Police enquiry at home
Discussion
The big yin said:
Is it a possibility the op and complainer were ina queue of slow ish traffic and the op overtook a few vehicles and pulled in to a not space in front of the complainers and they had to brake to let him in but only because they had not left enough space .
I think I would be wanting to see any evidence before deciding whether guilty or not.
There are so many scenarios. Eg the complainant could be one of those morons who accelerates when being over taken and consequently has to brake. I think I would be wanting to see any evidence before deciding whether guilty or not.
The op really does need some proper evidence
I remember years ago studying how to calculate risk. It is probability multiplied by consequence.
Taking the fixed penalty: probability is 100%. Cost is £100, plus minor insurance increased let's say £50 for 3 years. Total risk £250 and it's done.
Contest it in court.
Probability? From what I've heard of English magistrates, they can be cranky when it comes to motoring offences.
Visions of Rumpole pacing around pontificating whether some obscure appeal judgement defines an accident correctly, that the two colluded and the whole thing should be thrown out? Fah, it will fall as flat as a pancake.
As long as the two car occupants describe calmly a credible situation that reflects badly on the OP, the OP is toast in court.
Any reasonably intelligent people should be able to do this with ease. Columbo only ever pulled things apart so easily because it was scripted that way.
I would imagine it would be far harder in real life, especially with no particular experience at doing it.
So, back to probability of loss in court - easily 50%, probably 75%. Because people who have the nouse to correctly record a number, and go to the effort of contacting the police are likely to be intelligent enough to not cock it up in front of the court.
Consequences at court? Well, it will be more than £100, and more than 3 points, as I understand there is a sort of inbuilt punishment for "wasting" the time of the court.
So let's double the £100 to £200, and keep insurance the same: that's £350 now, which at 75% will be a higher risk if £263.
Plus all the agro, uncertainty and frustration.
Probability of the Scottish CPS throwing it out? Hmm, it's impossible to judge. Sounds nice, but you would be throwing the dice blindly on that one.
Frankly, unless the OP has a squeaky clean conscience, is very good at investigative questioning, and adept at debating points on the fly, I would think taking the fpn is the best strategy to minimise risk.
Sucks, but that's where I am on it.
Taking the fixed penalty: probability is 100%. Cost is £100, plus minor insurance increased let's say £50 for 3 years. Total risk £250 and it's done.
Contest it in court.
Probability? From what I've heard of English magistrates, they can be cranky when it comes to motoring offences.
Visions of Rumpole pacing around pontificating whether some obscure appeal judgement defines an accident correctly, that the two colluded and the whole thing should be thrown out? Fah, it will fall as flat as a pancake.
As long as the two car occupants describe calmly a credible situation that reflects badly on the OP, the OP is toast in court.
Any reasonably intelligent people should be able to do this with ease. Columbo only ever pulled things apart so easily because it was scripted that way.
I would imagine it would be far harder in real life, especially with no particular experience at doing it.
So, back to probability of loss in court - easily 50%, probably 75%. Because people who have the nouse to correctly record a number, and go to the effort of contacting the police are likely to be intelligent enough to not cock it up in front of the court.
Consequences at court? Well, it will be more than £100, and more than 3 points, as I understand there is a sort of inbuilt punishment for "wasting" the time of the court.
So let's double the £100 to £200, and keep insurance the same: that's £350 now, which at 75% will be a higher risk if £263.
Plus all the agro, uncertainty and frustration.
Probability of the Scottish CPS throwing it out? Hmm, it's impossible to judge. Sounds nice, but you would be throwing the dice blindly on that one.
Frankly, unless the OP has a squeaky clean conscience, is very good at investigative questioning, and adept at debating points on the fly, I would think taking the fpn is the best strategy to minimise risk.
Sucks, but that's where I am on it.
Conversely, do these complainants expect to have to attend court in person and state their case in person, confidently and believably, potentially taking a day off work each, all to stitch up a fellow motorist?
Or are they just busybodies who think they can go running to the law at the drop of a hat and expect the OP to fold at the first sign of any kind of pressure, but never imagined they would have to spend time and money to show up in court to justify their allegation?
Or are they just busybodies who think they can go running to the law at the drop of a hat and expect the OP to fold at the first sign of any kind of pressure, but never imagined they would have to spend time and money to show up in court to justify their allegation?
Peter3442 said:
Presumably, if the OP, or whoever the offending driver was, overtook the other car 'at speed,' he was going much faster than them. In that case, why did they need to brake hard to avoid a vehicle in front of them that was moving faster than they were? It makes no sense and their evidence should be discounted.
