Wednesday 29th May 2002

One rule for them...

Aldershot Magistrates court will today see a senior Hampshire police officer trying to explain why one of its officers was by a speed camera in Fareham. The unmarked car exceeded the 30mph limit but Deputy Chief Constable Ian Readhead will have to explain why the force can't find the driver of the unmarked car.

---

[james]

Well, according to the rules, the boss gets the points.

Oh, I do hope so

James

[yum]

funny, though, I suspect that the points will get lost in the post.

[pbrettle]

This unfortunately isnt the only time that this has happened. It seems that it is getting to be a fairly common practice to avoid payment - especially in the police force.

Still, I do somewhat understand the problems associated with this - BUT and this is the BIG one - any police officer that knowingly lies or doesnt own up to something that they did (small or not) will result in a heavier penalty later. For example it is not uncommon for a PC to be docked one months salary, dropped a grade or whatever.

So, lets be honest here - who ever did it has more to loose by NOT admitting it than just owning up. Is there more to this story that they are letting on?

Cheers,

Paul

[outlaw]

This is quite normal happens all the time, it just dont get leaked out very often.

Thats why I addvise All to do the same a play up taking the piss when you get that silly ticket come.

I do and have won every time and have a clean licence

play the tossers at there own game.



>> Edited by outlaw on Wednesday 29th May 22:18

[MikeGC]

I don't understand why the fuss.

All he/she had to say that "I was driving my chief constable/home secretary to a [new] Labour party conference" and it would have been in the line of duty to avoid a security risk. All charges dropped because the dutiful servant would have risked losing their pension.

Or am I missing something.

[JMorgan]

Bit more of the story on the BBC news site. Under UK/England link. Tried to post it but wouldn't show on the preview.

[marki]

I see the cheif contstable had to turn up and take some of his own medicine in front of the beak


>> Edited by JSG (moderator) on Thursday 30th May 09:10

[james]

Outlaw,

I understand the words, but the not the sentences

James

[Don]

quote:
I see the cheif contstable had to turn up and take some of his own medicine in front of the beak

Yes. Its an offence not to know who was driving your vehicle. Presumably mitigating circumstance could be that it had been nicked. This was not the case. So...I checked the Highway Code and "failing to provide the information as to who was driving" is £1K and 3pts (I think the 3pts is right). So Hampshire Police get only £500 and did the Cheif Constable get points on his licence like you or I would?

Anyone know?


Hmmn.

[CarZee]

maybe worth a letter, Don...

[mel]

No he didn't fined £500 no points.

Also for referance the car was and unmarked Fiesta !!!

[JMorgan]

Does sound like someone nipping down the chippy close to 2 o'clock for the station.

[wwp]

Does the highway code define where the points go if the Chief Constable were to be always chauffer driven, and not to have a driving licence? Or how many times he can lose his licence due to this type of event :-)

[hertsbiker]

'ang on. WHY is it an offence not to know who is driving?

If someone comes round to buy my vehicle, and I let them drive it - once I checked their insurance to see if they are covered 3rd party, I wouldn't make a note of it or anything. Does this mean I should do???? officious crap. The reason why an officer is better than a camera any day.

Carl.

[madcop]

Just to let you know. The Highway Code is only advice not law.
If you are prosecuted with some driving offence, the Mags can infer guilt if you have not complied.


We are just as P***ed off with the cams as you lot.
If you trigger one on a blues run, the vehicle gets a NIP.
Each vehicle has a log that must be filled in stating times used, mileage and user on each driver change.
CID cars are notorious for not being filled in ( must be down to pressure of work )

Having been served an NIP you also have to fill out an exemption and attach the control log of the job you were attending as evidence you were not going for a late meal with your beloved ( if there is such a thing)

Some Blues runs can see you with 5 or 6 of the damned things.

Think about this.

See Scrote car in distance = foot down to get closer and set off camera in process.
Scrote turns off lights and dives into no go area vanishing into the night.

This ends up with NIP to cop. No Job number on the Control log and a hell of a lot of explaining to avoid a court appearance.

Would you beleive that no one beleives you when you tell the truth.

[outlaw]

quote:
'ang on. WHY is it an offence not to know who is driving?

If someone comes round to buy my vehicle, and I let them drive it - once I checked their insurance to see if they are covered 3rd party, I wouldn't make a note of it or anything. Does this mean I should do???? officious crap. The reason why an officer is better than a camera any day.

Carl.

BECAUSE WITH OUT IT THEY CAN DO JACK m8

the need the admition on the nip to get the evidence for a convition in court.

with out it if you plead to guilty the they can offer no evidence to covicted.

thats why its in breach of artical 6
the privi councile desice to get out of it by invocking the public intrest cause but there has been
those case that contodict since

the idris case may win yet :-)

a small tip you can only get 3point for refusing to name the driver.

if they can prove you were driving it and your looking at more,

It may well be the best option to take the 3 for not telling them the driver if it was you.