Motorists exploit a legal loophole
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 вер 2024
- Magistrates’ courts could grind to a halt if thousands of motorists exploit a legal loophole unwittingly exposed by a Welsh driver, who was found not guilty of speeding when his case was heard recently.
LINK: tinyurl.com/bd...
PLEASE SUPPORT THE CHANNEL
Support me with silver or Gold: tinyurl.com/mf...
My videos are funded by people like you. If you enjoy them, please help me make more:
You can support me by making a one off donation www.paypal.me/...
Clive De Carle supplements: tinyurl.com/5n...
Shungite: www.ftwproject...
Thanks to Black Cat Computers for hosting and running my website: black-cat-comp...
My Website: richardvobes.com/
My Rumble Channel: rumble.com/use...
OTHER CHANNELS
Vobes Show - / @vobesshow
The English Couple - / @the-english-couple
Julia's channel - / @juliahartley
The Naked Englishman Podcast - nakedenglishma...
#speedingfine #motoring #legal
Having been caught on, camera, doing 25mph in a 20mph London limit. What seems unfair to me, is that speeding cyclists, electric bike and scooters that go past me get no penalties. Again because I have a number plate and they do not, I'm the easy target for a financial penalty. It has nothing to do with road safety.
No. They are money making cameras. Not safety cameras. 😮
Watching my speedometer and searching for overhead cameras means that I have little time to watch where am going or who might be crossing the road.
Agree. All cyclists should carry a registration plate and have insurance. If a cyclist scrapes your vehicle, causing damage, what are the chances of you getting compensation?
It's got nothing to do with not having numberplates, it's because bicycles don't have speedometers, and if an "ebike" is going past you at 20mph then it's not an ebike, it's a motorbike that requires the necessary licence/insurance etc.
Ebike motors are limited to 15.5 mph.
The government changed the name of speed cameras to safety cameras when they realised that the public weren't daft and we knew that they were just money making machines.
@@ashleym4887yes more regulation and control of people where it doesn’t exist
Just back from France after 11 weeks, very few cameras reason being the police do keep a presents on the roads, go over the limit in villages or town you get stopped.
We are now back in the uk, 9 cameras within one hour of driving, it's a money pit and not for safety. Also no potholes.
Its an open prison system
Wrong I spent a week in France and got seven lines sent home my home in UK... I didn't pay them
What "presents" do the police keep then?
FRANCE not France
Learn that COUNTRY NAMES - CORPORATE legal NAMES - The name of VESSSELS/SHIPS -
the CORPORATE fiction PERSON and CORPSES are always writen in the ALL CAPS iteration.
You were never taught corect grammatical legal English
You were taught Common Street English - which traditionally is the language of peasants.
And because people become offended when called Peasants - they are instead called
City-zens - they like that much better. It's a very clever work-around of terminology.
Learn to pay attention to detail.
Make sure the brain sees exactly what the eyes are looking at.
For the people who were programmed to be ZOMBIES -
Their eyes see one thing - and the brain sees something entirely different.
@@andrew_koala2974 corect? try correct.
The debt-based monetary system has always been unlawful and should be scrapped.
@@JohnofthefamilySmith yes your right especially when you look into things like the bills of exchange act and etc
It's going to be replaced with cbdc and digital ID. then fines will come out automatically.
@@willtaylor6112 You may get your wish before you think the next monetary system is ready and waiting , I'm sure it will be much better ..For someone ?
@@justalitttleun oh 100% they get more and more control while keeping us more divided
@@justalitttleunthat's why you need to start setting up common law assemblies!
Yes. Do not complete the form! I’ll explain. Years ago, I lost my license for 6 months for an accumulation of points. I studied the ‘legislation’ after this event as i believe it is a business primarily and the revenue is massive. I state here that I am not a reckless driver, only ever been given points for @ 8mph over the limit. Anyone driving excessively over the limit in a dangerous manner deserves to have their license suspended. When a letter is sent out to the registered keeper of a vehicle requesting driver details, it is sent automatically by a computer generated system. The form is designed so that the ‘driver’ incriminates and sentences themselves by giving details and then signs it. All the police need do is pass sentence by way of points and a fine. The form you sign is a contract of admission, guilt and an agreement to be sentenced. One cannot be forced to do this. One will be threatened that failure to complete the form ‘may’, I repeat, ‘may’ result in a £1,000 fine and/or imprisonment. Scare tactics from a form sent by a computer. If one chooses to not complete the form, usually three months will pass. By this time a reminder will be sent out (again by a computer), informing you that you ‘failed’ to complete the form. One did not fail, they chose not to complete it as one has the right to remain silent let alone commit to a contract that they object to. If one still does not complete the second reminder form, one will not hear any more regarding the offence. There is no third computerised response. It will be passed to the police for them to pursue after @ 2 months. That is now a total of 5 months after the offence. Here is the main point. After 6 months, without prosecution, the offence is null and void and CANNOT be pursued by any police force, court or establishment. The last remaining weeks are basically not worth pursuing or using resources to chase it knowing they will not get anywhere. This has been done on 4 occasions with not one prosecution, collection of points or fine.
Hi ashley4887, I had a speeding Ticket issued in my name back in July 2023 . My court case is September 2024 that’s well over 12 months but I still have to appear in court.where do you get your information from about the 6months .
Following as I have the same@@jeffbarrett1787
They usually just start proceedings right before the 6 months. After that they could see you in court a year later. Sadly they will catch up with you. They are good at fleecing us.
@@fukyutube2279 thank you, and your right they are good but we are better if we stand.
@@jeffbarrett1787 the info is straight from the police. Did you fill out the form and return it?
I got sent a form by the police fining me for not wearing a seat belt in a lorry. I was not the driver of lorryi was the otherside of the country and couldn't name the person who drovethe lorry as the firm had hundreds of drivers. In the end i said screw it take me to court. Turns out the picture evidnce was not me. It almost costs me thousands and it wasn't even me.
Unless you ate the registered keeper, who returned the original form naming you as the driver?
A similar thing happened to me years ago. I was told I was being done for crashing in to someone and driving off. I was at work at the time! It was 250miles away.
The letter stated unless I said I was the driver of a vehicle I do not own at a time I wasn't there, I would be prosecuted.
It took hours of speaking to stupid traffic officers, they even requested my local force look at my car.
Mine had a blown engine and had been parked for weeks. The back brakes were sized too. I was arranging to have it scrapped when my new one showed up.
Police lied stating they had a witness statement putting me as the driver and naming me. That's despite all the evidence and CCTV from work.
Then it changed to it might have been a similar car, then to a final admission that the person hit said 386 was in the number with a letter, so they sent the sane NIP to a few hundred people and lied to them all, hoping someone would own up!
why thousands?
a photo is NEVER you. A photo is just a likeness of you but it is not you. If the photo is you then the judge can ask the photo a question and expect an answer. Neither is the all-caps name on your ID documents you, it is a fictitious corporate entity created from your birth certificate.
@@redsed1565 probably including the court fees
@@redsed1565 Because driving court cases don't receive legal aid, and if you don't spend thousands on a solicitor, you will probably lose and incur costs from the opressors
Speeding cams keep getting sprayed in my area
Is amazing what an aerosol can of black paint can do under the cover of darkness! 😎 .
@@galaxion62 sure is bro 😎
@galaxion62 oh yeah so I've been told lol 😆 😂
WE SHOULD ALL INVEST!
Oh that's terrible don't do that..... I have several aerosol cans if anyone would like them 😅
One loop hole I managed to get away with a speeding ticket. Me and a friend was driving a long distance and we shared the driving on the way. The picture taken by the camera was not clear. At that point of the motorway neither of us knew who were driving. We told the police this and they tried to get me to take full responsibility for the ticket. Letters went back and forth until it all went quiet. 20 years down the line now and still no response from the police. In conclusion I beat the system because it was to hard for them to work out the correct driver on the day. I’ll definitely use that one again 😂
Always wear a Batman mask when driving.?
I've had this happen too , was a few year's ago and the camera used to take a picture of the back of the vehicle and my friend and I both looked the same from the back , both baldy heads.
They gave up after the second letter. We even admitted one of us was probably speeding , but we didn't know who was driving at the time and it was a private vehicle so no need to keep a book of who was driving. It was up to them to prove who was driving. If one of us admitted it not knowing who was driving it , it could've been a lie and taking points for someone else is an offence.
@@SOL_MAN. don't contract by not signing,they are screwed
Effectively signing the form is a signed confession. However, there is no law where a police force can force you to sign a confession, and we all have the legal right not to make a statement which makes us liable to criminal penalty.
The police will try to prosecute you for 'failing to furnish'. They will say that Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 means you have to tell them who the driver was. They send a letter from a civilian employee.
What Section 172 actually says is "The registered keeper of the vehicle has a duty to provide the identity of the driver when required to do so by a police officer". A civilian employee of a police force is not a police officer.
Feel free to use the above information as you wish.
robincook. By using the word OFFICER do you mean Constable.?.
Section 172 does not even say this. It is perfectly legal for a civilian to demand this information so long as they act on behalf of the relevant office. Robin, please never represent yourself in court.
@@stepbackandthink The forms are never signed by a police officer, and we still have the legal right not to incriminate ourselves, which filling in and signing the form does, and the police have no legal way to force us to sign a confession. It's also done under threat of criminal penalty, which is unlawful coercion and in direct contravention of the ruling given in the court case of Funke vs France in the European Court of Human Rights, on February 25th 1993.
@@robincook3367 A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. I think the conclusions you have drawn from this case are sadly totally incorrect
what if they say they saw you . Twice this has happened to me . 2 sgt the first time and 2 pc the second time . Both times they did not see me yet they made false statements, to feather their caps. Lol the 2 pc made a 2 page statement saying they saw me at the lights near the police station and run out and arrested me.
Lol I handed myself in that for 1 of their highway offences and I did not see either constable that day , and they definitely didn't run out of the station and arrest me at the traffic lights . Our whole system is corrupt. Their acts they force on us . I will not follow them .Any rule the crooks make up mean absolutely nothing
it used to be that cops in cars stopping you were acting to stop your behaviour, give you a bolloking and let you on your way or prosecute if it was bad enough, this constitutes a "DUTY OF CARE" on the police to keep you and the other road users safe, this was called back in the day ....POLICING ! now with camera vans and fixed cameras stopping no one there is no duty of care shown to keep the public and road users safe ! therefore it is nothing more than a secondary tax on drivers !
Spot on.👍👍
when i was a lot younger the above attitude would slow me down for a fair while but the just pay up system means i just pay up and carry on driving how i like . worked well for me so far . i even laughed when i booked my "speed awareness " lady on phone didn't understand as i thought it was funny how someone had convinced the law makers it was ok to buy your way out of trouble . oh and for the record it was one of those drop 10 mph past a junction on a otherwise 60 mph road a junction much like all the others id just passed on the road at 60 !
@andrewadam9544 don't speed and you won't get taxed, why is that so difficult to work out?
@@solihullman5230You never heard of lapses in concentration, no? You never found yourself driving at 35 in 30 completely unintentionally? If you say no, your pants are on fire.
@@WildMorgan You obviously didn't read my comment, or are trying, but you will fail to twist my words. So I will explain it to your little mind. I was talking about excess speed, not doing 35 in a 30 ffs. There is a world of difference, I hope you comprehend. Vobes is a complete p***k on this issue and would be the first to cry if his lovely Julie was smashed up by one of these lunatics.
The corruption is just getting out of hand now😮😮😢😢😢
The foreigners are in charge and are now exploiting the natives. Just time to say no and start deporting them all.
It's always been there,it is just being exposed more now thanks to the internet.
The government has got to go.
That was quick, we have only had this lot for 3 weeks.
@@matthorrocks6517 Peace. It is, 'those in government' who should be 'going' to additional educational classes for:
- Logic;
- Constitutional basis of society;
- Vocabulary enrichment, esprcially as to what 'legal' and 'lawful' truly mean, what corporations are ('department' is a legal term for fascist organizations!);
- Physical and mental developments of men and women as we age.
- And other enrichment courses as deemed appropo. Peace.
Thats long enough 😂@sisyphussapprentice8976
We need a Christian one, not an antichrist one.
@@sisyphussapprentice8976
We've had them all of our lives....
I remember few years back an advert in a motoring magazine asking for people who had received a ticket from a camera van operated by the council under a civil partnership to get in touch. They were wanting to challenge the legality as only the police are empowered to detect crime so evidence gathered by a civilian was inadmissible. It stated that so far every one they had appealed against had been dropped suggesting that they knew and didn’t want to let the cat out the bag and set a precedent.
I'm just waiting on a summons as I haven't provided any details. If they try and do me for failing to provide the information required, I am going to remind them that I have a lawful right to remain silent. That includes not giving written information.
It will be 6 points and a hefty fine. You must provide the requested information.
Someone already tried that, I believe they went to the ECHR and LOST, the court ruled something like ...that providing the information was an insignificant cost to the keeper and is none the less vital for the greater good of society to keep law and order.
@@grimlancedeathknell8506 Great point. Surely the ‘greater good’ cannot compel innocent folk to fill in forms.
@@grimlancedeathknell8506 the letter will go to the registered keeper and they are responsible to say who was driving, if they don't declare it was someone, that is sufficient proof it was them and they are the one who is held accountable. If you don't reply then you just get additionally charged with failure to provide information.
@@grrinc It does. If you are not happy with that then either don't drive a vehicle or drive within the law
Any actions we can take to destroy the British judicial system will be a good thing.
The power has always been in our hands, we just don't want to acknowledge it.
So, no one to send child abusers to prison?
Reported for terrorism
It is not a loophole because failing to sign is in itself an offence liable to £1000 fine.
@@StudentDad-mc3puthey usually don’t send them to prison do they, let them off with suspended sentences or less
@@marycoleman4301 No, that's not true. the vast majority of people convicted of sexual offences against a child recieve custodial sentences - and are often on the sex offender's register for life. But that still is irrelevant - we need a legal system to punish offenders and protect the public, the OP is just utter nonsense.
Time to take off plates....🚗🚓
@heyitsalanhere Insulation tape (black) is your best co-partner or cloned plates from the same model (it you get stopped) but if you are planning run (has risks) think about your plan first as the old bill when you put their backs against the wall showing their lack lustier enforcement - they pull out their A game & throw the book at you to see what sticks. As you see on the TV programmes .... oh look at our officers! A total mirrors & lies process from the top down.... look at the MET to see this!!
Our first right when dealing with Police and Legal matters is the right to NOT incriminate oneself is it not? Therefore signing ANY paperwork of this nature is admitting guilt and incriminating oneself?
No, you are obligated to respond.
Couldn’t your response be that you’ll exercise your lawful right to silence or state that you are unsure who was driving?
@@JasonRoberts-ec7pmlol is silence verbal or unwritten silence🤣
@@tayokarateI think he means Privilege against self-incrimination, which means you are not compelled to provide information or documents that might incriminate yourself in a future case.
If it was someone else driving providing information wouldn't be incriminating yourself, it would be incriminating them, ie providing information and assisting the police in their enquiry.
Refusing to provide information because to do so would incriminate yourself is an admission of guilt that you are the driver they seek (unless they have got it wrong)
If you go down the route of not providing evidence against yourself what do you think it says? Oh I know it was me so I'm gonna shut up. They'll pursue the case.
20-25 years ago I had an agreement with my mate, Miguel in Spain. Whereby he would be the person driving my car and me, his, if either of us had a speeding fine.
Never to this day have we paid a Penny.
hows that work bro?
@@redsed1565 I would guess as one lives in Spain & Other in UK ... Then neither of Laws apply or not worth chasing in Different Country
@@redsed1565 As Teddy says below, very hard to.pursue and enforce. Especially after Brexit. Between 1996-2004 I used to travel 3-4000 miles a month for my job. I used to regularly buy cheap cars from the auctions, preferably diesel (run them on "cherry"). I d register these in a "duff" name always a Muhammed Ahmed Housain sort of thing, at one of my 4 rental addresses. Even write up a Tenancy Agreement. Drive on cheap fuel (heating oil) no parking tickets or speed cameras.
I am now 63 live overseas never paid any tax of any sort in 30-40 years. Always Ltd Co. Bought and sold 6 properties never any taxes. £1,000,000s But it's getting much harder.
Unless they actually send the original request for details by signed recorded delivery then there is no way they can prove that you actually received the correspondence, so how can you comply unless you had the envelope in your hands? Royal mail mess up a lot these days.
@@redsed1565 The other good ploy is, as I have a Thai drivers license I use that to obtain an annex IDP which allows me to drive in the UK for 12 months. No.points no prizes. Do as I please
Letter writing skills seem to be a handy weapon to have in an unbalanced world, along with the armour of knowledge 💚💙💜
The pen 🖊️ is mightier than the sword 🗡️.
