Gardai seizing unrestricted bikes

RosieJoe

bladespin wrote: »

the law's not to blame it's the clowns that flout it.

Too ****in true!

Zascar

So can anyone give any details about people that have actually been caught and what has happened to them?

KamiKazi

bladespin wrote: »

the law's not to blame it's the clowns that flout it.

We'll have to agree to disagree there.

cantdecide

bladespin wrote: »

...he law's not to blame it's the clowns that flout it....

The law is man-made, it wasn't delivered from some unknowable spirit on stone slabs. In part, it is to blame actually. Not that I condone flouting the law but the gardai are given discretion because of the fact that the law, which is designed to be a catch-all is black and white. If there weren't some grey in reality, they wouldn't be given this discretion. And as for having reasonable suspicion?? The law often just gives sanctimonious, self important bullies, who enjoy their work a bit too much, sticks to beat their fellow man with.

Let he is without sin etc.

bladespin

KamiKazi wrote: »

We'll have to agree to disagree there.

Why? The law is basically 2 lines and there is no grey area, you should read some that are on the statute, they can often have books dedicated to a single law, some of the financial stuff that'll probably be public knowledge as soon as someone decides to do something about the bankers etc.
If you struggle with 'must ride a motorcycle of 33bhp or less or have a power to weight ratio of 0.16kw per kg or less' I can't hold much hope for you.

BTW I toatlly disagree with the limits etc (that's a different argument) but it's the law.

KamiKazi

bladespin wrote: »

Why? The law is basically 2 lines and there is no grey area, you should read some that are on the statute, they can often have books dedicated to a single law, some of the financial stuff that'll probably be public knowledge as soon as someone decides to do something about the bankers etc.
If you struggle with 'must ride a motorcycle of 33bhp or less or have a power to weight ratio of 0.16kw per kg or less' I can't hold much hope for you.

BTW I toatlly disagree with the limits etc (that's a different argument) but it's the law.

I disagree with the law because it doesn't motivate riders to get training to increase their riding skill.

If anything it encourages people to pass the test and wait it out for two years, then hop straight onto a big bike.

Should be a tiered system, based on training assessments, with a list of what bikes are good for what grades.

bladespin

KamiKazi wrote: »

I disagree with the law because it doesn't motivate riders to get training to increase their riding skill.

If anything it encourages people to pass the test and wait it out for two years, then hop straight onto a big bike.

Should be a tiered system, based on training assessments, with a list of what bikes are good for what grades.

That's the legislation, drop in to Leinster house and ask them to change it, I'm talking about the law and it's enforcement.

I always saw it as a half arsed attempt to copy the Uk, take the bad bits like the bhp limits etc and forget rewarding traingin etc with direct access.

KamiKazi

bladespin wrote: »

That's the legislation, drop in to Leinster house and ask them to change it, I'm talking about the law and it's enforcement.

I always saw it as a half arsed attempt to copy the Uk, take the bad bits like the bhp limits etc and forget rewarding traingin etc with direct access.

Exactly.

Idleater

KamiKazi wrote: »

with a list of what bikes are good for what grades.

Lists of bikes leads to an epic fail because it requires constant updating. The power/weight ratio is consistent over time regardless of technology advances.

I agree completely about the poor implementation though.

KamiKazi

nereid wrote: »

Lists of bikes leads to an epic fail because it requires constant updating. The power/weight ratio is consistent over time regardless of technology advances.

I agree completely about the poor implementation though.

It'd only be epic fail in this country with it's arseways Government.

When a new bike is brought on the market it gets graded & added to the list, that's it.

Dara Robinson

Now, have not had a chance to read the entire thread so someone had probably already commented on this point but, When I was driving a few years ago the Gardi did not have the facilities to check at the time. Is that still the case?

spud01

bladespin wrote: »

The law's clear, what are the gardai to proceed on if not the manufacturers own specifications?
What we're talking about here is grounds for investigation so the published figures are plenty to go on for the gardai to make the decision to seize, they can realease later and not proceed. This isn't trial at the roadside, it's only a preliminary investigation.


