HATO's to replace Trafpol
Discussion
Was reading motor cycle news and there was an article which stated that Trafpol are to be phased out countrywide in favour of HATO's. They are cheaper to employ, but have little or no training and have no powers of arrest apparently. The government have clearly nailed their colours to the mast on their view on which direction they wish to go with traffic control.Its all about cost saving and revenue generation and moving trafpol onto other duties. Won't driving standards improve ( not! )
blademan said:
Was reading motor cycle news and there was an article which stated that Trafpol are to be phased out countrywide in favour of HATO's. They are cheaper to employ, but have little or no training and have no powers of arrest apparently. The government have clearly nailed their colours to the mast on their view on which direction they wish to go with traffic control.Its all about cost saving and revenue generation and moving trafpol onto other duties. Won't driving standards improve ( not! )
Change the word 'HATOs' to 'speed cameras' and you'll accurately describe what is already happening!
DVD me owd china, was it thee or me which first predicted this?
Questions.
Highways Agency are only responsible for motorways and trunk routes.
HATOs currently only responsible for motorway network?
Are they to be extended to trunk routes?
What about significant quantity of roads which have been de-trunked? (oo-eerr Matron!)
What about remainder of road network?
Any references or links in/to MCN article?
Questions.
Highways Agency are only responsible for motorways and trunk routes.
HATOs currently only responsible for motorway network?
Are they to be extended to trunk routes?
What about significant quantity of roads which have been de-trunked? (oo-eerr Matron!)
What about remainder of road network?
Any references or links in/to MCN article?
Flat in Fifth said:
DVD me owd china, was it thee or me which first predicted this?
Questions.
Highways Agency are only responsible for motorways and trunk routes.
HATOs currently only responsible for motorway network?
Are they to be extended to trunk routes?
What about significant quantity of roads which have been de-trunked? (oo-eerr Matron!)
What about remainder of road network?
Any references or links in/to MCN article?
Questions.
Highways Agency are only responsible for motorways and trunk routes.
HATOs currently only responsible for motorway network?
Are they to be extended to trunk routes?
What about significant quantity of roads which have been de-trunked? (oo-eerr Matron!)
What about remainder of road network?
Any references or links in/to MCN article?
I fully agree with your thoughts fif on the future of HATO - a two/three tiered Police Force that was always denied but coming in via the rear door. Just wait and see.
Correct only responsible for roads that Highways Agency have responsiblity for i.e. M ways and Trunk Roads (not detrunked).
Other roads:
Traffic Officers can use their special powers on local roads. However, they must have consent from the local highways authority or the police. It is likely traffic officers may need to use their special powers off network when:
Signs may need to be placed on local roads warning of the major incident ahead on the motorway or
Where diverted traffic off the network will impact heavily on local roads. Traffic officers may then be asked to assist in managing traffic on local roads.
dvd
I understood that the specific, separate, Trafpol departments had been phased out in many forces already?
I did a 400 mile round trip yesterday and saw 1 marked police car (stopped in the shade under a bridge). I lost count of the number of HATO vehicles I saw.
I'm absolutely certain that it won't be long before HATO's gain many of the powers that the Police have.
I did a 400 mile round trip yesterday and saw 1 marked police car (stopped in the shade under a bridge). I lost count of the number of HATO vehicles I saw.
I'm absolutely certain that it won't be long before HATO's gain many of the powers that the Police have.
South down the M1 last week I was in the 911 doing an indicated speed of 90 units per hour (quiet M. way, dry etc etc). One of those HATO vehicles pulled from lane 1, through a virtually empty lane 2 to lane 3 at circa 65 mph clearly to slow me down. He sat in lane 3 at 65 - 70 mph for some distance. Was considering flashing the lights for him to move over but thought better of it.
djohnson said:
South down the M1 last week I was in the 911 doing an indicated speed of 90 units per hour (quiet M. way, dry etc etc). One of those HATO vehicles pulled from lane 1, through a virtually empty lane 2 to lane 3 at circa 65 mph clearly to slow me down. He sat in lane 3 at 65 - 70 mph for some distance. Was considering flashing the lights for him to move over but thought better of it.