If they claimed that he had cut in too early when overtaking them, they might have an argument, but from what OP writes that's not the case.
As OP says he has no recollection of the incident, he should have every right to ask the police to provide him with all the information they have. There must be at least the full written statements from the occupants of the other car. And, if they subsequently produce something else damning in court, shouldn't he ask them why they wasted everyone's time and money by not showing it to him earlier.
I would imagine that courts are aware of the value of the evidence/opinions of two people in a car. Many years ago, I was driving around a roundabout at normal speed and following a correct line. Another car entered the roundabout at the entrance after mine and drove into the side of my car. The two occupants stated to their insurance company that I had driven in front of them and that I shouldn't have entered the roundabout when they were approaching! In the end, their insurance paid for my repairs and also my costs.
He will if he decides to go to court. If they claimed that he had cut in too early when overtaking them, they might have an argument, but from what OP writes that's not the case.
As OP says he has no recollection of the incident, he should have every right to ask the police to provide him with all the information they have. There must be at least the full written statements from the occupants of the other car. And, if they subsequently produce something else damning in court, shouldn't he ask them why they wasted everyone's time and money by not showing it to him earlier.
I would imagine that courts are aware of the value of the evidence/opinions of two people in a car. Many years ago, I was driving around a roundabout at normal speed and following a correct line. Another car entered the roundabout at the entrance after mine and drove into the side of my car. The two occupants stated to their insurance company that I had driven in front of them and that I shouldn't have entered the roundabout when they were approaching! In the end, their insurance paid for my repairs and also my costs.
Some years ago I had a similar thing to this happen. Two policemen turned up at my house on a Saturday afternoon and told me somebody had reported me for undertaking them and causing them to brake. I genuinely had no recollection of this alleged incident and told them so.
After much discussion about when and were this was supposed have happened and me still having no recollection of it, I asked what would happen now?
The policemen said that nothing would happen as the person who reported it did not want to make a formal statement. Then they told me to take it easy on the road and left!
While they were at my house I noticed that my name was one of many names on a stack of papers they were holding and each name had a little paragraph after it. So I think they were having an afternoon out banging on doors and accusing people of things. Probably if they accuse enough people somebody will admit to something and they’ll be able to issue a ticket and get their stats up.
After much discussion about when and were this was supposed have happened and me still having no recollection of it, I asked what would happen now?
The policemen said that nothing would happen as the person who reported it did not want to make a formal statement. Then they told me to take it easy on the road and left!
While they were at my house I noticed that my name was one of many names on a stack of papers they were holding and each name had a little paragraph after it. So I think they were having an afternoon out banging on doors and accusing people of things. Probably if they accuse enough people somebody will admit to something and they’ll be able to issue a ticket and get their stats up.
TSS said:
... Probably if they accuse enough people somebody will admit to something and they’ll be able to issue a ticket and get their stats up.
I'm sure you're right. Most Police don't have enough to fill their days so will undoubtedly spend days at a time accusing people of stuff to 'get their stats up' and make their bosses look great. CharlesdeGaulle said:
TSS said:
... Probably if they accuse enough people somebody will admit to something and they’ll be able to issue a ticket and get their stats up.
I'm sure you're right. Most Police don't have enough to fill their days so will undoubtedly spend days at a time accusing people of stuff to 'get their stats up' and make their bosses look great. The whole thing seemed as if the police were wasting their own time.
What is the point of turning up at somebody's house, accusing them of something they know nothing about, offering absolutely no evidence, saying that nothing is going to happen and then going away again? It's totally pointless.
(Then when 6 months later my neighbour's caravan got stolen and the thieves caused quite a bit of damage to my property and his property to gain access the police couldn't even be bothered to turn up).
CharlesdeGaulle said:
TSS said:
... Probably if they accuse enough people somebody will admit to something and they’ll be able to issue a ticket and get their stats up.
I'm sure you're right. Most Police don't have enough to fill their days so will undoubtedly spend days at a time accusing people of stuff to 'get their stats up' and make their bosses look great. carl_w said:
Can the OP ask for the witness statements? Or at least confirmation of the location of the alleged offence and description of the car? Then he could at least work out if it was possible that it was him, and maybe look through some records for an alibi?
Again, no. If it goes to court, then yes.OP would have been told the date and time of the alleged offence, and it's been suggested several times already that he goes back through phone messages or calls, or anything which could track where he was or at least jog his memory where he was at the time, so hopefully he has looked.