Yes, of course, it's a two parter so if you satisyf one then you're ok.

HD themselves, all manufacturers who either restrict their bikes at factory or claim inside the power to weight rule will tell you that you nullify the legality of the bike if you modify it from standard.


Actually, Dyno's don't vary much at all (if calibrated properly and to the correct satndard) any dyno used as evidence would have to be calibrated to the national standard. There's no need to use a dyno anyway unless the rider wants to produce evidence the bike meets the limits themselves but it would be up to the cours whether to allow this.
The procedure is very simple, the bike has a manufacturers stated output, say for example a fireblade, with output power about 123kw and a claimed weight 176kg. if there is no modification to restrict the bike's power out then it doesn't meet the 33bhp rule (obviously) and the power to weight is 0.9631, this is way beyond the 0.16kw/kg so the garda have grounds for summons, the rider can use a dyno to try to prove innocent but it's up to them.




All riders already know exactly where they stand, they are either legal or they're not, it's so simple, I can't believe there are lads still arguing about it.
The gardai don't make it up as they go but they have some disgression so they can choose to turn a blind eye to some.

There is no debate on the subject, the law's written and contrary to all this it's fairly clear, the gardai have only lately realised how to enforce it and they're only doing their jobs in doing this, I fully support them, I'm fed up being labeled thanks to these chancers who think they can shortcut the system and leave all riders who make it their business to be legitimate to pay the price for mis-placed bravado.


Wow, you've been watching waaayyy too much american tv court rubbish and you're really not familiar with our legal system, all judges are biast in some way. They aren't elected so don't hold office :rolleyes:

The gardai in the above case would simply produce the maunfacturers specifications for the vehicle and show no effort had been made to restrict.
You'll find it very hard and even more expensive to challange a judge like this, you're talking appeals to the supreme court and even then you'd loose as they are following their directives in bias towards the law and the gardai. This isn't the USA, innocent until proven isn't a statute here.
I wouldn't suggest following this route but if you do you might get the law itself changed so I'd love to see it happen.


I don't understand where people get the idea that the gardai are convicting peolpe on a test ride of the bike, that's laughable, it's just a test to see if the bike needs a proper inspection and test by an approved mechanic.
As for making it up, where do you get that from? Once again the law's clear, they've copped on to how a superbike performs with and without a restrictor (not that hard really ).

You've said it all mate. Well done. I don't know why some guys keep harping on about Dynos. Theres no need to even go that route. Power to weight -restricted or not. A~nd that is where the investigation comes in and may mean seizing the bike. All within the law.

spud01

KamiKazi wrote: »

Have a read of this: http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?t=150503

Bike was seized and put on a dyno by the cops, not the rider.

(Yes I know it's in the UK but the law is exactly the same)

Why you still going on about Dynos. Its the manufacturers power and weight stats that are used and accepted. Take it from me mate I KNOW.
At the end of the day if your licence doesn't cover you to ride a bike of more than 25kW or 33bHP then you are not covered by insurance. (Ring AON, CN or Quinn and ask.) If you bike puts out more than that its easily investigated and the proofs for court are simple. Piece of advice ride legal or not at all.

Del2005

Dara Robinson wrote: »

Now, have not had a chance to read the entire thread so someone had probably already commented on this point but, When I was driving a few years ago the Gardi did not have the facilities to check at the time. Is that still the case?

They don't have to check, you have to prove.

As the others have pointed out if a bike needs to be restricted it's fairly easy for a cop to know if it is or not. If the cop can't tell they can call in a bike cop to check it out or seize the bike till you prove you're legal.

spud01

Zascar wrote: »

So can anyone give any details about people that have actually been caught and what has happened to them?

