Show Posts - TactiMgr

Quote from: andy_foster on 30 Mar, 2025 21:06If your driving fell below the standard of a competent and careful driver, you are guilty. If not, you are not.You have indicated some potentially serious issues and have deliberately avoided troubling us with any relevant details. You have sought to dispute the advice given based on what information you have provided, on the basis that it doesn't sit right with you.If you don't want to disclose the relevant details, that's up to you, but as it stands, this thread is going nowhere (or possibly into the circular file).I don't think I've denied the offence at any point, I'm not trying to get away without taking any responsibility for the the standard of my driving and for the record I made that very clear in my complaint. The issue I have is the disposal not being in line with the legislation or national guidance and that's before you consider the misconduct and integrity issues. I've stated relevant details I I've said the key element will have been flashing a lane hogger does that excuse my behaviour? Absolutely not but it's context. Happy to provide more "relevant details" but not sure what else I could provide? Surely if my driving had been that bad they wouldn't have waited for me to drive in to a busy city centre after being behind me for 40 minutes? Also busy city centre with lots of pedestrians and 20mph limits or an empty primary route which is safer? Also forgive me for being aggrieved for being assaulted, forced to stop, ordered out of my car and lied too as well as receiving one of the worst complaint experiences imaginable. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Quote from: NewJudge on 30 Mar, 2025 14:36If you choose to defend the charge in court you will be served with the evidence the police intend to rely on to convict you. This may include some video footage, it may not. As above, the likelihood is that it will consist of statements from the officers involved.If you believe there is footage that will either assist your case  or undermine theirs, you must ask the court to order its disclosure. If you are only relying on that footage to argue that you were given the impression that you would be offered a course, your request is likely to fall on deaf ears. As above, whether to offer a course or not is entirely within the gift of the police. You have no right to be offered one and no right to appeal against the decision if you are not. The court will not be interested in how that decision was reached. So to answer your questions:Quote- Driver retraining courses for non speeding offences are they are thing PSD seem to think driving without due care isn't an offence that would be eligible for a course but would be good to know for sure?Yes, courses are offered for careless driving offences. Whether or not to offer one rests entirely with the police.Quote- I think the COFP was only on hold till the end of March with the next working day being April if I email now to extend will this matter?You must ask the police whether or not they will extend the FP offer. They might ask (as do I) for what purpose should they do that? You raised the issue of not being offered a course and it seems they have addressed it. You also need to be aware that most forces will not keep a course offer open for much beyond three months from the date of the offence.Quote- What are my options? If the force are denying the existence of footage how can they use it to prosecute the aledged offence? Would a magistrate care if footage the force exhibited footage they had stated didn't exist?Your options seem to be to either accept the FP offer or face prosecution in court. If you choose the latter you will then see what evidence the police will rely on. It will be for the court to decide whether they are sure you committed the offence based on that evidence.Quote- In a similar vain would they be interested in the unlawful use of force/lying by the oic?Almost certainly not.Thank you for your detailed response. I guess my view is how good a witness do they make if they've lied on bwv (i have this) and have used unlawful force I get that it's not material to the traffic offence completely but it does suggest some foul play. I would have been quite content had A)the officer not said anything about how much of say he did or didn't have in the matter B) hadn't assaulted me for a routine traffic stop or C) the forces data protection team used an exemption to refuse disclosure of the footage rather than stating there isn't any. I've emailed the central ticket office as the complaint is with OPCC and may end up with the IOPC due to some article 3 HRA concerns.Re the course offer though the national policy does seem to state that a NDOR course is the preferred disposal for low level offences from the guidance:"▪ Being issued in situations that are observed by police officers where there are no victims, no collisions and no public complaint. (Tick)▪ it is intended that fixed penalty situations will in most scenarios be converted to a period of driver training. ▪ That no previous course has been offered/attended (within three years) (tick)"Also goes on to further define/give guidelines on suitability :Situations of lower level aggressive and inconsiderate driving where other drivers are not unduly affected, such as driving too close to the vehicle in front, failing to give way at a junction (no evasive action by another driver) overtaking and forcing into a queue of traffic, wrong lane at a roundabout, ignoring a road closed sign and forcing in to an orderly queue, lane discipline such as remaining in lane two or three when lane one is empty and there is no other vehicle to overtake, inappropriate speed, wheel spins, hand brake turns as well as other similar careless driving manoeuvres."Just at a loss that dispite my driving fitting in to both the above the officer is being unreasonably harsh.

