Police driving test.
Discussion
I'm not sure how I feel about this TBH so I thought I'd share.
A friend of mine is a BiB. She's recently been on a two week, (or so), driving course courtesy of her employers.
Her test was, shall we say, recently and sadly she failed on two points.
One was, I can only assume, over hesitancy when approaching a stationary bus and the other was that she exceeded the speed limit, drifting to 35 in a 30 limit meant an instant fail.
The reason(s) don't know how to feel about it are.......
1) I'm pleased, in a way, that she was 'pulled up' about the speeding. (Although I'm very sad she failed overall.)
2) If it means so much then why's she not getting points and a fine? (Don't get me wrong, I don't want her to get points, but had that been me or thee in front of a camera, there would be no leniency, right?)
3) During the bollocking she got, the tester did say that although she had been driving safely, she had 'broken the law'. I really thought the emphasis would have been on safety and observation rather than checking the speedo every two seconds.
Granted I appreciate that BiBs have an exemption to the posted speed limits, but if that's the case then why did she fail?
What do you think?
A friend of mine is a BiB. She's recently been on a two week, (or so), driving course courtesy of her employers.
Her test was, shall we say, recently and sadly she failed on two points.
One was, I can only assume, over hesitancy when approaching a stationary bus and the other was that she exceeded the speed limit, drifting to 35 in a 30 limit meant an instant fail.
The reason(s) don't know how to feel about it are.......
1) I'm pleased, in a way, that she was 'pulled up' about the speeding. (Although I'm very sad she failed overall.)
2) If it means so much then why's she not getting points and a fine? (Don't get me wrong, I don't want her to get points, but had that been me or thee in front of a camera, there would be no leniency, right?)
3) During the bollocking she got, the tester did say that although she had been driving safely, she had 'broken the law'. I really thought the emphasis would have been on safety and observation rather than checking the speedo every two seconds.
Granted I appreciate that BiBs have an exemption to the posted speed limits, but if that's the case then why did she fail?
What do you think?
Edited by Big Rod on Wednesday 2nd May 10:57
I have no issue with her failure. Its a set level me have to meet. Part of that on the test is that all speed limits are kept to its only the national speed limits that we are allowed to use whatever speed we deem reasonable. She has not broken the law (as she has an exemption which would apply for training). The keeping the speed limit is about your observation and car control its also about good practice. The argument is also that part of being in full control of your driving is having an awareness of your speed at all times. It would have been more than those two points alone. One minor speed trangression will not a failure create.
esselte said:
mr_annie_vxr said:
I She has not broken the law (as she has an exemption which would apply for training).
So a police driver who has not yet passed any sort of "ëxtra" test is deemed fit to break speed limits? Bilmey.......
She is under instruction. ALL police officers have the legal exemption when using a vehicle for police purposes (this will either soon change or is changing to fall in line with ACPO policy regarding driving standards). Exceeding the limit will be part of that test and instruction. On driving courses in my force at least your not supposed to breach the limit on posted limits unless carrying out blue light training runs. You can go above the national posted limit signs. To see if your fit to be allowed to exceed the limits you will have to exceed them in training. My force in training limits excesss by 20 mph above the posted limit on blue light training.
The test she is taking is at the end of her driving course which would have been three weeks. Most likely the 'standard' course.
Just so I'm straight on this Mr annie, please forgive me and correct me as necessary.........
Which kind'a cancels out your initial statement doesn't it? If I read it right, you're saying that she/you have an exemption for NSL+, which says to me that she has indeed broken the law. So why didn't she get points and a fine?
That's how I'd interpret it. Granted I wasn't there so may not know all the facts, but as we all know that it's more important to pay attention to the hazards around you it may not be prudent to concentrate on the speedometer from time to time. Creeping above the limit isn't the worlds worst crime, and I'd be quite happy for her to have passed on that minor point TBH, but if the offence is bad enough to be failed on then surely it's worthy of the application of the discipline we're all subject to.
You said:
Its a set level me have to meet. Part of that on the test is that all speed limits are kept to its only the national speed limits that we are allowed to use whatever speed we deem reasonable.
Then you said:
She has not broken the law (as she has an exemption which would apply for training).
Which kind'a cancels out your initial statement doesn't it? If I read it right, you're saying that she/you have an exemption for NSL+, which says to me that she has indeed broken the law. So why didn't she get points and a fine?
mr_annie_vxr said:
The keeping the speed limit is about your observation and car control its also about good practice. The argument is also that part of being in full control of your driving is having an awareness of your speed at all times. It would have been more than those two points alone. One minor speed trangression will not a failure create.
That's how I'd interpret it. Granted I wasn't there so may not know all the facts, but as we all know that it's more important to pay attention to the hazards around you it may not be prudent to concentrate on the speedometer from time to time. Creeping above the limit isn't the worlds worst crime, and I'd be quite happy for her to have passed on that minor point TBH, but if the offence is bad enough to be failed on then surely it's worthy of the application of the discipline we're all subject to.
Big Rod said:
Just so I'm straight on this Mr annie, please forgive me and correct me as necessary.........
Which kind'a cancels out your initial statement doesn't it? If I read it right, you're saying that she/you have an exemption for NSL+, which says to me that she has indeed broken the law. So why didn't she get points and a fine?
That's how I'd interpret it. Granted I wasn't there so may not know all the facts, but as we all know that it's more important to pay attention to the hazards around you it may not be prudent to concentrate on the speedometer from time to time. Creeping above the limit isn't the worlds worst crime, and I'd be quite happy for her to have passed on that minor point TBH, but if the offence is bad enough to be failed on then surely it's worthy of the application of the discipline we're all subject to.
You said:
Its a set level me have to meet. Part of that on the test is that all speed limits are kept to its only the national speed limits that we are allowed to use whatever speed we deem reasonable.
Then you said:
She has not broken the law (as she has an exemption which would apply for training).
Which kind'a cancels out your initial statement doesn't it? If I read it right, you're saying that she/you have an exemption for NSL+, which says to me that she has indeed broken the law. So why didn't she get points and a fine?
mr_annie_vxr said:
The keeping the speed limit is about your observation and car control its also about good practice. The argument is also that part of being in full control of your driving is having an awareness of your speed at all times. It would have been more than those two points alone. One minor speed trangression will not a failure create.
That's how I'd interpret it. Granted I wasn't there so may not know all the facts, but as we all know that it's more important to pay attention to the hazards around you it may not be prudent to concentrate on the speedometer from time to time. Creeping above the limit isn't the worlds worst crime, and I'd be quite happy for her to have passed on that minor point TBH, but if the offence is bad enough to be failed on then surely it's worthy of the application of the discipline we're all subject to.
As I tried to make clear, although we are expected in training and in this final drive to keep to posted limits, you are legally exempt from them which is why its not an offence but a mark down. I would suggest there was more than one tarngression of that limit. The test is about a whole host of skills one of which is keeping to posted limits (even if legally in this instance she would not be required to). Personaly I have no issues with her failure. Its a national standard and with the ever increasing focus on police driving and the headlines about fatalities (although very very few involve the police officers actual driving) it is right and proper that we have a fixed mark to achieve. There would have been more than just two points of failure unless they were considered serious enough. Keeping to the posted limit should not be a problem for 'standard' or 'advanced' driver. After all we expect all of you to do it.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff