It started with a report on the BBC News website that told us that:

“The Greater Manchester Police officer crashed the £33,000 VW Golf R on Wharfside Way, Old Trafford, at about 01:50 GMT on 15 December.

The driver was taken to hospital and treated for a back injury.

A Greater Manchester Police spokesman refused to reveal details of how the crash happened.

He said that “as a result of the incident, GMP is reviewing its policy on officers test driving cars”.

The officer, who has recovered from his injuries, is currently suspended from driving duties while an internal investigation takes place.”

The photo of the car shows just how much damage was done: not just a little bit of superficial damage as you might expect from a shunt on an urban road.

It'll polish out with a bit of T-Cut

Now Section 19 of the Road Safety Act 2006 amends Section 87 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 which grants police an exemption from speed limits when a vehicle is being used for police purposes. “Police purposes” is a pretty wide-ranging description but you do have to wonder what on earth this officer was doing at that time of the morning at the sort of speeds he must have been doing to cause that sort of damage whilst, apparently, testing the car for possible police use.

But the story gets better: apparently the driver was PC Paul Fletcher who was regularly seen on the TV programme “Car Wars” doing high speed chases.

PC Paul Fletcher on "Car Wars"

And GMP stated that no other vehicle was involved, despite emerging reports that in fact the whole thing was caught on camera by another high performance car out at the same time on the same piece of road when PC Fletcher – a trained driver, remember - lost control on a roundabout. Hmm. Racing each other, perhaps? That’s surely what the police would say if you or I were doing the same thing?

Greater Manchester Police are, supposedly, reviewing their policies in this regard but surely testing a vehicle would be better done on, say, the MIRA test facilities which are purpose-built for such testing?

Maybe next time I get a pull for speeding – at a significantly lower speed than that which would have led to a car being written off so badly as the Golf – I could just say I was testing its suitability? Ah wait: I don’t have the exemption they’ll be hiding behind whilst driving as dangerously as they do…

So I thought I’d ring them to find out the status. The website for the Lincoln DVLA local office says:

“For enquiries about vehicles: 0300 790 6802 (Textphone minicom users 0300 123 1279).

For enquiries about driving licences: 0300 790 6801 (Textphone minicom users 0300 123 1278).

Please note, all calls are handled initially by our call centre based in Swansea.”

Which would be fine, if DVLA Swansea actually answered their calls. The recorded message I got today says that due to high call demand they cannot answer my call and so it hung up the call.

So far, so good.

I have a couple of ride-outs coming up in a few weeks, so it’s time for me to apply for a tax disc to run from 1 April – I’ll do 6 months which will take me through my riding season from Kawasaki Day at the Ace Café London through to the ZRXOC Medbourne Meet in September.

Bearing in mind, you have to allow sufficient time for postage, etc. I thought I’d tax it today to run from 1 April.

No. You can’t do that. The stupid system will only accept my taxing the bike from 1 March, so the Government is insisting I pay tax for the last 24 days, plus however long it would take for the tax disc to arrive after they process the application tomorrow. Let’s see … yes, it would probably arrive around the 1 April and I’d have been unable to use the bike for the first month of the six I’d have paid for, plus I wouldn’t be legal if I wanted to do the September meet.

Absolutely useless!

Of course this is operated by the same people who tried to claim that the latest Budget was all for environmentally friendly vehicles … whilst upping the tax for bikes. Bikes that are perfect for single ‘occupancy’ commutes. And those that do not cause congestion…

“Thank you for your e-mail regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice that was issued to your vehicle while it was parked in Torrington car park.

“I have examined the grounds for your appeal and must inform you that, as shown on the large sign adjacent to the Southeastern Trains (ST) ticket machine from which you purchased your ticket, and on every exit door in the car park, the private bays where your ticket is valid are only the red bays belonging to ST, on the 3rd and 4th floor levels of the car park. A ST parking ticket is not valid for parking in a white Local Authority bay.

“To clear up any confusion, may I explain that the signage covering ST red bays, and ST tickets, machines and maintenance are entirely the responsibility of Meteor, which is the company operating on behalf of ST. Tunbridge Wells Borough Council, beyond its contracted obligation to enforce the ST parking regulations in the car park, has absolutely no involvement with or authority over what are these private business matters. Any complaints or dissatisfaction with the signage or system of issuing ST day tickets for commuters should be made direct to Meteor Customer Services Section. Their telephone number is 0845.603 6197 (7 days).

“The Parking Attendant’s comprehensive notes show that your vehicle was displaying a ST ticket but was not parked in the correct private red bay area. It was instead parked in a white bay belonging to the Local Authority and was not displaying a valid pay-and-display ticket. I have therefore to inform you that the grounds for representation against the Penalty Charge Notice have not been established and your appeal is rejected. I am, however, able to accept the reduced rate of £30.00, provided that payment is received within fourteen days of the date of this letter. Cheques and Postal Orders should be made payable to Tunbridge Wells Borough Council and addressed to the Parking Information Centre. Alternatively, you can pay via our website, www.tunbridgewells.gov.uk, or by credit/debit card on our dedicated payment line 01892 554094, which is open 23½ hours a day, 7 days a week (except between 5pm and 5:30pm when the system is closed for essential processing).

