I know someone who was done for dangerous , similar situation(ish)
He took offence at being overtaken by a motorbike and drove dangerously by driving really close to the bike through the next village
He got a NIP, went to court and found out the biker was an off duty police. He did pick up points for this.
There is some extra "weight" given to police testimony. I would say the dashcam footage is crucial.
Does your dash cam show the speed that your wife was travelling?
Just to confirm some points made in the thread so far.
While a driving awareness course wouldn't be the end of the world (still have to pay £100 for the privilege) it seems slightly unfair based on the footage. I think she would probably take that rather than fight it in court which on one hand I can understand but the other I think we have great evidence.
- All we have received so far is a letter (an application for the identity of the driver) asking us to confirm who was driving the car (we returned this immediately as I can't imagine there is anything to gain by not doing so)
- The letter is titled "intention to prosecute) and the offence is "drive a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road / in a public place without due care and attention"
- The location, time etc all correspond with the dash cam footage
- My wife was not on the phone or distracted (she is ultra over the top safe which is why it's quite amusing this has happened. I've been sending her "how to prepare for prison" links/videos )
- She was in our 2nd car (Focus 1.0 ecoboost) so hardly anything that would attract attention
- The NIP is dated 3 days after the offence took place
- I've purposefully not posted the footage as I'm not sure if I can given it may be used as evidence
The only other scenario I can think of is that perhaps one of the 2 cars going the other way have seen this guy waving his arms with his child, thought they were in distress and stopped to speak to them. Perhaps they had a dash cam themselves. I know things can look different from another perspective so perhaps it did look differently to the oncoming traffic? I've just got a hunch the guy is a policeman though.
Either way we'll see if we hear anything or get any more details of the allegation. Thanks for the help so far!
big stan - great film tooI've been sending her "how to prepare for prison" links/videos
I reckon she's the woman from @Rroff 's video!
@Burnsy2023 , can you shed some light please ?
I’m not sure, presumably they would have reviewed the statement and decided there was something in it hence sending the request to identity who was driving. I’d be very surprised if we go through that process and then not hear anything again. I do agree with you though, hence why I think it’s an off duty policeman as if a member of the public were to make a report I can’t see it would be followed up on given the police’s resources unless there were multiple witnesses or some form of evidence? It even crossed my mind if the letter was genuine but everything seemed to match up when I googled it and it was sent to me as I’m the registered owner.
Given what you've said, this sounds more like an off-duty cop trying to swing his little richard because she didn't stop to let him cross, despite her having no obligation to.
Just to confirm some points made in the thread so far.
While a driving awareness course wouldn't be the end of the world (still have to pay £100 for the privilege) it seems slightly unfair based on the footage. I think she would probably take that rather than fight it in court which on one hand I can understand but the other I think we have great evidence.
- All we have received so far is a letter (an application for the identity of the driver) asking us to confirm who was driving the car (we returned this immediately as I can't imagine there is anything to gain by not doing so)
- The letter is titled "intention to prosecute) and the offence is "drive a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road / in a public place without due care and attention"
- The location, time etc all correspond with the dash cam footage
- My wife was not on the phone or distracted (she is ultra over the top safe which is why it's quite amusing this has happened. I've been sending her "how to prepare for prison" links/videos )
- She was in our 2nd car (Focus 1.0 ecoboost) so hardly anything that would attract attention
- The NIP is dated 3 days after the offence took place
- I've purposefully not posted the footage as I'm not sure if I can given it may be used as evidence
The only other scenario I can think of is that perhaps one of the 2 cars going the other way have seen this guy waving his arms with his child, thought they were in distress and stopped to speak to them. Perhaps they had a dash cam themselves. I know things can look different from another perspective so perhaps it did look differently to the oncoming traffic? I've just got a hunch the guy is a policeman though.
Either way we'll see if we hear anything or get any more details of the allegation. Thanks for the help so far!
if someones starting to cross, and a car at excess speed is suddenly bearing down on them .... did she brake ? that would be the natural instinct No.
It's a NIP, there's nothing to appeal yet unless this whole incident literally never happened.They will need some kind of proof or reliable witnesses for it to stick if you appeal it (you should). If he decided to cross in a stupid spot then it's his fault.