Omega Owners Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Please play nicely.  No one wants to listen/read a keyboard warriors rants....

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - LC0112G

Pages: 1 ... 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 [114] 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 ... 165
1696
Omega General Help / Re: Tyre load rating
« on: 21 June 2017, 09:39:40 »
It's not an MOT failure, but it is an SVA/IVA failure. Plenty of Japanese imports fail their import SVA/IVA tests because the tyres are the wrong speed or load ratings. Daft, but "rulez is rulez". 

1697
General Discussion Area / Re: Speeding - outcome
« on: 12 June 2017, 21:46:21 »
One possibly for H21...

Hypothetically speaking ::), if I were to have bought a car 2 months ago, sent off logbook immediately, received that back after a couple of weeks, then approx. 6-7 weeks after buying said vehicle might have accidentally exceeded the speed limit whilst passing a cleverly disguised camera van (bastids, that ain't playing fair)...

...would I be able to deem myself "safe" by the end of this week (which will be 3rd week)?


Obviously, all hypothetically, of course, what with me being a shining light of law abidingness....

There is a DOCREF on the front of your new V5. This tells you the date on which DVLA records were updated. I'm not sure the current state of affairs, but AIUI not all forces use direct access to the DVLA database - they get 'tapes' of the database and use them. These 'tapes' are only updated every 'so-often'. I don't know if this is weekly, monthly etc.

The law is clear that the S172/NIP must be served within 14 days of the offence (the date of the offence is day zero). I believe that it's the DOCREF date that will matter, since that's the date held by DVLA, However, you could end up trying to convince a court of your point if the Police force were using an out of date database - once they've got you in their sights they are very reluctant to let you escape - often only dropping such cases on the steps of the courthouse (when they realise they are going to lose and trying to avoid costs!)

6-7 weeks after the DOCREF and 3 weeks after the indiscression - highly unlikely anything would come of it.

1698
General Discussion Area / Re: Speeding - outcome
« on: 10 June 2017, 20:28:46 »
Yes, it has to be posted to arrive in the normal course of post in 14 days. So they can't send it second class on the 13th day, or if there's a planned postal strike.

Not that any of this helps right now...

They can't sent it 2nd class full stop. The first NIP/S172 in the chain can only be served by either Registered, Recorded delivery or First class post.

But I agree, none of it helps in this situation.

1699
General Discussion Area / Re: Speeding - outcome
« on: 09 June 2017, 23:45:00 »
Date of postmark is considered applicable date, not date of receipt.

If said date is out with 14 days of date of offence then defence is complete and case is liable to be binned.

No. Absolutely No. How many times does it need explaining!

Section 1 of the ROTA 1988 says http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/53/section/1

Quote
1 Requirement of warning etc. of prosecutions for certain offences.

(1)Subject to section 2 of this Act, [F1a person shall not be convicted of an offence to which this section applies unless

(a)he was warned at the time the offence was committed that the question of prosecuting him for some one or other of e offences to which this section applies would be taken into consideration, or

(b) within fourteen days of the commission of the offence a summons (or, in Scotland, a complaint) for the offence was served on him, or

(c) within fourteen days of the commission of the offence a notice of the intended prosecution specifying the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed, was—

(i) in the case of an offence under section 28 or 29 of the M1Road Traffic Act 1988 (cycling offences), served on him,

(ii) in the case of any other offence, served on him or on the person, if any, registered as the keeper of the vehicle at the time of the commission of the offence.


Section 1-1-c-ii is the relevant bit for speeding, so the S172/NIP must be served on the Registered Keeper within 14 days. Served has a specific legal meaning defined in section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 the http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/30

Quote

7 References to service by post.
Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.


So service is deemed to be on normal delivery, which for 1st class post is 2 working days. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2009/2924.html

The nip is deemed "served" when it drops through the letter box at the address held by DVLA for the RK. Doesn't matter if you are in, out or shaking it all about. 

1700
General Discussion Area / Re: Speeding - outcome
« on: 08 June 2017, 23:26:36 »
This 14 day thing is very iffy. It would have to be well over 14 days to escape prosecution.

No, it wouldn't. The 14 day 'thing' is in the primary legislation. It's a cast iron defence backed up by case law.

However, it only applies if you were the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the offence, and you hadn't recently changed address/bought the car etc. This was a hire car, so it doesn't apply. The RK will be the hire car company, so providing they got the NIP/S172 within 14 days then that section of the law has been complied with.

There are ways to defeat/frustrate speeding cases in Scotland for English residents - all depends on how keen the 'offender' is. Pepipoo is the place to research this.


