Hit a bicycle today

[stone]

medicineman said:

I don't think resorting to personal insults about peoples intelligence helps

What personal insults?

[Streetcop]

stone said:

So following the incident he does the rational thing and visits the police station and attempts to report the facts with both parties present. He is then advised that the police have no interest. He is then contacted to produce documents! (and hazarding a guess this is going to lead to a compenstaion claim that almost inevitably the ins co will pay out on!) Can you tell me where there was room for discretion here? Discretion does not come into it. The officer concerned in my opinion should have taken details at the time as well as a possible statement from both parties. Surely from listening to the facts initially outlined any fool would be able to see that this would escalate! You appear to jump blindly to the defence of anybody levelling any form of critiscism towards the police service! There are good and bad in all walks of life! Perhaps the officer in question was having a bad day and didn't want to pick up all the additional work that this would create . How would you have dealt with this situation if you were the officer approached? Think! >> Edited by stone on Thursday 29th July 11:34

We don't know exactly what was actually said as we weren't there. However, certain forces have policies set in stone (rightly or wrongly) on what they will record as an accident and what they will not, thus leaving it to the insurance firms. If the officer has complied with that, then that's it..no problem. If he's not, then someone else will record the accident for you.

If a mistake has been made (not saying it has), then it can easily be rectified without involving the complaints procedure and clogging up more of the police's time. Afterall what do you want? The accident to be recorded or revenge against the constable or desk clerk that wouldn't take the report..

As for defending the police's actions...Yes I often do on here. Then again I've critisised certain policies and questioned how some BiB have dealt with some pistonheads.

The reasons why I dont simply defend, but try to explain is to show another way of thinking or another prospective. Whilst not meaning to sound rude...lots of people believe they can police the public better than the job that the police already do. These people have never been in the 'job', but have read many reports and watched lots of tv programs. However, if they were actually in the job and had to abide with all the rules/regulations/legislation/acts and so on that are involved in actually policing, they would see the world in a different light.

These rules and riduculous processes that the police must go through to protect the public and to put away criminals is almost beyond belief at times. The criminals and shitheads in this country abide by no such rules or regulations, yet when they are captured by the police, endless people from numerous agencies are called upon to either get the criminal off the charge or see that it's made lighter.

Street

[Mrs Fish]

That was a short shift at work?

[stone]

Streetcop said:

stone said: So following the incident he does the rational thing and visits the police station and attempts to report the facts with both parties present. He is then advised that the police have no interest. He is then contacted to produce documents! (and hazarding a guess this is going to lead to a compenstaion claim that almost inevitably the ins co will pay out on!) Can you tell me where there was room for discretion here? Discretion does not come into it. The officer concerned in my opinion should have taken details at the time as well as a possible statement from both parties. Surely from listening to the facts initially outlined any fool would be able to see that this would escalate! You appear to jump blindly to the defence of anybody levelling any form of critiscism towards the police service! There are good and bad in all walks of life! Perhaps the officer in question was having a bad day and didn't want to pick up all the additional work that this would create . How would you have dealt with this situation if you were the officer approached? Think! >> Edited by stone on Thursday 29th July 11:34 We don't know exactly what was actually said as we weren't there. However, certain forces have policies set in stone (rightly or wrongly) on what they will record as an accident and what they will not, thus leaving it to the insurance firms. If the officer has complied with that, then that's it..no problem. If he's not, then someone else will record the accident for you. If a mistake has been made (not saying it has), then it can easily be rectified without involving the complaints procedure and clogging up more of the police's time. Afterall what do you want? The accident to be recorded or revenge against the constable or desk clerk that wouldn't take the report.. As for defending the police's actions...Yes I often do on here. Then again I've critisised certain policies and questioned how some BiB have dealt with some pistonheads. The reasons why I dont simply defend, but try to explain is to show another way of thinking or another prospective. Whilst not meaning to sound rude...lots of people believe they can police the public better than the job that the police already do. These people have never been in the 'job', but have read many reports and watched lots of tv programs. However, if they were actually in the job and had to abide with all the rules/regulations/legislation/acts and so on that are involved in actually policing, they would see the world in a different light. These rules and riduculous processes that the police must go through to protect the public and to put away criminals is almost beyond belief at times. The criminals and shitheads in this country abide by no such rules or regulations, yet when they are captured by the police, endless people from numerous agencies are called upon to either get the criminal off the charge or see that it's made lighter. Street

Fair response. From what was posted it sounds to me as that statements should have been taken. Afterall there were injuries involved i.e Cuts and bruises. Please note that my comments were based on the info provided and I appreciate we don't know all the facts. Certainly not suggesting that the officer should be beaten up about it unless of course his actions were negligent hence why I asked how would you deal with the situation with the facts that were outlined.!

[stone]

Mrs Fish said:

That was a short shift at work?

[Streetcop]

stone said:

Fair response. From what was posted it sounds to me as that statements should have been taken. Afterall there were injuries involved i.e Cuts and bruises. Please note that my comments were based on the info provided and I appreciate we don't know all the facts. Certainly not suggesting that the officer should be beaten up about it unless of course his actions were negligent hence why I asked how would you deal with the situation with the facts that were outlined.!

I have to agree with some of the things that you have said..

Thanks for seeing it from my side too mate..

Street

[Streetcop]

Mrs Fish said:

That was a short shift at work?

Hi Honey..
Glad you listen to what I say and keep an eye out for me..

I'm still at work..Just having a break and a cup of tea in the reference room/library with internet access.

I will be going home soon, busy day..
Stolen motorcycle operation today...unmarked offroad police bikes, unmarked cars, marked cars, etc etc..

Nothing...! Zilch!...

Still worth doing...even if we'd managed to find one..

Street

[swilly]

Streetcop said:

swilly said: I think a complaint is in order here at least. Complaint against who? The police for not taking the accident and recording it? If they had just reason for doing so (depending on current policy etc), then so be it.... When people complain about the police all the time, it's no wonder certain officers do everything by the book when they stop you in your car. ie: ticket/report on summons everytime, no discretion, then you can't get complained about. Think! Street

Complaint against the police for not treating the incident in the manner justified.

The incident was a near-miss, could have been worse, and at the least imho the details should have been taken and the cyclist given at least a caution for what is dangerous/reckless cycling.

The fact there was no injury is no reason to dismiss the incident.....for the very reason the cyclist is now claiming he was injured.

More often than not, when you are in an accident the only opportunity to get some concrete facts down in writing is to get it recorded by the police....when they attend or as in this case when you make the effort to go to the stationand report it yourself.

Your claim about people complaining about the police and the consequences being that no discretion is allowed does not make sense.

I doubt anyone would complain about a policeman using his discretion and giving a verbal warning when caught speeding for instance as opposed to a ticket.

I suggest you do a lot less and a bit more thinking yourself, before adopting the stereotypical attitude of police officers all over, that of the "I'm right your wrong give me attitude and I'll give you trouble".

[Streetcop]

swilly said:

Complaint against the police for not treating the incident in the manner justified.

Getting you where/what exactly..You wont get compensation, you wont get the officer/desk clerk sacked. You will just be another on the whinging-whining sorts who suck the life out of each day.

swilly said:

The fact there was no injury is no reason to dismiss the incident.....for the very reason the cyclist is now claiming he was injured.

If that is the policy of that force. Thats' it. Write to your MP if you don't like it...

swilly said:

I doubt anyone would complain about a policeman using his discretion and giving a verbal warning when caught speeding for instance as opposed to a ticket.

Very quick story. I caught a driver committing two offences in one month. The first was a very close Red light, but nevertheless red light. I verbally warned him but didn't ticket. The second, three weeks later, was excess speed, but just over. Again verbal warn, no ticket. However, I did tell the driver that if I caught him again, his luck had run out and he would get a ticket. What did he do? He went to the station and complained that I was 'targetting him'! You just can't help some people!

swilly said:

I suggest you do a lot less and a bit more thinking yourself, before adopting the stereotypical attitude of police officers all over, that of the "I'm right your wrong give me attitude and I'll give you trouble".

You know what you can do with your suggestion, don't you Swilly?

I write on here about what happens day in day out on the streets concerning police/public. What I write is based on my own experience, not other people's, even other Bib. I do "think" before I write. What I don't do is contact you first to see whether or not it's to your liking.

Street

[swilly]

Streetcop said:

