Plod and Numptie
Discussion
Saturday evening, on a dual carriage way, I undertook (rarely done) a moron stuck in the outside lane. I was spotted and pulled by Plod and issued with a "verbal warning". Now, speeding tickets and the like have a finite existence on the old licence then they're gone. Anyone know what the score is with the verbal warning ? is it like, a life long attachment ?
>>> Edited by tegriffic on Tuesday 10th February 18:23
>>> Edited by tegriffic on Tuesday 10th February 18:23
I know nothing about this, so probably should keep my mouth shut...
But if it was given verbally, how is there any record of it? If it was written down, then surely it becomes a written warning?
So I would think that a verbal warning has no record beyond them saying it... No doubt someone knows more than me though!
But if it was given verbally, how is there any record of it? If it was written down, then surely it becomes a written warning?
So I would think that a verbal warning has no record beyond them saying it... No doubt someone knows more than me though!
....//P//Before we comment on this, it would be interesting to know the facts,
Was there another vehicle further ahead, in the near side lane ? If so the "numptie" could say that he had moved in to the outer lane to overtake the said vehicle.
For all we know you could be one of these nice people, who insist on racing up to within a car length of the vehicle in front, whilst undertaking & then cutting up the vehicle you've just undertook.
A bit like the t**t hat did it to me, resulting in me catching him & thus serving a short prison sentence.
Just a thought
Was there another vehicle further ahead, in the near side lane ? If so the "numptie" could say that he had moved in to the outer lane to overtake the said vehicle.
For all we know you could be one of these nice people, who insist on racing up to within a car length of the vehicle in front, whilst undertaking & then cutting up the vehicle you've just undertook.
A bit like the t**t hat did it to me, resulting in me catching him & thus serving a short prison sentence.
Just a thought
RUSSELLM said:
For all we know you could be one of these nice people, who insist on racing up to within a car length...
Like I said "rarely done". There were two cars on the entire stretch - me and him and that was it. Also noting your comments under "Lethal in the wet" thread: "I,ve put the above down to my poor driving skills."
>> Edited by tegriffic on Wednesday 11th February 13:49
Ahh well spotted, you will have noted that I have realised i'm not a good driver, unlike a few out there who "think" they are good drivers.
This undertakeing manoeuvre you carried out was pointed out by my sentencing court as "Dangerous driving" this may not apply to yourself or other drivers "with good ability"
Now you have pointed out that the road was clear I can see your frustration in trying to pass the aforementioned slow vehicle.
The other driver was clearly of poor skill. With this in mind, were you not concerned about him moving into the nearside lane as you went past, resulting in a poorly tiv ?
However, for undertaking I got charged with dangerous driving & a 3 month sentence, you got a verbal warning, lifes a bitch.
This undertakeing manoeuvre you carried out was pointed out by my sentencing court as "Dangerous driving" this may not apply to yourself or other drivers "with good ability"
Now you have pointed out that the road was clear I can see your frustration in trying to pass the aforementioned slow vehicle.
The other driver was clearly of poor skill. With this in mind, were you not concerned about him moving into the nearside lane as you went past, resulting in a poorly tiv ?
However, for undertaking I got charged with dangerous driving & a 3 month sentence, you got a verbal warning, lifes a bitch.
you'll be okay mate...a fine you can pay but at least you won't get points.AND....while you're talking about the plod,I had an experience last summer when this old bill car came from nowhere behind me and I swear he was tailgating me to goad me to push it.Being a sensible lad I obviously didn't push it and at the very next opportunity pulled into the middle lane to let them pass,but you know what?Miss wpc leant out of the passenger window and reprimanded me for going over the speed limit...by about 2 miles an hour???Didn't see them chase down the road after the guy in front of me who bombed off did they?You should have seen the glare I got off them when I next passed them....even coppers can be green eyed you know!!
tegriffic said:
Saturday evening, on a dual carriage way, I undertook (rarely done) a moron stuck in the outside lane. I was spotted and pulled by Plod and issued with a "verbal warning".
you performed an illegal and get let off with a warning!
was the car unmarked?
if it was a traffic or other marked car i imagine that the copper concerned probably felt that you were taking the pi55, doing such a thing in front of him, and maybe you might in some small part feel a bit silly for not seeing him, if it was a marked car.
thank your lucky stars mate. you could have got busted badly enough to prevent you from enjoying your car for some time.
agreed the other driver was in the wrong as well, and i have to put my hand up to having done the same thing, on the track, of course. cough.