I would not have hesitated to report him for at least careless driving.
Only a stupid, ignorant cretin would deliberately block the outside lane of the motorway.
Parrot of Doom said:
Well, provided that the HATOs are trained to the same level as your average Trafpol, personally I don't have a problem with them receiving increased powers. So long as they're not going to be extensions of the Pratnerships.
but see this PH thread
7db said:
Take his number - report for inconsiderate driving.
He does have power to close a lane, however.
He does have power to close a lane, however.
I did think about reporting him however if I did so 'honestly' I would have to say that he was obstructing my progress in the third lane by doing 65 -70 mph. Which would of course mean admitting that I had been and wished to continue going faster!!
Parrot of Doom said:
Well, provided that the HATOs are trained to the same level as your average Trafpol, personally I don't have a problem with them receiving increased powers. So long as they're not going to be extensions of the Pratnerships.
Rumour has it they will be granted powers to dish out on the spot fines, SCPs will no longer have hypothacation so go figure
djohnson said:
South down the M1 last week I was in the 911 doing an indicated speed of 90 units per hour (quiet M. way, dry etc etc). One of those HATO vehicles pulled from lane 1, through a virtually empty lane 2 to lane 3 at circa 65 mph clearly to slow me down. He sat in lane 3 at 65 - 70 mph for some distance. Was considering flashing the lights for him to move over but thought better of it.
Madness.
You're not the only one that such stupid things have been done to.
Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 18th July 16:45
vonhosen said:
djohnson said:
South down the M1 last week I was in the 911 doing an indicated speed of 90 units per hour (quiet M. way, dry etc etc). One of those HATO vehicles pulled from lane 1, through a virtually empty lane 2 to lane 3 at circa 65 mph clearly to slow me down. He sat in lane 3 at 65 - 70 mph for some distance. Was considering flashing the lights for him to move over but thought better of it.
Madness.
You're not the only one that such stupid things have been done to.
Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 18th July 16:45
Interesting. Whilst my indicated speed was in excess of the speed limit (no comment re actual speed - your honour) I believe that blocking lane three in such a manner is more dangerous than doing for example 90 mph down a quiet, dry motorway.
djohnson said:
vonhosen said:
djohnson said:
South down the M1 last week I was in the 911 doing an indicated speed of 90 units per hour (quiet M. way, dry etc etc). One of those HATO vehicles pulled from lane 1, through a virtually empty lane 2 to lane 3 at circa 65 mph clearly to slow me down. He sat in lane 3 at 65 - 70 mph for some distance. Was considering flashing the lights for him to move over but thought better of it.
Madness.
You're not the only one that such stupid things have been done to.
Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 18th July 16:45
Interesting. Whilst my indicated speed was in excess of the speed limit (no comment re actual speed - your honour) I believe that blocking lane three in such a manner is more dangerous than doing for example 90 mph down a quiet, dry motorway.
If I witnessed such a thing, it would be them I'd be ripping into not you doing 90.
That would be the priority.
djohnson said:
7db said:
Take his number - report for inconsiderate driving.
He does have power to close a lane, however.
He does have power to close a lane, however.
I did think about reporting him however if I did so 'honestly' I would have to say that he was obstructing my progress in the third lane by doing 65 -70 mph. Which would of course mean admitting that I had been and wished to continue going faster!!
easy, pull into middle lane and slowly pull ahead, as of yet all they can do is generate traffic cones
combemarshal said:
Reading some of the posts on here it's obvious they should be given powers to issue fines/points, If anyone thinks driving standards are good at the moment they need shooting!!!
Yep, and HATOs acting like this are not really going to pour oil on troubled waters are they
djohnson said:
One of those HATO vehicles pulled from lane 1, through a virtually empty lane 2 to lane 3 at circa 65 mph clearly to slow me down. He sat in lane 3 at 65 - 70 mph for some distance.
Clearly to slow you down? Sometimes they're sent to look for/confirm debris in lane 3, or lane 3 of the opposite carriageway. Once they're past where the reported debris should have been, they'd get back over.
If you're bothered you can always take the reg and report them.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff