car is an import and B. the exact db tested in compliance with the VOSA test procedure. Even though you car is an import it would still have to be under 101 db i believe as it would of had to have passed the VOSA tests to obtain a British registration.
Fight the system with the system. If you receive a summons don't wait until the court hearing to state your case. CPS will have to give you a copy of there evidence. Read it then set out your case with fact and copy's of any documentation that supports your case. Send a copy to CPS and tell them you intend to challenge them. Don't be surprised if you get a letter from CPS stating the charges have been dropped. Then if you feel like revenge is the time to make an official complaint about police incompetence and / or harassment. Because then you will have a letter from CPS saying there was no charge to answer.
For CPS to secure a conviction they would have to prove A. its louder than standard which would be difficult as your car is an import and B. the exact db tested in compliance with the VOSA test procedure. Even though you car is an import it would still have to be under 101 db i believe as it would of had to have passed the VOSA tests to obtain a British registration.
Fight the system with the system. If you receive a summons don't wait until the court hearing to state your case. CPS will have to give you a copy of there evidence. Read it then set out your case with fact and copy's of any documentation that supports your case. Send a copy to CPS and tell them you intend to challenge them. Don't be surprised if you get a letter from CPS stating the charges have been dropped. Then if you feel like revenge is the time to make an official complaint about police incompetence and / or harassment. Because then you will have a letter from CPS saying there was no charge to answer.
#36
thanks for the advice i have copied several pieces of proof , including a statement to the press from devon & cornwall police made by the officer in questions sargent, stating if someone denies modifiying the exhaust(they can't proove that can they) that they will use the noise legislation instead well guess what your honour it's under the noise limit and has never been tested either, NEXT QUESTION PLEASE
So are you saying the police did not test the noise db of you car? Do you have the original VOSA test certificate from when the car was inspected to get British registration?
#37
It will be "Your worship" not "you honour" I doubt thyis will find its way past the magistrates to crown court. Don't expect much joy from the magistrates, most will just take the police side which is why you need to set your case clearly and with facts to the CPS. Try and get CPS to drop it as UN-winnable.
So are you saying the police did not test the noise db of you car? Do you have the original VOSA test certificate from when the car was inspected to get British registration?
So are you saying the police did not test the noise db of you car? Do you have the original VOSA test certificate from when the car was inspected to get British registration?
#38
As i said, opt for the case to be heard in court. Then CPS will have to send you all the details of there case against you. Then after you have seen their case you can prepare your own and send it to cps. I wouldn't be surprised if it gets dropped shortly after you opting to go to court. There is no law making it illegal to use after market car parts and they cant prove noise levels at the time of the alleged offence because the copper didn't test it.
#39
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Spec C - 12.5 @ 110(340/350)
Posts: 2,314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The previous section of the RTA mentions you are not allowed to modify the car if it affects a number of things, one of them being noise, then the following section states the following - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...4#section-44-1, is your a JDM?
#40
The previous section of the RTA mentions you are not allowed to modify the car if it affects a number of things, one of them being noise, then the following section states the following - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...4#section-44-1, is your a JDM?
#41
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Spec C - 12.5 @ 110(340/350)
Posts: 2,314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess you really need to know what law you are being accused of breaking before you can start to form a defense.
I read the above as....the previous restrictions mentioned in the RTA are allowed under certain circumstances, one of them being "of vehicles or trailers, or types of vehicles or trailers, constructed for use outside the United Kingdom"
I read the above as....the previous restrictions mentioned in the RTA are allowed under certain circumstances, one of them being "of vehicles or trailers, or types of vehicles or trailers, constructed for use outside the United Kingdom"
Last edited by bluenose172; 02 June 2013 at 10:28 AM.
#42
I guess you really need to know what law you are being accused of breaking before you can start to form a defense.
