Ok the official slant...
No, people WONT be issued FPN's for stiff suspension or de-badging their cards. Its impossible to dom as there is NO offence code for this, so it simply can not be made up, its not a free text thing there HAS to be a specific offence and code for it. There IS more to the story, 100% than we are getting here. If a vehicle is stopped and the officer thinks its unroadworthy he will get a PG9 trained traffic officer to go over the vehicle. These officers will thoroughly check the car to see if it is roadworthy. Having an MOT does not make a car roadworthy...
So, its deemed un-roadworthy. A PG9 prohibition notice is served, and any apparent offences will be dealt with (tyres etc for instance). The vehicle hasd to stay where it is and get picked up, it can not be driven. It has to be repaired to VOSA standards and retested. A PG10 will then be issued when all relevant paperwork has been shown, only then can the vehicle go back on the road.
Onto Sec.59 notices (aften called asbo's for cars/bikes etc).
I beleive these are used mostly for the wrong reasons. They were brought in solely to stop anti social behaviour by chavs/scooter boys etc tearing around car parks etc being nobheads (but havent most of us done that when we were younger anyway?). It is dealt with at the roadside. There HAS to be a clear offence of the sec.3 rta OR Sec.34, and the vehicle driven in a manner which COULD cause alarm, annoyance etc to other members of public. It should be fully explained at the roadside and the driver whould be left with NO questions unanswered. It is NOT a prosecution, no disclosure is required nor ever given. If it is disputed, then the original offence of the sec.3 or sec.34 will be followed up on, which would result in a court appearance for sec.3, or points/fine for the sec.34. I'd rather have the Sec.59 thanks, its gone after a year too. However, I agree that it is a well over misused piece of legislation that officers need clearer guidelines for.
Any other help needed, fire away...