TS10 Woes...

Baileycat

Portly_Pig wrote: »

Were those the exact words used then?

The op appears to have done a lot here, witnessed the alleged non offence, been party to the whole conversation with the police, visited nearby premises for cctv. All without the tea going cold.

I've already stated I was in the car, parked outside the takeaway, when the officers came up and knocked on the window to speak to my partner, the driver. I picked up the pizza after they left.

Oh and I stated that I had just this second (ie. 8pm) spoken to the nearby business about CCTV, this hadn't occured to me at the time of the offence, which is now over a week ago.

Baileycat

Portly_Pig wrote: »

Questions like that may make some believe it was red.;)

The police have no reason to collect the cctv so the other driver would get away with it.

You can make up your own mind about that if that's what you think I realised as I was typing it that it made me sound guilty (not that I was even the one driving!), but I did wish to know what would happen to the other driver - wouldn't seem fair to convict one and not the other!

Baileycat

Portly_Pig wrote: »

Can you give us a street view of the junction?

In theory I could, but having given plenty of information about the actual case, then identifying the location of where it took place, I worry that it would make me easily identifiable (they talk about that kind of thing all the time on here, setting up aliases etc which I have not done, to avoid an employer, company etc googling you and finding it all out).

I could PM you it if you think it would help?

Baileycat

Portly_Pig wrote: »

Did you point out the other vehicle to the police.

Yes, as in I advised that there was another vehicle behind us who did the same. However they passed no comment, presumably as it was long gone by then.

fivetide

Portly_Pig wrote: »

Or show both went through on red.

Well obviously! Let's give the OP the benefit of the doubt though eh?

Baileycat

fivetide wrote: »

Well obviously! Let's give the OP the benefit of the doubt though eh?

Thank you fivetide, I was beginning to feel like a real criminal haha I know that it didn't happen, that's a fact. Sadly, between this thread and the one on pepipoo, it looks like the general consensus is that he should just pay up and accept the points, completely unfair but would be nigh on impossible to prove

I will still speak to the two local businesses tomorrow regarding their CCTV though, just in case there is any hope of him being able to defend himself. Got to be worth a shot rather than simply caving in! Thank you

Lum

BTW, you have a right to request the CCTV images and the organisation must provide them in at most 40 days. They can charge up to £10 for doing so.

http://ico.org.uk/for_the_public/topic_specific_guides/cctv

Baileycat

Portly_Pig wrote: »

I was, but now the lights may have been amber.

The op clearly wasn't looking at them.

I have had that discussion with them on the other forum and it certainly looks like the most plausible explanation from all advice provided, given that there would have been no benefit from them making a false accusation.

Are you hoping to contribute anything or are you just trying to pick holes in my story to make yourself feel better? Statements like that may make some believe you are a police officer with a vested interest in proving me wrong

I was looking at the lights and believe them to be green, but now doubting myself due to the discussion on the other forum. Amber at worst but they most certainly were not red. Thanks for looking it up though :T

Baileycat

Lum wrote: »

BTW, you have a right to request the CCTV images and the organisation must provide them in at most 40 days. They can charge up to £10 for doing so.

http://ico.org.uk/for_the_public/topic_specific_guides/cctv

Thanks for this information, I'll advise the companies of this when I speak to them tomorrow

giraffe69

I was beginning to feel like a real criminal

People who randomly add "haha" to the end of a sentence ought to be guilty of something!