I read the above as....the previous restrictions mentioned in the RTA are allowed under certain circumstances, one of them being "of vehicles or trailers, or types of vehicles or trailers, constructed for use outside the United Kingdom"
I read the above as....the previous restrictions mentioned in the RTA are allowed under certain circumstances, one of them being "of vehicles or trailers, or types of vehicles or trailers, constructed for use outside the United Kingdom"
you where the driver of vehicle reg number xxx xxx for the offence of using vehcile with altered silencer/exhaust system at xxxxx xxxxx contary to
section r54 rv (con & use) regs 86 s42 rta 88 any ideas on what this means ?
#43
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Spec C - 12.5 @ 110(340/350)
Posts: 2,314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, so Section 42 RTA 1988 is the previsous section I was talking about. Use the above section 44, sub-section 1, para (b) as a defense.....
Not sure what R54 is?
Not sure what R54 is?
#44
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Spec C - 12.5 @ 110(340/350)
Posts: 2,314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(1)The Secretary of State may by order authorise, subject to such restrictions and conditions as may be specified by or under the order, the use on roads—
(1)The Secretary of State may by order authorise, subject to such restrictions and conditions as may be specified by or under the order, the use on roads—
(a)of special motor vehicles or trailers, or special types of motor vehicles or trailers, which are constructed either for special purposes or for tests or trials,
(b)of vehicles or trailers, or types of vehicles or trailers, constructed for use outside the United Kingdom,
(c)of new or improved types of motor vehicles or trailers, whether wheeled or wheelless, or of motor vehicles or trailers equipped with new or improved equipment or types of equipment, and
(d)of vehicles or trailers carrying loads of exceptional dimensions,
[F1and sections 40A to 42 of this Act shall not apply in relation to] the use of such vehicles, trailers, or types in accordance with the order.
(1)The Secretary of State may by order authorise, subject to such restrictions and conditions as may be specified by or under the order, the use on roads—
(a)of special motor vehicles or trailers, or special types of motor vehicles or trailers, which are constructed either for special purposes or for tests or trials,
(b)of vehicles or trailers, or types of vehicles or trailers, constructed for use outside the United Kingdom,
(c)of new or improved types of motor vehicles or trailers, whether wheeled or wheelless, or of motor vehicles or trailers equipped with new or improved equipment or types of equipment, and
(d)of vehicles or trailers carrying loads of exceptional dimensions,
[F1and sections 40A to 42 of this Act shall not apply in relation to] the use of such vehicles, trailers, or types in accordance with the order.
#46
This sounds like one of these coppers on a personal crusade.
#48
well i can't find any data on the net. ref noise emmissions from a jdm only uk models after they where approved for uk/eu use and had to be under 89db. in fact i don't think subaru released that data, the p1 was allowed 101db when they where imported by prodrive/subaru
#49
Exactly. And testing it now would not be admissible as it should have been either tested at the time of offence or the vehicle confiscated and recovered to a site where it could be tested. They have no case because the coppe3r did not do his job properly.
#50
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Wales
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well the letter in the post today states i can take a fixed penalty of £30quid for using a vehicle with a non std exhaust, (so pc asshat is a jdm import specalist now lmfao, it's 2.5inch same as std just stainless not mildsteel, but the backbox is single 4.5inch outlet instead of 2x2.5inch) but i ain't doing that because thats admiting guilt.the exhaust system has been replaced not altered and i didn't do it anyway, secondly it's never been noise tested(but is 94db) thirdly it has a sva cert which allows it to be 101db so i fail to see what law i have broken
(I've had a Fixed Penalty for a stupid 'offence' which I completely ignored.
Almost 4 years down the line I think they've seen sense).
I presume that you've a legal eagle to represent you in court.
However, a couple of pointers (in my experience solicitors mostly know primarily how the criminal justice system works but aren't armed with the incisiveness to properly support their client. A bit like a mechanic who knows how cars work, but not how to efficiently and effectively diagnose faults and fix problems).
Firstly, to claim anything is non-standard the CPS has to provide the benchmark 'standard'.
