Letter from the police

[fridaypassion]

What good is "keeping it on file" going to do? Will it help them with a murder enquiry? "Tony go dig that file out this will be the work of that maniac who overtook that lorry in a moderately unsafe fashion last month on the A56"

The police are just dicks to the common man these days. As crime is just too bothersome all they seen to do is get on the tits of normal people. I had a pair of them driving up my arse trying to goad me into racing in my McLaren got 3 points for my trouble. Complained all the way to MP level and although I'm sure he got a bking I never got an apology.

And they wonder why they are so hated

Snotty letters for doing sod all
Knob head traffic cops that think they are gods gift
Complete inability to solve crime
They are all over the place during the day nowhere to be seen at night when all the crime goes on
Picking on "normal" folk that won't give them push back

The police are public servants we are their bosses absolutely not the other way around I think they seem as an organization to have forgotten this. They also seem in my experience to have also missed the point that their own reputation is in the gutter presently. My interaction has made me actively hate traffic cops. Previously no axe to grind.

[Nibbles_bits]

fridaypassion said:

What good is "keeping it on file" going to do? Will it help them with a murder enquiry? "Tony go dig that file out this will be the work of that maniac who overtook that lorry in a moderately unsafe fashion last month on the A56"

The police are just dicks to the common man these days. As crime is just too bothersome all they seen to do is get on the tits of normal people. I had a pair of them driving up my arse trying to goad me into racing in my McLaren got 3 points for my trouble. Complained all the way to MP level and although I'm sure he got a bking I never got an apology.

And they wonder why they are so hated

Snotty letters for doing sod all
Knob head traffic cops that think they are gods gift
Complete inability to solve crime
They are all over the place during the day nowhere to be seen at night when all the crime goes on
Picking on "normal" folk that won't give them push back

The police are public servants we are their bosses absolutely not the other way around I think they seem as an organization to have forgotten this. They also seem in my experience to have also missed the point that their own reputation is in the gutter presently. My interaction has made me actively hate traffic cops. Previously no axe to grind.

Sorry Friday, but I'm a Crown Servant.

Your view on solving crime is a bit warped. 90% of traffic offences have a positive outcome because you either did or didn't commit the offence, there's no grey area.
It's the RTA that makes these offences "easier" to solve, not the efforts of RPU Officers.

For criminal offences it's very different. If the evidence isn't there, it isn't there. If the points to prove aren't made out, the offence hasn't been committed. If witnesses or victims won't/can't provide statements, the offence isn't getting solved. If the Suspect can't be identified, they can't be identified. If CPS won't charge, the offence isn't getting solved.
I can spend weeks/months on an investigation, just to end up with the file being NFA'd.

Edited by Nibbles_bits on Thursday 2nd May 07:27

Edited by Nibbles_bits on Thursday 2nd May 07:28

[Random_Person]

Nibbles_bits said:

Or the Officer in the pursuit calls it off

Or the Comms Inspector calls it off

Or the FCR Inspector (Oscar 1) calls it off

Or the duty Inspector calls it off

Or the duty Sergeant calls it off

You are making assumptions. Half these roles do not exist in some force areas. The bottom three have zero place or involvement in London. Zero. Most of he time they will not even be aware a pursuit is taking place.

There is also no comms inspector. The control room duty officer will be in the building but on a different flor with no access to the radio and managing incoming calls from the public as well as despatch pods. Again, zero involvement or awareness. The officer driving is the only one who could decide to discontinue from your list.

[pavarotti1980]

Random_Person said:

You are making assumptions. Half these roles do not exist in some force areas. The bottom three have zero place or involvement in London. Zero. Most of he time they will not even be aware a pursuit is taking place.

There is also no comms inspector. The control room duty officer will be in the building but on a different flor with no access to the radio and managing incoming calls from the public as well as despatch pods. Again, zero involvement or awareness. The officer driving is the only one who could decide to discontinue from your list.

