3points for an illegal tyre.. but was it illegal?!

[coyle]

Hey guys, on my way home from the cleaned-uk launch today i got pulled over by the police.
the guy was pretty arsey to be honest, just said he wanted to do a random check, breath test etc etc.. i said thats fine,

everything was fine except my front drivers tyre, he deemed it illegal as the inside was heavily worn, he pointed it out to me and showed me it was bald, i agreed, signed the FPN he gave me and went on my way..
I thought it strange it was bald as it passed an MOT 10days ago.. but didnt realy have an arguement,

returned home and did some research, it appears there is some unclear circumstances surrounding tyre legality.

but im 99% the correct law is that the central 75% of the tyre must have at least 1.6mm of tread available. and the remaining 12.5% on each side can be devoid of all tread as long as the wire/thread is not sticking through..

my sources are: the 2nd to last post here...
http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t16509.html

and.. the tread depth section
http://www.etyres.co.uk/uk-tyre-law

so i went out and measured my tyre.. it was 8inches across.
meaning i am allowed 1.25inches devoid of tread on each side..
but mine is only bald about 0.9inches so i dont actually think it is illegal?!

but i dont know how to contest this, because if i return the FPN ticking the option to attend court, how can i prove my findings?
im thinking the best thing would be to take it to an MOT station tomorow, get them to check the tyre, and show them why i think its legal, and if it's legal get them to write a note to that effect. then maybe remove the tyre and take it to court with me?
or should i call the police station in the morning, explaining why i think the ticket is wrong, and explain i am willing to go to court and see what they say?

any help or suggestions welcome, i could do with not getting another 3points..

 

[Thomas_Si]

Wouldn't hurt to have a VOSA qualified inspector say your tyre is legal. Professional testimony and all that.

I think you would have to go to court to dispute it, never seen one of these tickets, don't know if there is any small print which requires careful reading.

You could try going down to the station with the ticket and quote the relevant act and ask someone to give a second opinion, would very much depend on the copper what kins of response you get though.

In any case I would would probably get your tracking checked and get a new tyre or pair if your other side is pretty worn as well, especially with it coming into icy weather.

 

[beau]

what make and model of tyre is it?

you got any pics?

i am a 'mot assistant' so im pretty good with knowing what is illegal/legal, where to measure, lots of people think that you just measure central 3/4 of the tyre- which is often wrong now days especially with low profile directional tyres.

and btw, put your spare on now so you dont wear it any more- but i presume you already would have.

 

[coyle]

what make and model of tyre is it?

you got any pics?

i am a 'mot assistant' so im pretty good with knowing what is illegal/legal, where to measure, lots of people think that you just measure central 3/4 of the tyre- which is often wrong now days especially with low profile directional tyres.

and btw, put your spare on now so you dont wear it any more- but i presume you already would have.

its a khumo, cheap one coz its on my winter wheels. not got any pics of the wear
225 45 17, so not realy a low pro, or any stretch..

my 2sources are with legal background, both stating on cars it is central 3/4.
and it managed to pass an MOT last week..

 

[beau]

its a khumo, cheap one coz its on my winter wheels. not got any pics of the wear
225 45 17, so not realy a low pro, or any stretch..

my 2sources are with legal background, both stating on cars it is central 3/4.
and it managed to pass an MOT last week..

khumo what? ecsta or what ever its called?

well it is central 3/4 of the tread, not the tyre, many tyres now have patterning, meaning basicly for example 2 inches of the tyre either side could be bald but tyre is still fully legal, its not the easiest thing to understand... i tried to explain on punto mk2 site but they just couldnt understand lol

but tbh, i cannot remember what those tyres are like, they could be all tread or they could have patterning.

 

[sledge]

If I was a magistrate I would ask you two questions.....

Was the tyre fitted to the car at the time of the MOT and the alledged offence the same one and can you prove it?

Asuuming you had actually taken the tyre, or some pics of it (which may be pointless because who says Magistrates can physically tell a worn tyre from a servicable one anyway?) or a third party report on its condition I would then ask the same thing. Was this the tyre fitted to the car at the time and can you prove it?

The point is, you cannot prove as a fact the tyre you are demonstrating/describing was the actual one fitted to the car when you got tugged.......so I think you are going to struggle to get away with this.

 

[EmmaM88]

Surely if your tyre passed its MOT but was near to the limit you would have got an advisory notice? I did

 

[coyle]

If I was a magistrate I would ask you two questions.....

Was the tyre fitted to the car at the time of the MOT and the alledged offence the same one and can you prove it?

Asuuming you had actually taken the tyre, or some pics of it (which may be pointless because who says Magistrates can physically tell a worn tyre from a servicable one anyway?) or a third party report on its condition I would then ask the same thing. Was this the tyre fitted to the car at the time and can you prove it?

The point is, you cannot prove as a fact the tyre you are demonstrating/describing was the actual one fitted to the car when you got tugged.......so I think you are going to struggle to get away with this.

the coper took down all the details and serial number on the tyre...

Surely if your tyre passed its MOT but was near to the limit you would have got an advisory notice? I did

if it is in the outer 12.5% its unrelated so wouldnt even be an advisory

 

[beau]

if it is in the outer 12.5% its unrelated so wouldnt even be an advisory

they should still advise it tbh.