swilly said: Complaint against the police for not treating the incident in the manner justified. Getting you where/what exactly..You wont get compensation, you wont get the officer/desk clerk sacked. You will just be another on the whinging-whining sorts who suck the life out of each day. Compensation isn't the issue, getting an individual sacked isnt the issue. The fact you consider people that actually stand up and be counted 'whinging-whining' sorts as opposed to people who may actually HAVE A POINT, does illustrate quite succinctly how out of focus the police force is today, or maybe just you. Not everyone is a scumbag out to get personal satisfaction for a percieved dent to their ego or knockback. It is a shame, maybe it is due to the job, you have become numb to such possibilities swilly said: The fact there was no injury is no reason to dismiss the incident.....for the very reason the cyclist is now claiming he was injured. If that is the policy of that force. Thats' it. Write to your MP if you don't like it... Sorry I didnt realise things really where as black and white. What a simple world we really live in. It is a shame the various police forces didnt adopt the same 'no injury no interest' policy towards speeding offences......ah but they generate revenue and are easy to stack up, fatten the figures so to speak. swilly said: I doubt anyone would complain about a policeman using his discretion and giving a verbal warning when caught speeding for instance as opposed to a ticket. Very quick story. I caught a driver committing two offences in one month. The first was a very close Red light, but nevertheless red light. I verbally warned him but didn't ticket. The second, three weeks later, was excess speed, but just over. Again verbal warn, no ticket. However, I did tell the driver that if I caught him again, his luck had run out and he would get a ticket. What did he do? He went to the station and complained that I was 'targetting him'! You just can't help some people! Agreed you cant help some people. Most people would be grateful though, and I'm sure you'd agree you cant tar everyone with the same brush. I sure many people could tell you dire stories about individual coppers, but it would be ridiculous to suggest all coppers are therefore the same. swilly said: I suggest you do a lot less and a bit more thinking yourself, before adopting the stereotypical attitude of police officers all over, that of the "I'm right your wrong give me attitude and I'll give you trouble". You know what you can do with your suggestion, don't you Swilly? Yes I do, I can suggest it again....and possibly you can actually do some thinking and come up with a more constructive answer than the implied one above I write on here about what happens day in day out on the streets concerning police/public. What I write is based on my own experience, not other people's, even other Bib. I do "think" before I write. What I don't do is contact you first to see whether or not it's to your liking. I dont expect you to contact me for my approval/liking of your writings. Please carry on. As for what happens on the streets day in day out, I would suggest what the police put up with, the public also have to put up with day in day out but without the backup, powers and support the police have, and often without any interest from the police.......until of course some one gets injured. Street

[leosayer]

pentoman, think yourself lucky this didn't happen in Switzerland where the 'bigger' party is always deemed to be at fault regardless of the facts.

[v8 westy]

tis unfortunate but i think the point street-rozzer was trying to make is that the coppers are being undermined by political correctness and the compensation culture just as much and if not more than the general public!
they are being used by the government more than ever before and getting shafted just like the rest of us in the name of operation enduring tony!
the cyclist will get compensation and the motorist will pay! we all know the story!

[towman]

leosayer said:

pentoman, think yourself lucky this didn't happen in Switzerland where the 'bigger' party is always deemed to be at fault regardless of the facts.

same here if you`re A TRUCKIE! (only slightly joking)

[towman]

swilly said:

As for what happens on the streets day in day out, I would suggest what the police put up with, the public also have to put up with day in day out but without the backup, powers and support the police have, and often without any interest from the police.......until of course some one gets injured

Glad i`m not the only one tiring of SCs "We put our lives on the line for you ungrateful lot".

[streaky]

Streetcop said:

swilly said: The fact there was no injury is no reason to dismiss the incident.....for the very reason the cyclist is now claiming he was injured. If that is the policy of that force. Thats' it. Write to your MP if you don't like it.

But this is the point I was making earlier with my quote from a previous post from gone.

IF the force has a "policy" of not taking details of an accident when there is clear evidence of injury, they are, at best, not fulfilling their part of the legislation ... to the potential detriment of the motorist and others involved.

If such a policy exists there are presumably guidelines regarding the definition of an injury. Not all injuries are self-evident; the cyclist might have had a concussion, might have had internal injuries, might have had an cerebal haemorrhage. If such a policy exists, it put that police officer in the position of acting a diagnostic physician ... without the knowledge and training to back it up.

Such a policy could easily turn out to be a dangerous one; improper application (and propriety will likely be determined in a court of law) could lead to a victim's death or long-term disability ... and who will be held to account? The poor BiB on the desk!

Looking at it now from the cyclist's point of view (and assuming they were in fact injured AND were not wholly in the wrong - just for the sake of the following argument), suppose they pursue their claim for compensation (for bodily pain and suffering) and the driver's insurers claim that the, "so-called injuries" were either non-existant or inflicted after the accident ("I suggest that you sustained these alleged injuries as a result of falling down the steps at your local hostelry!"). There is no police and hospital "witness" to support the existance of the injuries immediately after the accident, nor to support their having been received at the time and place of the accident.

In failing to take a statement when injuries were evident, the police officer did not provide the service that was expected of him. (Oh, my Gawd, I sound like an apologetic police spokesperson being quoted in the media.)

Streaky

PS - medicineman[/] - if your comment above about insulting a person's intelligence was directed at me, I'd be grateful if you would explain how I did that (and thank you stone if indeed you were coming to my defence) - S