Convicted for no Insurance (even Ins co wrote to their solicitor stating they weren't insured -ie AON) so they had no defense. 5 points on their licence and lucky not to be disqualified.

Dara Robinson

Del2005 wrote: »

They don't have to check, you have to prove.

As the others have pointed out if a bike needs to be restricted it's fairly easy for a cop to know if it is or not. If the cop can't tell they can call in a bike cop to check it out or seize the bike till you prove you're legal.

Yea but from what you say its still the same system. You can get your bike restricted, get a cert and then through the same guy a €50 or €100 and a lot of them will then take the restriction out. You then have paper "proving" its restricted but its actually not. If the Gardi then take it off you, it used to be anyways, that they did not have the facilities to check whether that cert is for real or not.

tbh I always left the restriction in as I was on a CB-1 400 so it only took 2 or 3 hp off.... well the reality is I personally would not have bothered taking it out regardless of improvement, would have been worried about insurance and so on. I mean if you claim on a bike that supposed to be restricted the insurance company are going to open up the bike and have a look, cant be worth all that grief and potential problems.
But at the time the Gardi were unable to check, I mean they can make an educated guess but in a court of law that means nothing. You need proof and a maybe or possibly is not said proof. I would have thought at this stage though that they would have the facilities to actually check.

bladespin

Dara Robinson wrote: »

Yea but from what you say its still the same system. You can get your bike restricted, get a cert and then through the same guy a €50 or €100 and a lot of them will then take the restriction out. You then have paper "proving" its restricted but its actually not. If the Gardi then take it off you, it used to be anyways, that they did not have the facilities to check whether that cert is for real or not.

tbh I always left the restriction in as I was on a CB-1 400 so it only took 2 or 3 hp off.... well the reality is I personally would not have bothered taking it out regardless of improvement, would have been worried about insurance and so on. I mean if you claim on a bike that supposed to be restricted the insurance company are going to open up the bike and have a look, cant be worth all that grief and potential problems.
But at the time the Gardi were unable to check, I mean they can make an educated guess but in a court of law that means nothing. You need proof and a maybe or possibly is not said proof. I would have thought at this stage though that they would have the facilities to actually check.

DOE mechanic.

Del2005

Dara Robinson wrote: »

Yea but from what you say its still the same system. You can get your bike restricted, get a cert and then through the same guy a €50 or €100 and a lot of them will then take the restriction out. You then have paper "proving" its restricted but its actually not. If the Gardi then take it off you, it used to be anyways, that they did not have the facilities to check whether that cert is for real or not.

tbh I always left the restriction in as I was on a CB-1 400 so it only took 2 or 3 hp off.... well the reality is I personally would not have bothered taking it out regardless of improvement, would have been worried about insurance and so on. I mean if you claim on a bike that supposed to be restricted the insurance company are going to open up the bike and have a look, cant be worth all that grief and potential problems.
But at the time the Gardi were unable to check, I mean they can make an educated guess but in a court of law that means nothing. You need proof and a maybe or possibly is not said proof. I would have thought at this stage though that they would have the facilities to actually check.

The piece of paper is worthless as proof for the reasons you've outlined. What the piece of paper does is it makes it easy for a Garda vehicle inspector to quickly check that it's restricted by looking in the correct place.

The Gardaí don't have to check that your bike is legal, you have to proof that it is. There is no longer a presumed innocence for motoring due to an EU ruling.


My bike has a throttle restrictor and anyone who has half an idea about motors will know it's restricted as soon as they twist the throttle, it only revs freely to about 7k. I'm sure any bike that puts out over 50bhp would be as easy to tell if it's restricted.

TBH if you are only 2 or 3 bhp over you're unlikely to be done, Quinn only require the restriction on bikes over 40bhp.

slapper2

Del2005 wrote: »

The piece of paper is worthless as proof for the reasons you've outlined. What the piece of paper does is it makes it easy for a Garda vehicle inspector to quickly check that it's restricted by looking in the correct place.

