So did you ask if there was video?
There is definitely no video, that car is not fitted with any type of camera system. I would have pressed matters further at this stage if there was as a clip of the incident as it would put this to bed.
Personally I'd send a letter to the Chief Constable asking for a full explanation on which part of Section 3 of the RTA you had contravened and therefore given a Section 59.
The Chief Constable is Brunstrom. I'll let you decide if the ink used would be worth it.
In my letter..."Officer X indicated that the warning was for what could possibly have happened, i.e I could have alarmed another driver not expecting the overtake. Whilst I fully appreciate my judgement was not of a high standard and I exceeded the speed limit to perform the overtake, I have had time to review the section 59 warning and do not believe that the manoeuvre or my driving during the incident meets the criteria of careless or inconsiderate driving. I did ask Officer X twice during our conversation if the manoeuvre was safe and he stated that he believed it was. At no point during the manoeuvre did I inconvenience any other road user..."
But I have been inconsiderate in the eyes of one officer as it has been revealed he had to brake, thus inconveniencing him..."If a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place, he is guilty of an offence.”
I'm aware motoring law is different from criminal law but I always have a problem with this statement as surely in the absence of other evidence eg video/second policeman, then the old adage of "everyone being equal in the eyes of the law" should stand firm with your word that "you didn't" being just as good as his word that "you did" which in effect you'd think should cancel each others accusations out resulting in a case dismisal or does this not apply and if not WHY NOT?
I would be contesting a decision made by a trained traffic officer with x years experience. The onus would be on me to prove I was not inconsiderate, ultimately having to prove that he did not brake or have to brake....reasonable doubt and all that good stuff.
I found out that if a policeman offers me a warning I have to decline it and say if they want to take it further they have to do me for it. Apparently accepting a warning is accepting you did what they said you did and being a doctor this would automatically put me in front of the GMC for a fitness to practice hearing...So basically I would be forced to make them come steal my car if they wanted to give me an S59 because theyre having a bit of a shoddy day.
You can tell them to stick the S59 and if you are 100% confident that they have nothing on you, drive away. They will just send it to you by post. You have no choice in receiving or accepting a warning so it makes zero difference if you sign anything or not.
There is also no official appeals procedure for a S59. Trawling for info on the Section 59 after I recieved it was a bit of an eye-opener as it seems to be abused and there is confusion as to its application, even on police forums.
But if you do ever get another one, let me know where you are and I will come and hijack it back for you, Layer Cake style 