FatboyKim said:
OP would have been told the date and time of the alleged offence, and it's been suggested several times already that he goes back through phone messages or calls, or anything which could track where he was or at least jog his memory where he was at the time, so hopefully he has looked.
But not the location? And if OP does so and for date and time of said offence says I have two independent witnesses, my wife and my daughter that both saw me on my sofa asleep after coming home from a night shift...what does poor plod do then? They have the car, but not the driver....?
I play slight Devils advocate. In the early 1990s as drink driving was starting to be cracked down on more and more (certainly in S Yorks) I used to often pick my ex up from the pub she worked at. Many times I was stopped on my way back to mine, young driver, XR2, midnight, just left pub car park, fair does, didn't mind, got to the point Dibble a few times when they stopped me realised it was me and let me on my way.
Now the reason my ex worked in that pub - it was opposite her Mum and Dads (admittedly big posh) house. If I stayed at my exs I'd usually park my car on their drive. This day, I'd not been able to as they'd had a house party. So I parked on the pub car park. Ex finishes work, we were going to join the party but had a bit of "personal business" to do together on that warm summer night first.
At 2am a the 5-0 knock on my exs parents house door. Exs Dad answers. Copper asks where myself and daughter are as they are concerned. FIL ne'er to be assumes we've gone to my folks house. Asks why copper is concerned. Copper replies "Cars is last one on the car park, usually well gone by now and the pub is shut up". FIL ne'er to be times it perfectly..."You know young uns, they're probably shagging in a bush" just as indeed me and ex start walking up their drive, indeed both looking through we'd been dragged through bushes backs as for the last hour I'd been scuttling the exs own bush front, back, side to side and a few other positions as well.
Oh how we all laughed and no one took offence to a friendly local Bobby looking out for citizens of the town.
I play slight Devils advocate. In the early 1990s as drink driving was starting to be cracked down on more and more (certainly in S Yorks) I used to often pick my ex up from the pub she worked at. Many times I was stopped on my way back to mine, young driver, XR2, midnight, just left pub car park, fair does, didn't mind, got to the point Dibble a few times when they stopped me realised it was me and let me on my way.
Now the reason my ex worked in that pub - it was opposite her Mum and Dads (admittedly big posh) house. If I stayed at my exs I'd usually park my car on their drive. This day, I'd not been able to as they'd had a house party. So I parked on the pub car park. Ex finishes work, we were going to join the party but had a bit of "personal business" to do together on that warm summer night first.
At 2am a the 5-0 knock on my exs parents house door. Exs Dad answers. Copper asks where myself and daughter are as they are concerned. FIL ne'er to be assumes we've gone to my folks house. Asks why copper is concerned. Copper replies "Cars is last one on the car park, usually well gone by now and the pub is shut up". FIL ne'er to be times it perfectly..."You know young uns, they're probably shagging in a bush" just as indeed me and ex start walking up their drive, indeed both looking through we'd been dragged through bushes backs as for the last hour I'd been scuttling the exs own bush front, back, side to side and a few other positions as well.
Oh how we all laughed and no one took offence to a friendly local Bobby looking out for citizens of the town.
What's the latest OP?
Have you decided to suck up the fixed penalty or have our day in court?
One thing I'm still perplexed about is your description of the alleged incident. You said "Apparently back in May I overtook another car at speed and caused them to brake hard".
Why would you overtaking them force them to slam on their brakes?
Have you decided to suck up the fixed penalty or have our day in court?
One thing I'm still perplexed about is your description of the alleged incident. You said "Apparently back in May I overtook another car at speed and caused them to brake hard".
Why would you overtaking them force them to slam on their brakes?
Scrump said:
PurpleTurtle said:
Why would you overtaking them force them to slam on their brakes?
I have been behind drivers who brake when a car came in the other direction, I can imagine how extreme they would react if overtaken.The “cause” may simply be total inability to comprehend that an overtake is a reasonable manoeuvre.
skwdenyer said:
Scrump said:
PurpleTurtle said:
Why would you overtaking them force them to slam on their brakes?
I have been behind drivers who brake when a car came in the other direction, I can imagine how extreme they would react if overtaken.The “cause” may simply be total inability to comprehend that an overtake is a reasonable manoeuvre.
A 20-year-old, female relative of mine is helping the police with their enquiries, as she was witness to anti-social behaviour from a customer at her place of work. They had questions arising from CCTV footage of the events, so rang her up on her mobile to discuss this....
... she was woken up at 00:15hrs.
... she was woken up at 00:15hrs.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff