Do we need a "softer" way of mandating driver reassessments?
Discussion
I'm sure many of us have seen this scenario a depressing number of times on the likes of Traffic Cops: BiB have the blues and twos on and are powering down the outside lane of the motorway or dual carriageway in busy but free-flowing traffic, only to come up behind someone who just does not notice them no matter how much they flash their headlights, restart the siren, move from side to side, etc. Sometimes the errant driver finally wakes up after 10 seconds (a long time really) or more; other times we cut to a later part of the journey and we don't know how long it took.
It does seem to be fairly common and it's pretty scary to me that some drivers are so very unobservant. Even if they have the stereo on so loud that they can't hear a siren, why can't they see the blues (which they should notice in some mirror or other even if they're badly adjusted)? It could be that in some cases, they've seen the BiB and just aren't moving over immediately for some reason (e.g. they're already at the speed limit and think they'll be done if they go any faster), but they don't tend to indicate left or anything to show that they've seen the BiB, so I do think that in most cases it's just that they don't notice the cops.
Clearly police in this situation can't stop the driver, being on their way to an emergency and everything. In any case I'm not sure what offence if any is being committed (due care?) But it seems to me that police in such a situation, having identified someone whose driving is at least potentially dangerously below standard, could and should be doing something to remedy it. Should an officer in that situation therefore be able to start a process which obtains the driver's identity by post and then compels them to show that their driving is in fact up to standard if they want to keep their licence?
I'm thinking that maybe there could be a short (and cheap) assessment at first, possibly by simulator, just to see whether the lack of observation was a "one-off" or whether there's a real and continuing problem. If the latter, then I don't see why the driver shouldn't be made to pay for and retake their test. They could continue driving for up to say 6 months in the meantime.
Obviously this could also be done in other cases where the officer feels that there is an obvious skill deficiency, but perhaps no specific offence being committed. So basically a way of making sure that a driver is up to standard, but without a punitive element. Would BiBs here welcome such an option? Or is there something like that already available? AIUI, drivers can only be mandated to retake their test as part of a penalty in court (usually after a ban), but ICBW. If there is a "soft" option already available then I've never seen it being used.
I know that others here have advocated test retakes for everyone every 10 years, which I agree with in principle, but, in the meantime, shouldn't we at least be getting some of the least competent drivers to retake their tests when they demonstrate their lack of skill to the police? It doesn't seem right to do nothing when they present a real danger to other road users and there's a clear opportunity to deal with them.
It does seem to be fairly common and it's pretty scary to me that some drivers are so very unobservant. Even if they have the stereo on so loud that they can't hear a siren, why can't they see the blues (which they should notice in some mirror or other even if they're badly adjusted)? It could be that in some cases, they've seen the BiB and just aren't moving over immediately for some reason (e.g. they're already at the speed limit and think they'll be done if they go any faster), but they don't tend to indicate left or anything to show that they've seen the BiB, so I do think that in most cases it's just that they don't notice the cops.
Clearly police in this situation can't stop the driver, being on their way to an emergency and everything. In any case I'm not sure what offence if any is being committed (due care?) But it seems to me that police in such a situation, having identified someone whose driving is at least potentially dangerously below standard, could and should be doing something to remedy it. Should an officer in that situation therefore be able to start a process which obtains the driver's identity by post and then compels them to show that their driving is in fact up to standard if they want to keep their licence?
I'm thinking that maybe there could be a short (and cheap) assessment at first, possibly by simulator, just to see whether the lack of observation was a "one-off" or whether there's a real and continuing problem. If the latter, then I don't see why the driver shouldn't be made to pay for and retake their test. They could continue driving for up to say 6 months in the meantime.
Obviously this could also be done in other cases where the officer feels that there is an obvious skill deficiency, but perhaps no specific offence being committed. So basically a way of making sure that a driver is up to standard, but without a punitive element. Would BiBs here welcome such an option? Or is there something like that already available? AIUI, drivers can only be mandated to retake their test as part of a penalty in court (usually after a ban), but ICBW. If there is a "soft" option already available then I've never seen it being used.
I know that others here have advocated test retakes for everyone every 10 years, which I agree with in principle, but, in the meantime, shouldn't we at least be getting some of the least competent drivers to retake their tests when they demonstrate their lack of skill to the police? It doesn't seem right to do nothing when they present a real danger to other road users and there's a clear opportunity to deal with them.
tbags do it on purpose?Funny. This exact thing happened to me today. On way to a grade 1/immediate, large 4x4 car, fully liveried, headlights flashing, blue roof bar, blue grill lights, 3-tone siren.