Knowledge is power 🤔
Agree.
But shouldn't have to be this way...
Personally I think speeding cameras and signing an NIP is entrapment...
Thats why its not taught at school
It's interesting that they insist we sign the form (as trustee) for it to be legally acceptable, but they never sign enything themselves...
That cuts both ways...
According to the Blackbelt Barrister you would be committing an offence not signing a S172 form. it could cost you a fine of £1000, 6 points or even a ban!
i got 2 last week for going through some village at 35 instead of 30 , so i've signed with V.C after see what happens.
they have new cameras now that are tiny , dont flash and can see whether you shaved this morning. , they can put them 80ft up on a pole so even though they have to be yellow you can't see that against the sky, and they dont have to have any signs even , gov site says they 'should ' have signage but its not mandatory . NOW they are making a lot of towns 20 mph near me , i used to love driving but not anymore
Know exactly how you feel. It's like a Jungle out there now with predators hiding all over the place. Even the innocent venture of going shopping is fraught with danger, spend too long or dare to return the same day then the PCN Vipers will get you.
@@murpheus299 i ignore those private car park fines , entirely, all they can do is send threatening letters , they are not going to spend £500 recovering £150.
What does the V.C. denote?
@@CosmicSeeker69 signed under duress.
Failure to comply with a s172 notice is an offence. Can't wait for the numptys to try and use this thinking it's a loophole. 6 points and £1000 coming their way.
Remember Richard this goes both ways..most of this legalease crap doesn’t get signed by them!!!!..
They nearly always get the 'benefit of the doubt'
Done this myself several times 20-30 yrs ago - receive NIP, complete questions and return form, unsigned. The enforcement authority will try to get you to sign it by returning it but as the Act only requires you to provide the info, you have complied. By signing it whether a form or a letter with the info, it becomes under PACE, evidence and thus can be relied upon in court. It should also be noted that not signing the form is effectively answering 'no comment when questioned' as you cannot be forced to incriminate yourself!
I know someone who has been doing this for about 20 years. He fills in the form and doesn't sign it. They send him another and request he signs it. He does this repeadedly untill the letters stop (They usually send about 3 before they give up)
But who's name do you put? Just random details?
@@Alex-if3sr Fill in all of the requested information honestly (it's an offence not to) There's only a couple of questions or 'tick boxes' For example they want to know who was driving the car at the time of the offense. just don't sign it. The document is invalid without a signature. My friend reckons the loophole is there so that the 'privileged' can exploit it. Which makes sense or they would have closed it.
Oh, my goodness. You nearly burned out my eyeballs out with that jumper. 😂 love it.
So similar to fines from parking. Filling out the form puts you into contract, so just don't fill out the form. Seems to work.
Thank you Richard big fan
3:55 So the fines get sent to the registered owners? Luckily we are only the registered keepers 😃
100%
Spot on!
yea so dont reply and u dont get sukked into a contract!
@redsed1565 we create the contract by their refusal to reply to our notice.
Repeat twice and then send a notice of default boom. Case file.
@@redsed1565conditional acceptance
Are you legally obliged to even open a letter?
exactly. what if it was lost in the mail?
If you remove your post box. You don't get any? Funny that. Most are bills or threats anyway. 😮
ah yes, the "burying your head in the sand" school of criminal defence.
Improper service is a rather effective defense around the world. @@yorkiemike
@@yorkiemike - It is not a criminal matter.
My brother received this form and he genuinely did not know who was driving as a few people drive his car. He was happy to accept If it was him driving and did not want to name himself and pervert the course of justice if it was not him driving.
He opted for a court date and requested the evidence. It went on for some time. He is a novice. I suggested to him to ask for the duty solicitor on the date of the hearing and explain the situation. He did this and his case was thrown out because it was out of time. Just something to be mindful of times.
Unless they actually send the original request for details by signed recorded delivery then there is no way they can prove that you actually received the correspondence, so how can you comply unless you had the envelope in your hands? Royal mail mess up a lot these days.
I wonder if signing it not only convicts yourself but also allows them to access your bond for the money ??
Your signature creates a statutory instrument like a promisory note. The same type as the notes we spend which say I promise to pay the bearer the sum of £5 etc. So it's as good as money, infact Lord Denning said its the same thing.
The signature creates joinder between the small caps you and your legal fiction the strawman ALL CAPS YOU.
I wonder if our favourite Bar Council belted barrister will be riding to the rescue to make sure we don't take this information seriously as we could end up losing everything we own and being cast away into some hell hole prison for daring to question "The Law" ?
The UA-cam man of the BARR and not a friend to the common man or woman. A wolf in sheeps clothing.
@@cloudbasenirvana Correct. I have been trying to impress that upon people since he first appeared on YT. Sadly it as, as always like talking to the wall most of the time.
Billy Big Balls is probably plummeted into existential crisis, cognitive dissonance if you will, by the prospect that he's on the wrong side of history, an oppressor, and has been deceived himself into believing a whole load of nonsense. 'Fiction yields to truth, where truth is, fiction of law does not exist.' - legal maxim.
Thank gowd someone else see's what a scammer he is! It's written all over his face!
@@CosmicSeeker69 The BAR system is the Scam & slav ery based law to harvest our wealth & should never apply to the people. If it's true the 3 stages are Corporate / Admiralty / Talmud Law then none apply to us.
Yes I love it, makes me want to test out the theory
Good luck with that, you're twenty one years too late.
