Advanced Driving Hub

Well here's a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Harlow Motorcycle Injunction

We already have laws banning all these things ... just nobody to enforce them.

So what is the point of another piece of paper that could make criminals of many riders innocently riding in Harlow?

I'm a bit curious: why ban between the hours of 10:00 and midnight? Dawn raids and breakfast meets would appear to escape the ban. Is this because someone thinks that bikers like a lie in or are those charged with enforcing the ban partial to a leisurely breakfast before starting work?

So, this is the first injunction of its kind, and it won't be the last if the busy bodies in the town halls up and down the country get to hear of this.

This could impact on the driving days organised by members of this forum.

Nigel.

Why do they need an injunction? I thought S59 was brought in to deal exactly with this sort of problem?

What's the trigger for the injunction ?

dvenman wrote:What's the trigger for the injunction ?

There was a planned ride out last weekend "in memory of a friend", but reading the report it suggests that two motorcyclists riding together could be committing an offence.

Last time I went to Nottingham, there was a convoy of several hundred bikes on the A52 approaching the A1, lead by a marked police car and with a couple of police bikes among the riders. Why couldn't Harlow & Essex police take that approach?

This is local democracy in action. What sort of government would be preferable?

waremark wrote:This is local democracy in action. What sort of government would be preferable?

Is it, really? Without seeing all the background, how do we know it's not just a couple of well-connected busybodies with a grudge? And how are you supposed to know as a member of the public that this is in force? If I arrange a social pub meet for a group of fellow lotus owners in Harlow, I could also fall foul of it, without even being aware the injunction exists.

S59 is already a nasty bit of legislation (in the way that it just needs an officers opinion, not any evidence or proof) - I'm still unclear as to why that is inadequate in this case. The injunction seems unnecessarily far reaching - if it's a few people causing the problem, why not name them (or the organisations they are involved with)?

Thing is, it's an absolutely pointless piece of paper. It isn't backed by a power of arrest and, like all injunctions it has to be properly served before it could be of even the vaguest use. So, if you chose to perhaps turn up on the border of Harlow, and decide to ride through it, on convoy, then unless the Council turned up to dish out copies, then you'll have done nothing in contravention of the injunction.

Or, more simply put, it's a pointless piece of paper used more for press kudos than of meaningful utility. It's also not obvious what the sanction cpuld be. The point of civil contempt is to either ensure compliance with the order or provide just compensation.

There was a recent court case up in Wolverhampton for the same thing, but I can't remember the outcome.

ETA http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cg ... ck+country

suspended sentences provided injunction complied with going forward. Sod all deterrent for a single offence.

Harlow Council have responded to the internet storm.

Injunction Clarification

Clear as mud then. Still see no need for it given existing police powers. What it still does is leave many people liable for a criminal charge if the council/police decide to use the injunction for a specific occurence/event.