Driving without reasonable consideration

[clubchamp98]

So they’re concluding their investigation without even interviewing you? I’m absolutely stunned.

That’s hardly an investigation.

Guilty until you can prove yourself innocent if you have the cash.

Its no wonder people are losing respect for the Police.

 

[IanM]

Isn't that the point tho? Riding two a breast means you are effectively overtaking a car sized object

By such you need to be careful and go other side of the road

Treat like overtaking a tractor for speed

A car sized object crawling along. Super. Bring back the dudes with the red flags

 

[Billysboots]

That’s hardly an investigation.

Guilty until you can prove yourself innocent if you have the cash.

Its no wonder people are losing respect for the Police.

I don’t disagree. You’ll be aware of my background - I’ve never known an investigation to be concluded, whatever level the offending, without the alleged offender being given the opportunity to comment.

Something about all this isn’t right. Either in regards to the police action or, with respect to the OP, in what is being shared here.

 

[PJ87]

I don’t disagree. You’ll be aware of my background - I’ve never known an investigation to be concluded, whatever level the offending, without the alleged offender being given the opportunity to comment.

Something about all this isn’t right. Either in regards to the police action or, with respect to the OP, in what is being shared here.

Has his chance tho, in court, just giving him the option to avoid court

 

[Billysboots]

Has his chance tho, in court, just giving him the option to avoid court

He should be interviewed first. No decision maker can complete a prosecution decision without hearing what an offender has to say.

 

[PJ87]

He should be interviewed first. No decision maker can complete a prosecution decision without hearing what an offender has to say.

Isn't it exactly the same as most traffic offences

You can go to court and plead your case or plead guilty now and accept the fixed pen

I mean you can't get a fix pen without pleading guilty

 

[Imurg]

Has his chance tho, in court, just giving him the option to avoid court

All 3 options are punitive to some extent so he's, effectively, been found guilty with no real chance to defend.
I'm amazed he hasn't been allowed to see the footage - the stills don't provide much in the way of real evidence by themselves.

On another point, although cyclists are higher up the list than car drivers, they still have a responsibility to move over and let traffic past if they are unduly holding people up.
That's not to say that as soon as there's a car behind they have to move over but when you have 10, 15 or more cars queuing up behind there is a responsibility to let them pass.
Tractors have this responsibility too..many a time I've been in a queue and the tractor has pulled over to let everyone through before carrying on.
Responsibilities go both ways.

 

[Billysboots]

Isn't it exactly the same as most traffic offences

You can go to court and plead your case or plead guilty now and accept the fixed pen

I mean you can't get a fix pen without pleading guilty

This isn’t a speeding offence. If you’re captured in a camera doing 50mph in a 30mph limit, then you’re doing 50 in a 30.

Careless driving isn’t like that. There are a number of defences to manner of driving offences, which I won’t go into here. Those can only be raised by an alleged offender if he or she is interviewed under caution.

However this matter is disposed of (course, fixed penalty, Court etc), it still amounts to an investigation, however low level that may be. This isn’t an investigation. The police, allegedly, have taken the complainant’s side, supported by footage which the offender hasn’t even been allowed to see, and he hasn’t been given any formal opportunity to comment.

Sorry. Something here is not right.

 

[upsidedown]

This article gives an insight to how the process works

Can you be prosecuted from dash-cam footage?

The surprising facts about the law

www.bennetts.co.uk

 

[rudebhoy]

I

I don’t disagree. You’ll be aware of my background - I’ve never known an investigation to be concluded, whatever level the offending, without the alleged offender being given the opportunity to comment.

Something about all this isn’t right. Either in regards to the police action or, with respect to the OP, in what is being shared here.

Am on a train heading to Leeds for my daughter’s graduation tomorrow, but I’ll happily post a copy of the letter with the 3 options when I get back home.

 

[Billysboots]

I

Am on a train heading to Leeds for my daughter’s graduation tomorrow, but I’ll happily post a copy of the letter with the 3 options when I get back home.

I’m not doubting they are the options you have been offered. What sounds extremely odd to me is the fact you have not been offered the opportunity to formally respond to the allegation.

The only response you’ve been asked for is to tell the police who was driving your vehicle. I believe I have already accepted that there are different force policies in play regarding out of court disposals, but the underpinning principles of investigation are the same everywhere, and as recently as two years ago when I retired that included considering what a potential defendant in a prosecution had to say. I’d be really, really surprised if that had changed.

EDIT: I should add for clarity that the bulk of my last half dozen years of service involved me supervising a team of investigators. Every day I was writing charging rationale, in which I set out my reasons for a disposal (prosecution) decision. I dealt with a huge variety of offences, including manner of driving offences, before dealing with driving offences only during my last three years. Not once did I make a disposal decision without hearing what the alleged offender had to say.

The move towards allowing the public to submit dashcam footage online may have changed things slightly, as that wasn’t something I dealt with. But the principles of a fair and transparent investigation should not have changed.

 

[cliveb]

At least 10 Road cyclists two abreast doing 10mph up a steep hill entirely blocking the road. Long queue of traffic as no way of overtaking without being fully on the other side of the road. It appears overtaking a bike is now illegal.

Section 3 of the Road Traffic Act:

If a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place, he is guilty of an offence

A bicycle is a mechanically propelled vehicle, yes?
So it would appear that cyclists riding in a selfish manner without consideration for other road users (eg. holding up cars by riding two abreast on a narrow road) are themselves committing an offense.

(Nothing against cyclists in general. I used to be one until it became too dangerous - about 30 years ago!).

 

[Billysboots]

A bicycle is a mechanically propelled vehicle, yes?

No.

 

[cliveb]

No.

Oh, right. I had assumed that because the pedals, chain and gears are mechanical devices this made a bike such a vehicle.
Does the term "mechanically propelled" mean it has to have an engine?

 

[rudebhoy]

I’m not doubting they are the options you have been offered. What sounds extremely odd to me is the fact you have not been offered the opportunity to formally respond to the allegation.

The only response you’ve been asked for is to tell the police who was driving your vehicle. I believe I have already accepted that there are different force policies in play regarding out of court disposals, but the underpinning principles of investigation are the same everywhere, and as recently as two years ago when I retired that included considering what a potential defendant in a prosecution had to say. I’d be really, really surprised if that had changed.

EDIT: I should add for clarity that the bulk of my last half dozen years of service involved me supervising a team of investigators. Every day I was writing charging rationale, in which I set out my reasons for a disposal (prosecution) decision. I dealt with a huge variety of offences, including manner of driving offences, before dealing with driving offences only during my last three years. Not once did I make a disposal decision without hearing what the alleged offender had to say.

The move towards allowing the public to submit dashcam footage online may have changed things slightly, as that wasn’t something I dealt with. But the principles of a fair and transparent investigation should not have changed.

Other than returning the form admitting I was driving, the only contact I have had with the police was when I phoned them upon receipt of the original letter to ask what it was about as the letter was very vague, and didn’t even mention the cyclist.

The officer told me that a cyclist had made a complaint and submitted a video which had been reviewed by another officer who was satisfied an offence had been committed. I told him I had no recollection of the incident and asked to see the video. I was told that wasn’t possible but they could send me some stills. That was the end of the conversation.

 

[Billysboots]

Oh, right. I had assumed that because the pedals, chain and gears are mechanical devices this made a bike such a vehicle.
Does the term "mechanically propelled" mean it has to have an engine?

In basic terms, yes. The propulsion needs to be something other than the poor bugger making the pedals go round!

 

[Billysboots]

Other than returning the form admitting I was driving, the only contact I have had with the police was when I phoned them upon receipt of the original letter to ask what it was about as the letter was very vague, and didn’t even mention the cyclist.

The officer told me that a cyclist had made a complaint and submitted a video which had been reviewed by another officer who was satisfied an offence had been committed. I told him I had no recollection of the incident and asked to see the video. I was told that wasn’t possible but they could send me some stills. That was the end of the conversation.

Please note I’m not commenting on the content of the still images you posted - my views on that are not relevant to what I am saying. My comments are confined to the way this appears to have been dealt with.

The police are effectively saying you’re guilty of an offence without even asking for your account. I’d say that’s shoddy police work, but it’s not even that good. They haven’t completed an investigation to any level - they seem to be taking a hopeful punt that you won’t dispute the allegation and will simply roll over and take what’s coming your way.

 

[Deleted member 18121]

i did the course a few years ago, one thing that stuck in my mind - there were about 20 of us in the classroom, they asked everyone to rate themselves out of 10 on how good a driver they were. The average was 8-9. They then asked us to rate the general public, the average was about 5. They then said 'so if you lot are all much better drivers than the general public, why are you here?

Arrogance is the answer.

I think that in modern cars people feel invincible. Cars are so capable these days, amazing braking distances, grip and aides to flatter your driving capabilities.

In my opinion.... I think every single person (where possible) should be made to do their CBT and motorbike test. That gives you a whole new view on where danger is and how to protect yourself. I think doing my bike test made me a much more considerate car driver.

 

[PJ87]

Arrogance is the answer.

I think that in modern cars people feel invincible. Cars are so capable these days, amazing braking distances, grip and aides to flatter your driving capabilities.

In my opinion.... I think every single person (where possible) should be made to do their CBT and motorbike test. That gives you a whole new view on where danger is and how to protect yourself. I think doing my bike test made me a much more considerate car driver.

I'd go as far as to have to have a refresher lesson every 5 years to tidy up your driving. Used to think test but the logistics of tests seem hard enough.

Too many people see driving as a right and not a privilege

 

[Deleted member 18121]

I'd go as far as to have to have a refresher lesson every 5 years to tidy up your driving. Used to think test but the logistics of tests seem hard enough.

Too many people see driving as a right and not a privilege

I wouldn't be against that. I'd be tempted to say a retest every 5 years.