warning signs apearing on lamposts s59

[peter.c]

This sign states this is your only warning and is a catch all to cover any form of motorised transport it has appeared on footpaths and open spaces covers off road use right across the local area
It even has plod out with camcorders called operation sacrifice they have seized motor bikes kids electric quads and even the vans they arrive in
It uses term like inconsiderate -careless-alarm -distress a great catch all
will get a picture next time I pass one

 

[peter.c]

Just out walking the dog and talked to the local farmer, cycle route 137 mardyke valley crosses his land has signs at both ends and at all access points S59 is hailed a success in Thurrock apparently we have a task force and is to be rolled out across Essex, other forces are showing interest its all lumped in with anti social behavior

 

[flecc]

This sign states this is your only warning and is a catch all to cover any form of motorised transport it has appeared on footpaths and open spaces covers off road use right across the local area
It even has plod out with camcorders called operation sacrifice they have seized motor bikes kids electric quads and even the vans they arrive in
It uses term like inconsiderate -careless-alarm -distress a great catch all
will get a picture next time I pass one

Thanks Peter. Here's the website referring to this action and its basis:

Information Link
.

 

[peter.c]

my next thought is if it does over 15.5 is it a motor vehicle I suspect yes
and alarm and distress are open to abuse ride up behind someone with head phones make them jump is that enough for alarm and the £1000.00 for not stopping now called opp caesar and had 4 officers out locally 9/9/ 2018 they even tweeted pictures

 

[Wander]

I've always considered this form of enforcement an abuse of Section 59 by the police.

The idea of S59, when it was brought in, was to address dougnuts in supermarket car parks and similar behaviour which caused genuine alarm and distress to others but was difficult to deal with under existing legislation.

It wasn't about people getting slightly upset about minor vehicle off road use.

 

[flecc]

I've always considered this form of enforcement an abuse of Section 59 by the police.

The idea of S59, when it was brought in, was to address dougnuts in supermarket car parks and similar behaviour which caused genuine alarm and distress to others but was difficult to deal with under existing legislation.

It wasn't about people getting slightly upset about minor vehicle off road use.

Same problem, the lack of suitable laws to deal with the various forms of off-road abuse. Trespass is an almost impossible law to use, the CPS will never use it, and getting a conviction under criminal trespass also has stumbing blocks. There's an over 100 year old law on taking a motor vehicle more than a certain distance from the road, but it's unlikely that can be used on something that isn't type approved as a motor vehicle and the penalties will be small.

In these circumstances I can understand why the police seize upon the opportunity to use Section 59 with it's confiscation powers, wrong though that is.
.

 

[Nefarious]

As long as they stick to genuinely anti-social behaviours then I'm all for it. Whether that's disregard for other people's safety or causing genuine distress...

 

[peter.c]

We have in Thurrock lakeside shopping centre and that has a permanent anti car cruise banning order a PSPO over a very wide area that's so strict you can be fined even if you watch the cruise from the pavement or to many people meet in the McDonalds car park even grays town centre has one
So they do not have to use S 59 on cars it seems to be a local council guided/ police enforced operation on open green spaces public or privately owned to stop any and all anti-social behaviour

 

[Wander]

So they do not have to use S 59 on cars it seems to be a local council guided/ police enforced operation on open green spaces public or privately owned to stop any and all anti-social behaviour

S 59 Police Reform Act 2002 only applies to the use of motor vehicles. Don't confuse it with Section 59 Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.

 

[peter.c]

Thanks for that but it seems that if the vehicle law is used for any thing with wheels and petrol or electric motor even down to mini electric quads or toy electric cars with the parents held responsible if the user is under age
The other 2014 act used on the people watching or spectating the more than several people in a group part it must work several court cases ending in item crushed fines etc

 

[mike killay]

By and large I agree with this action.
I live by a common and motor cycles tear it up, frighten the wild life etc.
Common land is simply land held in common by a number of owners and this vague phrase 'off road' is bandied about and people think that the common is some sort of open park owned by everybody.

 

[peter.c]

I agree with the motorbike and land damage this was its intended use but I get the dread that in Essex this will stretch to e bikes

 

[georgehenry]

Blimey. My 14 mile off road route to work using mostly bridal paths with the odd byway and slightly naughty I know section of footpath that avoids a particularly nasty bit of B road almost never see a soul, but when occasionally I do, horse rider or walker, pleasantly pass the time of day and pass on my way in my leafy bit of Surrey. The Saturday before last however my trend was bucked and I did find myself thankfully for only a small section amidst many runners doing an off road marathon and all calling me a cheat and then low and behold the next Saturday a horse event again only for a small section thankfully as horses are bigger but again many cheerful hellos passed too and fro and a field full of horse boxes and four by fours. And then the same field a couple of days ago had a dog club doing their thing with Italian pointer dogs. Still the Winter will be here soon and I will get my windy wet and muddy tracks to myself again. Not a PCSO in sight.