That court case was 21 years ago in 2003 and as I understand it, this loophole has been subsequently closed, if you don't sign, you will get charged with failure to provide information
The Association of British drivers, changed its name in 2012, that was twelve years ago. Vobes is gaslighting his disciples again. Lol..
PILE of rubbish 😂
@@sebgierek1462 Good old Vobes, leading his devoted followers to the promised land.
I have always said this about speeding fines. If we plead it in court, it would kill the courts and there are many other things that would also do this. Tv licence foe starters, if we all refuse and go to court, think of how many the courts would have to stop all this.
And thats what we all need to do is with any fine or demand. We have to fight them.
The courts are FAKE
Our "traffic courts" have 7-800 people lined up during the day you go up plead guilty get your 317$ cost of court (they don't "fine" you anymore because that money is required to go to the school system) and leave with no other penalty (maybe safe drive course taught by police officers on overtime at the communtiy college)
The last time I didn't do it so I plead not guilty. I was informed of the maximum penalty up to 2000$ dollar penalty and 30 days in jail if found guilty... (It's pretty scary hearing that not gonna lie) they told me to wait at the back of the court, and they would deal with "other business" so I wait all day, everybody pleads guilty.
About 15 minutes until the court closes they have gone through the line and made over 180,000 bucks in one day for the county... the judge asks if anyone has anymore business before the court. I stand and go up, tell the DA my name again...
She gets my file: Mr James is here on littering charges your honor (I hit some trash in the road and the cop thought i threw it out thw window myself) the police officer has not shown up for court today (there was not a single cop for the entire 6-700 case they saw that showed up) I would motion for a continuance inorder to allow the officer to testify.
The judge looks at me and asks if I had anything to say?
Me: Yes your honor I object and I have a right to a speedy trial, I showed up in court today per the summons ready to face my charges and the state is not prepared. I have spent all day waiting in court lost a day of work, and wish to proceed immediately with the trial.
The judge smirked and dismissed the motion to continue. DA then moved to drop charges due to not enough evidence to present.
I have used this "traffic court" speedy trial defense twice since then when I have been caught speeding and it's worked both of those times as well.
@@davidbilich1708 that's the problem with everyone. They believe it's easier. And we know and you witnessed first hand. That's easy money for the county, town etc. if 800 people plead not guilty and no cops turn up. That's 800 not enough evidence. Even if cops do turn up, they may not have any evidence. I have never in my life pleaded guilty to anything I did. Ev n wh n I was guilty. I knew I could get it reduced by more than half and possibly beat a few of them. I beat 2 out of 2 speeding. Courts apologised both times. And one other time I was charged with no insurance etc. I pleaded not guilty and was offered a plea of £50 and no marks on my licence. I declined and the cop who allegedly stopped me, could not identify me lol. So that was scrapped when the solicitor said can you identify the defendant? No sorry I can't. And that was dismissed. Imagine 800 saying not guilty every court every day. They would not be able to handle this. And would eventually make deals etc.
You need to see the Black Belt Barrister's post regarding this very so called flaw.
Bbb is full of shit
Black belt SCAMMER
Vobes and his disciples are not interested in real life, they only believe in fantasy.
No Chance... Incriminated in the Indoctrination of Corruption means the System Won't Make Them Any MONEY !
I started doing a similar thing. No signature and I write across it," this is not an admission of guilt". I also ask for the exact place with changing speeds either side and ask if there were actually any workmen working at the time and for proof of? I am in total control of my car. And I decide what is and what is not safe. That's how we drive cars. If we were not responsible for this safety. We would be driving like maniacs! Same goes for uLez. My car has passed an emissions test. Therefore any legislation brought after is ignored. How do they keep the bad air out? Oh. They don't? Well then. Stupid laws. 😮
God Bless Richard Vobes! Love from America! !❤❤❤
Motorists are targetted in many ways & as often as possible!. Let's see how quickly gvmt amends the law to combat this loophole.
I used this loophole twice with 100% success but I thought they had amended this and could no longer be used?
I live just outside Whitford and, as with all cameras, they are positioned in an altogether snakiest of slimy spots.
They can use these digital detection devices to ‘catch’ someone driving a couple of mph over the limit but the laws around detection devices, for motorists, is fraught with danger.
And for those saying, ‘Well don’t speed, then.’, I say, try using that statement when you wander just over the limit in an unfamiliar area and get a ticket. 👍 😂
Well done for putting this out to people. Too many people pay up without question. No compliance!
I think you'll find the way that its enforced with the ticket when signed is you're consenting to be prosecuted.
Don’t physically sign anything..respond via email and provide all the information they require, even admitting to being the “driver” but without your “signed in wet ink” signature they are stuffed…I caught a clerk out who requested that I sign their form, I asked why and she committed to print that they can’t do Jack without my signature 😂😂😂😂 I took great pleasure in telling her that they had all of my information and I’d not be signing anything
@@dodgster1p958 I don't sign anything, I don't enter into any contracts with any police, government agents or even people acting on behalf of the government.
Pretty sure failing to complete the sec 172 is an offence in its own right.
Correct, max £1000 fine and six points
Thank you Richard and Carlos ...... will distribute and share widely 🙏🏽❤🙏🏽 Hope all is well with you 🙏🏽
WHEN YOU SIGN IT YOU ARE AFFIRMING THE CONTENTS ARE CORRECT/ YOU CONVICTED YOURSELF IF YOU FILL OUT THE DOCUMENT AND SIGN IT. THIS WOULD APPLY TO ANY FORM YOU FILL OUT AND SIGN. THIS IS ALSO WHY WHEN YOU DRAFT A NOTICE YOU MUST SIGN IT TO GIVE IT LEGAL STANDING.
thank you because i didn't spot the loophole - much appreciated
Yes but this non signing has been known about for some years..
