This is for Priti Patel's credibility before the right wing of the Tory party & the Daily Mail, Sun & Express. There is no justification for it in reality & it contravenes the 2010 Equality Act, the European Declaration of Human Rights & the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Probably the 1998 Human Rights Act too.
Yes it's only for gypsies, travellers or vanlifers who are camped on private land far beyond their sell-by date. People cause their own problems by being noisy and leaving rubbish and dog shit all over the place, or blocking access. To be honest, the new legislation has made zero difference to anyone who lives or sleeps in their vehicle, and as long as you remain in 'stealth' mode and respect the environment you'll never have a problem.
Great video, it was much appreciated. There is always a certain section of people who seem to take great pleasure in doom mongering, rather that getting the facts or using a bit of common sense.
Thankyou for your information I also believe that this is for travellers.Just be considerate in where you park and " Leave nothing but footprints, and take nothing but photographs" It all is about respect.
This law was brought in primarily to tackle travelers who move onto private land. Before this law to get them off the land required an eviction notice from a court costing the land owner time and money. It was and isn't intended to be used against responsible wildcampers
We just got back from 2 weeks on the nc500 inc skye, lindisfarne and ullswater. we were made very welcome. Lots of pull ins with bins provided, car parks allowing overnight stays etc. There was no rubbish left anywhere. We used campsites through choice. Good stuff. Let’s keep it up 👍🏻
Iv said on many posts regarding this and that is..You can park where you want just as long as its NOT private land or there are no parking restrictions, as long as YOU, your VAN and where you PARK are perfectly legal then it will be fine.. Some ppl should read more than just the headlines
I totally agree with the new laws. Unfortunately there are a few campervaners ( is that a word) that give courteous and respectful campervaners a bad name
From personal experience i think this law is more designed for the travellers who turn up on a piece of land, be it a private field or the side of the road with lots of caravans, cars, vans trucks etc and cover the place in rubbish, and leave, not the lone van or camper etc. I saw it happen often, years ago all over my home town (milton keynes) and think this is law is there to make it easier to remove them quicker. Haven't read the rules, just going on what I've heard. I think the press is scaremongering as per usual.
Have you seen traveler sites where people are left alone without continual interference from authorities? I grant that they are extremely rare so you probably haven't but let me assure you that most are very clean & tidy.
Well near where I live there are motorhome parking spaces that have signs saying no overnight parking which people totally ignore and some go there every night,totally taking the piss
@@alanhat5252 well seeing as I don’t have a motor home I wouldn’t know if there are alternatives but there’s an app for that,and whether there is an alternative isn’t the point,the point is,piss takers park there every night when they shouldn’t
Useful video but unfortunately given the comments I've seen it unlikely to reassure the type who always think the government or authorities are up to no good.
@@Quickblood1 well seeing as you are no doubt completely trusting of every single thing that you are told by the powers that be and will blindly follow them off a cliff, good luck 👍
@@Quickblood1 conspiracy nutters are just that, nutters but believing blindly everything you are told could also be considered in the same light. Good luck following the herd.
so how does this work along side the following: "vehicles that have been modified from the original factory specs could if the police opinion invalidate vehicle insurance" and any other cash cow reasons the police want to fine just to make their quotas
I'm not sure that is relevant to this legislation. However it is something to be aware of - most (if not all) insurance policies put an obligation on the owner to declare any modifications to the vehicle when taking out the policy - if this is not done then the policy is likely to be invalid and therefore you would be liable to prosecution for not having valid insurance. That isn't new and its simply a case of declaring any modifications to your insurance company, to ensure you have valid insurance.
@@ExploreVanUK it's not new but it is & always has been an affront to civil liberties. If you were to modify your vehicle such that it no longer complied with the law that might possibly be understandable but given that the purpose of insurance is to compensate others for harms which you cause this seems contradictory.
Insurance pricing and policy validity is based on risk calculated from information on the driver(s) and the vehicle. It wouldn't be feasible for insurance companies to individually assess every individual person and vehicle so risk models are used based on all the information that the policyholder provides on the drivers and vehicle. Modifications made are a piece of information that helps to categorise the risk. Companies may choose not to insure or price accordingly to how they categorise the risk. Some companies / underwriters will choose not to insure any vehicle that has been modified, others will allow certain specific modifications and others will allow more specialist modifications based on their appetite to risk and their historic data on claims. Personally, I don't see it as an affront to civil liberties - it is simply data that allows the company to set its terms for protecting you in the circumstance of a claim, be it third party, fire, theft or fully comp. When you provide the information they decided if they are willing to protect you and at what cost, you can then decide to accept it or not. If you fail to declare the information asked for understandably the company can choose to withdraw the policy.
If you are correct it directly contravenes the 2010 Equality Act, the European & Universal Declarations of Human Rights & probably the Human Rights Act. I think perhaps you might consider revising your opinion.
Good, simple video. However, I'm unclear if you are quoting from and referring to the Act/Legislation OR the 'Guidance' issued by the 'sponsoring' Government department (i.e. the Ministry of Justice)??? Whilst what you have said makes sense and I'm sure it will be the manner that 'most' Authorities* will apply the 'rules' (*Police and LA), if it is the latter, it is open to interpretation of the individual 'Authority'. This is because "Guidance" is NOT LAW/Legislation - it's a statement made by the 'responsible/'sponsoring'' Government department explaining how they 'expect' the law to be interpreted and implemented. This is the case with any legislation and accompanying 'Guidance'. It is possible/probable that should different interpretations be made by different Authorities which result in a disparity of penalties for the same/similar offence, it will ultimately be decided/interpreted by case law precedents.
Hi Elizabeth, glad you liked the video, the quotes are from a number of Government sources - The Act itself, the Home Office Policy Paper, the Home Office response to the petition to amend the bill and the Home Office Statutory Guidance to Police on enforcement. As with any legislation, particularly that which is new, how it is interpreted when it comes to enforcement is only going to be fully clear once precedence is set in court. The object of the video was to share my personal opinion, that I struggle to see any interpretation of the Bill that could have any significant impact on the average Campervan or Motorhome user and certainly not to the level of the sensationalised tabloid headlines. However, I am always open to other opinions, so if you do think there is something that could realistically be interpreted in a way that could justify the headlines do feel free to draw attention to it.
@@ExploreVanUK I agree with you about some of the scare mongering on social media etc - I thought the same as you with some things I've read. I have downloaded the Bill but I haven't been able to find a pdf of the Act yet - do you have a link?
@@ExploreVanUK ... Pressed the wrong button ... Alhtough I used to have a motorhome (so I was/am familiar with some of the restrictions about where you can/can't park for the night), I don't currently have one but I have been thinking of trying 'micro-camping' in my car - this seems quite a trend at present and I like the idea of the challenge. For people sleeping in cars, I can envisage a scenario where the new legislation might impact. e.g. Hypothetical situation, a car, not an MPV which has removeable seats as per the manufacturers spec ... police knock on the window for whatever reason and then see that the rear seats have been removed to make space for a bed ... they then question if the modification is covered by the driver's insurance ... Answer??? NO ... response ... you are (or may be) driving without valid insurance ... result??? Possibly points on your licence and a fine. Prior to the Act, the police may not have been alerted to the parked car ... now ... Mr Plod Policeman wants to show that (s)he is up to date with new legislation and has an excuse to knock on the window etc. etc. Just a thought.
As I understand it the Bill as amended is what becomes the Act on Royal Assent. The final amendments to the bill were released on 25th April and given Royal assent on 28th are here, so in conjunction with the Bill that would form the Act. bills.parliament.uk/publications/46242/documents/1746
Come from “gypo” stock, and we were always taught to leave no trace of our having pitched up somewhere. The only thing I’ve taken is a couple of rabbits for the pot and some mushrooms 🤷♀️ Don’t tar us all with the same brush!
This is in affect an anti Traveler community ban and is absolutely disgusting! But it will not effect us lot. I do hope you all know now to never vote for the Tories after this if you didn't know already.
Key word in the act is "PERSON". Unless you are acting in a commercial capacity this does not apply to you. Know your rights. Know the law. Know what PERSON means in legalese.
I’m not sure that is correct, can you clarify at all? The definition of a “person” can be a legal entity rather than an individual but I don’t believe the definition excludes anyone that is not acting on a commercial basis, it just covers both “people” and “entities”.
