675.cc • Triumph 675 Forum

Traffic officers want respect and then act like this!!!

Discussion in 'Rants & Raves' started by Bigmac, May 4, 2014.

  1. dino

    dino

    1,774
    3
    38
    Location: Bromley Kent
    Where it's someone driving an insured vehicle but not covered by the policy then the injured parties Insurers will claim from the MIB.

    The MIB will then attempt to recover the cost from the insurer of the vehicle.

    As all insurers contribute to the MIB funds from which the claim is paid out I believe there is some sort of agreement that the vehicle insurer will pay out.

    Think of what happens if a vehicle is stolen and hits another car. The stolen vehicles insurers are usually liable.
     
  2. Bigmac

    Bigmac

    Thread Starter

    4,694
    280
    83
    Location: Slough
    I did mention before I don't know, they had traffic officer on the there jackets and car, I have said that a few times.

    Once again I'm lucky he didn't take my reg, for doing nothing? I did nothing wrong, so yes I am lucky but then is everyone (wether they have insurance or not) lucky there reg isn't taken when they talk to an officer?
     
  3. Wyrm

    Wyrm

    4,654
    30
    48
    Location: Surrey
    Driving without Insurance is inexcusable - you were breaking the law and ignorance is no defence - so don't say you were doing nothing wrong.
     
  4. Then they were HATOs, Highway Agency Traffic Officers, nothing, I repeat nothing todo with the Police.
    I am sure all of the previous keyboard warriors will be rushing to apologise now since they wanted "coppers sacked" over this???
     
  5. Bigmac

    Bigmac

    Thread Starter

    4,694
    280
    83
    Location: Slough
    I did nothing wrong for him to take my reg is what I was saying.
    Not having insurance is inexcusable and against the law, no body is disputing that.
    I'm getting quite bored of this thread as people are just going over old ground that has been covered.
    I had no insurance, I was breaking the law, this is true and inexcusable but however irrelevant to the situation. The only affect it had on the situation is stopping me from confronting this officer on his disgusting behaviour.
    As far as the situation is concerned, i did nothing, I stopped when told too and didn't move, then moved off when beckoned.
    I questioned the officer as I didn't know what they where doing as I couldn't see them.
    The officer broke the law, treated a member of the public disgustingly even though he is suppose to be a role model to how we are suppose to conduct ourselves. He even went on to threaten that member of the public.
    The other driver may have broke the law I'm not sure if continuing to drive when a officer on your left puts his hand up.

    So once again I will start up another thread about the insurance situation and how much of a royal c*nt i am if you want to burn me there if you'd like but that had nothing to do with what I saw the officer do which was the point of the thread.
     
  6. Re:

    Whilst I agree that riding/driving without insurance is unacceptable, I have to agree with Bigmac's suggestion that the discussion of this topic has turned this into a different thread. The original post questioned the behaviour of the police/traffic officer, and developed into a debate about the wider police force's behaviour that was still relevant to the original post.

    I suggest this thread has morphed into an insurance topic because the original debate had identified examples of inexcusable police behaviour that were difficult to defend in reasonable terms, and those wishing to defend them were keen to move the topic on to a more easily defendable one.

    Insurance is a valid topic for debate, but it should be in a separate thread in my opinion. What does the moderator think?
     
  7. dino

    dino

    1,774
    3
    38
    Location: Bromley Kent
    It would appear now, that it was not a police officer after all....

    So no need to vilify the police and still lucky to not get caught driving without insurance, an ANPR car would have pinged you straight off.
     
  8. dino

    dino

    1,774
    3
    38
    Location: Bromley Kent
    The only irrelevant posts on this thread seem to be those vilifying the police.

    To use your terminology

    Inexcusable behaviour by what appears to be NOT a police officer.

    Inexcusable behaviour by a driver failing to stop

    Inexcusable driving without insurance

    Should we ignore one inexcusable behaviour over another to grind our own personal axe or should we view the OP in its entirety and comment on the whole of the situation.
     
  9. Frequent Flyer

    Frequent Flyer

    3,092
    1,040
    113
    Location: Cardiff
    These guys shut the A48 near Cardiff because of a smash (fatality) on the M4 - weren't able to take a section off the central reservation and turn traffic round to the diversion off the A48 or open the hard shoulder to get off the mway three junctions before the actual incident - and do something useful.... So if you were diabetic, have infants or other pressing needs, then the 8hr wait wasn't at all an inconvenience.

