NIP for dangerous driving

Spicy_McHaggis

tgon wrote: »

This is pretty much how it was described. There were no other cars except the Fotheringhay old lady, him and the cop car he failed to notice behind him. They weren't ordinary traffic cops cause they arrested him on the spot, read him his rights, took some details and set him in his way again.

And, yeah, l know the "mate" story sounds lame but it was actually a mate in his white van today. Bad combo

Special ones were they?

tgon

Not traffic cops. These had guns apparently. No blues and twos so not an emergency Just bad luck I reckon.

Spicy_McHaggis

tgon wrote: »

Not traffic cops. These had guns apparently. No blues and twos so not an emergency Just bad luck I reckon.

Brat is a traffic cop with a shooter.

Aretnap

Dangerous driving is. Serious crime which carries a minimum one year ban and possible jail time. If your friend is charged with it he needs to see a proper lawyer - it's far too serious a matter to rely on advice from an Internet forum.

Yorkie1

I'd be surprised if he was charged with / summonsed for DD if he hasn't even been interviewed under caution at the police station with the chance for legal representation.

That being said, there's no time limit for a DD charge - careless driving carries a 6 month limit for the information to be laid at the court (it can only be tried at the magistrates' court, as opposed to DD which can be tried at the Crown Court). I also agree that a NIP is unlikely given he's been warned at the time.

As aretnap says, if any documents do arrive then get to a lawyer rather than an internet forum.

Spicy_McHaggis

Yorkie1 wrote: »

I'd be surprised if he was charged with / summonsed for DD if he hasn't even been interviewed under caution at the police station with the chance for legal representation.

That being said, there's no time limit for a DD charge - careless driving carries a 6 month limit for the information to be laid at the court (it can only be tried at the magistrates' court, as opposed to DD which can be tried at the Crown Court). I also agree that a NIP is unlikely given he's been warned at the time.

As aretnap says, if any documents do arrive then get to a lawyer rather than an internet forum.

There's no need to interview for dangerous driving.

Johnmcl7

Yorkie1 wrote: »

I'd be surprised if he was charged with / summonsed for DD if he hasn't even been interviewed under caution at the police station with the chance for legal representation.

It doesn't sound like there was any requirement for an interview since the police witnessed the alleged offence themselves that will provide the evidence they require.


John

jaydeeuk1

tgon wrote: »

This is pretty much how it was described. There were no other cars except the dothering old lady, him and the cop car he failed to notice behind him. They weren't ordinary traffic cops cause they arrested him on the spot, read him his rights, took some details and set him in his way again.

And, yeah, l know the "mate" story sounds lame but it was actually a mate in his white van today. Bad combo

Failing to spot a copper behind you is driving without due care or attention. When I'm blasting along, I'm constantly looking out for the following hazards...

Police cars
Speed cameras
Children and fluffy bunnies

In that order.

Spicy_McHaggis

jaydeeuk1 wrote: »

Failing to spot a copper behind you is driving without due care or attention. When I'm blasting along, I'm constantly looking out for the following hazards...

Police cars
Speed cameras
Children and fluffy bunnies

In that order.

Every now and then they throw a spanner in the works and have something out of the norm making it harder to spot.

Johno100

Spicy_McHaggis wrote: »

Every now and then they throw a spanner in the works and have something out of the norm making it harder to spot.

Err...like an unmarked vehicle, quite likely if the OP's friend encountered an ARV.