@@ExploreVanUKacts and statutes can only be applied to the person. Not the living human, only the legal entity. It's why the police always ask for ID because your all caps name with the MR/Miss title is the person the police can charge, not you as a human in your private capacity unless a crime has been committed. It's one huge trick the majority of the country doesn't understand. The police need us to represent (re-present) ourselves as the legal entity. By handing ID you consent to representing the legal entity and can be charged. It's why we should never give ID unless a real crime has been committed such as causing injury, loss or harm. I don't even carry ID unless I'm working in a commercial capacity, only because I don't represent my legal entity outside of work so there's no need to carry it anywhere and risk creating bindership when I don't want to. It's a lot to take in I hope it clicks👍🏽 Edit-also note that what you are reading is legalese in acts and statutes so the word PERSON has to be considered in its legal definition
👍 Thanks for sharing, personally I’m not convinced, as I would expect it to be far more common knowledge and been demonstrated as effective if it were the case, but happy to leave it here if anyone wants to comment further or take the advice.
@@ExploreVanUK yes it does work (& has worked in Court), *but* unless you are very experienced in the law the chances of tripping yourself up are huge & because you're saying you're not a 'person' you can't engage the services of a lawyer. Websearch 'freeman' for details.
Six and a half minutes of pure *wishful thinking!* You state yourself more than once in this video you have _NO_ experience of the behaviours of the Police. They can be *extremely* vindictive or callous when the mood takes them & they operate with a near-certainty of absolute impunity. I shall be taking the opinion of people who _have_ had dealings with the Police before I give any credence whatsoever to your declared __inexpert__ opinion. *Please act with more responsibility in future.*
Thanks for taking the time to comment, sorry you didn't find it useful. I actively encourage sharing of opinions so do feel free to give more info around your experience and how you feel the Police may react differently to the average Motorhomer / Campervan user due to this new law. Cheers Mike
@@ExploreVanUK We have always had large numbers of people on the move in this country, the Victorians distinguished them into 'migrant', 'itinerant', 'journeyman', 'peripatetic' or several other categories dependent mostly on class but the history goes back to the very earliest days of human habitation here. The first people walked here while we were still physically connected to the continent. Probably the first group since we were separated from the continent who arrived without any intention to settle were the Roma who arrived in the early 16th Century & slotted into society by establishing annual migratory routes & providing unusual services like repairing cookware or making elaborate cloth items. The next group to arrive were the Irish who were suffering genocidal conditions at home because of our Government's policies but, at least for the first century or so, had every intention of returning home when that became possible. There have been wave after wave of internally displaced people, again often because of Government policy. And of course, because we are individuals, there are some who simply cannot settle.
@@ExploreVanUK ok, one direct experience of mine (I have others). I was living in my 'van in Cambridge & I'd been away a few days & was returning about 4am. I was on a broad straight avenue with wide verges doing 30mph when another vehicle joined me. Worried that it was extraordinarily close behind me I had a look to discern what class of vehicle, I saw beacons on the roof which appeared yellow so I assumed it was a recovery vehicle & knowing that they are exempt from MOTs (form V112 if you want to check) I assumed I couldn't rely on it having brakes so when the traffic lights changed & I could see that we were the only 2 moving vehicles with the following vehicle still no more than 2 feet behind I elected to run the lights. Obviously the roof beacons, when they came on, were blue & the yellow I had seen was reflected street lighting. Of course the policeman wouldn't accept my explanation & instead chose to arrest me & impound my vehicle. What happened next scared me but didn't surprise me. I was taken from there to the east end of London & the Ford Fiesta we were traveling in only dropped below 100mph when we left the M11. My pockets were emptied as the Police do & the contents bagged & sealed. They kept me there for several meals, I couldn't tell you what that means in days because there was no window & nobody spoke to me. Meals appear in the hatch in the door, if you aren't quick enough they disappear again. Then they put me out on the street in the small hours of the morning with the name of the police station in the west end of London where my possessions had been sent, possessions which included my money. Fortunately I had a friend in London whose phone number I could remember & I placed a reverse-charge call from a phone box (I don't know that you can still do this) & he came & rescued me. Several hours later we discovered, by phoning all the police stations (you can't do this any more), which one _actually_ had my possessions (the police had lied). From there I was again rescued, this time by my parents who drove me back to Cambridge & stumped up the impound fees to get my van back. I still have no explanation for this & no charge was laid. On another occasion they took my vehicle 100 miles away & impounded it for 10 days on a charge which was dropped after the first solicitor's letter. When I got it back I discovered they had emptied my food into the bed. Fortunately the weather was hot & it dried out before too much went mouldy. I managed to rescue the mattress. I could go on...
