All criminals caught.

[Noops]

I've always wondered why there is the differance between a motor bike and motor car when it comes to number plate law.. ??most farm machinery also have just a plate at the rear considering you have to display an L plate on the front of a motor bike as well as the rear.

[neil]

Is it illegal to not have a front plate now? They should lock you up and throw away the key!

[r10crw]

Nahh not pointless, hes just frustrated. I know exactly wheres hes coming from although Ive a slightly different stance.
Im always losing my front plate and to be honest as long is I dont get points Im not caring about the fine, losing my license is far more worrying than a 60 quid donation to the police dpt. (180 and Id be getting a little annoyed though!)
Totally understand the reason we need the plate, its the very reason mine keeps failling off and know of several friends on here who have been saved by theirs falling off too.
Jimbo did you go to court?

[woody]

Just to be slightly provocative; this is your wife who lives and works at opposite ends of a perfectly straight stretch of dual carriageway that has a 50 mph SPECS enforced limit, prior to which the road had one of the highest serious accident & death rates in the UK?

[jason]

Must say I'm with Stewart on this. It sucks getting a fine, but there's a law and those who run without a plate mostly know this. Of course, it's gutting for folk like Pete and Mrs Pete who were not intentionally running plate-less, and you have my sympathy.

But how does a police officer differentiate true stories from lies? How do they filter out those who are deliberately running without? He/she can't really can they? It's obvious looking at photos of some cars on here that some people choose to intentionally never run a plate.

What frustrates me more though is the number of tintops, etc you see with fancy fonts, cluttered backgrounds, etc which are deliberately designed to make reading the reg impossible (from the rear too). They're so easily spotted, yet onviously thousands of car owners nationwide get away with it.

Totally understand the reason we need the plate, its the very reason mine keeps failling off and know of several friends on here who have been saved by theirs falling off too

If I am interpreting your sentence correctly, then clearly a fine is inadequate. Are you really admitting on here you (or friends) deliberately don't run a front plate to avoid identification?

[woody]

Of course, it's gutting for folk like Pete and Mrs Pete who were not intentionally running plate-less, and you have my sympathy.

It got knocked off by the AA dragging it onto a big yellow truck a couple of months ago and I never got round to putting it back on.

It may not have been deliberate, but a couple of months ago?

I'm no angel when it comes to this, but on the two occasions I did get stopped (once the plate was deliberately absent, once not) it was a fair cop guv'.

Must have had the same officers as Nizzy though; they advised a stick-on plate & did not realise these do not meet the full intention of the regulations.

[martins]

Before everyone decides what side of the fence they are on with this one, might I just add a further discussion point.....

If Mrs Pete is driving the car is it not her responsibility to make sure it is fit for purpose, ie if Mrs Pete knew there was no front plate on the car and knew it was not legal, should she (not the cats mother- never met Mr or Mrs Pete-just commenting) not have made arrangements to have the problem rectified. ie got down to Autosave and puchase said plate.

M (bitter-as was not permitted my Mrs M to go to TT so taking it out on everyone else)

[S111Y TT]

Jeeso SE, stop being such b****y people. Even I, being wifeless, can tell he is complaining at the earache he is getting from her and not the fine he received from the police. He said his mistake, why ignore that part. You don't need to be selective on every other part of his vent. He is quite obviously frustrated, so why attempt to annoy him further.

He made a slight joke at there are better things the police can do with their time, but there are. Pulling over someone driving their vehicle safely and cautiously but missing a front numberplate isn't high on the priority list to me. Anything driving away is only going to show its rear plate, not it's front. If she hit another car and tried to get away I'm pretty sure you won't be outrunning the escaping vehicle to make sure the front number plate matches the rear. The front plate is for other purposes, not what some of you have labelled.

You can pick as many nits as you want but saying that we could do the same back. Stop being ridiculous and start being realistic. I bet my manhood that you don't check your brake lights are working before you hop in your car before every single journey you make, if you say you do then your nothing shy of a liar and I pity you.
No brake lights could cause a car to hit the back of you as he didn't notice you were braking and by consequence cause you to move forward and hit the young child crossing the road at the time. Do you check tyre pressure before each journey too? That will affect your braking distance. The list goes on.

Just get real please, it frustrates me just to see some of the posts that make it on here and how it has just become a forum where you antagonise others rather than the close nit family of friends it once was.

[campbell]

Crikey, who's been making Ians coffee!

Martin - hm. I think it *is* the responsib of the driver to ensure a car is fit for use before a journey. But I guess that could all be debated many times over.

I think Ian made a good point though. Pete is here venting to feel a little better about Mrs Pete earache (although I think his concern runs deeper than that too...see the thread title...). Anyway, I remember similar earache when I did the "calculations" for fuel remaining on a trip home with Lisa in her Scoob a long time ago. She was driving. I was paxing. She ran out of fuel in the middle of the Forth Road Bridge. I got it in the neck. And not just from her but also from the Bridge Patrol. Never made the same mistake again right enough...case closed.

[tut]

A bit like Robin's post reference Katie and the ambulance. The enquiry was what would you do in this situation, so opinions are welcome, but it seems to deteriorate into abuse from some people, even vitriol, presume that they just like the sound of their own voices, or have little cocks.

Those of us who take the time to read Pete's posts properly will realise that his mind and his wording work along different lines than most of us, which to me makes them entertaining. Many are tongue in cheek and often acerbic, but they are usually witty and he does not intend them to be taken too seriously.

Maybe I have got it wrong, but then I do not actually fit into a standard groove anyway.

tut

[meatball]

It's a discussion forum.
I see the difference between a discussion and an arguement/abuse.
I've only seen two abusive posts on this thread...

[robin]

Is that a call for more abusive posts to even out the score

Cheers,
Robin

[meatball]

Is that a call for more abusive posts to even out the score

Cheers,
Robin

Awesome!
High 5 moment!

[tut]

There should be NO abusive posts on ANY threads, that is what this Forum is all about, and what separates it from others.

Argue, opinionate, take the piss, but engage brain before you post abusive remarks or personal insults. There is no excuse for it and you demean yourself by doing so.

tut

ps:- regarding the above I have obviously put myself in the firing line, but if any one can find an abusive insult from myself in my 15,000 posts, then I will eat dirt.

[meatball]

just like the sound of their own voices, or have little cocks.

Would you like salt with that dirt sir? Lol.
Only kidding boss.