Next, CPS via Plod has to provide evidence that the standard was being breached at the alleged time of the alleged offence.
Finally, CPS has to show that you had no reasonable excuse for committing the breach (usually by trying to break your defence, of, say, you couldn't get an original exhaust as a replacement - they (Subaru) don't make them any more).
Sorry if this is getting long but it is worth being very precise, even pedantic.
As I read it you're not being done for breaking noise regs., simply 'a non-standard exhaust'.
So, in line with my comments above CPS will need to provide in evidence:
1) the specification for your car, particularly the exhaust system and specifically for your model;
2) acceptable evidence - almost certainly photographic - of the exhaust system that was on your car at the time of the offence. I say photos because they'll have to prove that whatever part(s) they claim were non-standard were not simply cosmetic eg. you stuck a 4.5in pipe over a 2.5 one to make it look good (in other words they have to prove that you DID modify it, not simply made it look sportier). They would have to have something date and time-stamped;
3) You email a Subaru dealer asking for a quote for the relevant OEM exhaust, hopefully you'll be told that they aren't made anymore and that a company called eg. XYZ Exhaust Corporation of Outer Singapore are the suppliers.
Finally, prove that the officer isn't an expert, especially on Subarus (does he know the difference between Classics, Bugeyes etc. etc.), especially the suggested exhaust systems for legally modified cars (even if yours isn't modified) ?
That should prove that he had insufficient knowledge to provide him with a reason for stopping you. If you want to get arsey with him perhaps suggest that he thought the exhaust was loud but didn't have any sound measuring equipment and set his sights on ensuring that what he thought was a clear breach of the law was addressed in some way.
Has he ever seen an exhaust that large?
Remember, they're not having you for excessive noise, so you can't go down the path of how loud 90dB or any other level actually is.
The rules of evidence, as I understand, mean that the CPS' case will be available to your solicitor (but incredibly not to you if you defend yourself). Check it out, plead Not Guilty and let them incur the costs of a full hearing (which will likely be at a future date).
Make sure that the local press will be there, or will be informed of the outcome.
Chief Constables don't like headlines such as 'PC's expensive exhausting mistake'.
"Devon Police prosecuted a middle-aged driver for having a tailpipe which was too large for one of their PC's liking. Mr X was found not guilty after it emerged that the PC nor the CPS were able to ascertain what exhaust should have been on the vehicle. Mr X was awarded costs in a case estimated to have cost taxpayers well over £2,000".
Oh - and it goes without saying that you don't become involved in any dialogue, written or verbal, with any representative of Plod and/or the CPS, just ignore the FPN. Give nothing away (I'm uneasy at posting all this on here, but if CPS realsie how much work they'll have to do for a possible fine of £50 and perhaps £100 in costs they might decide it's not cost-effective).
Good luck !
#51
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Wales
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It will be "Your worship" not "you honour" I doubt thyis will find its way past the magistrates to crown court. Don't expect much joy from the magistrates, most will just take the police side which is why you need to set your case clearly and with facts to the CPS. Try and get CPS to drop it as UN-winnable.
So are you saying the police did not test the noise db of you car? Do you have the original VOSA test certificate from when the car was inspected to get British registration?
So are you saying the police did not test the noise db of you car? Do you have the original VOSA test certificate from when the car was inspected to get British registration?
I agree with the comment about partisanship but even magistrates wouldn't want to be associated with supporting a PC who hasn't done his job anywhere near properly.
It's noticeable that the only alleged offence is a non-standard exhaust, not breaching noise regs. They know they haven't got evidence.
Also, I don't think madscoob as an individual would be given their case because he isn't governed by a code of legal confidentiality. I never got anything when I took them on years ago until the hearing. Made the police witnesses and the complainant look complete fools, the magistrates still had me but I had the moral victory - no order for compensation and no order for costs. I got done because I hadn't contributed to a solicitor's coffers.
