URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Speeding and other criminal offences
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 64904--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Due care, NDORS and police misconduct 
   DIR By: NewJudge
       Date: March 30, 2025, 5:00 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I think (though cannot be sure) that the decision how to proceed
       with a particular allegation is not taken by the individual
       officer involved. It is taken in a “back office” based on the
       report from the officer.
       However, it is by the way. You can illustrate and discuss the
       finer points of their guidance but it makes no difference. They
       have made their decision.
       I think instead you need to deal with the situation you are in.
       You have a fixed penalty offer which will almost certainly soon
       be withdrawn and you must decide whether or not to accept it.
       The other issues you mention are somewhat peripheral to that
       especially if, as you say, three points will have such a
       profound effect on you. Those other issues are almost certainly
       not going to be resolved before the police withdraw their offer
       and probably not before they must instigate court proceedings
       (which they must do within six months of the offence date). When
       making your decision you should realise that if you are
       convicted in court, careless driving carries a maximum of nine
       points or a disqualification.
       --- Quote ---
       > The issue I have is the disposal not being in line with the
       legislation…
       --- End Quote ---
       Courses offered by the police as an alternative to prosecution
       are outside any legislation. The guidance is just that.
       #Post#: 64967--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Due care, NDORS and police misconduct 
   DIR By: ManxTom
       Date: March 31, 2025, 8:25 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: TactiMgr link ---
       >
       >
       > I totally get that it's "discretionary" but it's the lack of
       integrity that's my issue. Stating they as the oic have no say
       and then them not only having a say but deciding the outcome
       just doesn't sit right.
       >
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I don't see that you have any real argument here about the
       officer's "integrity".   What you said in your initial post was:
       --- Quote from: TactiMgr link ---
       >
       > ... I received a TOR for "driving without due care and
       attention" and the made a point of saying they don't normally
       have a say in how the matters are dealt with.
       >
       > I received an COFP a few days later which only gave me the
       option of points and a fine which would be hugely impactive to
       me, work and volunteering. I queried this with the central
       ticket office and they advised the "officer in the case had
       advised them the matter wasn't suitable for a driver retaining
       course" which is in stark contrast to what they had said (on
       body worn video) during the stop...
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I have no doubt that it is the ususal practice for officers
       conducting roadside stops to tell drivers that the final say as
       to the outcome is not up to them.  That's because they don't
       want to get into any protracted debate, negotiation or possible
       argument at the roadside. They just want to issue the TOR and be
       done with it.  But it's obvious that whatever final decision is
       made will have to be based on the officer's report - that's
       because it's the only source of information available to whoever
       makes the decision.
       I also don't necessarily see any contradiction or deception in
       the officer telling you that they don't normally have a say in
       how matters are dealt, but they then issue a report saying that
       they didn't consider the matter suitable for a driver retraining
       course.
       In any case I can't see what difference it makes to you whether
       he'd told you that he had no say in the matter or whether he'd
       told you that he would report that no course should be offered?
       I think your clutching at a straw with this integrity approach -
       unless the bodycam recording you have clearly shows that he told
       some lie to you that you relied on to your detriment
       *****************************************************
       Page 2 of 2
   DIR Previous Page