id have rocked their car and said it was too soft, cause you also have made up rules in you are head, fight it mate, and slap them too from me thanks

having a tuv certificate for your suspension only means it's type approved for the car, which in law means it's 'fit for purpose'.. having suspension that is too stiff will fall foul of the construction and use regulations, also a very low ride high is covered in there too..

I think the police have treated you quite harshly if i'm honest as they have no way of accurately testing the car at the roadside, but if you appeal they could order you to have the car put through a single vehicle approval test at your expense. and your stretched tyres will fail that with flying colours

personally i would take the 3 points on the chin and let it go... you wont win that appeal...

by the way, code 123 'dangerous condition' applies to the brake lights if i recall correctly..

is there anything else you aren't telling us?? they must have stopped you for a reason?

tbf mate you were in the wrong, the red may of only been on for 0.6 seconds but the amber would of been on for a lot longer than that which would give you plenty of time to of stopped. I've took the same gamble before but its a risk you take, some times it pays off s6e times it don't, i'm sure some of the ambers last longer than others tho

^^^McLovin the avi man^^^

there is nothing else they pulled me up for...simple question do i have insurance and who owns the car which lead to all other checks. I do know a few people that have appealed similar cases and have won. It dont mean i will but possibly take some documentation and give it a try.

I guess points don't always mean prizes.......

To pass an MOT the suspesion should be able to be pressed down and rebound.... this is tested by pushing down on the front and back... rocking it from side to side tests how much movement you have in your sidewalls more than anything

Edited 11 May, 201016 yr by #13

My car failed its MOT on the suspension being too hard, I brought up the point about what about road legal race cars like Radicals etc., but at the end of they day they are built to take suspension that hard, a polo isn't.

However, I don't think the MOT tester really knew what he was going on about, as he said the coilovers were "adjusted to the limit", whereas in actual fact they were about halfway up the thread.

i think the police force in certain areas in the UK are terrible hearing all these stories. where i live in kent i've never been hastled about anything really except for having a bumperless mk2 but i can kind of understand that. and i've done the lot, running plate in front window, stretched tires, rock hard suspension, putting the tax disk elsewhere and much more lol. I think around here as long as you are driving sensibly and not purposely flaunting the law you can get away with anything. You are always taking a risk with the law modifing your car simply due to the fact we are looked upon as 'boy racers' which is totally understandable. it's pretty normal to be stereotyped.

^^^McLovin the avi man^^^

no idea what that means

As 'Fail' says, seems like some areas have bored as fuck police reading shit on here. Makes me kinda glad i live in a busy high crime rated city, the police have shit to do up here 90% of the time, its only calling round to peoples houses to do sweet fuck all and hand out CRNs most of the time though. But meh, if it keeps bollox reasons for pulling someone over down then - woop!

Its weird. Must be just police in different areas. I've never been pulled (the age of the car might help). Even when driving home on night with my exhaust on the ground sparking everywhere I had the police behind me for a few mins then they just turned off. Was going about 10mph the whole way too.

It might just be about catching them in the right mood I guess. That and the attitude you give them.

^^^McLovin the avi man^^^

no idea what that means

it means i love your avatar of gordon hitler!

I really can't see how they can test a car for 'stiffness' at the side of the road and I can't see how they can say a car is 'too stiff' when there are vehicles out there driving on the road with no suspension at all (Forklifts, tractors etc.)

Maybe they did it as a ploy to get you to appeal it in court and in turn get you busted for your illegal tyres aswell, which could effectively ban you.

Personally I'd take it on the chin this time, get some legal tyres on there and just keep the suspension as it is.

If they try to do you for it again then appeal it as there should be nothing else they could do you for instead.

tbf mate you were in the wrong, the red may of only been on for 0.6 seconds but the amber would of been on for a lot longer than that which would give you plenty of time to of stopped. I've took the same gamble before but its a risk you take, some times it pays off s6e times it don't, i'm sure some of the ambers last longer than others tho

Some times it pays off, in what way? you save yourself a few mins, in witch that time you can roll yourself a ciggarette whilst waiting?

Edit: Just thought i would get this in before you got there first...

"what if they don't smoke"

Well maybe they could tug one out and see if they can unload before the lights go green again, but then you have no time to clean up, so i will put a warning on that one.

Edited 12 May, 201016 yr by dub17

tbf mate you were in the wrong, the red may of only been on for 0.6 seconds but the amber would of been on for a lot longer than that which would give you plenty of time to of stopped. I've took the same gamble before but its a risk you take, some times it pays off s6e times it don't, i'm sure some of the ambers last longer than others tho

Some times it pays off, in what way? you save yourself a few mins, in witch that time you can roll yourself a ciggarette whilst waiting?

Edit: Just thought i would get this in before you got there first...

"what if they don't smoke"

Well maybe they could tug one out and see if they can unload before the lights go green again, but then you have no time to clean up, so i will put a warning on that one.

