Driving without due care?
Discussion
My partner was driving home from her new job and passing through a section of road, with several roundabouts and speed cameras. She noted there was a Police van behind her, so kept an even closer eye on her speed. She was stopped by the lone Officer, who went on to state that she had passed through a red light and would be reported for the offence. Being new to the area, she asked what red light he was talking about?, to which he said a crossing near an Aldi store they had passed. She said, she didn't know this crossing, being new to the area, to which the Officer stated that this constitutes Driving without Due Care. She explained that she did not know the crossing he described, because she did not know the area, and was not offering this as a reason for her possibly having passed through the red light. The Officer continued to report her for both 1. Passing through a red light and 2. Driving without Due Care & Attention. Evidently his report will be passed on and she will receive a letter and court date, in due course.
The following morning we returned to the crossing in question and it is actually some considerable distance, from the Aldi store described by the Officer. Even if she had known the area, it seems likely one would question what crossing he was talking about?
I have to say, knowing what a safe driver my partner is, I am extremely surprised that she would pass through a red light. Especially when she knew there was a Police van directly behind her. They were also in rush hour, stop/start traffic. Does the Officer have to provide any evidence of her alleged wrong-doing or is his word enough?
Does not knowing a specific light or junction constitute DWDC?
Thanks in advance.
The following morning we returned to the crossing in question and it is actually some considerable distance, from the Aldi store described by the Officer. Even if she had known the area, it seems likely one would question what crossing he was talking about?
I have to say, knowing what a safe driver my partner is, I am extremely surprised that she would pass through a red light. Especially when she knew there was a Police van directly behind her. They were also in rush hour, stop/start traffic. Does the Officer have to provide any evidence of her alleged wrong-doing or is his word enough?
Does not knowing a specific light or junction constitute DWDC?
Thanks in advance.
e21Mark said:
I have to say, knowing what a safe driver my partner is, I am extremely surprised that she would pass through a red light. Especially when she knew there was a Police van directly behind her. They were also in rush hour, stop/start traffic. Does the Officer have to provide any evidence of her alleged wrong-doing or is his word enough?
Sorry, was she staring at the speedo to avoid exceeding the limit, or was it nose-to-tail stop-start traffic?Either way, it seems that the presence of the van rattled her sufficiently that her concentration was on that rather than where it should've been.
e21Mark said:
Does not knowing a specific light or junction constitute DWDC?
No, but failing to even notice a red light at a pedestrian crossing certainly does.Being in a strange area is no defence, if anything you would be more careful and traffic lights are everywhere, unless of course the office is lying/mistaken but I'm pretty sure their word is enough unless you can prove otherwise (I really should consider a dash cam thinking about it!).
M
e21Mark said:
My partner was driving home from her new job and passing through a section of road, with several roundabouts and speed cameras. She noted there was a Police van behind her, so kept an even closer eye on her speed. She was stopped by the lone Officer, who went on to state that she had passed through a red light and would be reported for the offence. Being new to the area, she asked what red light he was talking about?, to which he said a crossing near an Aldi store they had passed. She said, she didn't know this crossing, being new to the area, to which the Officer stated that this constitutes Driving without Due Care. She explained that she did not know the crossing he described, because she did not know the area, and was not offering this as a reason for her possibly having passed through the red light. The Officer continued to report her for both 1. Passing through a red light and 2. Driving without Due Care & Attention. Evidently his report will be passed on and she will receive a letter and court date, in due course.
The following morning we returned to the crossing in question and it is actually some considerable distance, from the Aldi store described by the Officer. Even if she had known the area, it seems likely one would question what crossing he was talking about?
I have to say, knowing what a safe driver my partner is, I am extremely surprised that she would pass through a red light. Especially when she knew there was a Police van directly behind her. They were also in rush hour, stop/start traffic. Does the Officer have to provide any evidence of her alleged wrong-doing or is his word enough?
Does not knowing a specific light or junction constitute DWDC?
Thanks in advance.
I'd be very surprised if they pursued careless driving. A traffic signal offence does not require corroboration.The following morning we returned to the crossing in question and it is actually some considerable distance, from the Aldi store described by the Officer. Even if she had known the area, it seems likely one would question what crossing he was talking about?
I have to say, knowing what a safe driver my partner is, I am extremely surprised that she would pass through a red light. Especially when she knew there was a Police van directly behind her. They were also in rush hour, stop/start traffic. Does the Officer have to provide any evidence of her alleged wrong-doing or is his word enough?
Does not knowing a specific light or junction constitute DWDC?
Thanks in advance.
TooMany2cvs said:
e21Mark said:
I have to say, knowing what a safe driver my partner is, I am extremely surprised that she would pass through a red light. Especially when she knew there was a Police van directly behind her. They were also in rush hour, stop/start traffic. Does the Officer have to provide any evidence of her alleged wrong-doing or is his word enough?
Sorry, was she staring at the speedo to avoid exceeding the limit, or was it nose-to-tail stop-start traffic?Either way, it seems that the presence of the van rattled her sufficiently that her concentration was on that rather than where it should've been.
e21Mark said:
Does not knowing a specific light or junction constitute DWDC?
No, but failing to even notice a red light at a pedestrian crossing certainly does.Of course failing to notice a red light constitutes driving without due care, but she wasn't saying that. She said she didn't know the light he was referring to, especially given that he stated it was near an Aldi store when in fact it was quite some distance away. If you drive along a strange road and are then questioned about lights on junctions on it, does not knowing one constitute DWDC?
Initially she was being reported for running a red light, but in asking what light he meant, it was escalated to DWDC and that seems unfair to me. She wasn't saying she hadn't seen it, just that she wasn't sure which light he referred too.
e21Mark said:
Of course failing to notice a red light constitutes driving without due care, but she wasn't saying that. She said she didn't know the light he was referring to,
Might have sounded like she was being evasive. Seems a massive escalation by the Officer though. I wonder why the Police think it's a good idea to p
s off ordinary members of the public - it used to be standard practice to be threatened with all sorts of things when stopped, but you'd hear nothing further.
Sheepshanks said:
Might have sounded like she was being evasive. Seems a massive escalation by the Officer though.
I wonder why the Police think it's a good idea to ps off ordinary members of the public - it used to be standard practice to be threatened with all sorts of things when stopped, but you'd hear nothing further.
Pissing people off? By stopping them for running red lights?I wonder why the Police think it's a good idea to p
s off ordinary members of the public - it used to be standard practice to be threatened with all sorts of things when stopped, but you'd hear nothing further.e21Mark said:
agtlaw said:
See ss. 3 and 3ZA RTA 1988. I wouldn't worry about something unlikely to be pursued.
Sorry, can you elaborate?http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/sectio...
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/sectio...
Mk3Spitfire said:
I have had people directly in front of me (in a marked car) drive straight through reds. People tend to panick unnecessarily when they see a Police car behind them and their driving becomes infinitely worse than before they noticed it.
even worse when it flys up behind you flat out, then pulls up beside you for a minute mirror to mirror, then darts in front of you and lifts off so that you have to slow down ....
mph1977 said:
in considering DWDCA one ofthe questions is the motoring equivalent to 'the reasonable practitioner test' ... what would an ordinary average (actually rather than butt hurt PHer whose just been caught) law abiding motorist do in that situation ...
well as the average motorist drives at 38 in NSL's and then continues to drive at 38 in 30 zones, reads the daily mail and wants to vote for UKIP I would say they are a very poor bench mark to judge things by Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff