Hither Green 'burglar' stabbing: Man, 78, arrested

The sort of my point was that those of a criminal bent seem to have a general disregard for any laws. Hence they ignore the simple ones ( MoT, Insurance etc...) and bring themselves to the attention of the police. It's bordering on arrogance.
I saw a couple leaving a building site on Friday, I dont think they were doing building repairs, their car a Ford Mondeo estate was heavily laden and dragging it tail and was driven at speed towards a well known encampment
their car was taxed tested and insured
well the registration number was
the reg no was a vauxhall agilia ie driven by old wrinkly peeps , not a 2 litre diesel monde estate
but they were both silver
They also have members of the travelling community who hire or lease out vehicles to other travellers
A good friend used to run the traffic stops using anpr and other data
the vans were often legal, but the drivers often had no licence
Billy Jeeves van by the way was not insured, although it had an MOT and Tax, this would stop the DVLA clampers
it also had a whole load of advisories on its last MOT
which it scraped through after failing earlier the same day

they also have a habit of borrowing parts from other vehicles to get them through the test ! ( they never bother to ask for the loan though)
I am told that this vehicle was on the fleet for some time, it certainly clocked a few miles in the last few years while its owner looked for work ?

Date tested24 November 2017
PASS
Mileage195,273 miles


Expiry date23 November 2018
Advisory notice item(s)
  • rear number plate deterioated
  • disc corroded worn pitted scored
  • rear spring tips corroded
  • o/s head light started to mist
What are advisories?
Date tested24 November 2017
FAIL
Mileage195,273 miles


Reason(s) for failure
  • Offside Rear position lamp(s) not working (1.1.A.3b)
Advisory notice item(s)
  • rear number plate deterioated
  • disc corroded worn pitted scored
  • rear spring tips corroded
  • o/s head light started to mist
What are failures and advisories?
Date tested14 May 2015
PASS
Mileage185,089 miles


Expiry date6 June 2016
Advisory notice item(s)
  • Rear registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (6.3.1d)

Date tested14 May 2015
FAIL
Mileage185,089 miles


Reason(s) for failure
  • Exhaust emits an excessive level of metered smoke for a turbo charged engine (7.4.B.3b)
  • Nearside Front position lamp(s) not working (1.1.A.3b)
  • Offside Rear Brake pipe excessively corroded (3.6.B.2c)
  • Brake load sensing valve seized (3.6.E.3)
Advisory notice item(s)
  • Rear registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (6.3.1d)
  • Offside Outer Front constant velocity joint gaiter deteriorated, but preventing the ingress of dirt (2.5.C.1a)
What are failures and advisories?
Date tested 12 May 2014
PASS
Mileage170,842 miles


Expiry date 6 June 2015
Advisory notice item(s)
  • Offside Headlamp deteriorated but light output not reduced (1.7.5a)
  • Offside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
  • Nearside Rear Shock absorber has a light misting of oil (2.7.3)
  • Rear registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (6.3.1d)
  • offside front tyre worn on inner edge

Date tested13 May 2013
PASS
Mileage157,559 miles


Expiry date 6 June 2014
Advisory notice item(s)
  • Rear registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (6.3.1d)
  • Nearside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
  • Nearside Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
  • offside headlight milky
  • rear exhaust box delaminated

Date tested 13 May 2013
FAIL
Mileage157,559 miles


Reason(s) for failure
  • Nearside Stop lamp not working (1.2.1b)
  • Offside Front Lower Anti-roll bar linkage has excessive play in a ball joint (2.4.G.2)
Advisory notice item(s)
  • Rear registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (6.3.1d)
  • Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1g)
  • Nearside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
  • Nearside Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
  • offside headlight milky
  • rear exhaust box delaminated

Date tested 18 May 2012
PASS
Mileage144,054 miles


Expiry date 6 June 2013
Advisory notice item(s)
  • Offside Front Anti-roll bar linkage has slight play in a pin/bush (2.4.G.2)
  • Rear registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (6.3.1d)
  • Nearside Rear Shock absorber has a slightly worn bush (2.7.4)
  • Offside Rear Shock absorber has a slightly worn bush (2.7.4)
  • offside headlight milky
  • offside and nearside front tyres worn on inner edge's

