Registration plate 
Official local mnemonic: North
Postal area: Newcastle
Issued: between march 2017 and august 2017
Grey Volkswagen, manufactured in 2017, first registered on 1 March 2017. Cylinder capacity: 1968cc, CO2 emissions: 158 g/km.
Official local mnemonic: NorthPostal area: Newcastle
Issued: between march 2017 and august 2017
Grey Volkswagen, manufactured in 2017, first registered on 1 March 2017. Cylinder capacity: 1968cc, CO2 emissions: 158 g/km.
✗ Untaxed Tax due: 1 March 2020
MOT: No details
Rate driver
Comments
NK17 ZWL
Philip G .. Dorset2017-04-30 11:20:17
2017-04-30 02:44:50 i agree with your comment 100% the police fail as to the bikes and what not's, They should now pass a law that includes all private car parks and lands etc, Now if someone was to be assaulted in a car park then the one committing the act of voilence is arrested and charged and not forgetting they ask to see CCTV or witness reports, So my question is this, Why not charge people committing illegal road acts surely if someones car get hit in that car park and the other party is injured the police arrest that other driver for what ever the charge may be, So why is that, It's no different to this person driving over a very LARGE road marking and no doubt is a regular there at that Aldi store of which could be real easy for the police to ask Aldi as they would state if the driver was a regular and in that case if they were then that driver was already aware of the car park markings etc, That to me would warrant a charge of somekind if not least a very sturn word to the driver and then keep it on record, Hell the law keep some pathetic things for years on file as to the likes a child stealing an apple from a green grocer or a down and out mother who steals baby food for her starving child, Yes its a funny old law we have in this country
2017-04-30 02:44:50 i agree with your comment 100% the police fail as to the bikes and what not's, They should now pass a law that includes all private car parks and lands etc, Now if someone was to be assaulted in a car park then the one committing the act of voilence is arrested and charged and not forgetting they ask to see CCTV or witness reports, So my question is this, Why not charge people committing illegal road acts surely if someones car get hit in that car park and the other party is injured the police arrest that other driver for what ever the charge may be, So why is that, It's no different to this person driving over a very LARGE road marking and no doubt is a regular there at that Aldi store of which could be real easy for the police to ask Aldi as they would state if the driver was a regular and in that case if they were then that driver was already aware of the car park markings etc, That to me would warrant a charge of somekind if not least a very sturn word to the driver and then keep it on record, Hell the law keep some pathetic things for years on file as to the likes a child stealing an apple from a green grocer or a down and out mother who steals baby food for her starving child, Yes its a funny old law we have in this country
NK17 ZWL
2017-05-02 04:50:47
Many stores outsource the administration of the car part to a third-party. They have signs saying they do not cover theft, damage or injury. All they're doing is trying to limit or remove all forms of liability. And you think shop-lifters are bad? Yeah, right..
Many stores outsource the administration of the car part to a third-party. They have signs saying they do not cover theft, damage or injury. All they're doing is trying to limit or remove all forms of liability. And you think shop-lifters are bad? Yeah, right..
NK17 ZWL
2017-04-30 21:36:01
I do find it a very odd state of affairs. A store cares more about someone who shop-lifts a 30p pack of gum than they do someone driving a couple of tonnes of metal in a hostile manner..
I do find it a very odd state of affairs. A store cares more about someone who shop-lifts a 30p pack of gum than they do someone driving a couple of tonnes of metal in a hostile manner..
NK17 ZWL
Anon2017-04-29 04:36:33
Whether the police will prosecute
Whether it's breaking a law or not
It's inconsiderate driving
And bad parenting to swear in front of a kid
It's not acceptable and if it could be enforced it should be. Imagine every car driver on every "private land car park" ignoring every road signage then there would be more road rage and maybe the odd assault. It's not worth it. Respect the road and drive safe is the goal and if you don't the expect your regd to be listed on this site.
Driver gets a thumbs down from me.
Whether the police will prosecute
Whether it's breaking a law or not
It's inconsiderate driving
And bad parenting to swear in front of a kid
It's not acceptable and if it could be enforced it should be. Imagine every car driver on every "private land car park" ignoring every road signage then there would be more road rage and maybe the odd assault. It's not worth it. Respect the road and drive safe is the goal and if you don't the expect your regd to be listed on this site.
Driver gets a thumbs down from me.
NK17 ZWL
Gem2017-04-29 19:55:12
The police can't even be bothered to prosecute drivers who endanger people's lives so we've got no chance of them prosecuting drivers like this one.
The police can't even be bothered to prosecute drivers who endanger people's lives so we've got no chance of them prosecuting drivers like this one.
NK17 ZWL
2017-04-28 17:02:31
Open question. Is this a civil or criminal matter? See, the car was technically on private property. I'm not saying this to tread on anyone's toes, I just want some feedback. Thanks. Have a good day.
Open question. Is this a civil or criminal matter? See, the car was technically on private property. I'm not saying this to tread on anyone's toes, I just want some feedback. Thanks. Have a good day.
NK17 ZWL
JJ2017-04-30 14:03:48
As supermarket car parks are open to the public, drivers using them must have a licence, insurance, tax and MOT otherwise they are breaking the law. It's just the road markings and signage that's unenforceable.
As supermarket car parks are open to the public, drivers using them must have a licence, insurance, tax and MOT otherwise they are breaking the law. It's just the road markings and signage that's unenforceable.
NK17 ZWL
Joe2017-04-29 11:03:07
It's not an offence to do what the van did. There aren't even any no entry signs and the car park won't have a traffic order because it's private land so no offence has been committed. The van driver was still in the wrong though.
It's not an offence to do what the van did. There aren't even any no entry signs and the car park won't have a traffic order because it's private land so no offence has been committed. The van driver was still in the wrong though.
NK17 ZWL
Pepe2017-04-28 16:57:23
Why these haters come here and shout nasty words to each other, Boy i feel sad for them people because sad trolls also need love too
Why these haters come here and shout nasty words to each other, Boy i feel sad for them people because sad trolls also need love too
NK17 ZWL
Connor2017-04-28 09:28:33
Sad rat, as if you're actually putting this on here. What is wrong with you!
Sad rat, as if you're actually putting this on here. What is wrong with you!
NK17 ZWL
Q2017-04-28 09:11:50
Ignore James the local pathetic troll, Yes he is correct it is a private car park but IF! and i use that word if the owner of that car park recieves a complaint from a member of the public and they check their cctv then that owner can report the incident to police of which then the police have the power to arrest and charge James! so get your fact right will you buddy
Now if the police wish to act they would normally give the driver a good telling off BUT! the road this driver came onto was actually a public road which is where the camera car was coming from James! which means that the other driver was entering a public road which then comes under the road or highways act of whichever you like to call it
Now i have watched this video just like you James! and i can see where you are coming from but if you look deeper into the offence then maybe you will understand James!
Look at the othe motors as the drivers are also annoyed at this offender and yet you fail to say anything about them on this comment WHY! is that James! is it because the camera car may have been the only one that actually had a dashcam and caught the culprit and this is why you pick out this one individual perhaps
Or maybe you have a dislike for anyone that has a camera in their motor as they catch drivers out when they commit a road offence
No matter what you think of the camera car the other driver has committed a road offence do you AGREE or DISAGREE as if you were to disagree then that only tells us all that you think that the law is wrong and everyone should continue to commit road offences and to hell with the safety of others CORRECT James!
Maybe you have a personal dislike for genuine and caring drivers and maybe you have been caught in the act of committing a road offence in the past and you were caught on dashcam and thats why your comments are always negative towards all drivers that carry dashcams
Either way James! you my friend only make yourself look more and more stupid on this website and no doubt you will return with yet another trolls name and agree with your own comment and give it a thumbs up
I really feel sorry for you James! as we all now know what you are and what your feelings are towards every decent drivers video evidence
James! if i could make a suggestion my friend.. GET A LIFE! buddy and please let it go
Ignore James the local pathetic troll, Yes he is correct it is a private car park but IF! and i use that word if the owner of that car park recieves a complaint from a member of the public and they check their cctv then that owner can report the incident to police of which then the police have the power to arrest and charge James! so get your fact right will you buddy
Now if the police wish to act they would normally give the driver a good telling off BUT! the road this driver came onto was actually a public road which is where the camera car was coming from James! which means that the other driver was entering a public road which then comes under the road or highways act of whichever you like to call it
Now i have watched this video just like you James! and i can see where you are coming from but if you look deeper into the offence then maybe you will understand James!
Look at the othe motors as the drivers are also annoyed at this offender and yet you fail to say anything about them on this comment WHY! is that James! is it because the camera car may have been the only one that actually had a dashcam and caught the culprit and this is why you pick out this one individual perhaps
Or maybe you have a dislike for anyone that has a camera in their motor as they catch drivers out when they commit a road offence
No matter what you think of the camera car the other driver has committed a road offence do you AGREE or DISAGREE as if you were to disagree then that only tells us all that you think that the law is wrong and everyone should continue to commit road offences and to hell with the safety of others CORRECT James!
Maybe you have a personal dislike for genuine and caring drivers and maybe you have been caught in the act of committing a road offence in the past and you were caught on dashcam and thats why your comments are always negative towards all drivers that carry dashcams
Either way James! you my friend only make yourself look more and more stupid on this website and no doubt you will return with yet another trolls name and agree with your own comment and give it a thumbs up
I really feel sorry for you James! as we all now know what you are and what your feelings are towards every decent drivers video evidence
James! if i could make a suggestion my friend.. GET A LIFE! buddy and please let it go
NK17 ZWL
Tim2017-04-28 16:46:34
2017-04-28 13:03:22 why you say this to people and get admin to remove your comment JAMES.. SID JAMES.. ANON
2017-04-28 13:03:22 why you say this to people and get admin to remove your comment JAMES.. SID JAMES.. ANON
NK17 ZWL
Chris2017-04-28 10:12:03
James is an idiot but he is right about no offences being committed because its a private car park. The police could not prosecute the van driver even if the land owner asked them to. The van driver was wrong to do what he did but he didn't actually break the law.
James is an idiot but he is right about no offences being committed because its a private car park. The police could not prosecute the van driver even if the land owner asked them to. The van driver was wrong to do what he did but he didn't actually break the law.
NK17 ZWL
No doubt I'll be called a troll, lol.2017-04-28 09:27:49
Couldn't be bothered to read all this foaming-at-the-mouth drivel but seriously..
1. Do you think that the owner of the car park would even bother examining CCTV over something so trivial and then wasting time reporting it to the police?
2. Do you think it is worth our tax money having the police squander resources investigating such a trivial matter?
3. Would you like calling the police when your car is stolen and they tell you, sorry we are too busy investigating someone exiting a carpark in a slightly inconvenient manner?
Couldn't be bothered to read all this foaming-at-the-mouth drivel but seriously..
1. Do you think that the owner of the car park would even bother examining CCTV over something so trivial and then wasting time reporting it to the police?
2. Do you think it is worth our tax money having the police squander resources investigating such a trivial matter?
3. Would you like calling the police when your car is stolen and they tell you, sorry we are too busy investigating someone exiting a carpark in a slightly inconvenient manner?
Add comment
Attaching movies and photos (?)
It's enough to include link to photo or youtube or facebook movie into comment's content in order to attach them to the comment
HERE you go same bloke different day same prick
NO EXIT!