My understanding has always been that the postcode was just a way of advertising for the motor trader not a legal requirement, the post code has never been raised by the police when stoped by them and I see no relevance to it being on a number plate as when the police check the registered details of the bike they know who owns it? So bit baffled by that,
Well I hope you get away with it, but you're on thin ice the Gov leaflet INF104 states the requirements for British Standard of plates must carry : The British Standard number (currently BS AU 145d) The name, trademark or other way of identifying the manufacturer or supplier The name and postcode of the supplying outlet So the fact that it does not say this again under the motorcycle section is rather subjective as to whether it applies. We know it applies to all number plates but the Gov document is not very well worded.
That's the problem if they had said "additional rules for Bikes and Tricycles" it would apply but separate denotes a different set of rules. The fact that most people know cannot be used as a point of law. I suspect it will be re written to reflect this but I have been told by a barrister it is highly unlikely the CPS will pursue a case with the current wording on the Gov site. Producing the rules for Bikes without the wording about manufacturing, PC and BS will be enough to have the case dismissed. They cannot refer to a document that in their own wording does not pertain to Bikes and Tricycles by using the word separate. As I said they have already had 5 weeks to think about this and I have heard nothing. Lets see.
If you want to check compliance for yourself, then here is the actual piece of legislation http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2001/561/pdfs/uksi_20010561_en.pdf As to why the Police are keen to stop bikes on small plates, then this is the part that applies where the regs state (2) A registration plate must not be treated in any other way which renders the characters of the registration mark less easily distinguishable to the eye or which would prevent or impair the making of a true photographic image of the plate through the medium of camera and film or any other device. The reason for this is that in the event of a non stop crash (and bikes can also be guilty) the small plates make it more difficult to identify them, and in fact I myself was a pedestrian when I got hit by a Kawasaki GPZ900R, busted 6 ribs and the rider legged it because he was dunk. He had a small plate and I could not read the number. Fortunately he left other evidence at the scene which incriminated himself, but mine was not the first and I won't have been the last. The other reason of course is being able to be read by the cameras, and we go back to attemting to pervert the course of justice, so as someone has already said, might be better riding without a plate but risk having your bike seized or impounded pending potential stolen vehicle checks. Black and white plates are legal on vehicles registered pre September 1975, but I have seen quite a few 15, 16 and even some 17 plate bikes on white on black plates who are leaving themselves wide open, especially as camera's cannot read the old fashioned white on black plates. The number is unreadable, but same issue applies.
Had a letter today from police in Camarthen saying they are still looking at it the case and if I have already paid the fine it will be refunded until the case is resolved. My plate is 7 x 5 1/2, 2 inch letters and numbers (5) as stated the incident was April 4th.
What does this bit mean ^ Does it mean that it's "better" to ride with no numberplate than riding with a small plate (with smaller and hence custom font)?
In respect of the fact that you cannot be convicted of a criminal offence, only a minor traffic offence, but .....you leave yourself open to having your bike seized and impounded whilst it is given a forensic strip down to ensure it is not stolen (or using stolen parts) and you get the recovery and release bill which is not cheap.
