Advised to drive dangerously (in writing) by the Police.
Discussion
Jediworrier said:
Antony Moxey said:
Indeed. I wonder if a similar letter was sent to the officers, who given their training should be even more aware of their obligations and the potential for possible driving mistakes from members of the public than your average motorist.
This obviously passed them by completely so they decided the best way to deal with the situation was to wade in two footed with aggression and confrontation. Poor form from plod, they could have handled it much better.
What mistake did I make? This obviously passed them by completely so they decided the best way to deal with the situation was to wade in two footed with aggression and confrontation. Poor form from plod, they could have handled it much better.
JNW1 said:
The OP said he was at the front of the right lane waiting to enter the roundabout with the police car in the left lane;
but that's not what the OP has said, he has said he was in the right lane and the other car was in the left as they entered the roundabout.One vehicle had to be effectively overtaking the other as at 50m? before the roundabout they were line astern... either the car was in front or the van; they could not have been side by side!
Antony Moxey said:
Marcellus said:
Antony Moxey said:
Indeed. I wonder if a similar letter was sent to the officers, who given their training should be even more aware of their obligations and the potential for possible driving mistakes from members of the public than your average motorist.
Not if they weren't changing lanes on a roundabout though, it may explain what then happened, especially if they were at the roundabout entry before the van, so therefore actually established in their lane past the road marking!as for why do I put it as a possibility, because I happen to think that we are only getting one side of a situation..... a senior police officer has reviewed, undoubtedly spoken to the officers and got the other side and written to the OP and I happen to believe that a senior police officer wouldn't actually lie.
Also I don't think anyone involved would have deliberately driven as a cock so trying to understand what actually happened and why the policeman who is probably more qualified to drive than any of us may have thought that the OP has!
Shuvi McTupya said:
Indeed. I imagine if a cop saw you going straight on from the obviously marked left hand turn lane, he would have something to say about it..
According to the traffic officer I spoke to (who is stationed about 1/2mile from the roundabout) that advised me to throw the letter in the bin he would pull someone over and have a chat with them if he saw them driving in the manner of the officers. What a shame he wasn't behind me when the incident occured.Antony Moxey said:
We’re only ever going to get one side. There’s little point in a discussion forum if we’re going to assume an OP is lying every time they post up details of an incident they’ve witnessed or been involved in.
Ah OK then.... yes OP I'm sorry the Police are complete and utter idiots and you did nuffink wrong, f
k em all as they don't know what they're talking about!Marcellus said:
Antony Moxey said:
We’re only ever going to get one side. There’s little point in a discussion forum if we’re going to assume an OP is lying every time they post up details of an incident they’ve witnessed or been involved in.
Ah OK then.... yes OP I'm sorry the Police are complete and utter idiots and you did nuffink wrong, fk em all as they don't know what they're talking about!
Marcellus said:
All the OP has to do to discount this possibility is answer the question!
as for why do I put it as a possibility, because I happen to think that we are only getting one side of a situation..... a senior police officer has reviewed, undoubtedly spoken to the officers and got the other side and written to the OP and I happen to believe that a senior police officer wouldn't actually lie.
Also I don't think anyone involved would have deliberately driven as a cock so trying to understand what actually happened and why the policeman who is probably more qualified to drive than any of us may have thought that the OP has!
as for why do I put it as a possibility, because I happen to think that we are only getting one side of a situation..... a senior police officer has reviewed, undoubtedly spoken to the officers and got the other side and written to the OP and I happen to believe that a senior police officer wouldn't actually lie.
Also I don't think anyone involved would have deliberately driven as a cock so trying to understand what actually happened and why the policeman who is probably more qualified to drive than any of us may have thought that the OP has!
There was no overtaking anywhere to my knowledge. It was rush hour and there where vehicles in both lanes. When I got to the front of my lane the officers were obviously at the front of the left lane. Who drove past the sign first, who knows?
The Ap/s that I spoke to had no interest in what happened as they were chatting on their radio for most of the interview. He also told me 'we all like to think we're the best drivers in the world' which at that point made it pretty obvious nothing would be done.
The reason I put in a complaint was because of the way I was spoken to/ ranted at despite my first words upon them pulling up alongside me and her yelling out the window 'next time you cut someone up you want to make sure it's not a couple of police officers' being, 'I'm really sorry but I think you may have been in the wrong lane'. She continued to be confrontational and make accusations about me nearly causing an accident until I asked for their details as I would like to email them a picture of the junction at which point they told me I was lucky they were on their way to training so would let me off. The details I was given were not their full details and I was initially informed they were untraceable.
One side of the story,yes, an accurate account, I'd like to think so.
I guess others would have handled it differently as the chap in the van with me said 'I'd have just told them to f off and walked away'.
I've read this whole thread and have thought about the situation overnight....
I must admit I have a very different view to the majority... in my view if you are in the right lane at the entrance to the roundabout you should move into the inner/right most lane (nearest the grass) of the roundabout, not the outer lane further from the grass...