I would say don't make assumptions on the rest of England based on the Met

[Random_Person]

pavarotti1980 said:

I would say don't make assumptions on the rest of England based on the Met

Which is absolutely true and I know elsewhere does it differently.

However, London has by far the most pursuits / follows in comparison to the rest of the country. Around 30- 35 follows/pursuits a day with 25 - 28 killed or seriously injured per year as a result of this same activity, so with that in mind, very very relevant.

[pavarotti1980]

Random_Person said:

Which is absolutely true and I know elsewhere does it differently.

However, London has by far the most pursuits / follows in comparison to the rest of the country. Around 30- 35 follows/pursuits a day with 25 - 28 killed or seriously injured per year as a result of this same activity, so with that in mind, very very relevant.

Not really if they are an outlier with C&C and processes

[Nibbles_bits]

Random_Person said:

Nibbles_bits said:

Or the Officer in the pursuit calls it off

Or the Comms Inspector calls it off

Or the FCR Inspector (Oscar 1) calls it off

Or the duty Inspector calls it off

Or the duty Sergeant calls it off

You are making assumptions. Half these roles do not exist in some force areas. The bottom three have zero place or involvement in London. Zero. Most of he time they will not even be aware a pursuit is taking place.

There is also no comms inspector. The control room duty officer will be in the building but on a different flor with no access to the radio and managing incoming calls from the public as well as despatch pods. Again, zero involvement or awareness. The officer driving is the only one who could decide to discontinue from your list.

Believe it or not, there is policing outside of London.

And you're incorrect. In MY force anyone on that list can, will and has terminated a pursuit.

[Random_Person]

Nibbles_bits said:

Believe it or not, there is policing outside of London.

And you're incorrect. In MY force anyone on that list can, will and has terminated a pursuit.

I said in London not your area.

[Countdown]

fridaypassion said:

And they wonder why they are so hated

They're hated by people who drive like knobs and hate being told they're driving like knobs.

[Paul Dishman]

This is a vid from the Devon & Cornwall Police DCW Operation Snap

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlqMcR19T4g

If you look at the overtake shown at 13 secs and again at 1min 45 secs you'll see an overtake across a hatched area which earned the overtaker a conviction for DWDCA and a driving course. To my mind that looked quick but safe, I can only think he was prosecuted for going over the solid white line at the start of the hatching so would have been ok if he'd entered the hatched area a couple of metres later.

It seems that the definition of DWDCA is fluid and a manoeuvre on the road may or not be considered for prosecution at the whim of an individual member of the Operation Snitch team.

In the OP's case I'd definitely write to the sender of his warning letter and request clarification of what criteria constitutes an offence of DWDCA and establish what justification they've got for accusing him of the offence, including the video evidence. A letter written in the spirit of wanting to learn a lesson would perhaps get a better response than an indignant letter.

Ultimately if one is blanked or ignored, the best course of action would be to submit a formal complaint, but if doing so insist that you will only communicate by letter or email, so that a formal record exists.

[GeniusOfLove]

Paul Dishman said:

This is a vid from the Devon & Cornwall Police DCW Operation Snap

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlqMcR19T4g

If you look at the overtake shown at 13 secs and again at 1min 45 secs you'll see an overtake across a hatched area which earned the overtaker a conviction for DWDCA and a driving course. To my mind that looked quick but safe, I can only think he was prosecuted for going over the solid white line at the start of the hatching so would have been ok if he'd entered the hatched area a couple of metres later.

Rationally that was safe, and notwithstanding the hatched area it did look fast and the leaves going everywhere made it look dramatic which was probably enough in and of itself in this age of fussing farts.

I'd have made that overtake but I'd have known I shouldn't have done

[Debaser]

Paul Dishman said:

This is a vid from the Devon & Cornwall Police DCW Operation Snap

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlqMcR19T4g

If you look at the overtake shown at 13 secs and again at 1min 45 secs you'll see an overtake across a hatched area which earned the overtaker a conviction for DWDCA and a driving course. To my mind that looked quick but safe, I can only think he was prosecuted for going over the solid white line at the start of the hatching so would have been ok if he'd entered the hatched area a couple of metres later.

It seems that the definition of DWDCA is fluid and a manoeuvre on the road may or not be considered for prosecution at the whim of an individual member of the Operation Snitch team.

In the OP's case I'd definitely write to the sender of his warning letter and request clarification of what criteria constitutes an offence of DWDCA and establish what justification they've got for accusing him of the offence, including the video evidence. A letter written in the spirit of wanting to learn a lesson would perhaps get a better response than an indignant letter.

Ultimately if one is blanked or ignored, the best course of action would be to submit a formal complaint, but if doing so insist that you will only communicate by letter or email, so that a formal record exists.

I'd also be interested to know why that's DWDCA.

[Nibbles_bits]

Debaser said:

Paul Dishman said:

This is a vid from the Devon & Cornwall Police DCW Operation Snap

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlqMcR19T4g

If you look at the overtake shown at 13 secs and again at 1min 45 secs you'll see an overtake across a hatched area which earned the overtaker a conviction for DWDCA and a driving course. To my mind that looked quick but safe, I can only think he was prosecuted for going over the solid white line at the start of the hatching so would have been ok if he'd entered the hatched area a couple of metres later.

It seems that the definition of DWDCA is fluid and a manoeuvre on the road may or not be considered for prosecution at the whim of an individual member of the Operation Snitch team.

In the OP's case I'd definitely write to the sender of his warning letter and request clarification of what criteria constitutes an offence of DWDCA and establish what justification they've got for accusing him of the offence, including the video evidence. A letter written in the spirit of wanting to learn a lesson would perhaps get a better response than an indignant letter.

Ultimately if one is blanked or ignored, the best course of action would be to submit a formal complaint, but if doing so insist that you will only communicate by letter or email, so that a formal record exists.

I'd also be interested to know why that's DWDCA.

Is it because the overtake is completed just before the hatch markings end, and if the overtake had been 10-20s later then the overtaking vehicle wouldn't have needed to enter the hatched area =
Rule 130 "unless it is necessary and you can see that it is safe to do so".

Was that overtake necessary? Or could the driver have waited until they were past the chevrons?

[Roger Irrelevant]

Debaser said:

Paul Dishman said:

This is a vid from the Devon & Cornwall Police DCW Operation Snap

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlqMcR19T4g

If you look at the overtake shown at 13 secs and again at 1min 45 secs you'll see an overtake across a hatched area which earned the overtaker a conviction for DWDCA and a driving course. To my mind that looked quick but safe, I can only think he was prosecuted for going over the solid white line at the start of the hatching so would have been ok if he'd entered the hatched area a couple of metres later.

It seems that the definition of DWDCA is fluid and a manoeuvre on the road may or not be considered for prosecution at the whim of an individual member of the Operation Snitch team.

In the OP's case I'd definitely write to the sender of his warning letter and request clarification of what criteria constitutes an offence of DWDCA and establish what justification they've got for accusing him of the offence, including the video evidence. A letter written in the spirit of wanting to learn a lesson would perhaps get a better response than an indignant letter.

Ultimately if one is blanked or ignored, the best course of action would be to submit a formal complaint, but if doing so insist that you will only communicate by letter or email, so that a formal record exists.

I'd also be interested to know why that's DWDCA.

And me. I could understand if there was a side road off to the right that the hatched area was taking care of as well as the one to the left, but there wasn't. So notwithstanding the hatched area that's really just a bog-standard overtake of something moving slowly.

[otolith]

Nibbles_bits said:

Debaser said:

Paul Dishman said:

This is a vid from the Devon & Cornwall Police DCW Operation Snap

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlqMcR19T4g

If you look at the overtake shown at 13 secs and again at 1min 45 secs you'll see an overtake across a hatched area which earned the overtaker a conviction for DWDCA and a driving course. To my mind that looked quick but safe, I can only think he was prosecuted for going over the solid white line at the start of the hatching so would have been ok if he'd entered the hatched area a couple of metres later.

