Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Source

Its shocking is this, i always knew that a majority of police where i live were corrupt, sometimes when i am in town you will see the police throwing litter on the floor regardless if their near a bin or not or spitting, smoking cigarettes and then dumping them on the floor and speeding. And the police are supposed to be role models, they are supposed to tell us right from wrong not do the opposite.

Atleast some of them have been caught, what i find hard to believe is..

So the police do not know who is driving their vehicles, well that's a load of BS as far as i am concerned.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

I sort of agree...As far as I'm concerned, the police should be trained to the highest standard possible in everything they do (including driving and litter laws).

If they aren't going to follow the rules then what gives them the right to enforce the law on us? (The law and the nature of their jobs obviously but it was just a "if they dont do it why should we" thing...)

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

This has been a problem for years in the UK, who do the police give chase to, and when not to. A few years ago the BBC filmed a documentary at the police advanced driving school, and one of the phrases used by the instructors caused an inquiry at the time, Golf, Lima, Foxtrot which translated to "go like ..." it was due to this there was an overhaul of the teaching methods at the school, eg: to stop encouraging young officers to react to the red mist

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

---------- Post added at 16:43 ---------- Previous post was at 16:42 ----------

police as such dont have to obey speed limits ( The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, reg 87 ) and are bound to have accidents

the amount of money they are talking about there is not that much and is only quoted because mostly these vehicles are not insured in the same way our cars are and thier accident rates are not huge when you consider they spend a lot of time rushing to help US

as to not knowing who was driving which would you prefere next time a officer is rushing to attend a 999 call and wants the first car available that he signs out the car or just goes

remember he / she may have to then stay at the sceen and may or may not take that car back

i would prefere these papers and programs concerntrated on real coruption that there is rather than this

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Oh right, so its one rule for them and another for us. Bad example, we all follow one rule or there is no rules at all.. Having two sides is bad and will lead to chaos.

Next time i know someone who has got a speeding ticket i will tell them to bring up The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, reg 87.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Funnily enough, I live in Yorkshire, and I know quite a few officers from various forces (Wakefield, Leeds, Bradford -including an Inspector in the Internal Investigations area), and I have to disagree with you on that statement - then again, I try not to making sweeping generalisations about any group of people.

I am sure there are, as in any profession, a number who do not live up to the high standards expected - that doesn't (imho) mean all, or the majority, don't maintain those standards.

---------- Post added at 16:58 ---------- Previous post was at 16:57 ----------

trev, if they had to obey the speed limits, how would they catch speeders? btw, they can be prosecuted for dangerous driving.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Yes, i know they have to break the speed limits to catch criminals, but i am on about the police not on duty, or rushing to get a bloody kebab or just simply can't be bothered waiting behind a red light so turn their lights & sirens on till they get past the traffic lights then turn them off again. TYPICAL ****.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

close ranks and cover up.... what else did you expect , does anyone have a photo of a police officer its that long since i saw one round here i've forget what they look like ,? they do still exist dont they or are they an urban myth ???.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

I see them everyday..

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/04/5.jpg

oh i forgot, the bobbies on the beat, never see them anymore.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

They do have to obey the speed limits if they are not on an emergency call though.

A number of years ago in my town they placed a mobile camera van on a section of dual carraigeway with a 50mph limit. They were at first boasting and patting themselves on the back claiming how the number of speeders they had caught in the first week of using the mobile camera at that location would net £50k.

The red faced chief constable within a few weeks was having to answer why a number of police cars without flashing lights and not on emergency calls, during that week had been exceeding the speed limit. To further add to that about 13 incidents occured where officers had not signed the car out, and the red faced chief was apologising that his officers were less than honest and indicating that they should do the right thing and step forward.

Yeah right they would.:rolleyes:

Of course we also have the coppers in our area who were suspended for using police cars to go to the seaside at Weston during their working shift. They only got caught because the car broke down on that occassion, and it then came out that it had been a frequent occurance for a gang of coppers. (I think they were named the Seaside gang by other officers who knew of it)

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

ahahaa thats where johny 5 went

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

So next time you are chased by a gang of knife-wieding Asians (which judging by your posts must happen frequently), be sure to let the 999 operator you don't want immediate assistance.

Ahh, the usual informative, researched, intelligent post that we've come to expect from you. Normally I get upset by insults against people I know and respect. Fortunately your posts are all complete nonsense, so there's no need.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Some of my fastest times back from Grimsby have been while following a police car driving well over the speed limit (in some cases faster than I felt comfortable doing) without their lights going.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

As stated by Escapee

They do have to obey the speed limits if they are not on an emergency call though.

If my post are informative why do you waste your time in replying to them? Also, this is the internet, i can and will say what i like.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

theres a special bylaw that allows you to speed away from Grimsby cos its a dump:D

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

I've just pruned some of the more off-topic posts from this thread.

Keep the posts on-topic and stop the arguing and bickering or else the thread will be closed permanently.

---------- Post added at 18:48 ---------- Previous post was at 18:40 ----------

Oh and you know the majority of your local force personally do you?

Hmmm, a bit later you say

So which is it.

Good luck with that :tu:
Of course when it turns out they aren't emergency workers on their way to an emergency call you'll look a bit foolish, but then again I'm sure you're used to that.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

---------- Post added at 18:48 ---------- Previous post was at 18:40 ----------


:LOL: Classic :D

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

so if your in trouble you want them to come slowly stopping for every red light ?

---------- Post added at 19:41 ---------- Previous post was at 19:35 ----------


not quite true they can break the speed limit on any call they see fit to so though ACPO rules ( these are not law though ) limit the ones who can to those trained to do so

what i find funny about this is from my knowledge of the police the oposite is now true

lots of police are so fed up with having to fill out forms every time they get in a car and have to get some where fast because off 999 call or because they see something they wont go over the limits no matter what as it causes to much hassle

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Read Through The Thread, I Am Not Going To Repeat Myself.

Doesn't worr both ways tho does it, they cannot have one rule and we have another.

---------- Post added at 19:48 ---------- Previous post was at 19:42 ----------

Cheers, but i have not seen any police for over 6 months now, and when i used to ever need to call the police they were always late so i don't really give a crap. If i need the police for any reason i will take the law into my own hands, atleast i know the thugs are being punished.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

This makes for very interesting reading.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7000318.stm

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

I did not say i know them in person, you are putting words into my mouth.

Oh and why you getting so uptight, have i upset you, oh poor you.

Don't like my opinion don't read it.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Read it again, he is asking you a question, some people :rolleyes:

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

I could say the same thing about you, judging me just because i vote for the BNP, SOME PEOPLE.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Apologies, Rob - post removed.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

It is a number of years ago now (prob 7 or so) but I remember the chief saying that they would get points on their licence if he found out who they were instead of them coming clean.

I believe that he had a lot of egg on his face because the mobile camera had been set up on the basis that speeding motorists were a danger on that section of dual carraigeway. (never know of an accident there myself)

It is however possible that the identifiied speeding police officers who filled in the vehicle log did not receive points on their licence.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

It is also possible that they were hamster-eating alien xenomorphs masquerading as humans, but is it probable? ;)

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

I see, again you choose to pick up a one liner in my post and use your usual methods, I understood these methods were against the terms and conditions of the forum. Your methods certainly leave a lot to be desired considering you always seem to imply that you are on the moral high ground.

however, I do not go around the forum picking single liners from peoples posts that have a different view to my own, and I do not try to put people down here for having a different view even if I do feel they are very unguided or not in the real world.

The cheif constable was looking to make an example of those who were responsible for the egg on his face, those who could be indentified were not responsible for this.

foreverwar, If you really do believe you are better than any other members on this forum please lead by example, and not stoop far lower than members you disagree with.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Escapee, you are extremely mistaken - I do not believe I am any better than any of the other members on this forum.

I was just pointing out you appear to have confused possible (could have happened, no matter how unlikely) with probable (likely to have happened), which could have unintentionally misled readers.

Anything is possible, but not everything is probable.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

OK. So you are willing to claim a lot of people that you don't know are corrupt? How do you know this?

As a mod, he has no choice.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

The Police DO have to obey the speed limits under normal driving conditions...and they must follow the rules of the road just like the rest of us.