Thanks for sharing, but I’m still not seeing anything that suggests how his new law makes this more likely to happen, considering that happened presumably before the law was in place? Can I also clarify that you judge yourself as an average recreational campervan / motorhomer (as you say you lived in your van) I did try to make it clear the video was based on how I felt the law would or wouldn’t impact us personally as recreational campervan users.
I believe this is for the travelers
This is for Priti Patel's credibility before the right wing of the Tory party & the Daily Mail, Sun & Express.
There is no justification for it in reality & it contravenes the 2010 Equality Act, the European Declaration of Human Rights & the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Probably the 1998 Human Rights Act too.
Yes it's only for gypsies, travellers or vanlifers who are camped on private land far beyond their sell-by date. People cause their own problems by being noisy and leaving rubbish and dog shit all over the place, or blocking access. To be honest, the new legislation has made zero difference to anyone who lives or sleeps in their vehicle, and as long as you remain in 'stealth' mode and respect the environment you'll never have a problem.
Great video, it was much appreciated. There is always a certain section of people who seem to take great pleasure in doom mongering, rather that getting the facts or using a bit of common sense.
I’m not wild camping officer I’m merely following the Highway Code and I felt tired and pulled over for a nap before continuing my journey 😜👍🏻
Excellent video. Nice to see someone looking past the hysteria and dealing with the matter sensibly. Good advice
Thankyou for your information I also believe that this is for travellers.Just be considerate in where you park and " Leave nothing but footprints, and take nothing but photographs" It all is about respect.
what, just like the vast majority of Travelers? Hmm...
This law was brought in primarily to tackle travelers who move onto private land. Before this law to get them off the land required an eviction notice from a court costing the land owner time and money. It was and isn't intended to be used against responsible wildcampers
We just got back from 2 weeks on the nc500 inc skye, lindisfarne and ullswater. we were made very welcome. Lots of pull ins with bins provided, car parks allowing overnight stays etc. There was no rubbish left anywhere. We used campsites through choice. Good stuff. Let’s keep it up 👍🏻
Iv said on many posts regarding this and that is..You can park where you want just as long as its NOT private land or there are no parking restrictions, as long as YOU, your VAN and where you PARK are perfectly legal then it will be fine.. Some ppl should read more than just the headlines
That was true till this Act got Royal Assent, we have yet to see how it gets interpreted.
I totally agree with the new laws. Unfortunately there are a few campervaners ( is that a word) that give courteous and respectful campervaners a bad name
you should apply for a job with the Daily Mail, this is the fruition of one of their campaigns.
From personal experience i think this law is more designed for the travellers who turn up on a piece of land, be it a private field or the side of the road with lots of caravans, cars, vans trucks etc and cover the place in rubbish, and leave, not the lone van or camper etc. I saw it happen often, years ago all over my home town (milton keynes) and think this is law is there to make it easier to remove them quicker.
Haven't read the rules, just going on what I've heard. I think the press is scaremongering as per usual.
👍 I would agree.
Have you seen traveler sites where people are left alone without continual interference from authorities? I grant that they are extremely rare so you probably haven't but let me assure you that most are very clean & tidy.
Well near where I live there are motorhome parking spaces that have signs saying no overnight parking which people totally ignore and some go there every night,totally taking the piss
Is there alternative provision? Are there directions to this supposed alternative? Is this supposed alternative adequate?
@@alanhat5252 well seeing as I don’t have a motor home I wouldn’t know if there are alternatives but there’s an app for that,and whether there is an alternative isn’t the point,the point is,piss takers park there every night when they shouldn’t
I can’t believe you posted this!!
It’s so informative
They’ll be many You Tubers left fuming as this may have scuppered their Doom & Gloom videos 😂😂😂
Thank you for this reassuring update....
Thanks for that.
Useful video but unfortunately given the comments I've seen it unlikely to reassure the type who always think the government or authorities are up to no good.
The government and authorities ARE always up to no good, regardless!!!!
@@karldingbat I'd love to say I'm surprised by this comment 😂
@@Quickblood1 well seeing as you are no doubt completely trusting of every single thing that you are told by the powers that be and will blindly follow them off a cliff, good luck 👍
@@karldingbat Ta I'm sure you'll no doubt do the same with the Conspiracy theory nutters so good luck to the both of us 👍
@@Quickblood1 conspiracy nutters are just that, nutters but believing blindly everything you are told could also be considered in the same light. Good luck following the herd.
very usefull and reassuring. thank you
Brilliant and very helpfull thank you
so how does this work along side the following: "vehicles that have been modified from the original factory specs could if the police opinion invalidate vehicle insurance" and any other cash cow reasons the police want to fine just to make their quotas
I'm not sure that is relevant to this legislation. However it is something to be aware of - most (if not all) insurance policies put an obligation on the owner to declare any modifications to the vehicle when taking out the policy - if this is not done then the policy is likely to be invalid and therefore you would be liable to prosecution for not having valid insurance. That isn't new and its simply a case of declaring any modifications to your insurance company, to ensure you have valid insurance.
@@ExploreVanUK it's not new but it is & always has been an affront to civil liberties.
If you were to modify your vehicle such that it no longer complied with the law that might possibly be understandable but given that the purpose of insurance is to compensate others for harms which you cause this seems contradictory.
Insurance pricing and policy validity is based on risk calculated from information on the driver(s) and the vehicle. It wouldn't be feasible for insurance companies to individually assess every individual person and vehicle so risk models are used based on all the information that the policyholder provides on the drivers and vehicle.
Modifications made are a piece of information that helps to categorise the risk. Companies may choose not to insure or price accordingly to how they categorise the risk. Some companies / underwriters will choose not to insure any vehicle that has been modified, others will allow certain specific modifications and others will allow more specialist modifications based on their appetite to risk and their historic data on claims.
Personally, I don't see it as an affront to civil liberties - it is simply data that allows the company to set its terms for protecting you in the circumstance of a claim, be it third party, fire, theft or fully comp. When you provide the information they decided if they are willing to protect you and at what cost, you can then decide to accept it or not. If you fail to declare the information asked for understandably the company can choose to withdraw the policy.
@@ExploreVanUK then your civil liberties will be (are being) cheaply eroded.
I think we’re going to have to agree to disagree, Safe Travels!
Wow great thank you!
This new law is aimed at TRAVELLERS not happy campers! It's so the police can now move them on without using the courts and bailiffs.
Pikeys you mean
If you are correct it directly contravenes the 2010 Equality Act, the European & Universal Declarations of Human Rights & probably the Human Rights Act.
I think perhaps you might consider revising your opinion.
Just because it is aimed at travellers won’t necessarily mean it won’t get used against campers by some over zealous copper.
Good, simple video. However, I'm unclear if you are quoting from and referring to the Act/Legislation OR the 'Guidance' issued by the 'sponsoring' Government department (i.e. the Ministry of Justice)??? Whilst what you have said makes sense and I'm sure it will be the manner that 'most' Authorities* will apply the 'rules' (*Police and LA), if it is the latter, it is open to interpretation of the individual 'Authority'. This is because "Guidance" is NOT LAW/Legislation - it's a statement made by the 'responsible/'sponsoring'' Government department explaining how they 'expect' the law to be interpreted and implemented. This is the case with any legislation and accompanying 'Guidance'. It is possible/probable that should different interpretations be made by different Authorities which result in a disparity of penalties for the same/similar offence, it will ultimately be decided/interpreted by case law precedents.
Hi Elizabeth, glad you liked the video, the quotes are from a number of Government sources - The Act itself, the Home Office Policy Paper, the Home Office response to the petition to amend the bill and the Home Office Statutory Guidance to Police on enforcement.
As with any legislation, particularly that which is new, how it is interpreted when it comes to enforcement is only going to be fully clear once precedence is set in court.
The object of the video was to share my personal opinion, that I struggle to see any interpretation of the Bill that could have any significant impact on the average Campervan or Motorhome user and certainly not to the level of the sensationalised tabloid headlines.
However, I am always open to other opinions, so if you do think there is something that could realistically be interpreted in a way that could justify the headlines do feel free to draw attention to it.