The Gardaí don't have to check that your bike is legal, you have to proof that it is. There is no longer a presumed innocence for motoring due to an EU ruling.


My bike has a throttle restrictor and anyone who has half an idea about motors will know it's restricted as soon as they twist the throttle, it only revs freely to about 7k. I'm sure any bike that puts out over 50bhp would be as easy to tell if it's restricted.

TBH if you are only 2 or 3 bhp over you're unlikely to be done, Quinn only require the restriction on bikes over 40bhp.

i wouldnt be too sure about you having to prove its restricted thats like saying you guilty until proven innocent
and thats wat i was told from a traffic sgt in conversation
but at the same time insurance companies should not be insuring people on bikes restricted or not that are to bike for a learner
r1 gixxer 1000 blades busa's and the like should not be insured by someone on a prov
feck dont they should even be aloud 600 sports
and that goes for the lads in theyre 40 and 50s
your a learner 50 same as at 20 so the attitude of sure i'm such an age i'm mature enough to drive a big bike (even as first bike)



fact is lads the majority wont drive without a lid ,tax ins
cause its the law well you are driving without insurance

tislike paying for insurance and driving a truck and all you have is a car licence they'll take your money doesnt mean your covered



and checking bikesfor restrictors is not a case of rev the **** out of em some with trottle stops you will no but others you wont till you drive it

frogwestside

do the garda generally let ya off if its a couple of bhp over the limit mine is 42 bhp

Del2005

slapper2 wrote: »

i wouldnt be too sure about you having to prove its restricted thats like saying you guilty until proven innocent
and thats wat i was told from a traffic sgt in conversation

The Gardaí don't know half the laws they are supposed to enforce. If someone has a licence the requires them to ride a ≤33bhp they have to be able to proof it's legal not the other way around. Riding or driving aren't rights they are privileges so criminal law doesn't apply, which is the only time where innocent till proven guilty exists.

slapper2 wrote: »

but at the same time insurance companies should not be insuring people on bikes restricted or not that are to bike for a learner
r1 gixxer 1000 blades busa's and the like should not be insured by someone on a prov
feck dont they should even be aloud 600 sports
and that goes for the lads in theyre 40 and 50s
your a learner 50 same as at 20 so the attitude of sure i'm such an age i'm mature enough to drive a big bike (even as first bike)

Once a bike is ≤33bhp it's legal to drive so why shouldn't the insurance companies insure it. A bike designed to go 250km/h easily will have top quality brakes and suspension, a bike designed to go 180km/h won't have as high quality components. I know which one I'd rather have for my own safety.

slapper2 wrote: »

fact is lads the majority wont drive without a lid ,tax ins
cause its the law well you are driving without insurance

tislike paying for insurance and driving a truck and all you have is a car licence they'll take your money doesnt mean your covered

The muppets driving around on unrestricted bikes, on learner permits or new full licences, are breaking the law and should be done or will get a not very nice surprise when the worst does happen.

frogwestside wrote: »

do the garda generally let ya off if its a couple of bhp over the limit mine is 42 bhp

What weight is your bike does it fall under the 0.16kw/kg limit?

It's not the Gardaí you really have to worry about, your insurance company will pay out any 3rd party claims if you do have an accident. But if they find out the you are driving outside the terms of your licence, which you are, they can reclaim all their costs back form you. This hasn't happened yet, that I know of, but with insurance companies not making large profits any more they may well start.

frogwestside

Del2005 wrote: »

The Gardaí don't know half the laws they are supposed to enforce. If someone has a licence the requires them to ride a ≤33bhp they have to be able to proof it's legal not the other way around. Riding or driving aren't rights they are privileges so criminal law doesn't apply, which is the only time where innocent till proven guilty exists.



