Official Close Pass Licencing response

[Joseph]

Joseph, thanks for the offer. I think it would be better coming from me (do you have some connection with the exec that would help?). I think I will try and contact the licencing section back to see if they will look into my 'concerns' about their investigation. If not then I will take it further, i.e. council/MP etc.

No connection at all. (Well, not unless you count my other recent complaining; but more about that if/when it finally concludes.)

Private hire falls under land/environmental services, your next step up (if you didn't know already) is this guy:

Robert Booth BA(Hons), DMS, DPM
Executive Director of Land and Environmental Services
231 George Street
GLASGOW
G1 1RX
Phone: 0141 287 9100
E-mail: robert.booth@glasgow.gov.uk

I've experienced other people low down in environmental services and I was rather unimpressed (even before your response), so up to this guy is likely the correct next step. As you say, not worth bringing the press in at this stage.

 

[col]

Why not let it go?he knows what happened ,so do you,do you have to hound this guy ?If you followed all incidents like this you would have loads on your list to push your complaint about,and probably no time for anything else.Let it go.

 

[barnesy]

The driver stated that while he was in the process of overtaking, you moved to the right, therefore reducing the space that he would normally leave for cyclists.

This is just a stupid excuse. Any of us who drive aswell as cycle im sure allow cyclists plenty of room when overtaking.
This is incase the cyclist were to swerve off their line, if i was overtaking with the right amount of room a cyclist would still never be close enough to my car to be able to touch it, even if they were swerving or wobbling.
Fact is it was stupid of him to think he could overtake there in the face of oncoming traffic and he was never allowing you any room.
Id take it further if you can, although i doubt the driver is going to learn anything

 

[alp1950]

If you did want to continue, I think this is the area to work on. "Although the driver feels it was safe to pass" is exceptionally weak wording. Regardless of his feeling, your video shows him overtaking in the face of oncoming traffic. The Highway Code is clear on when and where overtaking is or isn't a good plan, and into oncoming traffic is solidly in the isn't category. So he can feel whatever he likes, but the expected standard of driving says otherwise

Jez

I think Jez is right here Mags.

The problem with these cam videos is that it is very difficult to look at them & be entirely certain about road positioning and movements relative to other road users. Do I think you moved out?- no. Does the video provide incontestable evidence that you didn't?-it seems to support your position but I'm not sure that a neutral would find the video evidence absolutely clear cut.

However as Jez points out, whether or not you moved out is largely immaterial as no matter what position you were in the driver should not have attempted to overtake if there was insufficient room. Does the video provide sufficient evidence that he acted recklessly? There was incoming traffic, but can we be certain of his position both in relation to the centre of the road and also yourself. Again I think that the video supports your position, but would it meet a legal standard of proof? I have my concerns that it would not, and in the unlikely event that this was ever tested in court I suspect your case would fail without a video shot from an external viewpoint.

BTW are you sure that the licensing services are the best way to pursue this? Surely, they're not going to take action without some form of official censure, whether a conviction for dangerous driving or whatever. Would it not be better to take the video to the police?

 

[marinyork]

If you're bothered then write back. It's just them trying to fob you off with official talk. For what you've already done you'll have really pissed off the drivers boss because you made them spend time "investigating" it for a couple of minutes. They'll be extremely ticked off. If you write back to someone higher up they'll then have the heat on the back of their neck.

As for the driver, they may have been given a telling off but more from anger of their boss's time being taken up. Who knows. Complain anyway.

 

[downfader]

Why not let it go?he knows what happened ,so do you,do you have to hound this guy ?If you followed all incidents like this you would have loads on your list to push your complaint about,and probably no time for anything else.Let it go.

Sorry col but thats airy fairy talk. If we are put at risk we should speak up. This guy who wrote back is not doing his job properly as a public servant and said taxi driver could end up costing the council/tax payer money if he ends up knocking someone over or smashing into someones car.

 

[col]

Sorry col but thats airy fairy talk. If we are put at risk we should speak up. This guy who wrote back is not doing his job properly as a public servant and said taxi driver could end up costing the council/tax payer money if he ends up knocking someone over or smashing into someones car.

