Failing to stop summons - help
Discussion
This is genuinely a friend's predicament.
He's been summoned for driving on the hard shoulder of a M-way and failing to stop.
He is adamant he was not driving on the hard shoulder. One of the police witness statements says he was in the hard shoulder whilst the 2nd statement states he was in the inside lane when he turned around to look.
The driver was entering the M-way from a service station slip road.
The 2 police men in question were attending an accident scene. Their Landie was behind the 2 stricken cars facing the direction of travel.
The statements continue that one of the police men pointed with his left arm and raised his right arm to signal the driver to stop. The driver continued straight on.
The question: is failure to stop strict liability or is there any mitigation/defence?
The driver reasons that at no time did he think he was being asked to stop. He did see the left arm pointing but not the right arm raised. Visibility was good (as per the statements). However, the overhead gantry said 'accident in hard shoulder' and an artic had just moved into lane 2 leaving lane 1 clear of any trafic around the accident vehicles.
The driver interpreted the police man's signal as a precautionary 'move over to lane 2, we're clearing an accident' type of gesture. In his mind, the artic had done just that and he followed suit and there was also the info from the overhead signage.
What are the likely outcomes?
Any help most appreciated.
ps can anyone point me to the Road Traffic Act and Road Offenders Act online?
He's been summoned for driving on the hard shoulder of a M-way and failing to stop.
He is adamant he was not driving on the hard shoulder. One of the police witness statements says he was in the hard shoulder whilst the 2nd statement states he was in the inside lane when he turned around to look.
The driver was entering the M-way from a service station slip road.
The 2 police men in question were attending an accident scene. Their Landie was behind the 2 stricken cars facing the direction of travel.
The statements continue that one of the police men pointed with his left arm and raised his right arm to signal the driver to stop. The driver continued straight on.
The question: is failure to stop strict liability or is there any mitigation/defence?
The driver reasons that at no time did he think he was being asked to stop. He did see the left arm pointing but not the right arm raised. Visibility was good (as per the statements). However, the overhead gantry said 'accident in hard shoulder' and an artic had just moved into lane 2 leaving lane 1 clear of any trafic around the accident vehicles.
The driver interpreted the police man's signal as a precautionary 'move over to lane 2, we're clearing an accident' type of gesture. In his mind, the artic had done just that and he followed suit and there was also the info from the overhead signage.
What are the likely outcomes?
Any help most appreciated.
ps can anyone point me to the Road Traffic Act and Road Offenders Act online?
pdV6 said:
I'd write and explain - can't do any harm, can it?
I agree. I did the same for a red light summons years ago and it worked.
I wasnt lieing either and didnt deserve to go to court for what happened. They read my letter and believed me.
Still got 3 points and a fixed penalty though and even though I still think I shouldnt have I accepted this.
Wont hijack thread by going further but just want to say that my letter worked so yours might too.
there (strangely enough) are some reasonable people in charge in some places(or so i'm led to believe).
Dusty's comment about writing to them is appropos in the case IMHO. tell them what you saw, and what you didn't see. if you can recall anything about any other road conditions it would prove that you were paying attention.
good luck, let us know
Dusty's comment about writing to them is appropos in the case IMHO. tell them what you saw, and what you didn't see. if you can recall anything about any other road conditions it would prove that you were paying attention.
good luck, let us know
Without commenting on the rights or wrongs of the particular case, it seems to me that a police officer on foot should only direct a vehicle on the motorway to stop in an extreme situation. The risks of injury to the officer, the motorist and other motorway users are severe. Given the busy nature of motorways, the speeds involved and the fact that the officer is hardly likely to be in a highly visible position (ie. directly in front of the motorist), the probability of a motorist correctly interpreting a signal to stop is low.
I'd be interested in the personal views of the BiB here on this one.
Streaky
I'd be interested in the personal views of the BiB here on this one.
Streaky
He is more concerned about the failure to stop.
The initial NIP was for driving on the hard shoulder but when the summons came through there were 2 of them for the 2 seperate offences above.
The 2 police statements (I read them at the weekend) might be construed as being a bit contradictory and only one of them states the accused was driving in the hard shoulder.
With regards the failure to stop, he insists that had he been aware that he was required and asked to do so then he would have. As it was, the road M-way was busy, there was an accident, an accident was notified on the overhead signs, and the speeds were fast, obviously being a M-way.
I for one believe that it was a genuine misunderstanding or mistake on his part.
If he had driven in the hard shoulder, then he would have known he had due cause to be flagged down by the policeman. But, he believed he had not committed any wrong and genuinely thought the policeman was signalling for him to move ove to give them some space.
The initial NIP was for driving on the hard shoulder but when the summons came through there were 2 of them for the 2 seperate offences above.
The 2 police statements (I read them at the weekend) might be construed as being a bit contradictory and only one of them states the accused was driving in the hard shoulder.
With regards the failure to stop, he insists that had he been aware that he was required and asked to do so then he would have. As it was, the road M-way was busy, there was an accident, an accident was notified on the overhead signs, and the speeds were fast, obviously being a M-way.
I for one believe that it was a genuine misunderstanding or mistake on his part.
If he had driven in the hard shoulder, then he would have known he had due cause to be flagged down by the policeman. But, he believed he had not committed any wrong and genuinely thought the policeman was signalling for him to move ove to give them some space.
Fail to stop for PC - no defence - up to &1,000 fine. No points S163 RTA 88 RTOA.