Quote from: tonys on 30 Mar, 2025 11:58Quote from: TactiMgr on 29 Mar, 2025 18:53If the force are denying the existence of footage how can they use it to prosecute the aledged offence? Would a magistrate care if footage the force exhibited footage they had stated didn't exist? I don't think they should use evidence that's not been disclosed. But they don't need video anyway, the evidence can be statements from the police officers.Totally get that video isn't required, there will at least be body worn (or should be as per force policy but then so should there be in vehicle video) the point I'm getting at is integrity could be called in to question based on the pic's statements mentioned above. Also no disclosure requested as part of a court case just a subject access request

Quote from: The Slithy Tove on 30 Mar, 2025 08:34The offer of a course is entirely at the discretion of the police. If they don't offer one, tough luck. There is no way to "appeal" against it. The fixed penalty is the best you'll get. If you really think you are not guilty of the offence, then go ahead take it to court. It could get expensive. Unless you already have a rack of points on your licence, would these 3 make such a difference? I would suggest that for them to carry out the kind of stop you described meant that your driving was not exemplary. What do you think you did to provoke that reaction?As for the complaint and the allegations you make against the police, I can't comment.I totally get that it's "discretionary" but it's the lack of integrity that's my issue. Stating they as the oic have no say and then them not only having a say but deciding the outcome just doesn't sit right. Unfortunately 3 points is a deal breaker for some of my long standing volunteering roles and impacts my current employment slightly and also other roles more hard to explain without giving too much away. As for the stop/my driving I'm not going to suggest my driving was impeccable but worst part was me flashing someone lane hogging in lane 3 of an empty 3 lane dual carriage way. The officer tried to berate me around various aspects including suggesting at one point I was doing 90+! But dispite following me for 20/25 miles in good conditions in a double crewed traffic car had no evidential speed readings or at least failed to report me for this. Regularless chose to undertake a risky pursuit tactic in crowded city centre rather than initiate a stop in the 30/40 minutes they were behind me. In my view, that, the ordering me to exit my vehicle and the unlawful use of force highlights some poor decision making.

Hello,Bit longwinded and I'm hoping you can help but here goes.I was stopped in December (I say stopped this was a re-enforced stop after I had been followed for around 20/25 miles). I was immediately ordered out of the vehicle and placed in handcuffs and "assisted" in to the back of a traffic car. I should say that the vehicle I was driving is a company car, has no markers that I'm aware of and the reason for the stop was "the manner of my driving". I received a TOR for "driving without due care and attention" and the made a point of saying they don't normally have a say in how the matters are dealt with. I received an COFP a few days later which only gave me the option of points and a fine which would be hugely impactive to me, work and volunteering. I queried this with the central ticket office and they advised the "officer in the case had advised them the matter wasn't suitable for a driver retaining course" which is in stark contrast to what they had said (on body worn video) during the stop. The COFP was placed on hold while a complaint was dealt with but complaints service has been awful, first response was around 300 words all in and made no effort to address the unlawfulness of the force used or the integrity issue when raised formally they stuck with their original conclusion complaint is currently under review by the review body not hopeful. At the same time I did a subject access request for all footage of me and my vehicle and sole limited body worn was provided and the information governance team simply stated "there was no in vehicle footage" which would be against force policy and the body worn clearly shows the screens in the car with the in vehicle feeds. To be clear they didn't rely on an exemption to the data protection act just said there was no footage to disclose. My queries are:- Driver retraining courses for non speeding offences are they are thing PSD seem to think driving without due care isn't an offence that would be eligible for a course but would be good to know for sure? - I think the COFP was only on hold till the end of March with the next working day being April if I email now to extend will this matter? - What are my options? If the force are denying the existence of footage how can they use it to prosecute the aledged offence? Would a magistrate care if footage the force exhibited footage they had stated didn't exist? - In a similar vain would they be interested in the unlawful use of force/lying by the oic?Sorry for long winded one and thanks in advance.