Outside lane of DC for best part of a mile. Some extremely uninterested Middle Aged dear driving a Yaris. Completely oblivious. It is, extremely frustrating.
Outside lane of DC for best part of a mile. Some extremely uninterested Middle Aged dear driving a Yaris. Completely oblivious. It is, extremely frustrating.
Nigel Worc's said:
So, they aren't breaking any rules.
As stated above, they could potentially be done for due care and attention.Just like if your defence for speeding was that you didn't see the signs, a jobs worth could report you for due care/attention.
By not paying attention to your surroundings, POTENTIALLY could be reported for DC/A
Mk3Spitfire said:
Nigel Worc's said:
So, they aren't breaking any rules.
As stated above, they could potentially be done for due care and attention.Just like if your defence for speeding was that you didn't see the signs, a jobs worth could report you for due care/attention.
By not paying attention to your surroundings, POTENTIALLY could be reported for DC/A
Mk3Spitfire said:
Funny. This exact thing happened to me today. On way to a grade 1/immediate, large 4x4 car, fully liveried, headlights flashing, blue roof bar, blue grill lights, 3-tone siren.
Outside lane of DC for best part of a mile. Some extremely uninterested Middle Aged dear driving a Yaris. Completely oblivious. It is, extremely frustrating.
Do you have any options? Outside lane of DC for best part of a mile. Some extremely uninterested Middle Aged dear driving a Yaris. Completely oblivious. It is, extremely frustrating.
On the surface this sort of thing seems demonstrate 'Driving without due care and attention', couldn't you run their registration and pay them a visit at a later day for 'words of advice'; or not due to time and man power.
A colleague of mine did it before, followed them up, and I assume gave them words of advice.
I normally try and give them serious stink eye and point at the mirrors, but I was driving today and single crewed so just concentrating on the driving. But I think I'm going to start following these up!
I normally try and give them serious stink eye and point at the mirrors, but I was driving today and single crewed so just concentrating on the driving. But I think I'm going to start following these up!
Mk3Spitfire said:
A colleague of mine did it before, followed them up, and I assume gave them words of advice.
I normally try and give them serious stink eye and point at the mirrors, but I was driving today and single crewed so just concentrating on the driving. But I think I'm going to start following these up!
Are you really that important ?I normally try and give them serious stink eye and point at the mirrors, but I was driving today and single crewed so just concentrating on the driving. But I think I'm going to start following these up!
Mk3Spitfire said:
Nigel Worc's said:
Only if they were stupid enough to say they didn't see you !
So with your clear disdain for emergency service exemptions, is that what you would say if BIB came knocking because you'd held them up for miles, just because you have a chip?What I have an issue with is your presumption of right of passage, you don't have one, it is a request, you should know this.
Mk3Spitfire said:
Like I said. Not worth a sensible response. Let's pray you and yours are never disadvantaged by someone with your attitude holding them up. Good night.
I've never knowingly, purposely, held up an emergency vehicle in my life.You do seem a little jumped up though, get over yourself.
Nigel Worc's said:
I've never knowingly, purposely, held up an emergency vehicle in my life.
You do seem a little jumped up though, get over yourself.
Actually Nigel I think you are a little provocative/pedantic comment in your postings, e.g. "presumption of right of passage" comment.You do seem a little jumped up though, get over yourself.
Personally I don't care if it is a request to move over or a right. I move over when I see a blue light.
Vaud said:
Nigel Worc's said:
I've never knowingly, purposely, held up an emergency vehicle in my life.
You do seem a little jumped up though, get over yourself.
Actually Nigel I think you are a little provocative/pedantic comment in your postings, e.g. "presumption of right of passage" comment.You do seem a little jumped up though, get over yourself.
Personally I don't care if it is a request to move over or a right. I move over when I see a blue light.
Nigel Worc's said:
So do I, but it is a request, not a demand, and there are no rules requiring any of us to do so, so if someone doesn't, what is the spitty one going to charge them with by "following it up" ?
Words of advice and a gentle chat seems appropriate. Due care and attention if it was malicious (as an extreme example - slowing down to 20mph to deliberately slow and block)
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff