# Justified being annoyed with Cheshire police?



## Bazzer (16 Jan 2019)

Travelling home from work before Christmas this happened. (Contains swearing).



The driver failed to stop despite hitting me on the hip and handlebar with the nearside wing mirror. Cheshire police were contacted and sent the full footage the same night. The following day the police told me they were treating it as fail to stop pedal cycle collision and the footage would be sent to the investigating officer. A day later I was contacted by the investigating officer and asked whether I was wearing a helmet and what injuries I had (hip bruising). The PC was also told I had traced the car's insurer and was going to write to them asking if the driver had reported the incident.

Not having heard anything further, ten days later I contacted the investigating officer who told me that as I had the car registration number and insurer, it would be for the insurance companies to establish blame and the police would be taking no further action. This came as a surprise to me, as firstly I thought driving offences were separate from blame. For example a car can skid on black ice causing damage to another car and whilst there may be blame, there is not necessarily an offence. And secondly I know from personal experience that Cheshire police have prosecuted car drivers for close passes which were not this close.

So after a couple of rather cross emails, the investigating PC met with me on the 20th. It seemed to me he hadn't even reviewed the footage. For example asking to see the footage on my computer and he and his colleague wincing when I'm hit. Then asking for the footage to be provided on a memory stick. (Even though the full footage had been sent the night of the incident).

The PC told me that because neither I was injured nor my bike damaged, (that will teach me not to go down!), no action would be taken on the failure to stop. After discussion it was clear the best I could hope for was an offence for the close overtake. So it was agreed if the driver admitted the offence they would pay to go on a driving course. If they didn't admit, papers would go to the CPS.

A couple of days ago, I was told the driver had admitted the offence and was "happy to go on a driving awareness course." Tonight I have been told [the] _application for a DAC course for the driver has been declined due to evidence and not in the public interest to prosecute. Also the time elapsed since the initial incident.
There will be no further police involvement in this incident.
_
I've stirred it up with the driver's insurance company as I was told between Christmas and the New Year by the company the driver hadn't reported the incident, but I'm feeling pretty peed off with the police. I'm thinking of making a complaint to the Police and Crime Commissioner for Cheshire. As per the title is my annoyance justified, or just too close to it?


----------



## classic33 (16 Jan 2019)

Justified. Get in touch with the insurance company. They've a legal obligation to report it.


----------



## MikeG (16 Jan 2019)

Isn't the insurance company a side issue here? Even a red herring? A driving offense was committed, and that's what the police should be dealing with. Nothing else is any of their business. Frankly, it's only half their fault, with the CPS giving up too easily too. I would make contact with them if there is a way, and ask for an explanation.


----------



## Slick (16 Jan 2019)

It's definitely disgusting but probably pointless and it has the potential to just leave you ill chasing shadows. 

I know the obvious retort to my own argument is you could have been left really ill by someone who considered getting home seconds earlier much more important than your safety and wellbeing. 

Tough but let it go.


----------



## derrick (16 Jan 2019)

Had the same problem when my wife got hit, the police did not want to take any action, i wrote to the police complaints division, They had the driver do a course, But she never got prosecuted for it, she was on a mobile phone, The drivers have to kill you before the police look into it.


----------



## Drago (16 Jan 2019)

From what you say I can understand you being aggrieved.

Write to the Chief Freemason - Despite sticking their noses in on TV, PCC's have no sway whatsoever over operational matters. Ideally, you have a right to have the decision reviewed - the decision is usually made by a Sergeant, so in the first instance their Inspector would review the evidence themselves and make a decision.

It's one thing to let insurers do their bit, that's fine. However, in this instance their is clear evidence of an offence being committed, aggravated by someone (you) being injured, and a separate fail to stop at an injury RTC offence, with evidence of the offence and evidence to identify the suspect being at fault - there is no justification for failing to investigate where such evidence exists, so it's good that you pushed.

I would suggest a driving awareness course is not an appropriate outcome for an injury RTC and a fail to stop offence. I would also suggest that time elasped is not a reason to fail to prosecute (statutory time limits aside),particularly when that is down the the investigators dragging their heels. Most forces have some kind of road safety strategy or stated priority, which places such proescutions firmly in the public interest.

As for asking you whether you were wearing a helmet, considering you received no head injury I would be asking what the relevance of that question was before deciding whether or not to answer?

It sounds, going solely from your evidence, like it may have been badly handled. Insist that the decision is reviewed, as is your lawful right under the victims charter, and take it from there. However, if it looks like you'll go nowhere just let it go, not worth getting an ulcer over.

Either way, good luck.


----------



## tom73 (16 Jan 2019)

I had to watch it a few times to believe what I was seeing. I’d say if you have the mindset to run with this do it insurance involment or not is not an issue. Or has any effect on police involment in working out blame. I can’t see why they are not willing to act. But sadly it’s not a surprise. Good luck

@Drago is right it’s the top dog you need to go to PCC are just political window dressing be it expensive one.


----------



## mjr (16 Jan 2019)

MikeG said:


> Frankly, it's only half their fault, with the CPS giving up too easily too. I would make contact with them if there is a way, and ask for an explanation.


CPS would have dropped it due to the police being too slow. A Notice of Intended Prosecution has to be sent swiftly, else the driver gets away with it.

I'd make a formal complaint but expect nothing good to come from it except adding 1 to their complaints tally.


----------



## classic33 (16 Jan 2019)

The insurance company may just be able to apply pressure to the police. Incident number would be required by them, as would time and location. Just in case the drivers version differs from yours.


----------



## vickster (16 Jan 2019)

Did you get the hip brushing checked and documented by a doctor, do you have photos of the injury and have you followed up with the doctor? If you're a member of British Cycling or CUK or similar, I'd talk to them and see if they'll pursue an injury claim. Then let them do all the legwork with the drivers insurance company. I personally wouldn't get in contact with the insurer unrepresented.

The police complaint is a separate issue I think 

Good luck


----------



## vickster (16 Jan 2019)

classic33 said:


> The insurance company may just be able to apply pressure to the police. Incident number would be required by them, as would time and location. Just in case the drivers version differs from yours.


Why would the drivers insurance company apply pressure on the police to prosecute their customer?


----------



## fossyant (16 Jan 2019)

The police was similar with me, despite my broken spine - no charges. This was GMP up the road. The Police knew I had insurance (BC) so just said, they would sort it. It wasn't about money, no money stops the constant pain I am still in, but the driver didn't get even a slapped wrist. I'm attending counselling to help me deal with the accident, three years on - it's the 'injustice' that gets me so wound up. I'd torch the guy's car, but I'd be prime suspect and I have a 'responsible job/career' so it won't happen - I'd lose my job.

Unfortunately, the 'paperwork' stops the cops getting out on the 'job', which is probably why they didn't push further. 

We are in an unfortunate position, not enough cops, so minor stuff is ignored.


----------



## classic33 (16 Jan 2019)

vickster said:


> Why would the drivers insurance company apply pressure on the police to prosecute their customer?


Was it recorded as reported by the other person involved?
Have the police recorded it?

Both just two questions in trying to prove it did happen.


----------



## I like Skol (16 Jan 2019)

Lucky bastards the lot of you. GMP never even took a statement from me after I was knocked off my bike resulting in unconciousness, a broken neck and fractured skull. There is no law enforcement! Get used to it.


----------



## Bazzer (16 Jan 2019)

Thanks for the responses. Like I said I wasn't sure if I was being independent enough.
The insurance company know it was reported and they were provided with the incident number. 
Despite optimism I may have harboured about a prosecution for failing to stop, the pessimist inside me suspected a driving course was the likely outcome and I wanted to make sure the driver didn't hide their actions from the insurers. What I hadn't expected was to have to fight the police to actually take action and then seemingly bugger it up.
I'lI see what can be done through the chain of command in the police.
As to my bruising, no there isn't a picture, but that was always a side issue. I suspect I will need some surgery on that hip this year for other reasons, so the discomfort from the hit was "lost" in the other stuff going on in it. My main concern was the driver's attitude. There was clearly no gap and as any driver who has hit a wing mirror knows, the sound is bloody loud in the car. - A point acknowledged by the PCs whom came to my house. So the driver must have known something had happened. It was obvious they didn't hit the lorry, which left one alternative, me. Some mea culpa at the time would have gone a long way, but they chose to drive off.
It sounds petty, but I think I will try to reclaim from the insurance company the £3 the MIB search cost me. Who knows, they might pay up and take it from the driver's policy?


----------



## Phaeton (16 Jan 2019)

Dangerous driving & should be prosecuted at such, but I can't see it happening, but I would be making a complaint to the Police & pushing it as hard as I could. I don't do Feacesbook & Twatter but I think I'd sign up for both & be posting that video wherever I could.


----------



## classic33 (16 Jan 2019)

Bazzer said:


> Thanks for the responses. Like I said I wasn't sure if I was being independent enough.
> The insurance company know it was reported and they were provided with the incident number.
> Despite optimism I may have harboured about a prosecution for failing to stop, the pessimist inside me suspected a driving course was the likely outcome and I wanted to make sure the driver didn't hide their actions from the insurers. What I hadn't expected was to have to fight the police to actually take action and then seemingly bugger it up.
> I'lI see what can be done through the chain of command in the police.
> ...


Any search on the insurance database, flags up for the insurers.

As for the attitude of the police, it doesn't suprise me. I'd similar and had the officer offer copy of the pages their notebook as proof they never attended. All calls, recorded, said otherwise.


----------



## Grant Fondo (16 Jan 2019)

Bloody ridiculous. Get in touch with Boardman who has been lobbying for years. The more fuss, the more change!


----------



## Arjimlad (16 Jan 2019)

I agree with the comments above, complain about this ridiculous mishandling of your complaint please.


----------



## randynewmanscat (17 Jan 2019)

I think you may not have posted this if that car was 15cm further to the left, maybe from your bed at the hospital. If if was me I would talk with a shyster type lawyer with a what if conversation regarding a pain that seems to have developed and worsened after the collision. Normally during insurance settlements people visit St John Street in Manchester when they want to focus the minds of the third parties insurers into addressing a claim. 
It sounds like there is no traction to be found with Cheshire Police but as almost all the others say you could go through the motions and see what happens. I don't see you finding justice but if you want to hurt him with the hope that he remembers next time he is about to roll the dice on somebody else's life then an injury claim might bring satisfaction.


----------



## steveindenmark (17 Jan 2019)

As an ex police officer things like this annoy me a little. A member of the public comes in and drops an almost completed case on your table. Complete with evidence and you do nothing.
Policing is also about winning hearts and minds. If the officer had done his job and CPS then decided no further action. At least he would have tried. The police have no control over the CPS. 
Unfortunately the op has to let this go. But I can see why he is annoyed.


----------



## NorthernDave (17 Jan 2019)

I can't believe this has not been acted on.

Road.cc would be interested in using your footage as their video of the day though and there have been a few occasions where the wider publicity that brings has prompted a rethink.


----------



## Cycleops (17 Jan 2019)

Unfortunately you don't look like you're going to get justice so just take him(or his insurance company) for everything you can.


----------



## Mrs M (17 Jan 2019)

That was a ridiculous pass, amazed you managed to stay upright!
Hope things are resolved to your satisfaction
xx


----------



## glasgowcyclist (17 Jan 2019)

Do *not* let this go.

The driver needs to learn there are consequences for a hit & run and the investigating officer needs to learn there are consequences for farking up a perfectly straightforward prosecution for careless driving, especially where a vulnerable road user was struck and injured.

I would tweet the sh1t out of this or, as @NorthernDave said, pass it to road.cc. All police areas now have a presence on Twitter and will react if there's a backlash. Just the other day Gloucestershire Police had to apologise and reopen an investigation where the cyclist's initial report was similarly dismissed but was then spread all over twitter. 
(See https://road.cc/content/news/254485...nvestigation-after-cyclist-who-suffered-close )

This driver absolutely deserves prosecution and the investigating officer definitely needs to be further educated on his responsibilities.


----------



## Phaeton (17 Jan 2019)

Cycleops said:


> Unfortunately you don't look like you're going to get justice so just take him(or his insurance company) for everything you can.


Such as? OP has already said there was no damage to bike, he has no evidence of injury to himself. I fail to see what the insurance company will do


----------



## benb (17 Jan 2019)

I'd be very peed off. They overtook dangerously close, hit you, failed to stop and failed to report.
Presumably there's a channel to escalate this?

It's a lottery with police sometimes.
They took NFA for this one: (saying "insufficient evidence")


----------



## tom73 (17 Jan 2019)

I want to add to @NorthernDave and @glasgowcyclist have SM is powerful stuff get this all over it. It don’t take long for this to be picked up and extra coverage can't harm things. Organisations are now hot on image it don't take much for the PR dept to get in a flap. It's a hit and run someone has t learn its not on to just leg it. The driver that left Mrs 73 in cheep in the road was never found so police had to leave it. But this it's all to see and still they leave it that's another matter.


----------



## Bazzer (17 Jan 2019)

A complaint has gone into the police this morning. I have also told the insurance company of the police response and asked for reimbursement of the MIB fee in further bids to damage the driver's NCD.
I don't do Facebook etc., and am not a member of RoadCC (yet). I'll have a look over there later this morning.

Edit. Now submitted it to roadcc.


----------



## derrick (17 Jan 2019)

benb said:


> I'd be very peed off. They overtook dangerously close, hit you, failed to stop and failed to report.
> Presumably there's a channel to escalate this?
> 
> It's a lottery with police sometimes.
> They took NFA for this one: (saying "insufficient evidence")



He called him an idiot, what did he expect to happen.


----------



## benb (17 Jan 2019)

derrick said:


> He called him an idiot, what did he expect to happen.



Yes, that totally justifies the driver's behaviour.
FFS


----------



## tom73 (17 Jan 2019)

@Bazzer Once it's out on the web someone will soon start sharing it anyway so not being on SM won't stop it doing the rounds. Save you going it if nothing else.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (17 Jan 2019)

That's an appalling overtake, you're lucky to be alive.

Shocking (lack of) response from plod. Please take every avenue available, I'd suggest going via your MP too.

The more pain failing to act causes them, the more likely they are to act in future, even if nothing comes of it for you.


----------



## derrick (17 Jan 2019)

benb said:


> Yes, that totally justifies the driver's behaviour.
> FFS


So you don't mind being called an idiot? He just put the guy in his place, FFS.


----------



## fossyant (17 Jan 2019)

@Bazzer your probably just best leaving this, pop it on the web and forget it. As Skolly and I have said, we were both seriously injured and GMP did not respond with a slapped wrist as a minimum. Thank you're lucky stars you had bruises. Both Skolly and I could have been dead, or very close to being wheelchair bound. I'm currently having counselling to deal with the outcome of my accident - I'm still angry that the driver got away without any telling off and I have life changing permanent injuries, that not only has affected my physically, but mentally as well. I'm having to learn to let it go - 3 years after my accident.

You'll just eat yourself up. Maybe we should set up a vigilante group that goes round in the dead of night, and sticks a 'spud' up these drivers exhausts (the cars won't start properly - and it will be a bugger to diagnose)


----------



## classic33 (17 Jan 2019)

Phaeton said:


> Such as? OP has already said there was no damage to bike, he has no evidence of injury to himself. I fail to see what the insurance company will do


Damage to one vehicle involved though.


----------



## benb (17 Jan 2019)

derrick said:


> So you don't mind being called an idiot? He just put the guy in his place, FFS.



If I've done something idiotic, as this driver did, then by all means.
Slightly worrying that you don't think there's anything wrong with the driver's behaviour, but I have no desire to hijack the thread, so might as well leave it.


----------



## derrick (17 Jan 2019)

benb said:


> If I've done something idiotic, as this driver did, then by all means.
> Slightly worrying that you don't think there's anything wrong with the driver's behaviour, but I have no desire to hijack the thread, so might as well leave it.


There is no comparison between the two Vids, I can understand why the police did not follow up on the second vid, But the OPs vidio they should have nicked him without a doupt.


----------



## Phaeton (17 Jan 2019)

classic33 said:


> Damage to one vehicle involved though.


But that was damage to the presumed owner of the car, they don't have to have it repaired


----------



## Bazzer (17 Jan 2019)

fossyant said:


> @Bazzer your probably just best leaving this, pop it on the web and forget it. As Skolly and I have said, we were both seriously injured and GMP did not respond with a slapped wrist as a minimum. Thank you're lucky stars you had bruises. Both Skolly and I could have been dead, or very close to being wheelchair bound. I'm currently having counselling to deal with the outcome of my accident - I'm still angry that the driver got away without any telling off and I have life changing permanent injuries, that not only has affected my physically, but mentally as well. I'm having to learn to let it go - 3 years after my accident.
> 
> You'll just eat yourself up. Maybe we should set up a vigilante group that goes round in the dead of night, and sticks a 'spud' up these drivers exhausts (the cars won't start properly - and it will be a bugger to diagnose)



@fossyant I know I was very lucky compared to you and @I like Skol and some others on here. And I came off better than the two previous times I was hit by cars; neither of which was my fault and both times the police wouldn't prosecute.
I think I am cross for two reasons.
Firstly, the driver not giving a stuff. Yes I know this is experienced by cyclists, commuters like me in particular, on a regular basis. But hitting someone with a car and then leaving the scene without any regard to what injuries may, or may not have been caused, to my mind crosses a further boundary; irrespective of whether it is me, another cyclist or a pedestrian.
Secondly, the attitude of the police, when something like this is handed on a plate. Various forces have implemented initiatives concerning bad driving, such as the ability to upload dash cam footage, but unless they take positive action with bad driving, then drivers will continue to flout the law. I think it was @Drago said on another thread, something along the lines of the way to enforce seat belt legislation would be to put a spike in the middle of the steering wheel. Drastic? Possibly, depending upon your point of view, but if law breaking driving is dealt with properly, with real consequences for the driver, then may be the roads would be safer for all users and not just those who are vulnerable.
It remains to be seen if today's emails have any effect. I have done what I can to make life more difficult for the driver, but I don't intend to let it eat me up.

Many thanks to those who replied to thread. The suggestions were helpful and it was useful to get the perspective of others.


----------



## fossyant (17 Jan 2019)

GMP pretend they are doing something, but aren't. I know one of the Manchester Wheelers is a police officer, and they got rather upset when I said their officers hadn't done a thing, and even when we complained to the Chief Constable (solicitors letter) they refused to pursue the matter further. The officer handling my case was 'obviously' anti cyclist - my wife spoke to him as I was in a bit of a bad way in hospital. GMP are shockingly bad. My solicitor said that in most of the cases, drivers were never prosecuted.

Don't let it eat you up, it's not worth it, just pop it, and the registration on you tube. Hey, how about the village's local facebook group ! Ours has caught a few idiots out - e.g group of lads throwing stones at a couple of elderly blokes. Parent's saw the post, recognised their kids, and were somewhat 'not very happy' - kids got a come-uppance !


----------



## boydj (17 Jan 2019)

A claim on the driver's insurance for the fright and the pain inflicted by the driver is certainly justified and should cause some aggravation for the driver.

Twitter,using the vid and referencing the Cheshire Police account, Chris Boardman, who's from that area, and anybody else who might be relevant (e.g. Jeremy Vine) would certainly bring some embarrassment to the police and might goad them into action.

The vid is also a shoe-in for ROAD.CC's 'Near Miss of the Day' feature.


----------



## boydj (17 Jan 2019)

[QUOTE 5505582, member: 9609"]It is not often that phrase is used correctly - they really did nearly miss the cyclist[/QUOTE]

And it's already on ROAD.CC. That was very quick.


----------



## Bazzer (17 Jan 2019)

boydj said:


> And it's already on ROAD.CC. That was very quick.



I forgot to mention it was Cheshire Police.  I was contacted by Roadcc late afternoon about this omission.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (17 Jan 2019)

boydj said:


> And it's already on ROAD.CC. That was very quick.



Link? I couldn't see it.


----------



## Slick (17 Jan 2019)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Link? I couldn't see it.


https://road.cc/content/news/254725...g-mirror-no-action-taken-whoopi-goldberg-says


----------



## fossyant (17 Jan 2019)

Was going to ask - where in Cheshire ? I know it very well. Or did do..... @Bazzer The fence sort of gives a few possibilities.

I see the van passed you with miles of space.


----------



## Bazzer (17 Jan 2019)

fossyant said:


> Was going to ask - where in Cheshire ? I know it very well. Or did do..... @Bazzer The fence sort of gives a few possibilities.
> 
> I see the van passed you with miles of space.



Holcroft Lane, between Glazebrook and Culcheth. A very pleasant stretch when there is no wind and no nobbers.


----------



## fossyant (17 Jan 2019)

Bazzer said:


> Holcroft Lane, between Glazebrook and Culcheth. A very pleasant stretch when there is no wind and no nobbers.



Looks very similar to Astle Park area, near Chelford - similar fences.. Shows you though, the other drivers pass wide, that idiot would rather hit a cyclist. I'll still say pop the video on the local facebook pages near Glazebrook.

I've commuted nearer Dunham a few times on the bike...


----------



## glasgowcyclist (20 Jan 2019)

@Bazzer The Cheshire Police Complaints Commissioner, David Keane, has been on Twitter saying he'd be "happy to receive contact from the victim and to look into the matter further ". Also says he's a big supporter of the 'too close for comfort ' campaign.

Looks like the added social media attention in your incident might pay off, who knows?

Edited to add: his email is police.crime.commissioner@cheshire.pnn.police.uk


----------



## Bazzer (20 Jan 2019)

glasgowcyclist said:


> @Bazzer The Cheshire Police Complaints Commissioner, David Keane, has been on Twitter saying he'd be "happy to receive contact from the victim and to look into the matter further ". Also says he's a big supporter of the 'too close for comfort ' campaign.
> 
> Looks like the added social media attention in your incident might pay off, who knows?
> 
> Edited to add: his email is police.crime.commissioner@cheshire.pnn.police.uk



@glasgowcyclist cyclist, many thanks for the heads up. 
I hadn't contacted him following @Drago 's response, but shall do so now. I had made a formal complaint, which has been acknowledged and I have been given the name of the inspector who will review it.

Edited to add, email now sent.


----------



## Schneil (21 Jan 2019)

derrick said:


> There is no comparison between the two Vids, I can understand why the police did not follow up on the second vid, But the OPs vidio they should have nicked him without a doupt.


Why wouldn't the police get involved in the second video? Benb was followed for some time by the nutter in the astra and threatened. (Imho calling him an idiot is a statement of fact....)
@benb post the video up somewhere and tag with the driver's reg. It won't look great for him if he's ever in front of the beak....


----------



## derrick (21 Jan 2019)

Schneil said:


> Why wouldn't the police get involved in the second video? Benb was followed for some time by the nutter in the astra and threatened. (Imho calling him an idiot is a statement of fact....)
> @benb post the video up somewhere and tag with the driver's reg. It won't look great for him if he's ever in front of the beak....


Go tell a complete stranger he is an idiot. Let me know how you fair. Someone bigger than you. Dont go picking on a whimp though.


----------



## classic33 (21 Jan 2019)

Schneil said:


> Why wouldn't the police get involved in the second video? Benb was followed for some time by the nutter in the astra and threatened. (Imho calling him an idiot is a statement of fact....)
> @benb post the video up somewhere and tag with the driver's reg. It won't look great for him if he's ever in front of the beak....


And a good chance of any complaint being thrown out, let alone get to court.


----------



## Schneil (21 Jan 2019)

classic33 said:


> And a good chance of any complaint being thrown out, let alone get to court.


I have a feeling it won't be long before the nutter is in court for something as a result of his temper...


----------



## classic33 (21 Jan 2019)

Schneil said:


> I have a feeling it won't be long before the nutter is in court for something as a result of his temper...


But not for what he did in the video, if your advice is followed.


----------



## benb (22 Jan 2019)

I don't want to derail the OP's case, so if anyone does want to discuss my video further, we should start a new thread for that.


----------



## Phaeton (22 Jan 2019)

@Moderators Any chance of somebody spending 10 minutes to split the 2 threads here pretty please.


----------



## 400bhp (22 Jan 2019)

Bazzer said:


> Holcroft Lane, between Glazebrook and Culcheth. A very pleasant stretch when there is no wind and no nobbers.



That stretch is pretty bad for stupid overtakes, especially on the bridge taking you over the motorway.

Cheshire police do seem reasonably good to be fair. You can report and upload videos of bad road behaviour online. I hope you get some sort of closure on this.


----------



## semislickstick (22 Jan 2019)

This has come up before, a guy locally was knocked off (they didn't stop) and the police treated it like a minor car/car prang insurance swap issue. What are the police guidelines on it?


----------



## Slick (22 Jan 2019)

semislickstick said:


> This has come up before, a guy locally was knocked off (they didn't stop) and the police treated it like a minor car/car prang insurance swap issue. What are the police guidelines on it?


Hit and run or at least leaving the scene.


----------



## Vantage (23 Jan 2019)

Bazzer said:


> Holcroft Lane, between Glazebrook and Culcheth. A very pleasant stretch when there is no wind and no nobbers.



I know that one. Nice isn't it?


----------



## Bazzer (4 Feb 2019)

An update:
The complaint to the Police Commissioner didn't get far. "As the police are investigating the Commissioner doesn't think it is appropriate..etc." But I shall now get back to him in the light of recent contact with the police.
In brief, so far as the police are concerned, I have spoken with the investigating inspector, who has accepted somethings went wrong in the process, which she is going to address and update me in due course.
The first thing that went wrong was the officer who reviewed the original uploaded footage didn't pass the footage to the investigating officer, neither does she know how it could be, as so far as she is aware, there is no facility to do this. She is going to speak with the reviewing officer about this.
Next was the investigating officer, coming to a decision the insurance companies would sort it out, based upon my statement and him contacting me about injuries, without seeing the camera footage. Apparently if you are injured, it is treated under a different Section of the RTA. If there is an injury or death, prosecution is more likely. - I know there are some one here who would take issue with the last comment, as do I, having been previously been hit and injured and no action was taken.
Next was the investigating officer not being aware of the time limits for a NIP to be issued and ensuring his investigation was completed in sufficient time.
Then there was the conversation I had with the investigating officer at my house. It was not within his remit to discuss the driver going on an awareness course. Irrespective of whether a prosecution or DAC was to take place, the police had to be satisfied that they could prosecute in the event of the driver failing to attend the DAC or not engaging with it. So my initial statement, as detailed as it was, would have had to be rewritten and this should have taken place at the police station.
Finally, it was not surprising the investigating officer's recommendation for a DAC had been rejected, a) because the time limit for a NIP had been exceeded and b) my statement needed to have been rewritten to a prosecution standard.
The investigating officer is to be spoken to.
The inspector agreed the driver should have been prosecuted, but we are where we are. From the notes by the investigating officer, she is of the opinion that the driver had a moment of bad judgement, rather than someone who is malicious towards cyclists. As the driver had already agreed to go on a DAC, she is going to try again to get the driver on a DAC, but in circumstances which are outside the normal. If the driver fails to attend, there is nothing the police can do, but she thinks the driver would benefit from it.
If she cannot get the driver on a DAC, or she refuses to go on one, then the investigating officer and one of his seniors will visit the driver and show her the footage and explain in detail what could have happened etc.
Given the time which has elapsed, probably the best I could hope for.
I did say to her that it felt like cyclists were fair game for motorists and were were not being protected by the police. It may of course have been her defusing the conversation, but she agreed, claiming her partner had been hit when cycling, but the police could only work within the laws.


