harassing driving...worth doing anything?
Discussion
I was travelling with my daughter this evening with her driving her car behind me. I could see that the car behind her was doing some appalling things. Lights on main beam, pulling out as if to overtake and pulling back in, travelling excveptionally close to the back of her car.
Is it worth reporting? If so, to whom and how?
Graham
Is it worth reporting? If so, to whom and how?
Graham
gridgway said:
I was travelling with my daughter this evening with her driving her car behind me. I could see that the car behind her was doing some appalling things. Lights on main beam, pulling out as if to overtake and pulling back in, travelling excveptionally close to the back of her car.
Is it worth reporting? If so, to whom and how?
Graham
Is it worth reporting? If so, to whom and how?
Graham
Just the sort of dangerous, idiotic behaviour that a trafpol could pick up on. Oh hang on we don't need them coz of all the cameras we've got now.
Should be worth reporting, trouble is it's your word against theirs, so doubt if BiB would be interested, (no implication of any fault with BiB in this case, just that's the way it is).
Sorry andmole I never want to disagree with you but there are two witnesses. The statements will corroborate each other of what took place. Its all down to a question of credibility.
If both witnesses can id the driver then bags of evidence to report this one.
Is it Scotland? Classic breach of the peace at common law. Stuff the RTA.
I got a conviction on this exact same thing 1 month ago. Ned got £500 fine.
Roadragers beware.
If both witnesses can id the driver then bags of evidence to report this one.
Is it Scotland? Classic breach of the peace at common law. Stuff the RTA.
I got a conviction on this exact same thing 1 month ago. Ned got £500 fine.
Roadragers beware.
OK I don't know about English law so I can't speak with authority on this but I do know that the basics you have to look at is
1. Has a crime been comitted?
2. Is there sufficient evidence to establish a charge?
3. Can the accused be identified?
If the answer is yes then you have loads to take it further.
Report it, stand up against this bully and put the fear you and your family had right back at him.
If this happened in Scotland I would be giving the owner of the car a wee visit tonight and asking some bloody hard questions.
All the best.
1. Has a crime been comitted?
2. Is there sufficient evidence to establish a charge?
3. Can the accused be identified?
If the answer is yes then you have loads to take it further.
Report it, stand up against this bully and put the fear you and your family had right back at him.
If this happened in Scotland I would be giving the owner of the car a wee visit tonight and asking some bloody hard questions.
All the best.
gently bentley said:
OK I don't know about English law so I can't speak with authority on this but I do know that the basics you have to look at is
1. Has a crime been comitted?
2. Is there sufficient evidence to establish a charge?
3. Can the accused be identified?
If the answer is yes then you have loads to take it further.
Report it, stand up against this bully and put the fear you and your family had right back at him.
If this happened in Scotland I would be giving the owner of the car a wee visit tonight and asking some bloody hard questions.
All the best.
1. Has a crime been comitted?
2. Is there sufficient evidence to establish a charge?
3. Can the accused be identified?
If the answer is yes then you have loads to take it further.
Report it, stand up against this bully and put the fear you and your family had right back at him.
If this happened in Scotland I would be giving the owner of the car a wee visit tonight and asking some bloody hard questions.
All the best.
Good for you GB, and I stand corrected, of course there were 2 cars witnessing the poor behaviour.
However similar things have happened to me, admittedly I was the only witness, I was nearly forced off the road at a roundabout, and the local BiB weren't particulary interested. Might have been because the driver was a BiB?
Whilst I have you attention GB, perhaps you can advise about that incident.
I'm approaching a roundabout, and am intending to take the 3rd exit, so I approach in the right hand lane, and the left hand lane is empty as I approach. As I go round the rounadbout, I am overtaken on the left by BiB, who cuts in front of me and takes the third exit, nearly forcing me into a road sign.
When I complain I am told that it is my driving at fault because I was in the wrong lane, why?
Because this roundabout has been built recently, and is off line from the road, so the 3rd exit is actually straight on, as shown on the road signs, but you have to travel more than halfway round to get to it. By the way, the 4th exit is the road that I approached on.
The local BiB inspector telephoned me, and basically told me that I was wrong and was an idiot, and was quite short with me in the process.
Any thoughts GB?
The road thing confuses me a bit. I have to be honest Ive never heard of such a layout.