Dont forget the how far can you roll back before the driver behind looks like they're about to shit themselves! That or put your car in reverse then start revving, hours of rear view mirror entertainment there!

tbf mate you were in the wrong, the red may of only been on for 0.6 seconds but the amber would of been on for a lot longer than that which would give you plenty of time to of stopped. I've took the same gamble before but its a risk you take, some times it pays off s6e times it don't, i'm sure some of the ambers last longer than others tho

Some times it pays off, in what way? you save yourself a few mins, in witch that time you can roll yourself a ciggarette whilst waiting?

Edit: Just thought i would get this in before you got there first...

"what if they don't smoke"

Well maybe they could tug one out and see if they can unload before the lights go green again, but then you have no time to clean up, so i will put a warning on that one.

best post yet

Did they take any photos or actual measurements of your car? If not just wind your coilies up make it all wobbly then nip back down there and they cant say shit, just dont clean your coilies while you do it or it'll be a bit obvious!

If it was me i'd be putting some legal wheels on it, making sure the car is ok and wont fail an mot and appeal, atleast they wont get you on anything else and once its sorted put your wheels back on

having a tuv certificate for your suspension only means it's type approved for the car, which in law means it's 'fit for purpose'.. having suspension that is too stiff will fall foul of the construction and use regulations, also a very low ride high is covered in there too..

I think the police have treated you quite harshly if i'm honest as they have no way of accurately testing the car at the roadside, but if you appeal they could order you to have the car put through a single vehicle approval test at your expense. and your stretched tyres will fail that with flying colours

personally i would take the 3 points on the chin and let it go... you wont win that appeal...

by the way, code 123 'dangerous condition' applies to the brake lights if i recall correctly..

is there anything else you aren't telling us?? they must have stopped you for a reason?

Strange that you'd say that as an SVA test involves no checking of tyres or any such things, it checks the vehicle conforms to uk road specifications, Eg beam pattern and headlight height, having the required indicators etc. I've taken numerous imports for SVA's and its literally a 30 - 40 minute test, in which they do very little, I've sat through it, its about as exciting as watching paint dry, in all honesty, an MOT is more thorough, as that is checking the actual vehicle for faults, the SVA just checks if the vehicle has the nesscecary features to be road legal in the UK. TUV type approval basically means that the suspension is fit for its purpose, and if that purpose states the suspension is opperable within a certain range, and your suspension is set within that certain range, its perfectly legal. There is no legal limit to how much ground clearance a vehicle must have, how stiff or otherwise the suspension set up may be, headlight height, or any other number of things the police may claim is an offence. The best thing usually with the police is next time you see an undercover vectra, check the rear ride height of how much tyre is tucked under, and if you're ever lucky / unlucky enough to be in one, sneak a glance at the headlight ajustment switch, I'm yet to see one who's had it compensated for the massive load on the rear end, meaning they have a nice sky high pointing set of lights. And since most undercovers are 3 years old or under, they dont need an mot either, so no one picks up on it.

Basically just contest the fine, they cant legally give you more points for contesting it, its part of your rights in a democracy, the worst that can happen is they could make you pay some court costs and an increase on the fine. However since there is no concrete test for suspension and it is still down to TESTERS DISCRETION, i doubt the police are going to fight with you, its not like tints where they have a 100% scientific reading, its an oppinion, and just because they dont like it doesn't make it the law.

Maybe they did it as a ploy to get you to appeal it in court and in turn get you busted for your illegal tyres aswell, which could effectively ban you.

A. if that was the case he could of just given him enough points to ban him at the side of the road surely?

B. he wasn't done for the tires and they are not being disputed so there would be no reason that he couldn't change them before the test if he had to go to one. if it's mention which i can't see why it would be, just say that you got a puncture and had to change them all as they would of been odd tire sizes.

fight it

i'd like to know what calibrated equipment he used to check the stiffness of your shocks

well when i went to court for lows and poke, during cross examination of the officer i asked "officer can you please explain to the magistrates how you actually tested the vehicles suspension roadside and state any equipment you used?"

his reply was "well, i performed a 'bounce test' which involved pushing down each corner of the car and testing the rate it bounces back"

i replied "where did you learn that the 'bounce test' was a reasonable way to test the safety of a vehicles suspension and deem it unroadworthy?"

his reply "i've been a traffic officer for 15 years and been to many courses regarding construction and use of vehicles on road"

then it was time for my cross examination...officers lawyer asked "so mr dhanjal, have you any past experience in mechanics?"

my reply "yes, 3 A levels at grade A in mechanics, maths mechanics and physics, all 3 involved the understanding of newtons laws of physics of moving objects, kinematics of moving objects, forces and energy transfer including within springs and dampers found in suspension components, and collision theorys. Give me 10 minutes and i can mathematically prove to you that it is IMPOSSIBLE for my car to 'flip over' upon impact with a pothole or uneven road surface at any speed below 70mph"

they pooped themselves and threw out the lows penalty after that...c0ck suckers

what really gets me s that they can do someone like you or me for having 'stiff suspension', but to the little low life council scamming scum who are probably vandalising some old ladys front lawn wont get shit.

WTF?!! thats written like a scene from a mass murder case at the old Bailey

I didnt think that you would get to litterally fight it out in court over minor traffic offences, i thought it would just be a case of writing an apealing statement and handing it to a majistrate. Then they cross it with the prosicutors statement and make a decision in the toilet or something