NIP for dangerous driving

Edwood_Woodwood

tgon wrote: »

He did a momentary stupid move and knows it. It's out of character

Tough, throw the book at him. What kind of ridiculous explanation is the above statement meant to make?

AdrianC

tgon wrote: »

DD is such a broad offence it really is difficult to know how it will play out.

No, not really.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/dangerous_driving/

If he is charged, then a 12mo ban, extended driving test, and a fine. Fairly low-end as dangerous driving goes, so unlikely to be custodial.

harveybobbles

Even unmarked plod cars are easy to spot.

Around here the unmarked ones are 330d and 530d's.. they are non M Sport models and are generally clean.

N9eav

harveybobbles wrote: »

Even unmarked plod cars are easy to spot.

Around here the unmarked ones are 330d and 530d's.. they are non M Sport models and are generally clean.

Its not quite as simple as that.


X5, Volvo. Range Rover, a whole range of CID cars - focus, astra, fiesta, corsa. While they may not stop you as they have no lights under the grill.... if an officer sees you do something stupid and dangerous or even..
any officer off duty could if they felt inclined to do so see an offence note the time, date and registration and send the registered keeper a notice in the post to identify the driver and then start the NIP process.

Spicy_McHaggis

N9eav wrote: »

Its not quite as simple as that.


X5, Volvo. Range Rover, a whole range of CID cars - focus, astra, fiesta, corsa. While they may not stop you as they have no lights under the grill.... if an officer sees you do something stupid and dangerous or even..
any officer off duty could if they felt inclined to do so see an offence note the time, date and registration and send the registered keeper a notice in the post to identify the driver and then start the NIP process.

Driven by someone who hasn't got a clue or any interest in traffic offences.

Anne129

My son was stopped by police officers for driving without due care and attention. Whilst they were taking his details on the pavement. Another officer was looking in his car. Another police officer drove past and hit and dented the door. In the Officer's statement he admits liability. However, when the insurance company put in a claim, they are quoting ex turpi causa, which I thought only meant profit, or gain. Not claiming for damage caused by an Officer. They claimed he went through a red light, which he denies. Then they said his car was emitting a strong smell of cannabis (note: he won't allow smoking in the car, let alone drugs). He was there for 3 hours while then sent for lights and other equipment to search his car. NOTHING was found. He asked to sit in the back of the police car to keep warm. Whilst in the car, he heard the officer report the accident over his car radio. He was asked for his driver's permit number. The Officer said he didn't have it on him. The Sergeant on the other end of the line said, he's not allowed to drive back. My son will be pleading not guilty. The officer's statement is full of words like 'appeared' 'seemed'. Can someone help. Thank you,

System

He was asked for his driver's permit number

I take it that you are not in the UK?

neilmcl

Ex turpi causa essentially means you can't claim a legal remedy that has arisen from your own illegal act. I'd agree that would be the case if the damage was caused whilst your son was in the process of committing the act however in this case it doesn't sound right as he was in police custody at the time.