Set that aside. The Inspector is wrong and could be the subject of a complaint. Incivility to a mop is a regulation offence. there is no excuse.
If an Inspector is carrying on like that what the hell example is that to a bib.
Ok say you were in the wrong. I'm not saying you were but say you were. What would be wrong with the Inspector saying.
Sir Ive investigated and I want to go back through what happened that night...bla bla bla. It turns out from the information you gave me you missread the road layout and the officers did nothing wrong. I interviewed the officers and they remember the incident and thought 'these things happen etc' or they couldn't remember it (which is more likely if they think there is a millionth of a chance they have done something wrong)
I'll read your road thing again though because its stumpped me. That does not in any way deter from the response you got from the Inspector.
You have the option now of ' Bring bring....Chief Inspector please...'
Set that aside. The Inspector is wrong and could be the subject of a complaint. Incivility to a mop is a regulation offence. there is no excuse.
If an Inspector is carrying on like that what the hell example is that to a bib.
Ok say you were in the wrong. I'm not saying you were but say you were. What would be wrong with the Inspector saying.
Sir Ive investigated and I want to go back through what happened that night...bla bla bla. It turns out from the information you gave me you missread the road layout and the officers did nothing wrong. I interviewed the officers and they remember the incident and thought 'these things happen etc' or they couldn't remember it (which is more likely if they think there is a millionth of a chance they have done something wrong)
I'll read your road thing again though because its stumpped me. That does not in any way deter from the response you got from the Inspector.
You have the option now of ' Bring bring....Chief Inspector please...'
Ive read the road thing again and I'm still a bit lost. It should be down to road markings and lane discipline.
I'll stick my neck out and I'm not 100% but the bibs undertook you on a round-a-bout. That itself seems a bit daft of them, then they crossed into your lane. Thats what I'm reading from it. Its not very good driving and since they should be setting an example of driving to the system of car control I think they have let themselves down. Not exactly a good example of careful and compitent driving.
If you were driving like an idiot according to the Inspector then why did the bibs not stop you to have a word?
I'll stick my neck out and I'm not 100% but the bibs undertook you on a round-a-bout. That itself seems a bit daft of them, then they crossed into your lane. Thats what I'm reading from it. Its not very good driving and since they should be setting an example of driving to the system of car control I think they have let themselves down. Not exactly a good example of careful and compitent driving.
If you were driving like an idiot according to the Inspector then why did the bibs not stop you to have a word?
gently bentley said:
Ive read the road thing again and I'm still a bit lost. It should be down to road markings and lane discipline.
I'll stick my neck out and I'm not 100% but the bibs undertook you on a round-a-bout. That itself seems a bit daft of them, then they crossed into your lane. Thats what I'm reading from it. Its not very good driving and since they should be setting an example of driving to the system of car control I think they have let themselves down. Not exactly a good example of careful and compitent driving.
If you were driving like an idiot according to the Inspector then why did the bibs not stop you to have a word?
I'll stick my neck out and I'm not 100% but the bibs undertook you on a round-a-bout. That itself seems a bit daft of them, then they crossed into your lane. Thats what I'm reading from it. Its not very good driving and since they should be setting an example of driving to the system of car control I think they have let themselves down. Not exactly a good example of careful and compitent driving.
If you were driving like an idiot according to the Inspector then why did the bibs not stop you to have a word?
Is is an odd layout, caused by the fact that the roundabout was added later to allow easy access to a new housing estate. The roundabout is off centre from the line of the original main road, and the main road was curved into the roundabout. To go "straight on", and it is signed as straight on by the way, you have to drive about 2/3rds of the way round, and it is the 3rd exit. Going the other way you only have to drive about 1/3rd of the way round, and straight on is the 1st exit. There are 2 of these, one after the other, within about 1/4 of a mile, on the main road from Lancaster to Morecambe, both with this off centre arrangement.
Unfortunately this all happened some time ago, so I can't follow it up now. Let's just say that this, and more recent incidents, have slightly coloured my view of our local BiB. Just wish I lived on your patch GB!
andmole said:
gently bentley said:
Ive read the road thing again and I'm still a bit lost. It should be down to road markings and lane discipline.
I'll stick my neck out and I'm not 100% but the bibs undertook you on a round-a-bout. That itself seems a bit daft of them, then they crossed into your lane. Thats what I'm reading from it. Its not very good driving and since they should be setting an example of driving to the system of car control I think they have let themselves down. Not exactly a good example of careful and compitent driving.
If you were driving like an idiot according to the Inspector then why did the bibs not stop you to have a word?
I'll stick my neck out and I'm not 100% but the bibs undertook you on a round-a-bout. That itself seems a bit daft of them, then they crossed into your lane. Thats what I'm reading from it. Its not very good driving and since they should be setting an example of driving to the system of car control I think they have let themselves down. Not exactly a good example of careful and compitent driving.
If you were driving like an idiot according to the Inspector then why did the bibs not stop you to have a word?
Is is an odd layout, caused by the fact that the roundabout was added later to allow easy access to a new housing estate. The roundabout is off centre from the line of the original main road, and the main road was curved into the roundabout. To go "straight on", and it is signed as straight on by the way, you have to drive about 2/3rds of the way round, and it is the 3rd exit. Going the other way you only have to drive about 1/3rd of the way round, and straight on is the 1st exit. There are 2 of these, one after the other, within about 1/4 of a mile, on the main road from Lancaster to Morecambe, both with this off centre arrangement.
Unfortunately this all happened some time ago, so I can't follow it up now. Let's just say that this, and more recent incidents, have slightly coloured my view of our local BiB. Just wish I lived on your patch GB!
It sounds as if the BIB was in the wrong, unless you weren't indicating or you were indicating right when trying to take the roundabout exit.
Re andmole's incident.
Sounds like to me he was approaching a roundabout with 4 exits. (for the pedants that includes the road he is currently on)
Planning to take 3rd exit which is beyond 12 o'clock on road layout but not on the signs. (seems odd but nothing unusual for road planners)
Seems to me an approach in right hand lane is correct unles signs or road markings indicate otherwise.
Further thought if Inspector Muppet (and I agree with GB about lack of diplomacy) insists that it was incorrect to approach in right hand lane, then that is tantamount to saying that the only reason for using right hand lane would be for traffic that intend to do a 360 and take 4th and last exit.
Surely not, Shirley!
Sounds like to me he was approaching a roundabout with 4 exits. (for the pedants that includes the road he is currently on)
Planning to take 3rd exit which is beyond 12 o'clock on road layout but not on the signs. (seems odd but nothing unusual for road planners)
Seems to me an approach in right hand lane is correct unles signs or road markings indicate otherwise.
Further thought if Inspector Muppet (and I agree with GB about lack of diplomacy) insists that it was incorrect to approach in right hand lane, then that is tantamount to saying that the only reason for using right hand lane would be for traffic that intend to do a 360 and take 4th and last exit.
Surely not, Shirley!
Call in at your local police station , find a friendly police Sgt and make a complaint - i did about a taxi year or so ago - i wanted to do 25 in 20 - he objected, come 30 - he got arsy -i stopped and asked him his problem - he had no excuse - drove straight to police station , with taxi number - Sgt was very concerned.
Flat in Fifth said:
Re andmole's incident.
Sounds like to me he was approaching a roundabout with 4 exits. (for the pedants that includes the road he is currently on)
Planning to take 3rd exit which is beyond 12 o'clock on road layout but not on the signs. (seems odd but nothing unusual for road planners)
Seems to me an approach in right hand lane is correct unles signs or road markings indicate otherwise.
Further thought if Inspector Muppet (and I agree with GB about lack of diplomacy) insists that it was incorrect to approach in right hand lane, then that is tantamount to saying that the only reason for using right hand lane would be for traffic that intend to do a 360 and take 4th and last exit.
Surely not, Shirley!
Sounds like to me he was approaching a roundabout with 4 exits. (for the pedants that includes the road he is currently on)
Planning to take 3rd exit which is beyond 12 o'clock on road layout but not on the signs. (seems odd but nothing unusual for road planners)
Seems to me an approach in right hand lane is correct unles signs or road markings indicate otherwise.
Further thought if Inspector Muppet (and I agree with GB about lack of diplomacy) insists that it was incorrect to approach in right hand lane, then that is tantamount to saying that the only reason for using right hand lane would be for traffic that intend to do a 360 and take 4th and last exit.
Surely not, Shirley!
That's what I thought, thanks for your support.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff