Reporting dangerous driving

George_Michael

452 said:

Does that link mention starting to discuss a potential court case on the Internet?

If so I'll have a look. 

Surely if simply discussing a potential court case was enough to get a prosecution stopped, every single crime that written about in any newspaper or reported about on the news where a possible court case was mentioned would end up being dismissed, something that obviously isn't the case.

TooManyPoints

If the van driver is charged or summonsed then this thread as problematic to the case.

Why?

If the matter went to trial it would be heard by either a Bench of three lay magistrates or a District Judge (Magistrates’ Courts) sitting alone. Any of them who had followed this thread and felt their judgement may be prejudiced by it would excuse themselves. Though quite how they would be prejudiced (unless what we’ve seen is materially different to what actually occurred) is a little hard to fathom.

If the police did take action based on the OP's submission it would almost certainly be the offer of a fixed penalty. It is unlikely that a course would be offered as one of the criteria for that is that the offence should be witnessed by a police officer.

452

TooManyPoints said:

If the van driver is charged or summonsed then this thread as problematic to the case.

Why?

If the matter went to trial it would be heard by either a Bench of three lay magistrates or a District Judge (Magistrates’ Courts) sitting alone. Any of them who had followed this thread and felt their judgement may be prejudiced by it would excuse themselves. Though quite how they would be prejudiced (unless what we’ve seen is materially different to what actually occurred) is a little hard to fathom.

If the police did take action based on the OP's submission it would almost certainly be the offer of a fixed penalty. It is unlikely that a course would be offered as one of the criteria for that is that the offence should be witnessed by a police officer.

There's no fixed penalty for dangerous driving and police don't need to witness the offence for a course. 

fred246

This thread reminds me of a TV programme talking about car insurance. They interviewed a group of young lads stood next to their modified hot hatches asking them if they would like a 'black box' to be fitted to their vehicle. Of course none of them wanted a black box. Reasonable, law abiding citizens are happy for this sort of technology to be used. People who think the public road is a race track and all motoring rules are there to be broken aren't going to be happy.

Mercdriver

fred246 said:

This thread reminds me of a TV programme talking about car insurance. They interviewed a group of young lads stood next to their modified hot hatches asking them if they would like a 'black box' to be fitted to their vehicle. Of course none of them wanted a black box. Reasonable, law abiding citizens are happy for this sort of technology to be used. People who think the public road is a race track and all motoring rules are there to be broken aren't going to be happy.

You are quite ignorant to how an insurance company can use the data to increase premiums for trivial reasons.  Who designs the algorithms of the black box?  It's not just speeding and other legal issues that are picked up.  There are other factors that are far more subjective.

TooManyPoints

There's no fixed penalty for dangerous driving and police don't need to witness the offence for a course.

 Although I didn't make it clear (and despite the title of the thread) such an episode as illustrated by the stills would almost certainly not constitute a dangerous driving charge. Careless driving would be much more appropriate. A course is available as a diversion for that offence. Normally a course would not be offered unless a police officer witnessed the incident as an initial view (whether the offence is suitable for a course) should be taken by that officer. See Section 2 of this document:

https://www.npcc.police.uk/Publication/NPCC%20FOI/Operations/069%2015%20NPCC%20Response%20att%2001%20of%2002.pdf

MinuteNoodles

fred246 said:

Reasonable, law abiding citizens are happy for this sort of technology to be used. People who think the public road is a race track and all motoring rules are there to be broken aren't going to be happy.

No they're not. My son had one fitted to his first car. I took it out for a run to see just how it scores, driving to test standard. Apparently it would appear that driving to test standard isn't good enough to get a good score.
You should get one fitted where you can check on the insurance company website your individual journey scores. I think you may have a change of tune.

MinuteNoodles

shaun_from_Africa said:

I don't live in a town. I live in a small village

I was unfortunate enough to spend 18 months living in a small village in my youth.  You'll be like those in a village I know who used to bleat on about all the speeders going through the village, campaigned to have a speed camera fitted only for the vast majority of people getting caught by the camera being the villagers themselves.

And yes if you think I have a particular hatred of the dashcam brigade you'd be right. It's not because I'm ever worried about what I do which someone films rather than the upgrade in "righteousness" of the individual purchasing such a device that tends to accompany one being fitted to a windscreen and how every little slight suddenly gets bigged up to a life threatening "we could have been killed" drama, often to be shared online after a bit of careful selective editing in the pursuit of likes, thanks and upvotes on social media just like you've done.

452

TooManyPoints said:

There's no fixed penalty for dangerous driving and police don't need to witness the offence for a course.

 Although I didn't make it clear (and despite the title of the thread) such an episode as illustrated by the stills would almost certainly not constitute a dangerous driving charge. Careless driving would be much more appropriate. A course is available as a diversion for that offence. Normally a course would not be offered unless a police officer witnessed the incident as an initial view (whether the offence is suitable for a course) should be taken by that officer. See Section 2 of this document:

https://www.npcc.police.uk/Publication/NPCC%20FOI/Operations/069%2015%20NPCC%20Response%20att%2001%20of%2002.pdf

Does it actually say that?

Car_54

452 said:

TooManyPoints said:

If the van driver is charged or summonsed then this thread as problematic to the case.

Why?

If the matter went to trial it would be heard by either a Bench of three lay magistrates or a District Judge (Magistrates’ Courts) sitting alone. Any of them who had followed this thread and felt their judgement may be prejudiced by it would excuse themselves. Though quite how they would be prejudiced (unless what we’ve seen is materially different to what actually occurred) is a little hard to fathom.

If the police did take action based on the OP's submission it would almost certainly be the offer of a fixed penalty. It is unlikely that a course would be offered as one of the criteria for that is that the offence should be witnessed by a police officer.

There's no fixed penalty for dangerous driving and police don't need to witness the offence for a course. 

There is no course available for DD either.