 

[AppleSei]

wheres JohnW when you need him...again

 

[Jai]

rather than debating the minutia of tyre depth, which no doubt you will during your day in court, perhaps you should consider this, despite your protests that by your interpretation of relevant legislation that the tyre is legal, it's obvious there is cause for concern, maybe looking at the weather gone and to come you'd want to change it anyway? i know if mine were looking iffy, for safety and peace of mind i'd want them changed out, after all, when it comes down to it, it's those 4 little patches and how much grip they generate that decides wether i do make it court, or it's dropped because my face and a windscreen shouldn't meet at 30mph....

 

[coyle]

they should still advise it tbh.

just checked the advisory sheet, its on there.. but today was the 1st time i drove the car since the MOT, so doubt its worn much more??

 

[sludgeguts]

rather than debating the minutia of tyre depth, which no doubt you will during your day in court, perhaps you should consider this, despite your protests that by your interpretation of relevant legislation that the tyre is legal, it's obvious there is cause for concern, maybe looking at the weather gone and to come you'd want to change it anyway? i know if mine were looking iffy, for safety and peace of mind i'd want them changed out, after all, when it comes down to it, it's those 4 little patches and how much grip they generate that decides wether i do make it court, or it's dropped because my face and a windscreen shouldn't meet at 30mph....

:yeahthat:


Try riding a motorbike at 30mph and putting both feet on the ground to slow it down.
Now bear in mind that your car has little more tyre surface touching the tarmac.
The other thing is that an MOT is only good for the moment the test is being carried out. It shouldn't happen but in theory you could get a tug a mile down the road & have a problem.
You could take the tyre for someone's opinion at a local tyre dealer.
At the end of the day, you could also ask why plod was so harsh - I've seen quite a few progs on cable & in many cases they will simply ask you to put the spare on & get that one fixed.

 

[ChrisUK]

rather than debating the minutia of tyre depth, which no doubt you will during your day in court, perhaps you should consider this, despite your protests that by your interpretation of relevant legislation that the tyre is legal, it's obvious there is cause for concern, maybe looking at the weather gone and to come you'd want to change it anyway? i know if mine were looking iffy, for safety and peace of mind i'd want them changed out, after all, when it comes down to it, it's those 4 little patches and how much grip they generate that decides wether i do make it court, or it's dropped because my face and a windscreen shouldn't meet at 30mph....

Thats not what he's arguing though.

He probably knows it could do with changing, You'd have to be a retard to think its OK. Whats he's arguing about is if its legal or not and if not the 3 points he'll receive are unjust.

 

[dave]

its one thing to get advice to change it soon, but to be given points when the tyre is legal is another thing all together. if its done no miles sine the mot and the mot man who knows a lot more about tyre safety than a pc says its legal then seems its unjust to me

 

[PandaMark]

...the mot man [...] knows a lot more about tyre safety than a pc...

just checked the advisory sheet, its on there...

A good traffic officer will know the law regarding tyres (and everything else on your car!) The MOT man seems to have misjudged it Even you admit it is bald - if you have done only a few miles since the MOT then you may have a case against the MOT station

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

its one thing to get advice to change it soon, but to be given points when the tyre is legal is another thing all together. if its done no miles sine the mot and the mot man who knows a lot more about tyre safety than a pc says its legal then seems its unjust to me

I'd agree.

On a slightly OT matter though, I though police now had to have a reason to pull you over and couldn't just do random stop checks (unless under a road cencus thing)?

 

[Jai]

Thats not what he's arguing though.

He probably knows it could do with changing, You'd have to be a retard to think its OK. Whats he's arguing about is if its legal or not and if not the 3 points he'll receive are unjust.

first thing i said, let the court decide, he has that option on his paperwork,

I'd agree.

On a slightly OT matter though, I though police now had to have a reason to pull you over and couldn't just do random stop checks (unless under a road cencus thing)?

road traffic act 1988:

section 163: Power of police to stop vehicles

(1) A person driving a motor vehicle on a road must stop the vehicle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.

(2) A person riding a cycle on a road must stop the cycle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.

(3) If a person fails to comply with this section he is guilty of an offence.

you'll notice that that nowhere in that bit of legislation does it talk about grounds/reasons for the stop.

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

road traffic act 1988:

section 163: Power of police to stop vehicles

(1) A person driving a motor vehicle on a road must stop the vehicle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.

(2) A person riding a cycle on a road must stop the cycle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.

(3) If a person fails to comply with this section he is guilty of an offence.

you'll notice that that nowhere in that bit of legislation does it talk about grounds/reasons for the stop.

 

[pk090]

first thing i said, let the court decide, he has that option on his paperwork,



road traffic act 1988:

section 163: Power of police to stop vehicles

(1) A person driving a motor vehicle on a road must stop the vehicle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.

(2) A person riding a cycle on a road must stop the cycle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.

(3) If a person fails to comply with this section he is guilty of an offence.

you'll notice that that nowhere in that bit of legislation does it talk about grounds/reasons for the stop.

so if he isnt wearing his uniform you can drive off?