“Should this Penalty not be paid within the given time-scale, a ‘Notice to Owner’ subsequently will be sent to the registered owner/keeper of the vehicle. The registered owner/keeper will be given 28 days from receipt of the Notice either to pay the full charge of £60.00 or make formal appeal in writing on the Notice, which the Council will be under a statutory obligation to consider. If the formal appeal is rejected, they will be sent the forms to allow them to appeal direct to the National Parking Adjudication Service, should they wish, for an independent ruling on the matter – which will be binding on all parties. There is no formal right of appeal to the adjudicators until the ‘Notice to Owner’ is issued and returned to us.”

So let’s just have a look at that, shall we?

“the Southeastern Trains (ST) ticket machine from which you purchased your ticket”

How does an unfortunate visitor to Tunbridge Wells know that this machine is supposedly a Southeastern Trains ticket machine, when all it says on it is “Parkeon” and (more particularly) “Central Parking System”?

Or:

“the large sign adjacent to the Southeastern Trains (ST) ticket machine”

That would be the large sign that says that railway day tickets can only be purchased from the South Eastern Trains entrance. We used the entrance to the car park and not to the station which was around the corner and down the road a way.

“To clear up any confusion, may I explain that the signage covering ST red bays, and ST tickets, machines and maintenance are entirely the responsibility of Meteor, which is the company operating on behalf of ST. Tunbridge Wells Borough Council, beyond its contracted obligation to enforce the ST parking regulations in the car park, has absolutely no involvement with or authority over what are these private business matters.”

Meteor, eh? And who are they? Are they saying that Meteor are Parkeon or Central Parking System? Who knows?

And whose car park is it anyway? Are Tunbridge Wells Borough Council saying that they don’t own or operate the car park but are simply a private contractor like those clamping cowboys? They certainly seem to come across like the cowboy clampers. They also seem to be ignoring their County Council’s ticket cancellation policy – no suprise there.

“Alternatively, you can pay via our website, www.tunbridgewells.gov.uk“

Well I tried that, but after I’d finally found a link to the payment section it refused to allow me to make payment as it didn’t recognise the parking ticket number…

“or by credit/debit card on our dedicated payment line 01892 554094″

That’s what I had to do but having carefully entered “6000″ for the payment amount the first time, the automated system thought I had entered 60p and it took two attempts for their system to recognise my debit card number.

So their payment systems are as useful as their parking facilities, then.

So congratulations, Tunbridge Wells. We will never again stay in or near Tunbridge Wells, not will we ever visit Tunbridge Wells, nor will we ever buy anything from anyone in Tunbridge Wells.

Or more succinctly, fuck you Tunbridge Wells!

Yes, you did right that correctly.

You couldn’t make this up!

What are the chances of this hypocrite being banned?

Of course, he’s no stranger to the Courts, having been caught speeding by speed camera twice before. And he’s also been taken to court on behalf of his own force for failing to inform the Courts of the identity of one of his speeding officers. But then again, one of his own was acquitted of speeding to collect a takeaway, though Hughes did subsequently remove him from traffic duties, with a spokesman saying:

“Such reprimands are normally dealt with by an officer of the rank of superintendent, but the Chief Constable wanted PC Akrill to understand how his conduct had directly led to a lowering in public confidence in the police.”

I see. I wonder how Hughes will deal with himself, then, as surely by being such an obvious hypocrite, public confidence in the police is further lowered by his shining example. After all, didn’t he himself once say:

“Driving is a privilege – not a right…”

Well I’d just like the RAC to know that I will never buy any of their goods or services as a result of this. If you hate spam, why not do likewise and boycott firms who use spammers.

[Update]

Well the RAC called me back a couple of times, but refused to get their Marketing Department – presumably the ones who paid for the spamming campaign and made arrangements with Colin Franklin to send it – to discuss it with me as they don’t deal with the public.

In view of that, a formal complaint has now been made to the Information Commissioner’s Office – see the link at the foot of this page.

Well guess what? When Jenna Bibby from DBS Datamarketing told me on 17 January 2007 that:

“I can confirm that your email address has now been permanently removed from our system”

she was lying to me, as Toyota GB spammed me two days later.

And no, there wasn’t an issue with the lists already being in the system for that one, because I received another spam from “Toyota (GB) PLC in Association with DBS [dbs-...@emailmovers.ec-messenger.com]” today about some crappy “Toyota Arse” or something.

Oh and I asked Jenna Bibby about this on 19 January 2007 and haven’t yet received a lie reply from her yet. I wonder why?

Well I recently (Wednesday 17th) received this e-mail from DBS data marketing (or are they DBS Datamarketing Limited – seems they can’t even decide on what their company name is):

“Thank you for your email. Your email address originates from  Business Flight Search (http://www.businessflightsearch.com/ ) with an opt in date of 09/12/03.

“I can confirm that your email address has now been permanently removed from our system.”

Never heard of them. Never used them. Never opted-in. A lie.

So when DBS data whatever say “permanently removed”, how long would you think that would mean? Permanently? Forever? No. Two days!

This time, it’s Toyota GB spamming me: “Your details were obtained from DBS Datamarketing Limited…” and they used spammer eCircle AG to send their shite to me.

Dingles Toyota (Norwich) whose name appears in the e-mail haven’t telephoned me back about this. I have also made a formal complaint to Toyota GB as by sending me this spam, they are in breach of the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 as enacted by Statutory Instrument 2003 No. 2426 – in other words, Toyota GB has broken the law and can be sued for damages by me and is liable to action by the Information Commissioner.