Insane bus overtake

[albion]

Its scary that cycle lanes make some idiots drivers think they thus have license to kill.So far in the north east though, I've found all bus drivers fantastic. There is even an occasional decent van driver too.

 

[gaz]

From experience that is a good result.
The CPS get only so much time in a month per court to deal with traffic offences so they have to pick and choose which ones they can take. Unfortunately in the grand scheme of things this is relatively minor when compared to collisions, so they will rarely get into court.

 

[Matthew_T]

I only report incidents to the police where the driver has got out of the car, or abused me in any way. I dont tend to report things like close passes or SMIDSY's because there is no point.

The bottom line is: If there is no collision then the only thing the police do is have a word with the driver.
Sometimes it gets to the stage where you wish he had nudged you just a little, or scraped your arm (not thinking positively I know). But you are always fortunate that he didnt hit you.

 

[gaz]

Sometimes it gets to the stage where you wish he had nudged you just a little, or scraped your arm (not thinking positively I know).

I have never wished that...

 

[growingvegetables]

Hmmm - to wait all this time for a response from First Yorkshire is not a good result. You have a pm with named people with positions to contact. Have fun - stir it a bit

The idea of waiting since June ........... words fail me.

 

[400bhp]

I'd be pretty happy with that result! I think that it's a suitable punishment, and is likely to be taken quite seriously by his employers and by the driver himself. The news will get around of helmet camera cyclists, and all the drivers that know about it at that company are likely to be much more careful in future.

Agree with most of this.

 

[oldfatfool]

tbh if they prosecuted every incidence of bad/ poor driving that caused a 3rd party to have to avoid an accident there wouldn't be a car/bus/van/lorry left on the road.

Hopefully if the officer does as he says then the driver and the company *should* sit up and take note. I don't know that it was a punishment pass I think half the time bus drivers think they are in cars and forget the length of the vehicle when they pull back in, as soon as they are past rather than the 30ft of bus behind them So hopefully some retraining will be on the cards.

 

[pshore]

I wonder if this is an example where the driver would get points under the system described here:



BBC: Fines planned for careless driving

Police will get powers to fine careless drivers, rather than taking them to court, as part of a government strategy to make Britain's roads safer.

Ministers say motorists who tail-gate, undertake or cut others up often go unpunished and that introducing instant penalties would be more efficient.

Offenders would get a fine of at least £80 and three points on their licence.

Critics say the approach - likely to be introduced in 2012 in England, Scotland and Wales - is too simplistic.

Currently motorists who have driven in a careless manner have to be prosecuted through the courts. Under the new plans, they will still have that option should they contest the offence.

Transport Secretary Philip Hammond released the new strategy for England, Scotland and Wales on Wednesday.

The proposals still have to go through Parliament.

...

 

[magnatom]

I must admit, I wouldn't be happy with that. I have a case ongoing of a close pass from a car, where the police were looking to go with careless driving, i.e. probably 3 points. That pass, due to size and speed of it was worse.

Responsibility will only come with increased 'prosecution' of the law IMO.

 

[Amanda P]

From experience that is a good result.
The CPS get only so much time in a month per court to deal with traffic offences so they have to pick and choose which ones they can take. Unfortunately in the grand scheme of things this is relatively minor when compared to collisions, so they will rarely get into court.

I agree it's a good result. I also realise that the CPS have a limited budget - but that is not given in the reponse as a reason for not prosecuting; if it were I might accept it. The reasons that are given seem weak and poorly argued.

I only report incidents to the police where the driver has got out of the car, or abused me in any way. I dont tend to report things like close passes or SMIDSY's because there is no point.

The bottom line is: If there is no collision then the only thing the police do is have a word with the driver.
Sometimes it gets to the stage where you wish he had nudged you just a little, or scraped your arm (not thinking positively I know). But you are always fortunate that he didnt hit you.

Well, you must make your own decisions. I had clear evidence of bad driving and reported it, and I'll do it again. It's looking like "a word" is all that will happen, but we'll see if they can be persuaded to do more.

I must admit, I wouldn't be happy with that. I have a case ongoing of a close pass from a car, where the police were looking to go with careless driving, i.e. probably 3 points. That pass, due to size and speed of it was worse.

Responsibility will only come with increased 'prosecution' of the law IMO.

That's good to hear. I've written back to say that I'm not content with this conclusion, and giving reasons, quoting the CPS guidelines (again) why I think they should prosecute for either dangerous driving or driving without consideration. I suspect they won't, but the fact that they've had to explain to me why not (and I'm not happy with the explanation I've quoted) might concentrate their minds a bit.

And I've nothing to lose - they've already committed themselves to 'having a word' in the presence of the driver's boss, so that'll happen anyway. And he'll have been carpeted by his boss once already, when I first reported it, if First's standard letter is to be believed.

What's the point of having a law, if, when there's clear evidence of it being broken, the appropriate punishment is not sought, let alone applied?!

And the bit "the fact that there was no collision... provides some mitigation" raised my eyebrows somewhat. That implies that any standard of driving is OK, as long as no collision occurs!

 

[Amanda P]

If I were you and it had come this far I would like to be present when he was shown the clip.

I'd like that too. I thought about asking for it, but decided it clouded the issue of whether there should be a prosecution. If the police decide once and for all that there won't be a prosecution, and it's not too late, I might raise this as a possiblity. But I won't hold my breath.

 

[wiggydiggy]

...............I've written back to say that I'm not content with this conclusion, and giving reasons, quoting the CPS guidelines (again) why I think they should prosecute for either dangerous driving or driving without consideration. I suspect they won't, but the fact that they've had to explain to me why not (and I'm not happy with the explanation I've quoted) might concentrate their minds a bit...........

Good for you

Without trying to criticise too much those that are content I think we should be pushing for maximum penalties in all incidents, the tendency of the CPS to manage down charges and indeed when it gets to sentencing (should that be if!) to be light means we should go for the throat.

 

[Gandalf]

I have to agree with Maggers. Whilst I can appreciate that the CPS has limited resources, I find the underlying rationale for not proceeding worrying.

Excuse the hyperbole, but to me it sounds as if it is perfectly OK to start waving a loaded gun around in public if, more by luck than judgement, nobody actually gets shot. The 'you were only made to crap yourself and you are not dead ' argument is becoming tiresome.

Not good enough. People operating heavy machinery in public spaces need to be made to take their responsibilities far more seriously.

 

[gaz]

It's not the CPS's resources that is the problem. it's the court time allocated to traffic based cases.

 

[BSRU]

Good for you

Without trying to criticise too much those that are content I think we should be pushing for maximum penalties in all incidents, the tendency of the CPS to manage down charges and indeed when it gets to sentencing (should that be if!) to be light means we should go for the throat.

I do not think people are content with the lack of criminal proceedings just it seems these days that the police/CPS only go down the prosecution route for "more serious" incidents.

I was told over a 18 months ago by a local traffic officer that they were only concerned with collisions, this has not stopped me reporting any incidents I feel needed reporting.