It seems that the definition of DWDCA is fluid and a manoeuvre on the road may or not be considered for prosecution at the whim of an individual member of the Operation Snitch team.

In the OP's case I'd definitely write to the sender of his warning letter and request clarification of what criteria constitutes an offence of DWDCA and establish what justification they've got for accusing him of the offence, including the video evidence. A letter written in the spirit of wanting to learn a lesson would perhaps get a better response than an indignant letter.

Ultimately if one is blanked or ignored, the best course of action would be to submit a formal complaint, but if doing so insist that you will only communicate by letter or email, so that a formal record exists.

I'd also be interested to know why that's DWDCA.

Is it because the overtake is completed just before the hatch markings end, and if the overtake had been 10-20s later then the overtaking vehicle wouldn't have needed to enter the hatched area =
Rule 130 "unless it is necessary and you can see that it is safe to do so".

Was that overtake necessary? Or could the driver have waited until they were past the chevrons?

The "penalty" of the driver training course - does that not mean that he was given the option of the course instead of prosecution and potentially a penalty?

[Random_Person]

The overtake mentioned above starts too early. The BMW enters the right hand filter for opposing traffic - had they waited and commenced the overtake beyond that point and past the solid line that separates that filter lane, it would have been perfectly viable. The road was empty so it was safe, however the overtake still commences at a hazardous physical feature, rather than once that feature was cleared.

[Nibbles_bits]

Random_Person said:

The overtake mentioned above starts too early. The BMW enters the right hand filter for opposing traffic - had they waited and commenced the overtake beyond that point and past the solid line that separates that filter lane, it would have been perfectly viable. The road was empty so it was safe, however the overtake still commences at a hazardous physical feature, rather than once that feature was cleared.

Was it necessary though?
If they'd waited 20s they wouldn't have needed to enter the chevoned area at all.

[Fermit]

That BMW overtake is in no way DWDC, it's clearly sighted, and no opposite direction traffic.

[ScoobyChris]

Nibbles_bits said:

Was it necessary though?
If they'd waited 20s they wouldn't have needed to enter the chevoned area at all.

It was necessary to enter the hatched area to complete the overtake they decided to take, yes. Whether they should have decided to overtake further up the road is another matter.

Chris

[Paul Dishman]

otolith said:

Nibbles_bits said:

Debaser said:

Paul Dishman said:

This is a vid from the Devon & Cornwall Police DCW Operation Snap

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlqMcR19T4g

If you look at the overtake shown at 13 secs and again at 1min 45 secs you'll see an overtake across a hatched area which earned the overtaker a conviction for DWDCA and a driving course. To my mind that looked quick but safe, I can only think he was prosecuted for going over the solid white line at the start of the hatching so would have been ok if he'd entered the hatched area a couple of metres later.

It seems that the definition of DWDCA is fluid and a manoeuvre on the road may or not be considered for prosecution at the whim of an individual member of the Operation Snitch team.

In the OP's case I'd definitely write to the sender of his warning letter and request clarification of what criteria constitutes an offence of DWDCA and establish what justification they've got for accusing him of the offence, including the video evidence. A letter written in the spirit of wanting to learn a lesson would perhaps get a better response than an indignant letter.

Ultimately if one is blanked or ignored, the best course of action would be to submit a formal complaint, but if doing so insist that you will only communicate by letter or email, so that a formal record exists.

I'd also be interested to know why that's DWDCA.

Is it because the overtake is completed just before the hatch markings end, and if the overtake had been 10-20s later then the overtaking vehicle wouldn't have needed to enter the hatched area =
Rule 130 "unless it is necessary and you can see that it is safe to do so".

Was that overtake necessary? Or could the driver have waited until they were past the chevrons?

The "penalty" of the driver training course - does that not mean that he was given the option of the course instead of prosecution and potentially a penalty?

The course is the penalty