----------



## classic33 (4 Feb 2019)

You got a quicker response than missen. That's one thing.


----------



## NorthernDave (4 Feb 2019)

Bazzer said:


> An update:
> The complaint to the Police Commissioner didn't get far. "As the police are investigating the Commissioner doesn't think it is appropriate..etc." But I shall now get back to him in the light of recent contact with the police.
> In brief, so far as the police are concerned, I have spoken with the investigating inspector, who has accepted somethings went wrong in the process, which she is going to address and update me in due course.
> The first thing that went wrong was the officer who reviewed the original uploaded footage didn't pass the footage to the investigating officer, neither does she know how it could be, as so far as she is aware, there is no facility to do this. She is going to speak with the reviewing officer about this.
> ...



I'm glad you've gotten some sort of closure, but parts of this last post fill me with a mix of incredulity and anger.
How can a police officer not be aware of the time limits for a NIP, or aware of when a DAC can (or cannot) be offered? It's hardly an unusual or unduly complex matter, so it seems reasonable to expect a constable to be able deal with in the course of their duties on a fairly frequent basis.
In my job I have to meet minimum professional standards, including qualifications. I have to be able to prove that I'm up to speed with current legislation, methods and developments and have to keep a record of CPD and regular examinations where failure to comply with minimum requirements can not only see me removed from professional bodies but actually stop me working. 
I have to meet multiple mandatory regulatory bodies requirements, including being of appropriate character.
If I take a flyer and provide poor professional advice, even with the best of intentions, or fail to discharge my role in a professional manner it could be enough to see me banned from working with punitive measures taken against me and my employer.
If I don't know something I'm required to go away and research it before presenting an opinion.
Why should it be any different for the thin blue line?

I'm fully aware that the police are stretched thin and have lost lots of experienced officers in recent years, but I don't feel that it's unreasonable to expect those that remain to have a basic grasp of their role and duties.


----------



## Bazzer (5 Feb 2019)

NorthernDave said:


> I'm glad you've gotten some sort of closure, but parts of this last post fill me with a mix of incredulity and anger.
> How can a police officer not be aware of the time limits for a NIP, or aware of when a DAC can (or cannot) be offered? It's hardly an unusual or unduly complex matter, so it seems reasonable to expect a constable to be able deal with in the course of their duties on a fairly frequent basis.
> In my job I have to meet minimum professional standards, including qualifications. I have to be able to prove that I'm up to speed with current legislation, methods and developments and have to keep a record of CPD and regular examinations where failure to comply with minimum requirements can not only see me removed from professional bodies but actually stop me working.
> I have to meet multiple mandatory regulatory bodies requirements, including being of appropriate character.
> ...



I know, but the inspector getting ear ache about it wasn't going to achieve anything, apart from raising my blood pressure: which isn't going to do me any good. She admitted the police got it wrong and the chilled side of me accepts we all do sometimes.
I got the feeling the investigating officer and possibly the initial reviewing officer, may be having some awkward conversations with her.

Even if the police had taken timely action, as I think many of us are only too aware and the inspector acknowledged in conversation with me, there are a number of the laws concerning motor vehicles, which are inadequate, even where death or serious injury results. But that is a subject for another thread.

Anyway, thanks to those who contributed to the thread, in particular @Drago for the advice about the police, @NorthernDave for the advice about Road.cc and @glasgowcyclist for picking up the reference on Twitter.


----------