1701
So we'll know when TB has outsourced OOF maintenance to India as the thread 'Reply' button will change to 'Revert' ::) ::) ::) ::)

If I was an admin here .. that would definitely be happening ;D ;D

Together with people that say "If I was admin here..." instead of "If I were admin here..."   :P

1702
General Discussion Area / Re: Manchester explosion
« on: 25 May 2017, 09:51:04 »
Indeed. :y

 For want of a better word, dumbing down the media coverage is about the only meaningful thing to be done. Anything else is not a world to live in...

Yes we're used to the whole process of crime/arrest/trial/conviction/sentencing/punishment. But perhaps we can accept the fact that the person who commits these acts generally ends up dead as some sort of justice?

I know it won't ease the suffering of the victims or their families, but you cannot try someone post mortem.

Given that this persons farmily have fled to Lybia, perhaps they can be dealt with there. Quietly and quickly. Failing that be prevented from ever returning here. Seizing any property/cash etc they have here would also reduce the incentive for them to return.

Whilst I agree with most of what you've written, I don't think 'dumbing down the media' is either a good idea, or very likely to happen. There are numerous 24hr news channels available to anyone with sky TV / Freeview, and all of them are scrabbling about for something to report most days regurgitating the same old rubbish in a 15 minute cycle. When something like this happens, it's bound to be seen as more important than "fireman rescues OAP's cat from tree" and they go into overdrive.  The press need to be report responsibly, but trying to gag them is also a way to a police state.

It's not dumbing down the media we need - its educating the public to realise what can and can't be done, and what will and won't have any effect, and that news outlets have bias so you need to question everything you see/read. Trouble is, despite close to 50% of people going to university now, that education seems very lacking.

1703
General Discussion Area / Re: F@cking Lufthansa
« on: 24 May 2017, 21:50:44 »
Looks like the most you are likely to get back is £1200

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/advice/the-airline-has-lost-or-damaged-my-bag-what-can-i-do

And expect a fight. They'll probably say you should have travel insurance to cover it.

 I regularly carry £5K+ worth of camera gear as hand luggage and would never check it in, especially on a non direct flight. If an airline tried to make me put it in the hold, either at check-in or at the door of the plane then I tell them I will decline to board. This works quite well at the door of the plane, particularly if you already have hold baggage checked in. They have to off load it which almost always causes departure delays.
That's a great ploy! Although sadly I rarely travel with checked baggage which makes them more likely to call your bluff I suppose.

I was aware of the limit, and I do technically have insurance, although I will claim from the airline as a weapon of first resort and probably use insurer to cover the difference. I also intend to bill them for the day of my time that they wasted by lying to me (3 times) about the expected arrival time of my case. In fact, the €1200 will probably cover the market value of the watch. Although obviously will not replace it.

As an aside, the first thing the customer service bod asked me was whether I had insurance and that he would advise me to claim on it if so. I (more calmly than I felt) explained that insurance was not relevant, I expected the airline to pay. This sort of thing really hacks me off and doesn't occur in any other sphere as far as I can tell. I mean, imagine if someone rear-ended you and then said "oh don't worry, you're fully comp, just claim on your own insurance"

If I'm travelling hand luggage only, I always have a photographers waistcoat and a jacket with lots of pockets with me,  All my camera gear will fit in the 'toggers jacket and/or the coat. It's happened once - Ryanair at Riga - So I unloaded my bag, put all the camera gear in the coat/waistcoat and handed them a now almost empty bag containing just some stale cacks and socks. For some reason they changed their mind and let me take the bag on board ;-)

The analogy with car insurance isn't quite right. They will basically say you should claim off your own insurance, and then your insurance claims their costs off the airline. They aren't setup to deal directly with the public.

1704
General Discussion Area / Re: F@cking Lufthansa
« on: 24 May 2017, 14:38:40 »
Looks like the most you are likely to get back is £1200

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/advice/the-airline-has-lost-or-damaged-my-bag-what-can-i-do

And expect a fight. They'll probably say you should have travel insurance to cover it.

 I regularly carry £5K+ worth of camera gear as hand luggage and would never check it in, especially on a non direct flight. If an airline tried to make me put it in the hold, either at check-in or at the door of the plane then I tell them I will decline to board. This works quite well at the door of the plane, particularly if you already have hold baggage checked in. They have to off load it which almost always causes departure delays.

1705
General Discussion Area / Re: Manchester explosion
« on: 23 May 2017, 15:06:04 »
ISIS have claimed responsibility.

Whilst the boreres are open it's easy for them to get in.  How do think they come in, parachute?

