Reasons for pulling over a driver.

[tvrslag]

This is a question for all you serving and or retired officers out there.

My Brother in law (whom I obviously trust very much) was using my Cerbera this weekend to attend a very posh wedding in London. On his way into the city he was being tailed by a vehicle which he noted and rightly suspected was an unmarked police unit. The car had pulled out of a side road behind him, so the driver hadn't sen my Brother in laws face (he is only 26 but still quite baby faced lucky sod). The in law wasn't speeding but still got pulled.

The reason given by the investigating officer was that the car was registered in ******** (not London but also not the other end of the country) and he suspected it might have been stolen. Fortunately I had provided my BIL with all the relevant paperwork, MOT Ins document etc so this wasn't a problem, he was also breathalysed (suspected drunk driving after a friday night out!!??) The car is in excellent condition and just needs two front tyres for its MOT next week which were/are on order.
I have several questions and would like some opinions, although I appreciate the officers checking and stopping to see if the vehicle is stolen, surely stopping someone because the car isn't registered at a London address when the vehicle is in London, is a litlte thin on the ground as a plausible reason. Had the vehicle been stolen isn't there a way for the officer to do a number plate check to get this info prior to stopping anybody? I thought there were supposed to be strict guidelines on the requirements for the stopping of vehicles? In the same way as there are for stopping and searching somebody on the street.
Had my BIL been driving like a loon then I could understand the reason for the stop, but at the moment I'm finding it hard to justify the actions of this officer. No harm done though just a little curious to hear some responses and or similar stories and excuses.

[t-c]

Although the stopping officers gave a reason as to why they stopped your brother in law, in reality they can stop any vehicle at any time for no other reason to ensure that the driver is licenced to drive that class of vehicle.

I would suspect that given the nature of your brother in laws appearance (young looking) that was the real reason it was stopped but they didn't want to come out and say it up front.

At the end of the day, I can appreciate where they are coming from, a young looking driver in a decent motor outside the area to which it is registered, it is probablly fair to say that he was a fair pull, I know because I have done it myself, but then look at it this way, if he has done nothing more than through no fault of his own look too young, then does that not encourage you that at least he can be trusted with your car?

[outlaw]

tvrslag said:

This is a question for all you serving and or retired officers out there. My Brother in law (whom I obviously trust very much) was using my Cerbera this weekend to attend a very posh wedding in London. On his way into the city he was being tailed by a vehicle which he noted and rightly suspected was an unmarked police unit. The car had pulled out of a side road behind him, so the driver hadn't sen my Brother in laws face (he is only 26 but still quite baby faced lucky sod). The in law wasn't speeding but still got pulled. The reason given by the investigating officer was that the car was registered in ******** (not London but also not the other end of the country) and he suspected it might have been stolen. Fortunately I had provided my BIL with all the relevant paperwork, MOT Ins document etc so this wasn't a problem, he was also breathalysed (suspected drunk driving after a friday night out!!??) The car is in excellent condition and just needs two front tyres for its MOT next week which were/are on order. I have several questions and would like some opinions, although I appreciate the officers checking and stopping to see if the vehicle is stolen, surely stopping someone because the car isn't registered at a London address when the vehicle is in London, is a litlte thin on the ground as a plausible reason. Had the vehicle been stolen isn't there a way for the officer to do a number plate check to get this info prior to stopping anybody? I thought there were supposed to be strict guidelines on the requirements for the stopping of vehicles? In the same way as there are for stopping and searching somebody on the street. Had my BIL been driving like a loon then I could understand the reason for the stop, but at the moment I'm finding it hard to justify the actions of this officer. No harm done though just a little curious to hear some responses and or similar stories and excuses.

it gos on alll the time my guess is at first they wanted a look at the car bing nosey ie intrested in there car.

probly ran the plate any im guessing that the details dident match the drive.

so tuged it on the off chance it was hot.

pluss if not give a nose round a nice motor.

teticaly it was an unlawful stop.

unless the had resonable grounds to supect it is hot
having said that if they had just said they want no see your lisence it would have been legal.

if they hadent give the other reson.
once they gave that reson tenicly they need to show there was grounds .

and thats where it becomes a bit of a grey area.

if you complaind you wouldent get anywhere un less you had the stop on tape and leaned on alot.

not realy worth it.



>> Edited by outlaw on Monday 8th September 12:51

[kevinday]

IIRC Madcop posted some time ago, that the only reason for stopping a car is to check the paperwork. In this case I would suggest the cop probably wanted a look at the car, this has happened to me before now, nothing to sweat about.

[tvrslag]

t-c said:

Although the stopping officers gave a reason as to why they stopped your brother in law, in reality they can stop any vehicle at any time for no other reason to ensure that the driver is licenced to drive that class of vehicle. I would suspect that given the nature of your brother in laws appearance (young looking) that was the real reason it was stopped but they didn't want to come out and say it up front. At the end of the day, I can appreciate where they are coming from, a young looking driver in a decent motor outside the area to which it is registered, it is probablly fair to say that he was a fair pull, I know because I have done it myself, but then look at it this way, if he has done nothing more than through no fault of his own look too young, then does that not encourage you that at least he can be trusted with your car?

T C

Totally agree, he is very mature and dealt with the situation well, he could quite easily have mouthed off as some people might have.
My only queery would be is that it isn't really at all rare to see young guys in flash motors whether the money has been obatined through the correct channels is another matter, but with the number of high fliers livin in and around the suburbs It can't be as unusal as it would be in say Plymouth city centre (no offence to any Plymouth PH'ers).
Its interesting to hear that officers don't need ANY excuse, to pull over a driver. Thats a new one on me. Thank for the Info.

[tonyhetherington]

I used to own an Escort Cosworth when I was 19. I owned it purely because of my love for the car, but the image it projected was very boy-racery, and not the one I wanted to show - a downside to the car.

Because of it, I got stopped fairly frequently (especially as I was always driving it long distances to shows, meetings etc and so it was "out of town").

At first I thought it a pain in the neck, but then on reflection I thought it very good. The police that stopped me were always really nice about it - many even asked me all about the car - and they were just stopping me for random check. I came to the conclusion that this was a good thing. Reason? Because the one time that it gets stolen and the one time I'm not driving it I'll be ever so thankful that they decide to stop the car (we all know how "stealable" they are).

Fortunately it never left my sight and I had many happy years motoring in it, however - just a different slant on your thoughts to give you, hopefully, a nicer impression on the situation.

Hope it's been of help
Tony

[tvrslag]

kevinday said:

IIRC Madcop posted some time ago, that the only reason for stopping a car is to check the paperwork. In this case I would suggest the cop probably wanted a look at the car, this has happened to me before now, nothing to sweat about.

Kevinday.
I had visions of something like this happening so as I said I provided the BIL with all the relevant stuff. Strange thing was my BIL said the officer didn't want to look at the paperwork as he would then have to fill out paperwork himself persuent to the stop.
I suspect it was as said just a curiosity stop nothing more nothing less, my BIL who is very law abiding was sh@tting himself the poor guy. LOL

[john_p]

When I got pulled over I got given the two reasons "because your car is registered in London .." (true, I was a student at the time, away at uni) and (my favourite) "because I've seen you driving around a lot this morning" (I was driving to uni, we'd had to turn around to go back to collect someone, then drive back again)

[wanty1974]

A car registered in London doing lots of miles? What would Uncle Ken think?

[tonyrec]

I dont see anythin wrong with stopping a car in those circumstances for the reasons already given by t-c.

Ive done it myself on loads of occasions and sometimes with some great results.

Its basically bread'n' butter policing.