Nanny Knows Best

Nanny Knows Best
Dedicated to exposing, and resisting, the all pervasive nanny state that is corroding the way of life and the freedom of the people of Britain.

Monday, December 05, 2005

You're Nicked

You're NickedNanny takes her responsibilities with respect to enforcing her rules and regulations on her highways very seriously, as Oliver Smith found to his cost the other day.

Smith went out for a drive in Leyland Lancashire, in a car with no tax disc and a broken indicator; to compound matters further, he was driving on the pavement!

Quite rightly Nanny pounced on him, and one of her policeman friends gave Smith a right old lecture on road safety.

Oh, by the way, I should at this stage point out that Smith is only 22 months old; he was driving a battery powered toy car, that can travel up to the awesome speed of 2 mph.

Indeed, Smith, was driving under the supervision of his grandfather Derek.

Nanny lectured Mr Smith (senior) about road safety before warning him that, under Nanny's new laws, Smith (junior) could be charged for having no tax, insurance or MoT certificate.

After delivering the lecture, Nanny's policeman issued a verbal warning then drove off.

Needless to say the Smith family are more than a little peeved that Nanny has the time to lecture toddlers on the Road Traffic Act.

Even more galling is the fact that Nanny got it wrong.

Under the Road Traffic Act 1998, any mechanically-propelled vehicle has to be registered with the DVLA and have proper insurance, MoT and road tax.

However, electrically-propelled pedal cycles and vehicles such as Oliver's jeep and certain classes of mobility scooters are exempt.

Oliver's father Richard said:

"I am also amazed that the officer in question did not know the law

and neither did his boss at the main police station when I telephoned to clarify the matter

A spokesman for Lancashire Police said:

"I can confirm that a child's toy car that can only travel about 2-3mph does not come under the motor vehicle legislation."

Nuff said!


  1. Why not just threaten them with the Terrorism Act like they seem to do with everyone else these days!!!

  2. Amazing. Simply amazing (or not).

    I guess I should be glad in this case that I'm on the other side of the Atlantic; otherwise my three-year-old grandson's Christmas present (the same type of battery-operated car that little Oliver was driving) would be going back to WalMart, pronto.

    What toddler (or his parents/grandparents) need the headache of further encounters like this one? It's frightening enough already that they're surrounded by zoological stupidity for at least twelve hours of each day during their formative years.

  3. Anonymous3:37 PM

    Another typical example of Nanny's obsession with triviality, whilst ignoring the big picture. If the police really want to make our streets safe for kids to play in (as they were in my childhood) I could suggest some far more appropriate subjects for their attention.

    The officer concerned was wrong on a further detail: whatever the other requirements of road traffic legislation, electric vehicles are exempt from road tax.

    For what it's worth, electric bicycles are covered by EU legislation:
    Max speed on the flat without rider assistance: approx 14mph.
    Max motor power: 250W
    Minimum age for riding: 14 years
    Compulsory insurance: No (although I have public liability insurance).
    Licence: No
    Helmet: No (although cycle helmet advised).
    Lighting and other "Construction and Use" requirements: As a for a conventional bicycle.

    I presume the 14mph came about as that's the average speed of a reasonably fit rider on the flat.

    Electric bikes or scooters that don't carry a CE mark can't be legally ridden on public roads. Machines with motor powers higher than 250W are capable of 30mph or more and classed as 50cc mopeds, although still exempt from road tax.


  4. Anonymous3:40 PM

    i sympathise , but there are so many morons driving everything from motor driven scooters to minature motorcycles , not to mention the hordes of cyclists who seem to have no idea that cycling on the pavement is illegal ,all bearing down on the defenceless pedestrian, who these days is not allowed to walk in peace and safety.

  5. Anonymous4:06 PM

    I too am a "defenceless pedestrian" (I don't drive) and find cars far more of a threat. And what about the hordes of selfish four-wheeled morons who park on pavements - also illegal, but not enforced? Anyway, in many areas (mine included) footpaths are designated dual-use: for cyclists as well as pedestrians. Another major hazard is the hordes of Vicky Pollard clones using their multi-kid Sports Utility Buggies as battering rams.


  6. Anonymous5:06 PM

    Pete; I believe the 14 mph came from the original regs which limited the max speed of a milk float. The lower minimum age comes from there too. It was intended to allow youngsters earning by working milk rounds to carry on doing so.

    And you missed out my pet peeve; people who park on the road or pavement but leave their drive empty.

  7. Anonymous6:16 PM

    "And you missed out my pet peeve; people who park on the road or pavement but leave their drive empty."

    Amen to that - they are doubly moronic, and well deserve a stiff parking penalty!! Serves to illustrate the contempt that UK motorists have for two-legged as well as two-wheeled road users. Thanks for the other info - filed for future reference. I think the EU speed limit is 20kph, which is actually 12mph - the UK limit was 14.

    By the way, don't forget that if a cyclist hits a ped, it's the cyclist who will probably come off worse, as he will usually hit his head in the fall. Despite what the safety nazis claim, cycle helmets give very little protection. Even a motorcycle helmet is generally only effective up to 30mph. When riding on our dual-use pavements, I always give way to peds - that's actually the rule.