Why would they need to 'get in' or use parachutes if they were born here?

Three of the London bombers were born here in the UK, and the 4th was born in Jamaica. All were British Citizens.

1706
General Discussion Area / Re: Manchester explosion
« on: 23 May 2017, 14:26:31 »
And that's your f***ing opinion.

So your happy for these arse holes to go around killing inocent folk.  We can minimise the risk.

And your evidence that the perpetrator wasn't born and bred in Manchester (or elsewhere the UK) is? Yet you jump to the conclusion that closing the borders will keep such people out?

1707
Omega General Help / Re: Overheating
« on: 18 May 2017, 13:17:07 »
Today omega overheated and saw 100 on degrees on needle... never seen it that high normally always half way or just below not matter on condition...  heater got turned on full and still didn't drop so pulled over turned car off.. checked header tank and was empty which is strange as was full yesterday ...

Although hot and pressurised slowly unscrewed cap not fully just enough to let it breathe and all of a sudden tank filled up with coolant?..

Anyone any ideas once coolant in tank I left cap loose and drove home heater on full whack window open and managed to stay about 95 on gauge got home no coolant again ...

Any help be appreciated car running fine in it self

Check the fans are working. Had similar symptoms last summer, and turned out to be a duff thermostat switch. Even on a cool day and at speed the fans need to run to draw enough air through the radiator.

And I'm not surprised the expansion tank was empty if you'd driven with the cap loose/off - Water will boil in the block if you do this, and the resultant steam will force water out. The system is designed to be run under pressure to stop the water boiling.

1708
Omega General Help / Re: Overheating
« on: 18 May 2017, 13:10:39 »
"Although hot and pressurised slowly unscrewed cap not fully just enough to let it breathe and all of a sudden tank filled up with coolant?.. "

That doesn't sound like a leak to me, if tank really filled up to it's original level?

Could it just be that due to overheating, coolant liquid boils causing tank to appear empty, and when opening the cap pressure releases and allows coolant to fill tank up again?

Could it be ceased up thermostat or old coolant liquid causing the overheating, or even defected water pump?

The "all of a sudden" bit is because under pressure, an antifreeze/water mix will boil at 120+ degrees C. If/when you release the pressure, the boiling point drops to around 100-110 Deg C (depends on you water/antifreeze mix).

So what is happening is that when you release the pressure, it's allowing the water to boil in the hottest part of the engine (block or head), expanding, and forcing (non boiled) water down the pipes into the expansion tank. This leaves steam in the hot part of the engine, which will eventually condense once things cool down, but in the mean time isn't doing much cooling. Generally you should avoid taking the expansion cap off on a non running hot engine for the above reason.

1709
General Discussion Area / Re: Severn bridge toll's
« on: 16 May 2017, 21:41:52 »

Same with the Severn crossings; no sensible motorist on business would go to Newport from Bristol via Gloucester; the toll was always the acceptable option. ;)

The Severn Crossings have always been far more expensive than the Dart Crossing.

£6.70 for a car, Vans are £13.40 (even small car derived vans) and HGV's are £20! 

Which makes the Gloucester route a consideration, especially for the haulage companies if they're headed into deepest darkest South Wales and need to go along the Heads Of The Valleys road.  ;)

But, it's one way. It's free to leave Wales, whereas the Dartford crossing is £2.50 each way. So £6.70 return over the Severn, vs £5.00 return over Dartford. Still more expensive, but not 'far more expensive'.

1710
General Discussion Area / Re: Driving licence renewal
« on: 08 May 2017, 01:48:24 »
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20968886

So we have DVLA writing to (roughly) 4.55 million people per year saying their driving licence is about to expire. 2nd Class post is what - 55p? Lets assume they get a 50% discount for bulk postage. Plus a bit of admin, an A4 piece of paper and an envelope. Say 30p all in. Times 4.55 million letters is £1.4 million per year.
 
Then we have 2 million people (according to the BBC as of 2013) either knowingly or unknowingly driving on expired licences. Next step is obviously to start issuing 3pts and £100 fixed penalty fines to these people - much like the requirement for continuous registration or SORN of cars. 2 million x £100 = £200 million, A nice little earner.

It's madness.

The article you link to is dated .. 12 January 2013 !!!!  Somewhat out of date methinks ??   :)
Yes, just over 4 years out of date. Do you have any newer data that shows things are getting better? Or perhaps there are now 4 million people driving on expired licenses, so £400 million potential tax revenue up for grabs. 

Pages: 1 ... 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 [114] 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 ... 165

Page created in 0.035 seconds with 20 queries.