Hence why they say it's an offence for not signing???
Writing 'Without Prejudice' on top should prevent them from using it too.
I'd also use only the beneficiary signature in dealing with authority: once accepted that consent to your status, and add v.c. for good measure as it's not stuff we want to do.
Seems, from the video, in UK you get a discount if you just shut up and pay up so the parasites obviously want to keep it away from courts.
All the more reason ...
Its a confession if you give driver's details, but has no effect if it is not signed, but its a loophole that is easily closed up, that's why the conditional acceptance method is more powerful, because it is backed up by section 172(4)
Pretty soon they will just take the money from our bank account after alerting us by text that will occur. Makes me wonder why
so much more money is needed from us above the Income tax, Nat ins., 20% VAT, Revenue on fuel, alcohol , tobacco and an average wait in A&E can be many, many hours.
to fund wars we're not a part of?
Also if you do fill in a form put V.C. in front of your signature
"Vi coactus" or "V.C." is used with a signature to indicate that the signer was under duress. The signer uses such marking to signal that the agreement was made under duress, and that it is their belief that it invalidates their signature.
And add bene. afterwards, as beneficiary of the NAME of the 'person'.
Beneficiarys don't pay.
ive just done that as i got 2 in one week (35 in a 30 again) Im waiting to see what comes back , funnily enough a few years ago i got a parking ticket and put vc on the form ...then a week later requested bodycam and they said it had already been cancelled.
@@NOT_SURE.. They try to contract, v.c. vitiates it :)
@@G-ra-ha-m i had to look it up, to destroy or impair the legal validity of, fingers crossed.
@@NOT_SURE.. Always write 'Without Prejudice' across the top too, that means it cannot be used against you.
They might need your signature to access your trust
Too bloody late just literally signed the form as got caught last week 😂😂😂
Don't feel too bad, this case is from 2003, and is no longer relevant, but Vobes doesn't want you to know that.
Over this last year I have been caught out 3 times by their new preferred method of calculating speed over distance via stationary cameras on lamp posts. There is a far higher chance of being caught this way as there won't be any speeding camera warning signs so you'll drive/ride naturally with the flow of the traffic and tickle over here and there - ALL doing no wrong or harm to anyone/anything I might add!
I didn't sign or admit to anything but have been fined 2 counts of £1014 with a 6 month ban + apparently 6 points already on the license when I apply for it back!!!!!
I'm currently at over 4 months of the ban served & less than a quarter of the huge fine paid off! So....they just drop the actual speeding offence as I never admitted to it and hammer you for not admitting to anything......it's a win win for them.
I wrote & explained to the court I suffer from manic depression and was medicated until being barred from my Doctors after telling them what I thought of them after receiving 14 text messages urging me to take the bio weapon!!!!! No reply from the court - just these huge fines!
Another element that boils my blood is that illegal immigrants can steal or cause criminal damage + no doubt cause trauma to the victims yet there is no incentive for the Police to act as I believe there is a value limit before they'll prosecute!!!!! Yet I got absolutely hammered & harmed no one!!!!!
This 'system' is just 1 massive money laundering sceme run by corporations purported to be government - it's a RACKET and until we stand up to it and change it we'll ALL just continue to be fleaced I'm afraid!!!! 🙄😣😔
You don't require a 'driver's license' to go from Point A to Point B in your 'private' property ON Public Roads
If you sign any so called gov't document, sign it 'without prejudice'. IF you go to 'court' DEMAND to confront your accuser which, doesn't exist...
So swap vehicles with friend and drive on without worries.
Then the Registered Keeper of your vehicle will still get done.
I have known this for several years. I'm not aware of any law that can force you to sign any document. Example, I was working for Royal Mail in logistics. After three years a bunch of forms was thrown down infront of me and told to sign them. When I asked what they were for, I was told it was to acknowledge that I had been trained in a multitude of health and safety concerning my work. I had never received any health and safety trying at all. When I said I would not sign them, I was told they would not offer me any more work unless I signed them. So I signed them. At the end of my normal signature, I added two letters, U D. The manager took no notice as he was happy that he seen me sign them. The UD stand for under duress. It makes the documents I signed worthless.
Are you sure Richard that this has happened recently? I can remember this happening years ago and thought the loophole was now shut down.
It's just more Vobes gaslighting, and the disciples as usual, lap it up.
The best and easiest way to beat a speeding ticket is . . .
Not to exceed the speed limit.
Wow. Who would have thought?
It is really that easy? Well. Yes.
It’s a novel idea, I know, but it actually works.
*Amazing video, you work for 40yrs to have $1M in your retirement, meanwhile some people are putting just $10K into trading from just few months ago and now they are multimillionaires*
Hello , I am very interested. As you know, there are tons of investments out there and without solid knowledge, I can't decide what is best. Can you explain further how you invest and earn?
Hello how do you make such monthly?? I'm a born Christian and sometimes I feel so down 🤦♀️of myself because of low finance but I still
believe in God
I'm favoured, $90K every week! I can now give back to the locals in my community and also support God's work and the church. God bless America,, all thanks to Ms Maria Frances 😊🎉
Good day all👍🏻 from Australia 🇦🇺. I have read a lot of posts that people are very happy with the financial guidance she is giving them ! What way can I get to her exactly ?
She's always active on Whats~App... 🎉
This is NOT a loophole. It's a separate offence not to complete the form correctly (by not signing it) and you could end up with a £1k fine and 6 points. Ignore this as a loophole.
Isn't there a high court ruling(I can't quote it though unfortunately, just remember reading it when studying) saying that's its against your human rights to be forced to sign something that you don't wish to sign.
@FallenAngel_23 If that was the case then surely the accused named in this video would have been charged with that offence as well as the speeding? As Richard explained, the form was completed correctly and as required, however it wasn't signed, which apparently you cannot be compelled to do.
@@theunknownentity1830 yes I agree, but! 'They' rely on people's ignorance....
As the drum they like to bang is...ignorance of the law is no excuse
If you don’t sign the form you are not complying with the requirements of section 172 and liable to prosecution. This is not a loophole it’s a way to end up costing you more!
Great comment, good work thank you
I’ve got a magistrates hearing because I sent a letter back from an alleged speeding offence stating I didn’t know who the driver was. I filmed posting the letter and the police didn’t receive it. They have now tried to accuse me for not helping them in their quest to find the driver but I have evidence of posting the letter. It’s now being heard with magistrates. Let’s hope they see the evidence of posting the letter and realise the police are in the wrong
I to have a court appearance in September I don’t fill out any of their forms ever, I always reply by letter and send registered post, I have fully complied with their legal system but still have a court hearing.
Funny how they've no proof of posting their letter to you, but insist you provide proof of posting to them
I went to court and got ,over 600 pound fine when I tried to fight it for speeding on the moto way in court that day a young lady got done for going through a red light for an ambulance she only pulled forward abit she was at a standstill traffic lights she thought appearing in person to explain would help guilty for her ,they are there for business always remember that first
@@boxingbill100 you are so so right, nothing to do with safety just revenue generating.
The Black Belt Barrister has explained what could happen if you don't sign the form, worth a watch it debunks this.
Vobes debunked ?. This could could cause rioting in Biggleswick.
But the owner of the car is Dvla you're just the keeper so send the fine to them job done
The DVLA don't own your car..did you lease it from them?
What on earth are you talking about
I don't understand how just not signing that form will get you off the offence.
The form has been delivered to YOUR address, the vehicle is registered to YOU and YOU have indicated on the form that YOU were or weren't the driver, so if you indicate YOU were the driver, isn't the offence complete and prosecutable?
Speed Equipment in Vehicles and Speed Monitoring Equipment has to comply by construction and use to be used legally. So if Speed control equipment in a motor vehicle is correctly used it is impossible to get a speeding ticket.
Turns out that going to court and admitting you have failed to sign the document is the admission of a more serious offence ! So now you are not facing a speeding offence but a breach of section 172, the penalties for which are much worse than the original speeding ticket. So not actually a loophole but a slam dunk gotcha.
I've often wondered if the 'Spartacus' defence would work.If you get a ticket find 9 friends willing to go to court and each person says they were driving.Surely they can't give everyone a fine and 3 points.
Absolutely fantastic Channel and watching you for about 6 months 💯💯💯👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼🇨🇦👏🏼
This is no longer a loophole! It was finally closed in 2007 when Idris Francis lost his appeal to the ECHR. It definitely was a thing in the early 2000's though, and probably earlier than that.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Time to wake up 😂😂😂😂😂
After observing the presence or absence of mobile "safety" cameras I can state the follwing
1. Sunny day - Road safety is paramount.
2. Pouring with rain - safety not an issue.
3. Warm day - Road safety is paramount.
4. Freezing cold / snow / ice - safety is not an issue.
5. Going down a steep hill where you may drift 2mph over speed limit watching road not speedo- Road safety is paramount.
Ps i just set my cruise control now which ensures no issue. Even brakes for me going down hills!
Cameras cant be used as evidence. I mean, "I would like a trial by jury please, and I would like to cross examine the camera" He who makes the claim must prove it. So how can the camera prove it was you driving. Could look like you, car could even be very much like yours, but cloned. The camera cant prove either. They are relying on you accepting what they saying, no more, no less.
Whilst working in Sweden a friend was caught drink driving (he was actually reported by staff at a fuel station while filling up to go fishing early in the morning). However, soon the contract ended and he had to leave and travel to Germany. Fortunately a colleague also lived in Germany (who was banned in Germany for drink driving) and so they agreed to take turns driving. One legally in Sweden and after the ferry journey, the other drove legally in Germany
In Portugal safety in towns and villages is paramount not making money from fining speeding motorists. Each town and village have a traffic light control system Velocidade Controlada .The speed limit is 50 km per hour. Exceed this limit and the traffic light automatically turns to red and you must stop. Some villages have multiple velocidade control systems.The accident rate is reduced witout the need for fines.
That is brilliant. However, I think in most countries, the main thing is revenue by extortion and safety is more a selling point.
It's so good to see the power of our signature at work. Brilliant. Thank you Richard. I've done the unsigned, it works.
In Dumbmark (DK) the fine goes to the owner of the vehicle and must be paid no matter who drove it...!! They even seize people's vehicles and sell them at auctions no matter who the driver was...!! They made a new law a few years ago against socalled 'crazy driving' and have since then seized over 2,000 vehicles!! The worst case I've heard of was a Norwegian who picked up a Lamborghini in Germany and drove it back to Norway through Dumbmark at night time, was measured doing 228 km/h at night with no or very little traffic, lost his 400,000 euros Lambo!! I encourage everyone to stay out of Dumbmark which has very little to offer anyway... 🤮
Thank you for your legal advice not to take your legal advice. I am ready to use that advice in court. 😊
I didn't sign one. It went to court without me and give me 6 points instead of 3 and 500 fine instead of 100. This is not good advice in my opinion.
Vobes advice 😂😂😂😂
The court had no right in law to fine you because you have an absolute right in law to a fair trial before any fine is levied against you and you did not have that.
Regardless of what has been said here Section 172 requires the form to be correctly filled in which includes signing it, if that isn’t done correctly you have not fulfilled your obligations. This means that you can (and will) be prosecuted for not complying with Section 172 which carries a fine of up to £1,000. Rules are rules end of!
This is well known in Scotland as “going unsigned” !!!
I got caught by a camera. I filled in the form and purposefully didn't sign it. They sent me another and again, I filled it in and purposefully didn't sign it. The result of this was 6 points and a £1000 fine with an immediate attachment applied to my wages with zero warning nor explanation so he very careful before you try this.
Whole system is bent rigged to its DNA! First you activate a speed scamera or scamera van. Then they send you the FPN must be within 14 days. They completely ignore the RTOA 1988 see therein. Then they'll use S.172 of the RTA 1988 if alleged offenders fail to sign their demand. Failure to identify the driver. They'll tell you their pics are used to identify the offending vehicle not the driver. Penalty for that is 6 points for an administrative error. How in the hell can you receive the same punishment for the alleged former when you only get 6 points for no insurance? Tis insane then there's the actual offence per-se 2 mph over the designated limit in some cases talk about a nanny state. Road safety "yeah right" they're just little yellow money boxes. 6 points for been on or using a mobile. Whilst the cops patrolling do it but that's OK. As a nation a society its just totally lost in it!
I wonder what other situations this could apply to? 🤔
Anything that requires a signature...
Nothing new about this loophole,people were trying to use it 20 years ago.
I thought they had closed the loophole.
if you dont fill in your legal fiction in the boxes at the top of the form they can not fine you or take you to court because the boxes at the top is a contract when you fill the boxes in with your legal fiction that binds you to the contract
Yes, filling their form accepts their jurisdiction.
Writing 'Without Prejudice' at the top, and using the suffixes
bene. and v.c. after the signature will disarm it.
That converts the signature to a beneficiary signing under duress.
"Pete: Smith, bene. v.c."
if you don't sign the form to accept your guilt yes they find you not guilty but then ask you to identify who was driving the car and if you are unable to do so charge you with negligence in not knowing who was driving your car at the time as it is your legal requirement as the keeper to know who is in charge of your car at all times. a friend is going through this at the moment
Decades ago I decided to stop off in Hexham on my way back to Scotland and went to an old small hotel there. I recognised high up in the Scottish Courts system and wondered why they were there so decided to sort of spy on them and listen to what they were doing there. As I listened whilst they had a meeting in a room which had no doors and sat just outside listening and what they were doing was meeting their counterparts from down South and discussing how they could close the loophole which was a big thing at that time which was when you did not have to disclose who the driver was. I found it strange they would meet in Hexham which isn't exactly on a main route between Scotland and England.
It's an automated letter with fixed fine in scotkand you dnt need to sign it
Nice little jaunt for them, as expenses are met by taxpayers.
Point of fact Richard, we are not the Registered owners but the Registered keepers. Job done .
The car bolted the pen just like a horse 😂
@@experiment54 🤣
known about this for years, fill the form out send it, but don't sign it, they will send it back saying its not been signed, send it back unsigned, and state there is no legal requirement to sign the form!
God Bless that welshman ❤
Not necessarily! I completed a police form for speeding some years back, and signed it. However,
I also "Wrote" a note "On the form" stating: "Although I have completed and signed this form, I do not admit to doing anything wrong or illegal"
I never received a court summons, nor any fines or points.
That's a jumper and a half Richard.
It’s a complete load of rubbish, you can be fined for not signing the form
If you hop up and down three times on one leg, and use Vobes' magic words, they can't touch you.
Bullshit, it is against the law to fine you for any reason whatsoever before a fair trial in a court of law.
The only drawback is yby not signing the form you would be commiting a different offence with worse consequences. The black belt barrister is far more informative than this charlaton.
BBB is controlled opposition
Excellent - if things are not done according to the law then there is no case to answer. People SHOULD drive at the speed limit.
But the Vobes disciples don't drive, they only travel in their conveyance.
@@paulhillman400
Of course. Just bend over when the earnest entitled man from the Sturmabteilung tells you to.
When the government makes arbitrary abusive laws then perhaps it's time to have a little think?
As for sychophants and collaborators ... if the man from the Sturmabteilung doesn't mistake you for human and a patriot then you'll be okay ;-)
@@freeman6147 When Vobes dispenses advice about a case that is twenty one years old, and pretends that it happened last week (on Thursday), it's definitely time to have a think about what his agenda is.
@@freeman6147 How is controling people's speed arbitrary? This comment is just hyperbolic nonsense.
Acts and statues certainly do affect living men. Its how living men react to the said statutes.
No law in Scotland requiring the owner to identify the driver. Just a thought though, Isn't giving third party information without consent a breach of GDPR!
You would get yourself into more bother by not signing. It will be taken to court and you will receive more points and a bigger fine. Do not follow this advice.
I never sign any speeding ticket or similar and I always win in the end.
In the past they had to prove who was driving, so you could simply say it could have been me or may have been my wife. It was then up to them to prove who it was. They changed that so it was the registered keeper responsibility to own up or grass up otherwise you got fined double the speeding ticket. Ignoring it just gets you double the speeding ticket. Failing to provide details of driver.
wrong check black belt barrister on this topic (section 172)
Thank you Richard 💪
By not signing the form you are committing a more serious offence, if you don't believe me listen to Black Belt Barrister who just covered this.
He works for the system 😂
He is part of the judicial system that generates revenue from fines (taxes), and as such, he is expected to echo the legal framework he has been taught. This framework includes both legitimate and potentially questionable practices carried out under the guise of law. #ColourOfLaw
@@andriuxandriux4818 Thats ok then do it this way and find out who is right, if VC is right you get away with it, if BBB is right you pay twice as much as you would have done and have a more serious charge found against you.