FAO Audi Smitten

[lenny007]

Just a quick query i'm hoping you can answer.

Back in 2001 is was collared quite fairly for speeding on the A66. Dunno if you are familiar with the road, but it's typical cross country for a while with a large section of dual carriageway.

Anyway, i was heading Eastbound and came over a crest on the dual carriageway when i noticed the 5 Series of Durham Constabulary sitting on the hard shoulder of the East Bound carriageway facing Westbound.

There was nowhere for the officers to do a u-turn (i.e a nearby parking spot) so i can only think they've used a truning point in the central reservation to cross the carriageway, driven along the hard shoulder the wrong way and then positioned themselves to maximum effect.

Question is this. Whilst i appreciate that officers are exempt from certain road laws in the course of their work, surely this is a dangerous breach of the highway code?

It was my first speeding offence so i was in a real "yes sir, no sir" state of mind but it's been bugging me ever since - should i have questioned it.

Without commenting on the constabulary in particular, could you put my mind to rest a bit? If not, can you make me even more angry and confirm that they were, as i suspect, breaking the law themselves?

Ta in advance

[Smudge]

Ok, so I'm in no way qualified to answer the question like AS is, but ask yourself this:

How often do you see an emergency vehicle jump red lights, pass on the otherside of the road etc etc??

They have slight flexibility in the laws to enable them to do their jobs.

Which, even if the did breach the law would I'm sure be their reply. I don't know the A66, so it's difficult to imagine the scenario IMO.

HTH though.

[lenny007]

I understand your point but i guess if not familiar with the road in question, it's difficult to fully explain why i'm still grumbly about this 4 years on.

Along the stretch of carriageway in question, there are numerous parking bays which could accommodate a police car whose officers are trying to catch speeders. However, they are on level stretches of carriageway and they would stick out like a sore thumb which = less people stopped.

The officers in question were parked on the side of the road (not even sure you could class it as the hard shoulder to be honest) just after the crest of a hill. No chance to see them = more people stopped.

To be fair i'm not trying to exempt myself from what i did. Like i said, it was a fair cop as i was speeding and i only have myself to blame. I'm trying to rationalise this as a revenue exercise as opposed to a safety one.

[Smudge]

Dude, there's nothing that can be done about it now, if I were you I'd move on!

[garcon magnifique]

Think of it this way. If a marked car is fully visible sat in a layby and you see it, that stops you speeding past that layby. If it's hidden, you don't see it and they collar you for 3 points etc, the chances are it'll stop you speeding (or at least stop you speeding as much) for the next three years.

Just a thought. I'd rather see the clear deterrent rather than the hiding behind a bush/hill/wall approach myself.

On the subject of positioning and how he got there, a police driver does have a high degree of discretion when it comes to the Highway Code.

[lenny007]

Fair enough then.

I have gotten over it and it's nearly off my licence anyway.

Next rant - why do insurers take points from the last 5 years and police only hold them on your licence for 4????

[simonb]

Because they're tw@ts and will do anything to bump up your premium!

Well, that's what i'd say as a bitter man in his mid 20's who's forked out thousands over the years for car insurance!

I'm sure TSN's resident Ferrari-driving insurance expert yorkshireman would be able to answer that question more accurately though if you ask him nicely.

[garcon magnifique]

[ QUOTE ]

Next rant - why do insurers take points from the last 5 years and police only hold them on your licence for 4????

[/ QUOTE ]

That's almost true. Insurers ask for convictions over the last 5 years, but these days one SP30 will make precious little difference to the premium (check out the "Interesting..." thread).

As far as your licence is concerned, points 'tot up' for three years and stay on your licence for five.

[lenny007]

Not necessarily true.

At the moment, i'm insured with Egg and have 3 points. My wife has 3 points and a claim. Getting quotes with 3 points off, the claim off and then a clean licence suggest that on my premium of around £530 per year, the claim is costing me £40 per year and each lot of 3 points is worth about £17.

It doesn't sound much but its about 4% in total for the premium. Work it out if your paying £1K p.a. for insurance.

[ian_m]

Lenny sorry but I dont know the road and cant really picture what you mean, can you draw a picture? even if its in paint

[danksy]

[ QUOTE ]

Question is this. Whilst i appreciate that officers are exempt from certain road laws in the course of their work, surely this is a dangerous breach of the highway code?

............ If not, can you make me even more angry and confirm that they were, as i suspect, breaking the law themselves?

Ta in advance

[/ QUOTE ]

AFAIK the Police are subject to the normal regulations the same as we are, unless there are exceptional circumstances, such as answering emergency calls etc.

To place a Police Car in a dangerous location, and against the highway markings (if applicable) is against the law. The police enforce the law and are not beyond it.

It would not get you off the speeding offence, but you could have challenged the Chief Constable over the parking of their vehicle.

There is a bloke in London who drives Tanks (I kid you not) who issues Parking Tickets to police cars, and also reports them everytime they are double parked, or parked on yellow lines.