@@ExploreVanUK I agree with you about some of the scare mongering on social media etc - I thought the same as you with some things I've read. I have downloaded the Bill but I haven't been able to find a pdf of the Act yet - do you have a link?
@@ExploreVanUK ... Pressed the wrong button ... Alhtough I used to have a motorhome (so I was/am familiar with some of the restrictions about where you can/can't park for the night), I don't currently have one but I have been thinking of trying 'micro-camping' in my car - this seems quite a trend at present and I like the idea of the challenge. For people sleeping in cars, I can envisage a scenario where the new legislation might impact. e.g. Hypothetical situation, a car, not an MPV which has removeable seats as per the manufacturers spec ... police knock on the window for whatever reason and then see that the rear seats have been removed to make space for a bed ... they then question if the modification is covered by the driver's insurance ... Answer??? NO ... response ... you are (or may be) driving without valid insurance ... result??? Possibly points on your licence and a fine. Prior to the Act, the police may not have been alerted to the parked car ... now ... Mr Plod Policeman wants to show that (s)he is up to date with new legislation and has an excuse to knock on the window etc. etc. Just a thought.
As I understand it the Bill as amended is what becomes the Act on Royal Assent.
The final amendments to the bill were released on 25th April and given Royal assent on 28th are here, so in conjunction with the Bill that would form the Act.
bills.parliament.uk/publications/46242/documents/1746
NB HL Bill 40 which the final amendment doc refers to is here as there are a few versions
bills.parliament.uk/publications/42132/documents/484
Thanks for that
It just seems they want people to not park on private property or those areas deemed no parking overnight.
top man, again thanks for taking the time - stay safe ;O)
very informative 👍
There is no part of the UK that is not owned by someone.
This law is for "travelers" or "gypos" because of the trouble and damage they cause, I wild camp and its always LNT
have you seen this "trouble and damage" or are you relying on bigoted opinions found in right-wing newspapers?
before you respond please be aware of the 2010 Equality Act & its Protected Characteristics of Race, Religion or Belief.
@@alanhat5252 YES, and had my diesel nicked on numerous occasions, seen the state of a building site after they ripped all the wiring out
@@dudleyedge1374 I'm sorry for your loss.
So you've seen & suffered the effects of law-breaking, did you see who committed these offenses?
Come from “gypo” stock, and we were always taught to leave no trace of our having pitched up somewhere. The only thing I’ve taken is a couple of rabbits for the pot and some mushrooms 🤷♀️ Don’t tar us all with the same brush!
Could someone please make a printable fact sheet to help us stay within the law? Ha!!! Then I watched the rest of the video... Thanks!! Lol
This is in affect an anti Traveler community ban and is absolutely disgusting! But it will not effect us lot. I do hope you all know now to never vote for the Tories after this if you didn't know already.
As if labour are better.
@@frenchonion8861 please show where this legislation features in _any_ Labour party manifesto.
indeed, it contravenes the 2010 Equality Act.
Vanlifers are not distinguishable from New Age Travelers, sorry.
Thank god common sense rules all the best Paul
Key word in the act is "PERSON".
Unless you are acting in a commercial capacity this does not apply to you.
Know your rights.
Know the law.
Know what PERSON means in legalese.
I’m not sure that is correct, can you clarify at all?
The definition of a “person” can be a legal entity rather than an individual but I don’t believe the definition excludes anyone that is not acting on a commercial basis, it just covers both “people” and “entities”.
@@ExploreVanUKacts and statutes can only be applied to the person. Not the living human, only the legal entity.
It's why the police always ask for ID because your all caps name with the MR/Miss title is the person the police can charge, not you as a human in your private capacity unless a crime has been committed.
It's one huge trick the majority of the country doesn't understand.
The police need us to represent (re-present) ourselves as the legal entity. By handing ID you consent to representing the legal entity and can be charged. It's why we should never give ID unless a real crime has been committed such as causing injury, loss or harm.
I don't even carry ID unless I'm working in a commercial capacity, only because I don't represent my legal entity outside of work so there's no need to carry it anywhere and risk creating bindership when I don't want to.
It's a lot to take in I hope it clicks👍🏽
Edit-also note that what you are reading is legalese in acts and statutes so the word PERSON has to be considered in its legal definition
👍 Thanks for sharing, personally I’m not convinced, as I would expect it to be far more common knowledge and been demonstrated as effective if it were the case, but happy to leave it here if anyone wants to comment further or take the advice.