Once a bike is ≤33bhp it's legal to drive so why shouldn't the insurance companies insure it. A bike designed to go 250km/h easily will have top quality brakes and suspension, a bike designed to go 180km/h won't have as high quality components. I know which one I'd rather have for my own safety.



The muppets driving around on unrestricted bikes, on learner permits or new full licences, are breaking the law and should be done or will get a not very nice surprise when the worst does happen.




What weight is your bike does it fall under the 0.16kw/kg limit?

It's not the Gardaí you really have to worry about, your insurance company will pay out any 3rd party claims if you do have an accident. But if they find out the you are driving outside the terms of your licence, which you are, they can reclaim all their costs back form you. This hasn't happened yet, that I know of, but with insurance companies not making large profits any more they may well start.

ya my bikes a fzr 250 not sure what weight but it def isnt heavy enough tis a little rocket:D

bladespin

frogwestside wrote: »

ya my bikes a fzr 250 not sure what weight but it def isnt heavy enough tis a little rocket:D

Not legal as standard on a restricted license I'm afraid, 45bhp and 0.23kw/kg.

frogwestside

bladespin wrote: »

Not legal as standard on a restricted license I'm afraid, 45bhp and 0.23kw/kg.

i know ya was just wondering do guards generally turn the blind eye to 250s

KTRIC

frogwestside wrote: »

i know ya was just wondering do guards generally turn the blind eye to 250s

Look, if your licence does not cover your bike , it doesn't cover the bike. Stop with all this nonsence.

They can and will take your bike off you and your insurance is invalid either way.

bladespin

frogwestside wrote: »

i know ya was just wondering do guards generally turn the blind eye to 250s

An Garda that knows his stuff wouldn't but I'm not sure how many know much about bikes, TBH it'd be an awful lot easier to know if you were on a bigger bike like a blade or R1 etc.
Whatever about the gardai, I'd be a lot more concerned about my insurance if I was you.

frogwestside

bladespin wrote: »

An Garda that knows his stuff wouldn't but I'm not sure how many know much about bikes, TBH it'd be an awful lot easier to know if you were on a bigger bike like a blade or R1 etc.
Whatever about the gardai, I'd be a lot more concerned about my insurance if I was you.

its parked up as i havnt the money for insurance just yet , apparently its restricted but iv no cert for it

TheDriver

According to Spud here, I get the impression that sounds like they are gunning for the big stuff at the moment i.e. r1 or blades because its dead easy to spot on side of road if its restricted or not and no amount of talking can twist that.

spud01

Going back to June 2010 and the posts about Bikes being seized by cops in Cork, posted by MCC1.
A lot of people were asking what happened this guy. He refused to come back on the forum and tell you.
He was driven home by the Traffic Corps after his bike was seized. His bike wasn't restricted. Facts proven in court with the power to weight ratios and manufacturers figures as proof. He was convicted of no insurance etc. AON even wrote to his solicitor stating he wasn't insured.
The Sgt was very polite even after he called him a "prick".
The Sgt is now retired and the laws have changed again ... for the better.
MCC1 sent an abusive text las yeat to the retired Sgt... not believing it could be traced. He was given more advice on law.
For all the bikers out there that were following MCC1's starting thread and pages of ****e written on restrictors
QED

spud01

Going back to June 2010 and the posts about Bikes being seized by cops in Cork, posted by MCC1.
A lot of people were asking what happened this guy. He refused to come back on the forum and tell you.
He was driven home by the Traffic Corps after his bike was seized. His bike wasn't restricted. Facts proven in court with the power to weight ratios and manufacturers figures as proof. He was convicted of no insurance etc. AON even wrote to his solicitor stating he wasn't insured.
The Sgt was very polite even after he called him a "prick".
The Sgt is now retired and the laws have changed again ... for the better.
MCC1 sent an abusive text las yeat to the retired Sgt... not believing it could be traced. He was given more advice on law.
For all the bikers out there that were following MCC1's starting thread and pages of ****e written on restrictors
QED