The Road Traffic Act allows them to be exempt from such limits in certain situations. IE they can only go through red traffic signals with blues & twos (and only at 15mph or less) when it is safe to do so.

It has been well publicised various officers (especially in S. Yorks. where I live) of Police officers getting speeding tickets from speed cameras.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

your talking about ACPO rules there not the law as it stands an officer can brake the speed limit and or go through red lights up one ways systems the wrong way when ever HE/SHE feels that it is needed

some forces choose to use the ACPO rules to disipline officers but they can not be taken to court for speeding

if however they can show what they did was dangerous driving or with out due care and attention then they can

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Easy way to cut down the amount they have to pay out for accidents get a lot of them out of the cars and onto their feet.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

So you won't mind that when you dial 999 someone will eventually wander round instead of hopping into a panda and driving to you? :erm:

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

:erm: i didn't say all of them Derek i said a lot of them blue moons flyby before i see a police officer on foot where i live yet i see a police car at least every 30 minutes (i live on a main road). Don't tell me every police officer needs to be in a car or a van and not on foot. Also police officers on foot would be doing a lot better in dealing with crime then they do in cars.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

How?

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Because if i see the same two police officers walking up and down my road i am a hell of a lot more likely to identify with them and talk to them then i would that fleeting glimpse that is the police car. If more people talk to the police socially more will talk to them about crime they will cease to just be the flash in a car or the uniform and will become what they used too which was a person i could trust. Keep enough officers in cars to rapidly respond obviously but make them people again and the public will work with them.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Personally I would rather they all have cars - I wouldnt walk up and chat to a police officer even if they were on foot, neither would 99% of people (and that 1% is the old dears)

I see PCSO's everywhere I turn on foot - I see police officers on bikes most days too..

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

WHISTLED neither would i at the minute but are you more likely to talk to a person you see often and recognise as someone you can trust or a car. Like it or not the police have to reconnect to the public and regain the trust that was once given and to be honest taken for granted.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

I do trust the police - The only time we need to talk to the police is to report a crime or a problem, I would flag a car down just as easy as a person on foot.

Im not saying they are perfect, in fact they are absolutely dreadful some times, and I have had problems with the police personally (wont go into detail) they are slow in responding as it is, that could only be worse with officers on the beat.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

I hope these lot don't have to respond to an emergency.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

I think the point Rizzy is trying to get across is that police on foot in residential areas where the locals can regularly see them, and if they wish talk with them, would engender a connection between that community and said policeman. I imagine if people knew the same copper was going to be on their streets day in and week in they would be far more inclined to report something to the face they know, as opposed to an unknown copper at the local station, at least they'd be reassured the beat copper would be back on their streets the following day.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

What's wrong with them using bicycles?They are faster than on foot, less likely to cause any real damage in an accident and more accessible if they patrol the same area plus they can do a larger beat than a foot patrol. :)

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Thats exactly what i am saying Froggie and it is what i hear many others where i live saying as well. When i was a kid the police in my area were as effective as they were because of what these days i guess they would call community intelligence where people living in the community gave information freely to the police about crime. You get seen talking to a copper now and someone is then nicked you better have a good glazing company local at the very least. If talking to a copper was seen to be a normal thing you remove that.

Re: Police payout £2.3m for accidents
 

Nothing if you work in a small area, aside from having to worry about some enterprising young scallywag nicking them if they aren't chained up.
If you cover a large rural area then a car is the only option.

With the current level of front line officers taking any away from cars to walk a beat would be dangerous, almost all the Police blogs have stories on them where shifts covering large areas have a handful of cops on at any one time. *IF* the number of office dwellers is reduced and more front line cops appear then yes having them out on foot or on bikes is a good idea.

Plus if any of the ones on foot get involved in a chase they first thing they do is call for assistance from anyone nearby with a car. If you've ever tried running in a stab vest and utility belt it's not easy. Especially if the person you are chasing is wearing a freshly shoplifted tracksuit.

---------- Post added at 10:50 ---------- Previous post was at 10:48 ----------

Besides having cops on foot isn't a bar to the force being sued and having to pay out.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/...st/6401371.stm