TT Tim said:
Should have told him to shove it and go and get the other driver for 'Driving without due care and attention'.
Makes me so cross that plod doesn't police driving standards now, too busy revenue collecting I guess.
Tim
'shove it' would have been 'go directly to jail', etc. in who's interest is it to inflame the situation?
unfortunately the last point is all too accurate. wouldn't like to say it was all their fault at all though.
chimburt said:
'shove it' would have been 'go directly to jail', etc. in who's interest is it to inflame the situation?
I agree, I was talking metaphorocally really, but the double standards issue really needs addressing IMHO.
I had to sit through the BRAKE representative blabbing on about needing more speed cameras everywhere, because 'you never know where the next accident will be' this morning on TV.
The above thread is an excellent example of someone's bad and inconsiderate driving prevoking another road user into performing both and illegal and potentially dangerous manouveur.
Would there be more policing for 'bad driving' if there was a fiscal incentive attached? £60 and 3pts for 'inapropriate use of a public highway', I made that one up btw, in case you hadn't guessed.
But you see my point. I think there could be money in developing a cemera that would determine if you were guilty of the above offence, because, let's face it, we're not going to see the 'human presence' increasing on our road network. Hey, why would we when an automota can collect money 24hrs a day, and that's all it boils down to at the end of the day!
Tim
Have a read of this huge topic from the Speed, Plod & Law forum. www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?p=2&f=10&t=61159&h=0&hw=%3Cspan+style%3D
One of the guys there asked the DoT and the answer was a 'yes,undertaking is legal, but...' The general consensus seemed to be if it is done carefully with plenty of warning and all possible efforts employed to get the idjat to pull over then it was ok(ish). Tho, still down to the opinion of any watching traffic cars as to whether an offence had been committed!
Also to quote: 'The highway code says you shouldn't but it's not in the road traffic act...'
Seems a bit of a major grey area to me.
The thing that does seem the norm is that if someone does get pulled over it's never the fool hogging the fast lane!
One of the guys there asked the DoT and the answer was a 'yes,undertaking is legal, but...' The general consensus seemed to be if it is done carefully with plenty of warning and all possible efforts employed to get the idjat to pull over then it was ok(ish). Tho, still down to the opinion of any watching traffic cars as to whether an offence had been committed!
Also to quote: 'The highway code says you shouldn't but it's not in the road traffic act...'
Seems a bit of a major grey area to me.
The thing that does seem the norm is that if someone does get pulled over it's never the fool hogging the fast lane!
Here's one for you, we've all past our driving test, yes ?
O.k. your on a 2 lane road & you see a parked car, you check your right mirror & indicate right, overtake vehicle, then what do you do ? (I've already checked the answer)
Do you have to indicate, to say you want to move back to the near side lane or do you just move back over.
If it's the latter, then surely any undertaking manouvre would be suicidle ?
O.k. your on a 2 lane road & you see a parked car, you check your right mirror & indicate right, overtake vehicle, then what do you do ? (I've already checked the answer)
Do you have to indicate, to say you want to move back to the near side lane or do you just move back over.
If it's the latter, then surely any undertaking manouvre would be suicidle ?
The definitive answer is:
The Highway Code says you should not pass on the nearside, but it is not a statutory offence. Therefore the fact that you passed a car on its nearside can only be used in evidence against you in another offence, eg, dangerous driving. However, there must be other circumstances to demonstrate the 'danger' - speed, distance from other car, closing gap, etc. - the fact that you passed another vehicle on its nearside is not, of itself, sufficient to convict.