Otherwise you are changing lanes as you enter and I don't see how you ever get to the inner lane?
Notwithstanding that I wholeheartedly agree that the road markings (the left arrow) are, at best, confusing and actually just plain wrong!
I must admit I have a very different view to the majority... in my view if you are in the right lane at the entrance to the roundabout you should move into the inner/right most lane (nearest the grass) of the roundabout, not the outer lane further from the grass...
Otherwise you are changing lanes as you enter and I don't see how you ever get to the inner lane?
Notwithstanding that I wholeheartedly agree that the road markings (the left arrow) are, at best, confusing and actually just plain wrong!
Marcellus said:
If there was no overtaking how do you get from single file to two abreast?
Seeing as he hadn't seen the police car until it tried to take the rear corner off his car once he was on the roundabout, i think it is safe to say that he didn't overtake them and they didn't overtake him 
Shuvi McTupya said:
Marcellus said:
If there was no overtaking how do you get from single file to two abreast?
Seeing as he hadn't seen the police car until it tried to take the rear corner off his car once he was on the roundabout, i think it is safe to say that he didn't overtake them and they didn't overtake him 
Antony Moxey said:
Having received that letter I might be inclined to reply to the author thanking him for taking the time to investigate the incident and coming to the conclusion that the arrows were confusing and misleading.
With that in mind perhaps the author might similarly issue a communique to the officers concerned reminding them of THEIR obligation to be more observant when entering a roundabout and that given their advanced training perhaps they should anticipate motorists’ confusion regarding the arrows.
The author might further remind the officers that perhaps it would be better to try to educate and advise motorists on what appears to be a genuine mistake over confusing road markings rather than admonishing them in a threatening and aggressive manner.
I’m with the OP: I would view the markings as the left lane being for the left turn and the right lane being for either of the two on the roundabout.
Exactly this.With that in mind perhaps the author might similarly issue a communique to the officers concerned reminding them of THEIR obligation to be more observant when entering a roundabout and that given their advanced training perhaps they should anticipate motorists’ confusion regarding the arrows.
The author might further remind the officers that perhaps it would be better to try to educate and advise motorists on what appears to be a genuine mistake over confusing road markings rather than admonishing them in a threatening and aggressive manner.
I’m with the OP: I would view the markings as the left lane being for the left turn and the right lane being for either of the two on the roundabout.
gothatway said:
Some confusion is added by the signage on approach to the roundabout. Streetview shows :
So the turn into the Services is shown as a 90 left, which does sort of accord with the arrow on the road. Nevertheless I think the plod were the plonkers - but not such big plonkers as whoever is responsible for the signage.
I disagree. The plan board and the arrow are clearly indicating that the left lane is intended for the A27 and docks etc.So the turn into the Services is shown as a 90 left, which does sort of accord with the arrow on the road. Nevertheless I think the plod were the plonkers - but not such big plonkers as whoever is responsible for the signage.
Johnnytheboy said:
All it needs is the word "services" in white paint under the arrow. Problem solved.
Like this one:
If they put the word services before the left arrow i think the services would go out of business as 'everyone' would head off back down the A27 looking for it after turning left as instructed Like this one:
Is the wilful misunderstanding displayed on this thread, and others like it, trolling, or just really poor reading and comprehension?
The signage is rubbish, but are you really telling me that, if you arrived at the roundabout in the left lane, as the police did, you would think that you could drive straight on without being very cautious about what the vehicles in the right lane were doing? I don't think you would. You'd think you were in the wrong lane, and you'd either turn immediately left (which is what I'd do, unless there was very little traffic), or you'd make it very obvious to the other drivers that you'd screwed up and you'd appreciate it if they would let you into the correct lane (by signalling right and moving slowly).
The police driver reacted like those civilian drivers who make a mistake, then immediately swear and gesticulate at whichever unfortunate was almost a victim of their carelessness.
As for the arse-covering follow-up letter... words fail me.
EDIT:
Looking at this picture, I imagine that the intention is to ensure that traffic for the A22 London/A27 Eastbourne isn't held up by the queue for the A27 Brighton.
Perhaps the police would be better employed writing to the council(?) about the "confusing" signs, rather than writing misguided letters that attempt to excuse their officers' poor driving and heavy-handed reactions.
The signage is rubbish, but are you really telling me that, if you arrived at the roundabout in the left lane, as the police did, you would think that you could drive straight on without being very cautious about what the vehicles in the right lane were doing? I don't think you would. You'd think you were in the wrong lane, and you'd either turn immediately left (which is what I'd do, unless there was very little traffic), or you'd make it very obvious to the other drivers that you'd screwed up and you'd appreciate it if they would let you into the correct lane (by signalling right and moving slowly).
The police driver reacted like those civilian drivers who make a mistake, then immediately swear and gesticulate at whichever unfortunate was almost a victim of their carelessness.
As for the arse-covering follow-up letter... words fail me.
EDIT:
Looking at this picture, I imagine that the intention is to ensure that traffic for the A22 London/A27 Eastbourne isn't held up by the queue for the A27 Brighton.
Perhaps the police would be better employed writing to the council(?) about the "confusing" signs, rather than writing misguided letters that attempt to excuse their officers' poor driving and heavy-handed reactions.
Edited by gareth_r on Friday 29th June 15:01
gareth_r said:
Is the wilful misunderstanding displayed on this thread, and others like it, trolling, or just really poor reading and comprehension?
The signage is rubbish, but are you really telling me that, if you arrived at the roundabout in the left lane, as the police did, you would think that you could drive straight on without being very cautious about what the vehicles in the right lane were doing? I don't think you would. You'd think you were in the wrong lane, and you'd either turn immediately left (which is what I'd do, unless there was very little traffic), or you'd make it very obvious to the other drivers that you'd screwed up and you'd appreciate it if they would let you into the correct lane (by signalling right and moving slowly).
The police driver reacted like those civilian drivers who make a mistake, then immediately swear and gesticulate at whichever unfortunate was almost a victim of their carelessness.
As for the arse-covering follow-up letter... words fail me.
EDIT:
Looking at this picture, I imagine that the intention is to ensure that traffic for the A22 London/A27 Eastbourne isn't held up by the queue for the A27 Brighton.
Perhaps the police would be better employed writing to the council(?) about the "confusing" signs, rather than writing misguided letters that attempt to excuse their officers' poor driving and heavy-handed reactions.
Spot on.The signage is rubbish, but are you really telling me that, if you arrived at the roundabout in the left lane, as the police did, you would think that you could drive straight on without being very cautious about what the vehicles in the right lane were doing? I don't think you would. You'd think you were in the wrong lane, and you'd either turn immediately left (which is what I'd do, unless there was very little traffic), or you'd make it very obvious to the other drivers that you'd screwed up and you'd appreciate it if they would let you into the correct lane (by signalling right and moving slowly).
The police driver reacted like those civilian drivers who make a mistake, then immediately swear and gesticulate at whichever unfortunate was almost a victim of their carelessness.
As for the arse-covering follow-up letter... words fail me.
EDIT:
Looking at this picture, I imagine that the intention is to ensure that traffic for the A22 London/A27 Eastbourne isn't held up by the queue for the A27 Brighton.
Perhaps the police would be better employed writing to the council(?) about the "confusing" signs, rather than writing misguided letters that attempt to excuse their officers' poor driving and heavy-handed reactions.
Edited by gareth_r on Friday 29th June 15:01
gareth_r said:
Is the wilful misunderstanding displayed on this thread, and others like it, trolling, or just really poor reading and comprehension?
The signage is rubbish, but are you really telling me that, if you arrived at the roundabout in the left lane, as the police did, you would think that you could drive straight on without being very cautious about what the vehicles in the right lane were doing? I don't think you would. You'd think you were in the wrong lane, and you'd either turn immediately left (which is what I'd do, unless there was very little traffic), or you'd make it very obvious to the other drivers that you'd screwed up and you'd appreciate it if they would let you into the correct lane (by signalling right and moving slowly).
The police driver reacted like those civilian drivers who make a mistake, then immediately swear and gesticulate at whichever unfortunate was almost a victim of their carelessness.
As for the arse-covering follow-up letter... words fail me.
EDIT:
Looking at this picture, I imagine that the intention is to ensure that traffic for the A22 London/A27 Eastbourne isn't held up by the queue for the A27 Brighton.
Perhaps the police would be better employed writing to the council(?) about the "confusing" signs, rather than writing misguided letters that attempt to excuse their officers' poor driving and heavy-handed reactions.
i am glad i am not the only one that was thinking along those lines, although i assumed the reading comprehension problem was my own and i was missing something. the fact the op said the police car was on red cross hatched area suggests they chanced their arm with an undertake that didn't come off. having a go at the op instead of accepting they made a mistake is a bit off, imo.The signage is rubbish, but are you really telling me that, if you arrived at the roundabout in the left lane, as the police did, you would think that you could drive straight on without being very cautious about what the vehicles in the right lane were doing? I don't think you would. You'd think you were in the wrong lane, and you'd either turn immediately left (which is what I'd do, unless there was very little traffic), or you'd make it very obvious to the other drivers that you'd screwed up and you'd appreciate it if they would let you into the correct lane (by signalling right and moving slowly).
The police driver reacted like those civilian drivers who make a mistake, then immediately swear and gesticulate at whichever unfortunate was almost a victim of their carelessness.
As for the arse-covering follow-up letter... words fail me.
EDIT:
Looking at this picture, I imagine that the intention is to ensure that traffic for the A22 London/A27 Eastbourne isn't held up by the queue for the A27 Brighton.
Perhaps the police would be better employed writing to the council(?) about the "confusing" signs, rather than writing misguided letters that attempt to excuse their officers' poor driving and heavy-handed reactions.
Edited by gareth_r on Friday 29th June 15:01
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff