Police cutbacks what a joke

[InitialDave]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Is the law requiring stickers that you think is stupid or the law forbidding smoking in company vehicles?

In this context it's specifically the sticker one.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

InitialDave said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Is the law requiring stickers that you think is stupid or the law forbidding smoking in company vehicles?

In this context it's specifically the sticker one.

With employees coming and going, isn't having a sticker in the vehicle the obvious way of making sure every employee knows the score. Otherwise they can claim they weren't advised .

[InitialDave]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

With employees coming and going, isn't having a sticker in the vehicle the obvious way of making sure every employee knows the score. Otherwise they can claim they weren't advised.

I agree. It is a good way of ensuring you remind your employees of the rule.

Shouldn't be a legal requirement.

[pavarotti1980]

InitialDave said:

I agree. It is a good way of ensuring you remind your employees of the rule.

Shouldn't be a legal requirement.

Absolving the employer of liability. Put a sticker in and someone gets caught they can wash their hands of it

[vonhosen]

Glasgowrob said:

More tondo with massaging figures

1 crime detected. 1 crime solved

Only it doesn't get recorded as a crime or a detected crime for the statistics, so that's out the window.

[ED209]

Glasgowrob said:

More tondo with massaging figures

1 crime detected. 1 crime solved

Except it isn't a recordable crime so it would make absolutely zero difference to crime figures.

[InitialDave]

pavarotti1980 said:

Absolving the employer of liability. Put a sticker in and someone gets caught they can wash their hands of it

No they can't. The employer part of the fine for smoking in a company vehicle is not waived just because they had a sticker in the vehicle saying not to.

And again, even if so, shouldn't be a legal requirement.

[Flumpo]

I can imagine it’s frustrating to be fined £200 for something that seems trivial.

But To be fair to the police they haven’t thought up this rule. As has been said, it’s more likely they have been asked to stop traffic and that’s their input. They will be likely get paid for the time taken out to make the traffic stops.

So no loss of police funds, not police issuing the tickets and these traffic officers would be no use helping solve knife crime.

The added problem is people’s imaginations tend to run away a bit. Somethimes I need traffic count data and we have the local police help as they stop every 5th car. That’s their only input, we then have people ask a couple of questions to get the data. They are instructed to tell those stopped its to gather traffic data and they are not with the police.

However a quick check on the local Facebook community pages will show hundreds of posts with conspiracy theories. It’s hilarious to see people saying with such authority it’s due to this or that crazy idea.

Edited by Flumpo on Thursday 24th May 16:57

[pavarotti1980]

InitialDave said:

No they can't. The employee part of the fine for smoking in a company vehicle is not waived just because they had a sticker in the vehicle saying not to.

And again, even if so, shouldn't be a legal requirement.

Try reading it again. i didnt say employee

The employer by virtue of the fact they have displayed a no smoking sticker are absolutely absolved of the responsibility and would not be fined.

Nice work on editing your post after i have replied

[TooMany2cvs]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

InitialDave said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Is the law requiring stickers that you think is stupid or the law forbidding smoking in company vehicles?

In this context it's specifically the sticker one.

With employees coming and going, isn't having a sticker in the vehicle the obvious way of making sure every employee knows the score. Otherwise they can claim they weren't advised.

I think the problem here is that you're thinking of the van as "a vehicle". The law isn't. The law is thinking of it as "a workplace"... The people are in that van because they're working, not because they're there for fun.

All workplaces need no smoking signs.

Smoking isn't banned in pubs. People work in pubs, so smoking is banned there because the pub is a workplace.

[surveyor]

TooMany2cvs said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

InitialDave said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Is the law requiring stickers that you think is stupid or the law forbidding smoking in company vehicles?

In this context it's specifically the sticker one.

With employees coming and going, isn't having a sticker in the vehicle the obvious way of making sure every employee knows the score. Otherwise they can claim they weren't advised.

I think the problem here is that you're thinking of the van as "a vehicle". The law isn't. The law is thinking of it as "a workplace"... The people are in that van because they're working, not because they're there for fun.

All workplaces need no smoking signs.

Smoking isn't banned in pubs. People work in pubs, so smoking is banned there because the pub is a workplace.

My van is my company vehicle. In the same way as most have company cars. I'm confused.

[InitialDave]

pavarotti1980 said:

Try reading it again. i didnt say employee

The employer by virtue of the fact they have displayed a no smoking sticker are absolutely absolved of the responsibility and would not be fined.

If this is what the law says, then fair enough, I'm wrong about this.

Still not changing my position on the signs. I think they should not be a legal requirement for which you can be fined.

pavarotti1980 said:

Nice work on editing your post after i have replied

I corrected my typo of "employee" to "employer" before you had replied. You can tell I caught it quickly, because there's no edit record at the bottom of the post, as appears if you return and edit later.

Your quote of my post contains the original because you started typing a reply before I did this. Nothing sinister.

[anonymous-user]

Glasgowrob said:

More tondo with massaging figures

1 crime detected. 1 crime solved

Is it a recordable crime?

[Sa Calobra]

colinrob said:

Our van just got pulled in dagenham the are police pulling all vans to see if they have no smoking signs displayed, over 10 police there, they moan about not enough resorces well my support for them has gone right out of the window, what a waste of resources, mind you they may get the proceeds of the fine £200, i am stunned

Is that the full story?

Post a pic of the fine with reasons or I'm calling custard.

[Bigends]

Faz50 said:

Is it a recordable crime?

No, its a minor Health act offence, and not a Police matter to enforce

Edited by Bigends on Thursday 24th May 17:35

[Red 4]

colinrob said:

no sticker £200 fine reduced to £150 if paid in 14 days, smoking in van £50 reduced to £30 if paid in 30 days, which is worst

Certainly not a Police FPN.

But Police were there so it's all their fault. Obvs.

Council PCN is my guess.

I agree with the OP though - it does seem petty (unless there's more to this story).

[Elroy Blue]

Multi-agency ops take place on a regular basis. Lots of other agencies turn up (customs, immigration, VSA, DVLA) and do their thing once the Police have done theirs. Cost effective and usually result in arrests, seized vehicles for no insurance/tax and vehicles in a dangerous condition taken off the road. Cost effective and productive

[Sa Calobra]

Red 4 said:

Certainly not a Police FPN.

But Police were there so it's all their fault. Obvs.

Council PCN is my guess.

I agree with the OP though - it does seem petty (unless there's more to this story).

Agree that's why I asked for more than secondhand information.

Unless the OP is directly involved with the drivers how would he know exactly? Is he in fleet or senior management.

Probably smoking in the van or another offence.

[Derek Smith]

PAULJ5555 said:

Meanwhile another child is stabbed to death in London

That's a bit harsh on the OP. It seems you are blaming him. Had he the sense to comply with the law, the child would still be alive.

[sssssssslow]

colin_p said:

Perverted justice further perverts itself. As long as those boxes are being ticked and fines are being collected from all of those dangerous stickerless vans, we, the general public can sleep a little bit easier at night knowing the police have their priorities in the right order.

Meanwhile, actually dangerous moped gangs carry on without any fear of being caught.

I saw a kid moped was chasing another kid WITH A HAMMER and ended up smashing a car window and I called the police, and got... "all our operators are busy" they called me back and were annoyed I hadn't got the make and model of the bike despite getting the reg.