It is easy to work out a defence to such a charge: I saw the other driver look at me in the nearside mirror, I thought he was going to turn right (the Highway Code says nothing about indicating right), I felt it dangerous to stay behind, etc.
The classic defence would be that the other person, by blocking other drivers' ability to pass on the offside, was creating a hazard and I felt it best to overtake in a safe manner in order to put the person and the danger behind me.
So, to clarify, it is not an offence to overtake on the nearside. The fact that you did overtake on the nearside can be used in evidence against you but only if there were other circumstances which made the action dangerous, careless or inconsiderate.
I used to be a prosecutions inspector in the police and if any PC had sent a file where the only evidence was overtaking on the nearside, it would have gone back to his or her sergeant with instructions to educate them.
However, what must be remembered is that most drivers do not expect you to overtake on the nearside so it is advisable to bring to their attention your intention. So flash your headlights, sound you horn, etc, so that you do not frighten them.
And, to clarify a point asked earlier, you cannot have a queue of one. It needs to be a line or sequence.
Derek
Derek
The Highway Code says you should not pass on the nearside, but it is not a statutory offence. Therefore the fact that you passed a car on its nearside can only be used in evidence against you in another offence, eg, dangerous driving. However, there must be other circumstances to demonstrate the 'danger' - speed, distance from other car, closing gap, etc. - the fact that you passed another vehicle on its nearside is not, of itself, sufficient to convict.
It is easy to work out a defence to such a charge: I saw the other driver look at me in the nearside mirror, I thought he was going to turn right (the Highway Code says nothing about indicating right), I felt it dangerous to stay behind, etc.
The classic defence would be that the other person, by blocking other drivers' ability to pass on the offside, was creating a hazard and I felt it best to overtake in a safe manner in order to put the person and the danger behind me.
So, to clarify, it is not an offence to overtake on the nearside. The fact that you did overtake on the nearside can be used in evidence against you but only if there were other circumstances which made the action dangerous, careless or inconsiderate.
I used to be a prosecutions inspector in the police and if any PC had sent a file where the only evidence was overtaking on the nearside, it would have gone back to his or her sergeant with instructions to educate them.
However, what must be remembered is that most drivers do not expect you to overtake on the nearside so it is advisable to bring to their attention your intention. So flash your headlights, sound you horn, etc, so that you do not frighten them.
And, to clarify a point asked earlier, you cannot have a queue of one. It needs to be a line or sequence.
Derek
Derek
Derek Smith said:
The definitive answer is:
The Highway Code says you should not pass on the nearside, but it is not a statutory offence. Therefore the fact that you passed a car on its nearside can only be used in evidence against you in another offence, eg, dangerous driving. However, there must be other circumstances to demonstrate the 'danger' - speed, distance from other car, closing gap, etc. - the fact that you passed another vehicle on its nearside is not, of itself, sufficient to convict.
It is easy to work out a defence to such a charge: I saw the other driver look at me in the nearside mirror, I thought he was going to turn right (the Highway Code says nothing about indicating right), I felt it dangerous to stay behind, etc.
The classic defence would be that the other person, by blocking other drivers' ability to pass on the offside, was creating a hazard and I felt it best to overtake in a safe manner in order to put the person and the danger behind me.
So, to clarify, it is not an offence to overtake on the nearside. The fact that you did overtake on the nearside can be used in evidence against you but only if there were other circumstances which made the action dangerous, careless or inconsiderate.
I used to be a prosecutions inspector in the police and if any PC had sent a file where the only evidence was overtaking on the nearside, it would have gone back to his or her sergeant with instructions to educate them.
However, what must be remembered is that most drivers do not expect you to overtake on the nearside so it is advisable to bring to their attention your intention. So flash your headlights, sound you horn, etc, so that you do not frighten them.
And, to clarify a point asked earlier, you cannot have a queue of one. It needs to be a line or sequence.
Derek
Derek
Excellent, difinative reply - Thanks
Tim
Gassing Station | General TVR Stuff & Gossip | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff