This has been over on Volvo OC for about a week or 2 and I think that it would be beneficial to post over here. If people want to look for the original thread it's in the General thread.
"I've had 15! Notice of Intended Prosection for speeding!
Yep....I really have had 15 Notice of Intended Prosection for speeding!
and yep i was driving.
However, they were all at work and in the response car going to emergencies, and they all arrived on station for me today along with everyone elses
For some reason, a certain police force that covers my area (naming no names) has decided to start issuing us all with NIPs if we go more then 20mph over the speed limit. No other force i know of is doing that.
Even though we verify we are on the way to a 999 call, they have decided to issue us all with NIPs and have to submit a report to them why we were going over 20mph above the speed limit, and then they will decided if to go a head with the NIP or not.
So people. If you start seeing Ambulances with the blues on etc driving not very fast to emergencies you now know why....You know it's only someones life we're dealing with and not some bilking or testing out our new police car!!!
petitions.number10.gov.uk/ambulancespeed/ "
Pandamedic, paramedic in Staffordshire based in the emergency response car, as he says has recieved 15 NIP of speeding, any one who agrees with him please add your support.
|
it happens to police drivers as well... i think you'll find that the thinking is you have to justify each and every time you utilise the exemptions
i think some common sense should come into it personally
there's no reaason why an ambulance driver should need to slow down, if they're driving lawfully in the first place
i'm aware that some London Boroughs have a system where marked car drivers don't have to fill them in, but unmarked ones do..some officers request not to be posted in the unmarked ones as it is a bind having to keep filling them in, when they eventually filter through. Some shifts you could set off cameras 7 or 8 times, easily
|
I would add my support for, probably, 90 per cent plus of cases, but in an urban area I'm not sure that even exceeding the speed limit by 20mph would make all that much difference to the time of arrival for an emergency case.
|
|
|
|
|
This one is very difficult to answer. On the one hand you have to consider the needs of the injured person, but on the other hand you have to consider the safety of other road users.
|
Correct me if Im wrong, but dont emergency vehicles have "black boxes" fitted?
If so, the answer is simple. Were they on an emergency call? Yes, throw it in the bin.
No? Throw the book at the driver.
|
Yep, we have to fill in an NIP and submit a report for every camera we go through. Takes about 20 mins a time. Consider that we can activate a dozen a night on some stretches of road, you can work the wasted time out.
(But it gives the Daily Wail chance to shout 'Police get off speeding fines ;) )
|
Yep we have to fill in an NIP and submit a report for every camera we go through.
Is this to keep you on your toes and to prevent you from becoming complacent?
|
If people don't have an accident, I don't see the problem.
It's accidents that cause upset, not speed,
|
|
|
|
|
Seems pretty simple. If it's an emergency, no prosecution, if it's only speeding. If it isn't an emergency, then the driver is like any one of the rest of us. The procedure needs streamlining if it takes excessive time, that's all.
|
you don't need to be on an emergency call to utilise the police exemptions, but you do have to have a valid reason
e.g.
-speeding up to catch car in front that you wish to stop,
-driving towards a call a colleague is taking on emergency call status and you anticipate they might well need support, but at that time you don't feel the need to use your emergency warning equipment, just get there a bit sharper than normal
|
|
Right - a lot of the posts have been removed. Unlocking it now for a sensible debate if you really want to. Any more personal jibes and the whole lot goes.
|
Mmmmm.
Maybe take a page out of the formual one book on this one - they are advocating getting an ex F1 driver as a permanent 'steward' to adjudge incidents.
So maybe Plod should appoint a senior Plod (with vast motoring experience) as the chap who looks at various incidents involving speed and circumstance BEFORE they start sending NIPs to poor paramedics and rozzers, and applying the 'benefit of the doubt' rule.
Just as an aside, what's the deal on fire engines?
|
So maybe Plod should appoint a senior Plod (with vast motoring experience) as the chap who looks at various incidents involving speed and circumstance BEFORE they start sending NIPs to poor paramedics and rozzers and applying the 'benefit of the doubt' rule.
that's what used to happen...before everything was civilianised
|
|
|
|
|
|
_COLON_no_upscale()/cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/59ea7aca27121b78c454213772e4bd33/2e3f883550494c26d7e61fa88aa84a8d.jpg)
_COLON_no_upscale()/cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/e3dddc56983548d7df69e9316eef9e93/a01549fd39a9dca7181c5032019f67d1.jpg)