@@ExploreVanUK yes it does work (& has worked in Court), *but* unless you are very experienced in the law the chances of tripping yourself up are huge & because you're saying you're not a 'person' you can't engage the services of a lawyer.
Websearch 'freeman' for details.
Six and a half minutes of pure *wishful thinking!*
You state yourself more than once in this video you have _NO_ experience of the behaviours of the Police. They can be *extremely* vindictive or callous when the mood takes them & they operate with a near-certainty of absolute impunity.
I shall be taking the opinion of people who _have_ had dealings with the Police before I give any credence whatsoever to your declared __inexpert__ opinion.
*Please act with more responsibility in future.*
Thanks for taking the time to comment, sorry you didn't find it useful.
I actively encourage sharing of opinions so do feel free to give more info around your experience and how you feel the Police may react differently to the average Motorhomer / Campervan user due to this new law.
Cheers
Mike
@@ExploreVanUK We have always had large numbers of people on the move in this country, the Victorians distinguished them into 'migrant', 'itinerant', 'journeyman', 'peripatetic' or several other categories dependent mostly on class but the history goes back to the very earliest days of human habitation here. The first people walked here while we were still physically connected to the continent. Probably the first group since we were separated from the continent who arrived without any intention to settle were the Roma who arrived in the early 16th Century & slotted into society by establishing annual migratory routes & providing unusual services like repairing cookware or making elaborate cloth items. The next group to arrive were the Irish who were suffering genocidal conditions at home because of our Government's policies but, at least for the first century or so, had every intention of returning home when that became possible. There have been wave after wave of internally displaced people, again often because of Government policy.
And of course, because we are individuals, there are some who simply cannot settle.
@@ExploreVanUK ok, one direct experience of mine (I have others).
I was living in my 'van in Cambridge & I'd been away a few days & was returning about 4am. I was on a broad straight avenue with wide verges doing 30mph when another vehicle joined me. Worried that it was extraordinarily close behind me I had a look to discern what class of vehicle, I saw beacons on the roof which appeared yellow so I assumed it was a recovery vehicle & knowing that they are exempt from MOTs (form V112 if you want to check) I assumed I couldn't rely on it having brakes so when the traffic lights changed & I could see that we were the only 2 moving vehicles with the following vehicle still no more than 2 feet behind I elected to run the lights. Obviously the roof beacons, when they came on, were blue & the yellow I had seen was reflected street lighting. Of course the policeman wouldn't accept my explanation & instead chose to arrest me & impound my vehicle.
What happened next scared me but didn't surprise me.
I was taken from there to the east end of London & the Ford Fiesta we were traveling in only dropped below 100mph when we left the M11.
My pockets were emptied as the Police do & the contents bagged & sealed.
They kept me there for several meals, I couldn't tell you what that means in days because there was no window & nobody spoke to me. Meals appear in the hatch in the door, if you aren't quick enough they disappear again.
Then they put me out on the street in the small hours of the morning with the name of the police station in the west end of London where my possessions had been sent, possessions which included my money. Fortunately I had a friend in London whose phone number I could remember & I placed a reverse-charge call from a phone box (I don't know that you can still do this) & he came & rescued me. Several hours later we discovered, by phoning all the police stations (you can't do this any more), which one _actually_ had my possessions (the police had lied).
From there I was again rescued, this time by my parents who drove me back to Cambridge & stumped up the impound fees to get my van back.
I still have no explanation for this & no charge was laid.
On another occasion they took my vehicle 100 miles away & impounded it for 10 days on a charge which was dropped after the first solicitor's letter. When I got it back I discovered they had emptied my food into the bed. Fortunately the weather was hot & it dried out before too much went mouldy. I managed to rescue the mattress.
I could go on...
Thanks for sharing, but I’m still not seeing anything that suggests how his new law makes this more likely to happen, considering that happened presumably before the law was in place?
Can I also clarify that you judge yourself as an average recreational campervan / motorhomer (as you say you lived in your van) I did try to make it clear the video was based on how I felt the law would or wouldn’t impact us personally as recreational campervan users.
Hi just come across your channel. Watched this video. Very informative. Thank you. We have subscribed and will be watching more. Check us out. A&Bx