Some weeks ago I was out for a
drive and
someone took offence to me
overtaking them and they shared
their dashcam footage with the
police who proceeded to first
send a "Notice of intended
prosecution".
Click here to read more...
This sounded worse
than it ultimately was, but it
was, let's say, irritating. I
didn't have my own dashcam
footage of the event so I cycled
out to the location because I
was being done for "crossing a
solid white line" and I wanted
to check the road. The irony
was, as I cycled to the
location, at least ten cars
passed me on solid white lines,
which, according our Highway
Code, they are not permitted to
do (I was travelling at greater
than 10mph). My immediate
thought upon receiving the NIP
was that I was in error for
thinking that after a particular
bend the double white lines
ended. At the location though I
saw that the double white lines
lasted a little bit longer than
I had thought, before ending.
Anyway, back at home I filled in
the form I was being legally
requested to do (I really
despise such things because they
are themselves a threat, and one
should not, I believe, respond
to threats) and a few days later
I was issued with an ultimatum;
pay to go on some course, pay a
fine and get points on my
license, or let it go to court
(or choose to do nothing and
incur further penalty). I
requested some evidence of which
I received the following three,
now much treasured snapshots
(which I have animated above):
I
actually laughed when I saw
the pictures, in part because I could
not only see that I had started
the overtake before the white
lines ended, but I had also
completed the overtake before
the white lines ended. I suppose
they last longer than I thought
because of the layby on the
right. Oh well, I was in the
wrong - I've been irritated by
slowness since "our government"
decided some months ago to
change all the 30mph roads to
20mph, and now I got caught out
(I'd never overtaken on this
stretch of road before this
change, I'd never felt the need
to). Supposedly the
multi-million pound change has
been overruled but that is not
going to change things for my
case (or others; I've since seen
speed-trap vans in this and
another 20mph zone).
In
the end I decided to pay for and
attend the "driver training
course" which became my first
ever Zoom thing (which
seems fitting). In considering
this I thought about Jordan
Peterson and his "retraining"
thing; it kind of bothers me
that in some situations this is
a thing, but then when there are
legitimate crimes, isn't
"re-education" a necessary thing
for a civilised society? Anyway,
my course, it transpired, was
not a pass or fail thing, you
just had to attend and
participate for three hours (it
was just a bit stressful to
ensure equipment was going to
behave on the day). There were
maybe ten of us on the course
and it was pretty pleasant tbh,
as was the instructor; some of
us mentioned our incidents or
talked of other ones, even
though we weren't required to do
so - although I was aware of the
instructor taking notes (they
weren't at all open about what
information they share with the
police but given the Ts&Cs we
had to accept, that would be
pretty much anything - we had to
write down answers to things and
show these to the camera, and it
was pretty obvious to me the
instructor was screenshotting
this stuff as evidence of our
participation. One guy had been
rear-ended a few times and it
seems, somehow, he was found to
be at fault on this particular
occasion; I'm thinking that's
surely got to be something to do
with his own driving if that
keeps happening to him. I think
passing on white lines and
tailgating were things
specifically covered based on
other attendees' incidents. A
few there seemed to be
legitimately victims also, like
an incident had occurred that
was either unavoidable or not
really their fault, yet they had
been landed on the course
(costing them £88). Generally
the course was sort of a basic
refresher of the Theory Test we
take when applying for our
driver's licence and a few
examples were used to show us
that we don't know the Highway
Code as well as we think we do
(and also that most people think
they are above-average drivers).
Also, it was claimed, that those
making the rules have access to
information that the rest of us
do not - basically, you
shouldn't question anything,
which then would beg the
question, why/how has the 20mph
thing been found to be wrong if
no one should have questioned it?
We
ourselves were not allowed to screenshot
or record the meeting ourselves
and at the end the instructor
sort of apologised to say we
don't get a certificate at the
end, in fact we simply hear
nothing more. So where is the
evidence I have for attending
this meeting? [I did actually
receive some emails pertaining
to my participation in the
course some weeks later.] The prosecution
simply vanishes as a result of
the instructor clicking a button
or checking a box? It seems
quite odd to me.
One
futile point I did raise during
the meeting was that the "rule
of the road" can (like the
20mph) can "just change" at the
whim of the powers-that-be. The
instructor stated that, when
apply for/get out driver's
licence we sign a form, which
basically means we agreed to
operate vehicles in accordance
with the law. This sort of begs
the question then of "what about
as a cyclist?" - I never signed
any such thing for getting from
A-to-B on my bike. Ultimately
I've come to think of driving
prosecutions, when no one has
been harmed, to be a sort of
"Pre-crime"; drivers are
penalised for driving in a way
that "might lead to death
or injury". Of course no one
should be made to feel unsafe by
drivers and other road users. I
kind of wish, instead of the
rigmarole I had to go through, I
would have had a polite visit
from a police officer who might
have said "we've had this
complaint... it's not ok to do
that, please drive safely in
future otherwise you might incur
a penalty."