Date tested 17 May 2012
FAIL
Mileage144,053 miles


Reason(s) for failure
  • Fuel system component leaking (7.2.3)
Advisory notice item(s)
  • Offside Front Anti-roll bar linkage has slight play in a pin/bush (2.4.G.2)
  • Rear registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (6.3.1d)
  • Nearside Rear Shock absorber has a slightly worn bush (2.7.4)
  • Offside Rear Shock absorber has a slightly worn bush (2.7.4)
  • offside headlight milky
  • offside and nearside front tyres worn on inner edge's

Date tested 19 May 2011
PASS
Mileage130,770 miles


Expiry date6 June 2012
Advisory notice item(s)
  • Offside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
  • Child seat fitted not allowing full inspection of adult belt
What are advisories?
Date tested 19 May 2011
FAIL
Mileage130,769 miles


Reason(s) for failure
  • Nearside Front Anti-roll bar linkage has excessive play in a ball joint (2.4.G.2)
Advisory notice item(s)
  • Offside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
  • Child seat fitted not allowing full inspection of adult belt
What are failures and advisories?
Date tested 20 May 2010
PASS
Mileage117,461 miles


Expiry date 6 June 2011
Date tested 20 May 2010

FAIL
Mileage117,461 miles


Reason(s) for failure
  • Offside Front position lamp(s) not working (1.1.A.3b)
  • Nearside Headlamp aim too low (1.8)
  • Nearside Registration plate lamp not working (1.1.5c)
  • Offside Registration plate lamp not working (1.1.5c)
  • Nearside Front Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm (4.1.E.1)
Advisory notice item(s)
  • Exhaust has part of the system slightly deteriorated (7.1.1a)
What are failures and advisories?
Date tested28 May 2009
PASS
Mileage106,957 miles


Expiry date 6 June 2010
Advisory notice item(s)
  • Offside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
What are advisories?
Date tested 5 June 2008
PASS
Mileage96,719 miles


Expiry date 6 June 2009
Date tested 5 June 2008

FAIL
Mileage96,719 miles
MOT test number9822 5785 8185
Test locationunavailable until further notice

Reason(s) for failure
  • Offside Windscreen wiper does not clear the windscreen effectively (8.2.2)
  • Nearside Windscreen wiper does not clear the windscreen effectively (8.2.2)
What are failures?
Date tested 7 June 2007
PASS
Mileage83,202 miles


Expiry date 6 June 2008
Date tested 3 October 2006

PASS
Mileage73,796 miles


Expiry date12 October 2007
Date tested13 October 2005

PASS
Mileage61,789 miles


Expiry date12 October 2006
 
Reading this thread has drained me of any drop of fellow feeling I might once have had for the protagonists in this unpleasant little drama.

I suggest we should all let the appropriate authorities get on with their jobs, and the rest of us get a ******* life.
yes good idea
lets run away together, drink wine eat pasta and run naked through epping forest
 
I'm saying I don't think he's deliberately a wind up merchant.
He posts, people respond and he bickers.
Is it the newspapers telling people what the pikeys are going to do? I named the the Sun and the Mail. Colonial leaps on to the fact that other newspapers are running the story. (Because that's so much better that all of the press are making it up as they go along?) The first telegraph link states they got the story from the Sun. The spastics get upset because they can't find a single quote from the pikeys, they are just frothing at the mouth because of bullshit stories.
I also didn't post that getting likes and being popular on an anonymous site are important.
Some people bring it on themselves. I just enjoy pointing out that they are fuckwits.
 
Last edited:
Stacker, I'd like to have a bit of fun and play tops trumps with you.

How many likes per post have you got on this thread?

Use the figure you come to as a measure of the worth of your offerings.
Do you really think that @stacker1 gives a flying **** about the opinion of the button bashers? And to think that you have the temerity to call other posters 'thick'. You carry on crying to the Mods you utter failure.
 
Is it the newspapers telling people what the likes are going to do. I named the the sun and the mail. Colonial leaps on to the fact that other newspapers are running the story. (Because that's so much better that all of the press are making it up as they go along?) The first telegraph link states they got the story from the Sun. The spastics get upset because they can't find a single quote from the pikeys, they are just frothing at the mouth because of bullshit stories.
I also didn't post that getting likes and being popular on an anonymous site are important.
Some people bring it on themselves. I just enjoy pointing out that they are fuckwits.

You actually stated something to suggest that it was only the Sun and Mail that published the story.
When challenged you changed tack.
Then, when you understood (finally) your error, you started personal insults.

I understood the reference to "likes" was an indication that people were supporting an opinion (there's no "agree" button), not as an indication of popularity.

I do agree that some people "bring it on themselves" and are "fuckwits".
Is it correct you have restrictions on where you can post on this site?
 
You actually stated something to suggest that it was only the Sun and Mail that published the story.
When challenged you changed tack.
Then, when you understood (finally) your error, you started personal insults.

I understood the reference to "likes" was an indication that people were supporting an opinion (there's no "agree" button), not as an indication of popularity.

I do agree that some people "bring it on themselves" and are "fuckwits".
Is it correct you have restrictions on where you can post on this site?
No I said the Sun and mail are telling people the cost and the route, like the telegraph who repeated the story (but gave credit to the Sun) My point was that the pikeys have said nothing. But people are getting upset because the press are telling them to be upset.

The reference to likes is because some spastics on here will not post what they really think, but what they think will make them popular, bandwagon jumping bellends who crave acceptance on an anonymous website.

Nice dig about the restriction, I'm hurt. :-(
 
Last edited:
No I said the Sun and mail are telling people the cost and the route, like the told the telegraph who repeated the story (but gave credit to the Sun) My point was that the pikeys have said nothing. But people are getting upset because the press are telling them to be upset.

The reference to likes is because some spastics on here will not post what they really think, but what they think will make them popular, bandwagon jumping bellends who crave acceptance on an anonymous website.

Nice dig about the restriction, I'm hurt. :-(

What you said was was different from the point you say you were trying to make.
You were challenged on your statement, with supporting reference.
Now it's a "what I meant.." scenario.

Sometimes a good point doesn't need repeating, a simple "like" will suffice?
Perhaps an "agree" button could be introduced?

Sorry about the dig, uncalled for. Hope those flying pixels didn't cause too much pain.
Shows you have my attention though.
 
What you said was was different from the point you say you were trying to make.
You were challenged on your statement, with supporting reference.
Now it's a "what I meant.." scenario.

Sometimes a good point doesn't need repeating, a simple "like" will suffice?
Perhaps an "agree" button could be introduced?

Sorry about the dig, uncalled for. Hope those flying pixels didn't cause too much pain.
Shows you have my attention though.
I put up the post of the telegraph telling their readers the story is from the Sun.

I'm not bothered about Likes, the point was someone seems to think they were important on here. It would be quite easy for me to build up Likes, I'd just agree with whatever the mob are saying.

I've already reported you.
 
I put up the post of the telegraph telling their readers the story is from the Sun.

I'm not bothered about Likes, the point was someone seems to think they were important on here. It would be quite easy for me to build up Likes, I'd just agree with whatever the mob are saying.

I've already reported you.

Not bothered in the least stacker. That's nice.

You've already reported me? Wow! I'm REALLY concerned and worried.
If that's true, you surprise me.
Stacker the popular voice of the people, running to teacher? Can't see that; even you couldn't be such a chod.

Tell you what. I've had my fun. I'll let you have the last word, because I know you like that.
I'm off to CA, see you over there?
 
Not bothered in the least stacker. That's nice.

You've already reported me? Wow! I'm REALLY concerned and worried.
If that's true, you surprise me.
Stacker the popular voice of the people, running to teacher? Can't see that; even you couldn't be such a chod.

Tell you what. I've had my fun. I'll let you have the last word, because I know you like that.
I'm off to CA, see you over there?
Some penis has already tried to attract the attention of the Mods on this thread.


I will see you there using my other account, Damanbugs.
 
No I said the Sun and mail are telling people the cost and the route, like the telegraph who repeated the story (but gave credit to the Sun)
So the Telegraph published the story too, then...?
 
And 'stated' that information

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Is the ARRSE website "Stating" information or is it just copying the tabloids, you chimp.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top