I just think it seems that for what happened,which he was also to blame by blocking the exit and staying there,it turns into a very vindictive thing,and him saying he doesnt want this driver to lose his job but just get told off seems a red herring.What does he think might happen when he goes to such extent to get this brought to everyones attention?Because he wasnt happy that the driver wasnt disciplined in someway,he keeps pushing,and demanding for somesort of action.No,there is getting something done,and there is being vindictive.
The driver has already been contacted about this,i think that would have been a bit of a shock to him,and made him think about it,and probably be wary in future,but no thats not enough is it?What exactly do you want to happen to this driver?

 

[Arch]

The driver has already been contacted about this,i think that would have been a bit of a shock to him,and made him think about it,and probably be wary in future,but no thats not enough is it?What exactly do you want to happen to this driver?

Rubbish, how will he learn or be bothered to think next time, if he gets away with a) driving badly in the first place and lying about it afterwards?

 

[silverbow]

I would certainly reply to that letter, and ask them to pass an additional letter on to the driver.

In that letter to the driver, you can explain his several failures of observing the highway code, how his impatience risked your life and that of the oncoming car driver, and that he would only have been waiting for you in the queue ahead anyway. I would quote the highway code at him, and explain that he's lying about you moving out as can clearly be seen on the video. I'd also mention how put his registration on youtube, searchable, and that his bad driving will remain there as an embarassment to his professional driving

Whilst reading this remember I have no legal qualifications whatsoever. I'm just drawing on experience of successfully litigating against a very slippy individual who pulled out all the tricks in the book. I won because my lawyer was first class (and very rich, even richer with my money!).

BentMikey is right, you need to write again before you take this any further, if that is what you intend to do. Make any apologies that you need to. I.e. I didn't mean to knock the top of your car it was a reaction against you driving so close self preservation if you will - I was extremely scared, ditto for the language... State that you are not satisfied with their findings, and when you would expect a reply i.e. 14 days. Restate any actions that you expect them to undertake.

Then send via recorded the delivery.

The one thing I would say is your achilles heal is that the video in on youtube. If I was the driver I would say that you are prejudicing the public against me.... it's you who is the problem.... I know this is all rubbish but I was told by my lawyer that to win any dispute you play the long game - take a few cheap punches from the other party, but remember who is delivering the knock out blow!

I'd write to the company again - await the expected poor or no response and then write the council and the MP stating how you feel and why you think training is needed.

But sometimes when dealing with difficult individuals you just have to admit that there is little point in pursuing any further.

 

[col]

Rubbish, how will he learn or be bothered to think next time, if he gets away with a) driving badly in the first place and lying about it afterwards?

So you think its rubbish?Ok what do you think should happen to him?

 

[Arch]

So you think its rubbish?Ok what do you think should happen to him?

Well, if he thinks it's ok to overtake in the face of oncoming traffic, and leaving inches to spare, I don't think he should be driving for a living.

Failing the sack, I'd like him to get some sort of official warning.

Come on, that letter basically says "Our driver says you're a liar and a thug, and we belive him, despite video evidence to the contrary". Is that fair?

 

[col]

Well, if he thinks it's ok to overtake in the face of oncoming traffic, and leaving inches to spare, I don't think he should be driving for a living.

Failing the sack, I'd like him to get some sort of official warning.

Come on, that letter basically says "Our driver says you're a liar and a thug, and we belive him, despite video evidence to the contrary". Is that fair?

Its not fair,but im sure everyone lies to defend themselves in someway.So he should lose his job because of this incident?Or because he lied?

 

[Arch]

Its not fair,but im sure everyone lies to defend themselves in someway.So he should lose his job because of this incident?Or because he lied?

He should get whatever is coming to him for the incident. But it seems he can get away with that, by lying.

So, every crim who pleads 'not guilty' should get off should they?

 

[col]

He should get whatever is coming to him for the incident. But it seems he can get away with that, by lying.

So, every crim who pleads 'not guilty' should get off should they?

Why do you say that?

 

[Arch]

[/COLOR]

Why do you say that?

Because if someone is arrested and charged, and pleads not guilty, there is a decent investigation of the evidence. The judge or jury don't just say "oh, well, if you say so, obviously you didn't do it".

This guy drove badly, but because he says he didn't they aren't following it up. That's not right. Especially when there is video evidence to the contrary.