    I put their usefulness below those digital motorway signs telling me to take a break or warning of traffic on clear days with about 4 cars on a 4 mile stretch.

    Should have video'd the rude soandso and sent it to the rags to blow up even more.
     
  10. If you read my post you will see I did not say any post was irrelevant, merely that the developing thread should be
    debated separately. The question of insurance is very important and deserves thorough debate, which is why I suggested it was deserving of its own thread.

    With respect, you have no grounds to describe my opinions as 'personal axes'. I believe I have valid opinions based on significant consideration, not just 'personal axes'.

    The crux of the original post was clearly the behaviour of the officer. Bigmac's admittance of his insurance mistake was an incidental if honest comment. I at no point suggested it should be ignored, as I have said above, the question of insurance is very important and deserves thorough debate, which is why I suggested it was deserving of its own thread.

    On the point of debate, in my opinion, some of the comments made regarding Bigmac's insurance mistake have verged on the vitriolic. I have agreed that his mistake is serious, and while I respect strongly held views I hope I would not have vilified him in such terms.
     
  11. Wyrm

    Wyrm

    4,654
    30
    48
    Location: Surrey
    Re:

    Yes, he did. The Traffic Management Act 2004 states that HATOs (Highways Agency Traffic Officers) have the power to stop vehicles, and when told to do so you MUST stop, and that it is an offence not to comply with their directions.

    You should really be thanking the HATO - if he hadn't acted as he did you might not have checked your insurance and may still be driving uninsured or have been pulled for it later.
     
  12. dino

    dino

    1,774
    3
    38
    Location: Bromley Kent
    Mark Carter - You said the discussion of wider police behaviour was relevant to the thread and insurance should be seperate. You can't pick and choose the facts to suit your own personal bias.

    Given that it wasn't, apparently, a police officer ......... The police behaviour is totally irrelevant.

    As for personal axes to grind, I didn't say you had an axe to grind, merely that some posts have some anti police views posted (Hillsborough, Miners strike etc) whenever the opportunity arises.

    These seem, IMHO totally irrelevant to the actions of a non police highways officer, and two drivers breaking the law.

    I don't see anyone steering the debate away from the indefensible actions, of all concerned, merely offering a different perspective.

    BigMac has his car insured, some ignorant twat of a driver has to buy a new mirror and hopefully the HPO officers actions will cause him some grief.

    Pity Bic Mac wasn't insured at the time or he could have made an official complant.

    Nobody got hurt, nobody got points on their licence and nobody lost their job, lessons learned all round.
     
  13. Bigmac

    Bigmac

    Thread Starter

    4,694
    280
    83
    Location: Slough
    He wasn't picking and choosing the facts (well maybe he was) but he was doing it on my behalf as I was the op and my intention was clearly to highlight the actions of the officer. my insurance I intended as a side note as it affected the way I dealt with it and in all honesty saved me from actually getting in trouble most probably. I'm not an angry person by any means, I don't have altercations and am generally very laid back but this really got to me. I felt verbal assaulted and threatened, hade shaking with anger, so the fact that I didn't have insurance saved me from getting out of my car.
    Either way, thank you for all the comments, anyone that defended me and for all the valid points to the opposing comments, where would any forum be without conflicting views and opinions.
    Also nicely brought to a close dino. I'm yet to see you or wyrm out but you live localish to me, I need to get out on some ride outs with you boys.
     
  14. Red675

    Red675

    11,999
    1,206
    113
    Location: Angola
    only if youre insured :whistle: :smileup:
     
  15. D41

    D41

    13,919
    139
    63
    Location: Orange, CA
    You're a sarky mofo, Red. :lol: :lol:
     
  16. Wyrm

    Wyrm

    4,654
    30
    48
    Location: Surrey
    That's why everyone likes him. :)

    Wouldn't have it any other way.
     
  17. Wyrm

    Wyrm

    4,654
    30
    48
    Location: Surrey
    Anytime - should be some more ride-outs being posted up on here and quite a few meet up at Rykas first.
     
  18. Bigmac

    Bigmac

    Thread Starter

    4,694
    280
    83
    Location: Slough
    Speak for yourself!!! [FACE WITH STUCK-OUT TONGUE AND TIGHTLY-CLOSED EYES]
     
  19. Indeed.
     

Share This Page

Loading...
  1. By using this website you agree to our Cookies usage. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, ads and Newsletters:
    Dismiss Notice