Drive on hardshoulder other than under exceptions - none of which fit your case -fine up to &2,500 plus 3 points.Reg 9 MW Regs and S17(4)RTRA 67 RTOA
As the summons have been issued then your plea of mitigation will have to be presented to Their Worships either by letter, personally or through a Solicitor.
Bear in mind all Courts should have a Duty Solicitor who should be present can be consulted before the case is called and who may in criminal cases defend/act as advocate FREE.
DVD
Drive on hardshoulder other than under exceptions - none of which fit your case -fine up to &2,500 plus 3 points.Reg 9 MW Regs and S17(4)RTRA 67 RTOA
As the summons have been issued then your plea of mitigation will have to be presented to Their Worships either by letter, personally or through a Solicitor.
Bear in mind all Courts should have a Duty Solicitor who should be present can be consulted before the case is called and who may in criminal cases defend/act as advocate FREE.
DVD
markmark said:
Strict liability - Road Traffic Act 1988 - a Constable in unform whether in the regulation of traffic OR requiring a vehicle to stop. I'd accept the points - hard shoulder or not - the Act covers road or public place.
what tot. Why should you stop for this? just say you didn't see. What can they prove without a gatso?
Cheers for all replies. Still a bit confused though. Since found this from
www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880052_en_8.htm#mdiv163
163.—(1) A person driving a motor vehicle on a road must stop the vehicle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.
(2) A person riding a cycle on a road must stop the cycle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.
(3) If a person fails to comply with this section he is guilty of an offence.
Does this imply that it is strict liability.
Could go for the 'I didn't see him' but given the witness statements it wouldn't hold firm (and of course it would be a pack of lies).
He's thinking of pleading guilty by post and taking it on the chin to reduce his costs cos he thinks he's on a bit of a no-hoper. Court date is end of Jan so a little while yet.
www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880052_en_8.htm#mdiv163
163.—(1) A person driving a motor vehicle on a road must stop the vehicle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.
(2) A person riding a cycle on a road must stop the cycle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.
(3) If a person fails to comply with this section he is guilty of an offence.
Does this imply that it is strict liability.
Could go for the 'I didn't see him' but given the witness statements it wouldn't hold firm (and of course it would be a pack of lies).
He's thinking of pleading guilty by post and taking it on the chin to reduce his costs cos he thinks he's on a bit of a no-hoper. Court date is end of Jan so a little while yet.
There is no statutory signal so it will be a question for the Mags to decide that Plod gave an indication that to any normal person would mean STOP. Using that in the Highway Code obviously has little argument.
Have known cases where flashing blue and headlamps under certain circumstances have been held to be sufficient indication.
DVD
Have known cases where flashing blue and headlamps under certain circumstances have been held to be sufficient indication.
DVD
Returning to my previous post on this, I wonder what the reaction of the BiB on the scene would have been had the accused instead immediately braked to a halt in the inside/middle lane. I don't see a rider (in RTA 1988 sect 35) that says, "stop when and where it is safe to do so". Although it does not specify, I submit that there is a strong implicaton that an immediate stop must be made.
If, then, the driver had immediately stopped in the inside/middle lane I wonder how long he would have survived before being hit at high speed up the exhaust.
I wonder too, had he stopped and (likely) thereby triggered a major incident, whether the charge would instead have been 'dangerous driving' rather than 'failure to stop'.
Streaky
If, then, the driver had immediately stopped in the inside/middle lane I wonder how long he would have survived before being hit at high speed up the exhaust.
I wonder too, had he stopped and (likely) thereby triggered a major incident, whether the charge would instead have been 'dangerous driving' rather than 'failure to stop'.
Streaky
Thought I'd finish this one off.
End result was cleared of driving on the hard shoulder (partly because the 2 police statements could not corroborate such an action), but was pinned for failure to stop for the policeman (which seems a bit silly cos he's cleared of any potential wrong-doing which leads to the failure to stop, so there is no reason to stop, plus he didn't interpret the gestures as asking him to stop).
End result was cleared of driving on the hard shoulder (partly because the 2 police statements could not corroborate such an action), but was pinned for failure to stop for the policeman (which seems a bit silly cos he's cleared of any potential wrong-doing which leads to the failure to stop, so there is no reason to stop, plus he didn't interpret the gestures as asking him to stop).
hertsbiker said:
Strict liability - Road Traffic Act 1988 - a Constable in unform whether in the regulation of traffic OR requiring a vehicle to stop. I'd accept the points - hard shoulder or not - the Act covers road or public place.
what tot. Why should you stop for this? just say you didn't see. What can they prove without a gatso?
Good advice Carl
Failing to stop for Police in uniform when directed to do so is now an arrestable offence.
That means days or even weeks later you could be taken from your cosy bed for not doing so if you are believed to have not done so when requested to.
Saying you did not see is hardly mitigation and could even lead to a charge of 'Without Due Care'!
It's not the case that he did not see the policeman or any gesture he was making, but having thought he had done no wrong (and with the police attending an accident scene) he actually thought the gesture was to move into lane 2 to make some room, as the lorry driver immediately in front of him did.
Anyway, fine was £50 plus £100 court costs. Solicitors fees were almost a grand but awaiting a 50% rebate since he was cleared of the charge of driving on the hard shoulder.
Anyway, fine was £50 plus £100 court costs. Solicitors fees were almost a grand but awaiting a 50% rebate since he was cleared of the charge of driving on the hard shoulder.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff