Can an off duty police officer give me a ticket?

Can an off duty police officer give me a ticket?

Author
Discussion

George H

Original Poster:

14,707 posts

165 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
First thing this morning a police officer was at my door, and gave me a section 59 warning for allegedly speeding past him whilst he was off duty yesterday.

Can he do that, I always thought it needed 2 police officers to give a ticket for something like that, since technically he had no evidence that I had been speeding.

I have admitted it and have accepted the warning; I was just curious.

SS2.

14,467 posts

239 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
George H said:
Can he do that..
Yes - he wasn't warning you for 'speeding' as such, it was a warning for the manner of your driving which he perceived as 'causing, or being likely to cause, alarm, distress or annoyance to members of the public'.





clio hooligan

3 posts

171 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
Not sure about giving you a warning, police are never off duty! did he show you ID? you say he had no evidence and it was his word against your never admit to anything, unless you know it can be proved by them ie. laser guns, vascar calibrated speedo, walking down the street doesn't count, think he was just being a over zealous copper

SS2.

14,467 posts

239 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
clio hooligan said:
..you say he had no evidence and it was his word against your never admit to anything, unless you know it can be proved by them ie. laser guns, vascar calibrated speedo..
Little requires to be 'proved' for a s.59 warning to be lawfully issued.

George H

Original Poster:

14,707 posts

165 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
SS2. said:
Little requires to be 'proved' for a s.59 warning to be lawfully issued.
But if it was just my word against his, how can anything be proved?

SS2.

14,467 posts

239 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
George H said:
SS2. said:
Little requires to be 'proved' for a s.59 warning to be lawfully issued.
But if it was just my word against his, how can anything be proved?
For the s.59 warning to be lawful, all he required was reasonable grounds for believing that the manner of your driving was inconsiderate and was causing (or was likely to cause) alarm, distress or annoyance to members of the public.

Unfortunately, you have hardly any options open to you, even if you do feel aggrieved by the warning or regard it as inappropriate in the circumstances.

You might consider complaining to a superior of the officer concerned but don't hold your breath - with no statutory measures in place to allow official challenge to a s.59 warning, the chances of a positive outcome would be slight.

George H

Original Poster:

14,707 posts

165 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
SS2. said:
For the s.59 warning to be lawful, all he required was reasonable grounds for believing that the manner of your driving was inconsiderate and was causing (or was likely to cause) alarm, distress or annoyance to members of the public.

Unfortunately, you have hardly any options open to you, even if you do feel aggrieved by the warning or regard it as inappropriate in the circumstances.

You might consider complaining to a superior of the officer concerned but don't hold your breath - with no statutory measures in place to allow official challenge to a s.59 warning, the chances of a positive outcome would be slight.
Thanks for the explanation smile

I can't complain, I was in the wrong - wasn't thinking and was doing 60 on a road that has just had the speed limit dropped from 60 to 40. I just always though something would need to proved in order for a warning to be issued.

Jasandjules

69,966 posts

230 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
Has anyone challenged S59 under Article 6?

SVTRick

3,633 posts

196 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
Would have been asked to leave my property and the ticket neatly folded and handed back to him, with a come back when you have evidence comment.

Pity they dont hand these out to the pie-keys down the road....


mel

10,168 posts

276 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
The below is quoted directly from "The Green Lane Association" who are at the forefront of fighting the whole Section 59 debacle because they are the ones who are having it abused and used against them to the highest degree. I think the quote answers just about any questions on Section 59's in a factually correct and well researched way. My advise would be to read understand and digest the following information if you ever think you may be effected by one.

The Gree Lane Association said:
The Legislation:
Section 59 Police Reform Act 2002 states that -

Where an officer has reasonable grounds for believing that a motor vehicle is being used in a manner which contravenes Road Traffic Act Section 3 (Careless Driving) OR Section 34 (Driving elsewhere than on a road) AND also the manner of use of the vehicle is causing or has been causing or is likely to cause, alarm distress or annoyance to members of the public, Section 59 can be used to:-

initially give a written warning (valid for twelve months)
(commonly called a Section 59 Notice)

and on a subsequent occasion to seize the vehicle.
(it will probably end up in the crusher, or may be ransomed back to the owner)

A constable in uniform has the power to order the person driving to stop the vehicle, to seize and remove the vehicle, to enter any premises on which the officer has reasonable grounds for believing the motor vehicle to be and to use reasonable force. Seizure can made only if a warning has been given, or believed to have been given, or if a warning is clearly being ignored.

So, usually it's a two-stage process - a warning or notice first, seizure if you persist or repeat.

Full text of Police Reform Act section 59 here.
Section 3 Road Traffic Act –

3. If a person drives a motor vehicle on a road without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road, he is guilty of an offence.

(Examples are – wheel spinning, skidding, revving engine excessivly, handbrake turns etc)
Section 34 Road Traffic Act (extract) –

34.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, if without lawful authority a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle
(a) on to or upon any common land, moorland or land of any other description, not being land forming part of a road, or
(b) on any road being a Footpath, Bridleway or restricted byway,
he is guilty of an offence.

(So you may only drive on a 'road' - including BOATs. Note that using a Private road without permission is NOT a s.34 offence, it is a trespass, unless it happens to also be a Public Footpath etc.)

(2) It is not an offence under this section to drive a motor vehicle on any land within fifteen yards of a road, being a road on which a motor vehicle may lawfully be driven, for the purpose only of parking the vehicle on that land.

(For younger readers that's about 15m, but ONLY for parking)
Enforcement Issues:

This legislation includes mechanically propelled vehicles, not intended or adapted for use on the road (minimotos etc.), as well as road-legal motors.

Section 3 RTA will include car parks that are open to the public – and other areas where the public would be expected to have access.

The powers cannot be exercised unless the driver is BOTH using the vehicle anti-socially AND is committing either the section 3 or the section 34 offence. Someone driving in a way that might be considered anti-social but not committing either of these offences is not liable to having his vehicle seized, nor is someone committing a different motoring offence. Nor is someone driving sensibly on a Footpath - though of course they are still liable to 'ordinary' prosecution under s.34 RTA.

Note that the officer at the time of the warning only has to have ‘reasonable grounds’ for believing that one of the offences has been committed, e.g. a believable report. It may transpire later that this is or was not the case, hence the guidelines below.

The warning is given to both the driver and the vehicle. This means that if either are subsequently stopped then a seizure may take place even if another driver is in the original vehicle, or the original driver is another vehicle….. be warned! The warning may be verbal, with paperwork to follow, or forms filled in on the spot. In either case the constable must make it clear what is happening.
Recommended Actions:
At the ‘scene’:

Firstly remain calm and polite. Getting hot under the collar may only lead to further offences (Public Order Act or Obstruction ).

Establish what offence you have committed for the officer to initiate a Section 59 Warning or Seizure. It may be prudent to carry a print of the above legislation to discuss with the officer – many officers give out warnings because they have had a report of Nuisance vehicles but do not understand the legislation in its entirety.

Ask if the officer intends to prosecute for the offence committed (some forces have a local policy to prosecute). Remember s.59 only applies if you may have already committed an offence, which could be prosecuted for anyway.

Ask the officer for his force number/collar number, name, station and name of his area Commander.

Ask for a copy of any paperwork you are asked to sign.

Do not be argumentative! But do know your onions – are you on a BOAT, UCR, private road etc and is the officer aware of its status?
Subsequent action:

If you have clearly done something wrong and are being prosecuted – get a solicitor….

If you have received a Section 59 warning and are unsure why, or feel that it was unjust or issued inappropriately then you need to establish your position.

Write to the Area Commander at the police station/area that the warning was issued and establish exactly what offence you committed (ie. Section 3 or 34) and what action is being taken. If you know they are prosecuting you then ask for Disclosure (this may be best done through a solicitor). Disclosure will be a pack of documents outlining the Prosecution case and should include witness statements, the officers statement, video copies and such like. This will give you a picture of the case against you in order to fight your corner.

Often at this stage a correctly worded letter or defence statement may negate any summons or court appearance if the warning was issued incorrectly or inappropriately. Keep to the facts and do not rant and rave about your thoughts on the local constabulary….

John145

2,449 posts

157 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
Scary legislation. So Op if you do this again and he sees you say goodbye to your car!

liner33

10,701 posts

203 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
John145 said:
Scary legislation. So Op if you do this again and he sees you say goodbye to your car!
OR any other vehicle you may be driving !!

jimxms

1,633 posts

161 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
John145 said:
Scary legislation.
Indeed! My tyres tend to light up quite often...wouldn't want some off-duty BiB behind me catching a look at that :/

14-7

6,233 posts

192 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
The idea behind the legislation is a good idea but unfortunatley it is at times badly used.

The problem is the idea of driving without due care and attention can be subjective. One persons idea of driving like a idiot may not be anothers.

Exige77

6,518 posts

192 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
So just for clarification, once issued does it last for 12 months and is then stricken from the record ?

Thanks

Ex77

SS2.

14,467 posts

239 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
Exige77 said:
So just for clarification, once issued does it last for 12 months and is then stricken from the record ?
Yes yes

Dwight VanDriver

6,583 posts

245 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
Off duty indicates possibility of being in civvies.

Requirement under the Act is that it only applies to a UNIFORMED Officer....

dvd

SS2.

14,467 posts

239 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
Dwight VanDriver said:
Off duty indicates possibility of being in civvies.

Requirement under the Act is that it only applies to a UNIFORMED Officer....
Agree that only a constable in uniform can issue a s.59 warning, but plod in civvies could witness incident and then issue warning at a later date (when suitably attired)..

Mandat

3,896 posts

239 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all

The Gree Lane Association said:
stuff
Reading this, I understand that a prosection for the underlying s.3 or s.34 offence is required for the s.59 notice to be valid. Is this not correct?

Milky Joe

3,851 posts

205 months

Thursday 26th January 2012
quotequote all
SVTRick said:
Would have been asked to leave my property and the ticket neatly folded and handed back to him, with a come back when you have evidence comment.
You're just oozing machismo! I bet the copper would skulk away good and proper.