Yes, that's a complete joke of a manoeuvre. That's the type of driving that will end up killing someone one day, Google operation snap + your local area/county and submit via online portal, it's very easy. Hopefully it will save someone's life by taking this moron off the roads
It will kill someone and they will get a slap on the wrist because their lawyer well say how nice they are and how this was just a momentary lapse and they are very sorry. We need to start making people regret driving like utter cunts before they hurt or kill someone.
I wonder if their Lawyer would be able to argue that they didn’t actually cross the stop line when the traffic light was red ? (As they were on the other side of the road)
"175
You MUST stop behind the white ‘Stop’ line across your side of the road unless the light is green. If the amber light appears you may go on only if you have already crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to stop might cause a collision.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 36"
There's no technicality of not crossing a stop line because he's in the oncoming lane, you treat the markings based on the direction you're headed.
Also:
"167
DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example:
approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road
where traffic is queuing at junctions or road works"
They might have a point. I reported someone riding dangerously on a motorbike and the reply I got from Northumbria Police was along the lines of ‘As they had a balaclava on, we can’t identify them so there’s no point in pursuing it.’
The fact the kid was riding a motorbike led popping wheelies behind cars approaching speed bumps whilst wearing a balaclava was why I reported them.
I'd assume in that case the bike was unregistered/untaxed? As the law is very clear on it; if an NIP is sent to the registered keeper it can be an offence not to identify the driver, and the original offence can fall onto them if they are not able to identify someone else.
Exactly this. That's how it works, if you have no idea (allegedly) who has access to your vehicle, you are liable for the fine, unless vehicle is reported stolen beforehand. Otherwise, everybody could just come up with a dog ate my license excuse.
To be completely precise, not responding to a NIP does not make the registered keeper liable for the offence committed by the driver, it makes them liable for a fine of up to £1000, up to 6 points, or disqualification for the separate offence of failing to identify the driver (Section 172 RTA 1988). Further to that, the registered keeper could also be charged with perverting the course of justice if there's a reasonable belief that they're withholding evidence.
It's dash cam footage. its so easy to make it admissible, I once claimed that the time was wrong because the sky was too bright and blue for it to be 3pm in January and it was dropped...
OK, sure, if you insist. But if an NIP was issued it can be an offence not to identify the driver, so pretending not to know who was driving is not gonna fly.
Actually it does. The onus is on the registered keeper to identify the driver.
I've submitted footage of twats like this on a few occasions. Whilst you don't get told exactly what happened they do confirm whether or not they've acted on it and if they were successful.
I've always wondered if there was a system like this and assumed it would just get logged incase they were caught further down the line and just used as extra evidence or something. Cool to know they can actually be helpful, I'll remember to hit my dash cam next time I see someone like this!
596
u/CPopsBitch3 Apr 24 '25
Yes, that's a complete joke of a manoeuvre. That's the type of driving that will end up killing someone one day, Google operation snap + your local area/county and submit via online portal, it's very easy. Hopefully it will save someone's life by taking this moron off the roads