Back OT

Unkess you can somehow link the fact that the car caused you to drive more quickly than the road was marked (Obscuring a Speed Limit sign for example), then I don't think you have a leg to stand on.

[danksy]

[ QUOTE ]

Rule 217 of The Highway Code states 'DO NOT park your vehicle or trailer on the road where it would endanger, inconvenience or obstruct pedestrians or other road users' One of the examples specifically stated is 'opposite or within 10 metres (32 feet) of a junction, except in an authorised parking space'

[/ QUOTE ]

From the highway code

[danksy]

The highway code is just a set of guidelines rather than the law the RTA 1988 is the law.

Section 22 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 applies to a person in charge of a vehicle who causes or permits a vehicle or a trailer drawn by it to remain at rest on a road in such a position or in such condition or in such circumstances to involve a danger of injury to other persons using the road.

As can be seen from the this Section of the Act, if a parked or stationary vehicle is left in the above circumstances (i.e highway code example) then the person in charge (either owner or driver) could be reported for a contravention of this particular Section.

So quite clearly you could quote S22 RTA 1988 to them and tell them to move, but the fact is you were still speeding.

[lenny007]

Audi

Not too sure about my artistic abilities so i'll try and describe the situation as best i can.

The road in question is dual carriageway across the country from Penrith (M6) to Scotch Corner (A1(M)). Other than about 8 miles of this stretch it is dual carriageway with a large central reservation which incorporates changes in the relative heights of the east/west bound roads. The road itself is as you can imagine a bit of windy round and up and down affair, with significant drops and steep rises to blind crests (but always in a straight line with respect to the blind crests).

At various points along the carriageway there are openings to allow "u-turns" - i assume that this is to allow users to turn back when the weather is bad. By this, i mean that at either end of the A66, there are barriers which can be lowered to close the road when the conditions aren't safe - mainly snow and blizzards.

Anyway, at intermittent intervals, there are areas at the side of the road to park up. The road itself does not have any hard shoulder on either side.

So the situation is this. I was travelling east bound along the dual carriageway and i dropped down a dip - it was at this point i picked up the speed which cost me the 3 points. I then rose up the bank and over the blind crest to be confronted by the patrol car which was situated about 150 - 200 yards along the road parked on the grass to the side of the road and facing westbound on the east bound carriageway.

As you can imagine, i realised what speed i what speed i was doing, slowed down and passed the patrol car. Looking in my mirror, i could see them executing a u turn by turning onto the dual carriageway (again i reiterate the blind crest about 200 yards max away from the patrol car) and then they proceeded to catch up with me, flash me and i pulled into the nearest parking bay available.

As i said before, i previously had a clean licence and it was a back door trembling moment for me!! To be fair, i held my hand up to what i was being charged with and when they offered to let me view the tape, i told them it wouldn't make any difference would it so no thanks.

I was bloody annoyed with myself and only when i got home did i start to think about it. The position they had parked up in had no gap in the central reservation beside it and i would estimate that the nearest gap would have been at least 300 - 400 yards away.

That meant that they would presumably have drove through the central reservation, across the dual carriageway and along either the inside land of the carriageway or across the grass adjacent to the road (unlikely as it's not particularly renowned for its off road ability the 5 series) and into the position they took.

It's obvious that they parked there to ensure maximum surprise when drivers came over the crest.

I hold my hand up and take my punishment on the chin. I was speeding and it was a fair cop. However, my driving wasn't dangerous to other road users - unless there had been an accident immediately after the crest of the hill (or a rather unlikely 30 mile tailback.....) but i would argue (and possibly should have done at the time if it wasn't for my nerves being frayed) that the actions of the officers in question, by not only driving the wrong way along a dual carriageway in order to maximise their revenue for speeding convictions but also executing a u-turn on the dual carriageway to catch up to me is dangerous and not surely within the remit of their duties as police officers.

If the argument was that they were positioned where they were as a "safety issue" i.e. it was an accident hotspot, surely their own actions in carrying out the u-turn blow this argument out of the water.

The ironic thing about this whole matter is that the force in question is Durham Constabulary, who do not have any fixed speed cameras within their jurisdication. I believe in this policy wholeheartedly as i believe education and human interaction are a better method of policing than merely "flash - you're nicked" of a Gatso and it's like. However, i do believe that their actions here leave a bitter taste in my mouth and make me wonder whether or not i'm correct about the Gatso.

Sorry for the long post but i thought it best to explain everything as clearly as i could. Hope this helps.

[ian_m]

hmmmm that is a weird one, it doesnt make any sense to me, I take it they didnt get you on a speed gun as you said about the tapes, I was thinking that they may have wanted to face you so that they could point the speed gun.

If they have indeed gone through the reservationand accross the carriageway, I cannot see any genuine reason to do so and admit it sounds pretty dangerous.

I dont really know if there is much you can do about it now though and it would never have got you off the ticket,I hope this is of some help?