#52
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Wales
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If CPS come back with 'well it has been modified' hit them with 'not by me it hasn't' (and then use D&C Plod's own statement to sink them).
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Wales
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(1)The Secretary of State may by order authorise, subject to such restrictions and conditions as may be specified by or under the order, the use on roads—
(1)The Secretary of State may by order authorise, subject to such restrictions and conditions as may be specified by or under the order, the use on roads—
(a)of special motor vehicles or trailers, or special types of motor vehicles or trailers, which are constructed either for special purposes or for tests or trials,
(b)of vehicles or trailers, or types of vehicles or trailers, constructed for use outside the United Kingdom,
(c)of new or improved types of motor vehicles or trailers, whether wheeled or wheelless, or of motor vehicles or trailers equipped with new or improved equipment or types of equipment, and
(d)of vehicles or trailers carrying loads of exceptional dimensions,
[F1and sections 40A to 42 of this Act shall not apply in relation to] the use of such vehicles, trailers, or types in accordance with the order.
(1)The Secretary of State may by order authorise, subject to such restrictions and conditions as may be specified by or under the order, the use on roads—
(a)of special motor vehicles or trailers, or special types of motor vehicles or trailers, which are constructed either for special purposes or for tests or trials,
(b)of vehicles or trailers, or types of vehicles or trailers, constructed for use outside the United Kingdom,
(c)of new or improved types of motor vehicles or trailers, whether wheeled or wheelless, or of motor vehicles or trailers equipped with new or improved equipment or types of equipment, and
(d)of vehicles or trailers carrying loads of exceptional dimensions,
[F1and sections 40A to 42 of this Act shall not apply in relation to] the use of such vehicles, trailers, or types in accordance with the order.
Be warned that you'd have to have the mods in the V5 or you'd be committing an offence.
#54
It can't go to Crown Court, it's not an 'each-way offence'.
I agree with the comment about partisanship but even magistrates wouldn't want to be associated with supporting a PC who hasn't done his job anywhere near properly.
It's noticeable that the only alleged offence is a non-standard exhaust, not breaching noise regs. They know they haven't got evidence.
Also, I don't think madscoob as an individual would be given their case because he isn't governed by a code of legal confidentiality. I never got anything when I took them on years ago until the hearing. Made the police witnesses and the complainant look complete fools, the magistrates still had me but I had the moral victory - no order for compensation and no order for costs. I got done because I hadn't contributed to a solicitor's coffers.
I agree with the comment about partisanship but even magistrates wouldn't want to be associated with supporting a PC who hasn't done his job anywhere near properly.
It's noticeable that the only alleged offence is a non-standard exhaust, not breaching noise regs. They know they haven't got evidence.
Also, I don't think madscoob as an individual would be given their case because he isn't governed by a code of legal confidentiality. I never got anything when I took them on years ago until the hearing. Made the police witnesses and the complainant look complete fools, the magistrates still had me but I had the moral victory - no order for compensation and no order for costs. I got done because I hadn't contributed to a solicitor's coffers.
As per your comment in your earlier post regarding cps giving there case file to your lawyer but not to you if representing yourself. You may have to ask CPS for it and they can not refuse. I agree with your point about leaving the ball in there court and not communicating with plod or cps until they notify they are proceeding with the case.
#55
Scooby Regular
My 3.0 Vec V6 had a non-standard exhaust, and it was ridiculously loud. Too loud for Donnington circuit in fact, and I never got pulled for it once, so this certainly sounds like it's a personal mission from the Coppa you got done.
I'll bet he's hoping that you just pay the FPN, keep the exhaust on, and then he can then keep nicking you for the same offense.
I'll bet he's hoping that you just pay the FPN, keep the exhaust on, and then he can then keep nicking you for the same offense.
#56
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Wales
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny thing is, i have represented myself in court 3 times. I was cleared in 2 cases and awarded an absolute discharge in the other. The one and only time i hired a lawyer, i lost. I still feel i could of won that case as the lawyer was missing lots of relevant points. I think representing yourself and fighting for your own justice carries a lot of weight with the beak sometimes, especially if they see you have taken time and care in constructing your case.
As per your comment in your earlier post regarding cps giving there case file to your lawyer but not to you if representing yourself. You may have to ask CPS for it and they can not refuse. I agree with your point about leaving the ball in there court and not communicating with plod or cps until they notify they are proceeding with the case.
As per your comment in your earlier post regarding cps giving there case file to your lawyer but not to you if representing yourself. You may have to ask CPS for it and they can not refuse. I agree with your point about leaving the ball in there court and not communicating with plod or cps until they notify they are proceeding with the case.
Your point about lawyers missing points is very valid and regrettably it goes with Plod as well.
My son was recently asked to 'help with inquiries' when a (counter)-complaint was made against him. I had to point out a number of anomolies to the PCs, and a number of pertinent questions that should be asked. Result - dropped, without it even getting as far as the CPS.
#57
I think it might be that if you don't pay the £30 they will CONSIDER taking the matter further. What is the exact wording?
(I've had a Fixed Penalty for a stupid 'offence' which I completely ignored.
Almost 4 years down the line I think they've seen sense).
I presume that you've a legal eagle to represent you in court.
However, a couple of pointers (in my experience solicitors mostly know primarily how the criminal justice system works but aren't armed with the incisiveness to properly support their client. A bit like a mechanic who knows how cars work, but not how to efficiently and effectively diagnose faults and fix problems).
Firstly, to claim anything is non-standard the CPS has to provide the benchmark 'standard'.
Next, CPS via Plod has to provide evidence that the standard was being breached at the alleged time of the alleged offence.
Finally, CPS has to show that you had no reasonable excuse for committing the breach (usually by trying to break your defence, of, say, you couldn't get an original exhaust as a replacement - they (Subaru) don't make them any more).
Sorry if this is getting long but it is worth being very precise, even pedantic.
As I read it you're not being done for breaking noise regs., simply 'a non-standard exhaust'.
So, in line with my comments above CPS will need to provide in evidence:
1) the specification for your car, particularly the exhaust system and specifically for your model;
2) acceptable evidence - almost certainly photographic - of the exhaust system that was on your car at the time of the offence. I say photos because they'll have to prove that whatever part(s) they claim were non-standard were not simply cosmetic eg. you stuck a 4.5in pipe over a 2.5 one to make it look good (in other words they have to prove that you DID modify it, not simply made it look sportier). They would have to have something date and time-stamped;
3) You email a Subaru dealer asking for a quote for the relevant OEM exhaust, hopefully you'll be told that they aren't made anymore and that a company called eg. XYZ Exhaust Corporation of Outer Singapore are the suppliers.
Finally, prove that the officer isn't an expert, especially on Subarus (does he know the difference between Classics, Bugeyes etc. etc.), especially the suggested exhaust systems for legally modified cars (even if yours isn't modified) ?
That should prove that he had insufficient knowledge to provide him with a reason for stopping you. If you want to get arsey with him perhaps suggest that he thought the exhaust was loud but didn't have any sound measuring equipment and set his sights on ensuring that what he thought was a clear breach of the law was addressed in some way.
Has he ever seen an exhaust that large?
Remember, they're not having you for excessive noise, so you can't go down the path of how loud 90dB or any other level actually is.
The rules of evidence, as I understand, mean that the CPS' case will be available to your solicitor (but incredibly not to you if you defend yourself). Check it out, plead Not Guilty and let them incur the costs of a full hearing (which will likely be at a future date).
Make sure that the local press will be there, or will be informed of the outcome.
Chief Constables don't like headlines such as 'PC's expensive exhausting mistake'.
"Devon Police prosecuted a middle-aged driver for having a tailpipe which was too large for one of their PC's liking. Mr X was found not guilty after it emerged that the PC nor the CPS were able to ascertain what exhaust should have been on the vehicle. Mr X was awarded costs in a case estimated to have cost taxpayers well over £2,000".
Oh - and it goes without saying that you don't become involved in any dialogue, written or verbal, with any representative of Plod and/or the CPS, just ignore the FPN. Give nothing away (I'm uneasy at posting all this on here, but if CPS realsie how much work they'll have to do for a possible fine of £50 and perhaps £100 in costs they might decide it's not cost-effective).
Good luck !
(I've had a Fixed Penalty for a stupid 'offence' which I completely ignored.
Almost 4 years down the line I think they've seen sense).
I presume that you've a legal eagle to represent you in court.
However, a couple of pointers (in my experience solicitors mostly know primarily how the criminal justice system works but aren't armed with the incisiveness to properly support their client. A bit like a mechanic who knows how cars work, but not how to efficiently and effectively diagnose faults and fix problems).
Firstly, to claim anything is non-standard the CPS has to provide the benchmark 'standard'.
Next, CPS via Plod has to provide evidence that the standard was being breached at the alleged time of the alleged offence.
Finally, CPS has to show that you had no reasonable excuse for committing the breach (usually by trying to break your defence, of, say, you couldn't get an original exhaust as a replacement - they (Subaru) don't make them any more).
Sorry if this is getting long but it is worth being very precise, even pedantic.
As I read it you're not being done for breaking noise regs., simply 'a non-standard exhaust'.
So, in line with my comments above CPS will need to provide in evidence:
1) the specification for your car, particularly the exhaust system and specifically for your model;
2) acceptable evidence - almost certainly photographic - of the exhaust system that was on your car at the time of the offence. I say photos because they'll have to prove that whatever part(s) they claim were non-standard were not simply cosmetic eg. you stuck a 4.5in pipe over a 2.5 one to make it look good (in other words they have to prove that you DID modify it, not simply made it look sportier). They would have to have something date and time-stamped;
3) You email a Subaru dealer asking for a quote for the relevant OEM exhaust, hopefully you'll be told that they aren't made anymore and that a company called eg. XYZ Exhaust Corporation of Outer Singapore are the suppliers.
Finally, prove that the officer isn't an expert, especially on Subarus (does he know the difference between Classics, Bugeyes etc. etc.), especially the suggested exhaust systems for legally modified cars (even if yours isn't modified) ?
That should prove that he had insufficient knowledge to provide him with a reason for stopping you. If you want to get arsey with him perhaps suggest that he thought the exhaust was loud but didn't have any sound measuring equipment and set his sights on ensuring that what he thought was a clear breach of the law was addressed in some way.
Has he ever seen an exhaust that large?
Remember, they're not having you for excessive noise, so you can't go down the path of how loud 90dB or any other level actually is.
The rules of evidence, as I understand, mean that the CPS' case will be available to your solicitor (but incredibly not to you if you defend yourself). Check it out, plead Not Guilty and let them incur the costs of a full hearing (which will likely be at a future date).
Make sure that the local press will be there, or will be informed of the outcome.
Chief Constables don't like headlines such as 'PC's expensive exhausting mistake'.
"Devon Police prosecuted a middle-aged driver for having a tailpipe which was too large for one of their PC's liking. Mr X was found not guilty after it emerged that the PC nor the CPS were able to ascertain what exhaust should have been on the vehicle. Mr X was awarded costs in a case estimated to have cost taxpayers well over £2,000".
Oh - and it goes without saying that you don't become involved in any dialogue, written or verbal, with any representative of Plod and/or the CPS, just ignore the FPN. Give nothing away (I'm uneasy at posting all this on here, but if CPS realsie how much work they'll have to do for a possible fine of £50 and perhaps £100 in costs they might decide it's not cost-effective).
Good luck !
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Wales
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#60
Scooby Regular
The meter should also be sent back to the manufacturers at least once a year for more in depth calibration.