Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
someone down the station is
someone down the station is fed up with being asked to do their job properly by cyclists submitting videos and thought you know what, let’s cut down on the workload by making cyclists scared to submit complaints in case they end up facing prosecution themselves
So when somebody (me) submits numerous indisputable videos of offences, the police REALLY don’t like it when they are deprived of a means of victim blaming like this because the only (I think) video of mine with swearing on it was when the offender said he was going to ‘fucking flatten’ me and knock me off my bike. No swearing from me. The police response was ‘verbal words of advice’ to the driver. As you know, for years the police have failed to respond to my reports.The police are obliged to
The police are obliged to investigate but they have considerable licence, along with the CPS, to decide if an offence has been comitted and/or if it is serious enough to require further action
This charming view of police thought and action processes may apply in some areas of the country, but they certainly don’t apply in the Land of the Traffic Offender: Lancashire. You have seen the videos too often, and I have the reporting details for all of them. The Filth don’t investigate, don’t reply and don’t take any action.The PCC responds to complaints with ‘this is an operational decision of the police’. Traffic law and active travel are dead ducks in at least one area of the country.But the Information
But the Information Commissioner (who is really the Information Restriction Commissioner, see below for his Decision Notice) agreed with Lancashire Constabulary, and will do again when the police refuse my ‘2 years later’ repeat request!Bungle_52 below says:
Bungle_52 below says: Gloucestershire will now only send an advisory letter for a close pass no matter how close. That shows how much progress is being made on close-passing: none. Some force, may have been Gloucestershire, recently demanded that cyclist have to demonstrate that they have been ‘inconvenienced’ by a close pass, and Essex (I think) came up with the idea years ago that there had to be evidence that the cyclist had braked or changed course before they would take close-passing seriously. Lancashire, as far as it’s possible to tell, has never taken anybody to court over close passing a cyclist, and it’s doubtful if Gloucestershire has. WU59 UMH is outside the Eagle and Child pub in Garstang right now, with no VED for over 7 years and previously, before his business insurance must have forced him to get one, had no MOT for 6 years and a badly failed MOT for 6 months. Police Officers and their attitudes are the problem badly affecting cycling safety on UK roads, and it’s not only Lancashire and Scotland
Positive action taken on
Positive action taken on every report I’ve made so far…
and particularly enjoy her
and particularly enjoy her obvious delight at dressing up in period costume!
I recall thinking exactly that when she was dressing up in Russia, or maybe it was Vienna
Calling HoarseMann!
Calling HoarseMann!
If you look back to the links in my post below with the Travellers Choice coach photo, you’ll know what this refusal letter from Lancashire Constabulary dated 9.2.23 is about
Lancashire Constabulary can neither confirm nor deny that it holds any information relevant to this request as the duty in Section1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply, by virtue of the following exemption:
Section 40(5) Personal Information
To confirm or deny whether we hold any information would in itself reveal the personal data of the subject(s). It is important to note that disclosures under the FOIA are considered as disclosures “to the world” and as such, to confirm or deny whether or not any information is held would be unfair on the data subject(s).
This exemption is engaged therefore as it satisfies the following two conditions:
1. To confirm whether or not the information is held would reveal the personal data of a data subject as defined by Article 4 (1) of GDPR and Part 1 Section (3)(2) of the Data Protection Act 2018.
2. That to confirm whether or not the information is held would contravene one of the data protection principles contained within GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 respectively, namely the first one, which states that personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully (and in the case of GDPR in a transparent manner).
Section 40(5) is an absolute class-based exemption therefore neither the public interest test nor evidence of harm in disclosure needs to be outlined.
This letter serves to act as a refusal notice for this request, as per S.17 (1) of the FOI Act. As per Section 40(5) of the FOI Act, this letter should not be taken as a confirmation or denial that Lancashire Constabulary holds any information pertinent to this request.I’m going to resubmit the FoI request again, just to see how much time, expense and effort they’re prepared to waste on the cover-up. What I would like from HoarseMann, and from Rendel in the event that the Met does eventually fulfil their promise is a case with a description of the original offence and a piece of the evidence submitted with the registration number of the vehicle, along with the outcome. Thanks
Even I would say ‘report
Even I would say ‘report horse ramming to the police ‘ because just ignoring that report is viewed as less acceptable than if it was a cyclist – especially when you have good video.Speed has nothing to do with
Speed has nothing to do with it
And it’s purely coincidental that a fellow awareness raiser was instrumental in another vehicle write-off shortly before. It’s all mysterious, just like Harry Potterin Lancashire driving schools
in Lancashire driving schools are even teaching it as the right thing to do
I was hoping one of the trolls would issue the Pavlovian ‘he HAD to pass that close to stay inside the unbroken white line!’FOI request submitted
FOI request submitted
There is an almost infinite number of dodges which enable public authorities to refuse FoI requests, and they could do it here under ‘intention to publish the information’ followed by continuing ‘technical difficulties’ to prevent you knowing for as long as possible how little they did when they ‘promised to take action but won’t tell you what it is’. However, if they do refuse to tell you about a few specific cases you will know there’s a lot of weaselling ahead. They’re relying on many people not being organised enough to follow up on this ‘action’ or being satisfied that ‘words of advice’ and ‘advice letter’ really constitute a deterrent. They don’t- and still less do all those NIPs the police couldn’t be bothered to follow up themselves ‘because vehicle not traceable’ or because the offender refuses to admit the offence or ‘has no recollection of it’.
Turns out they prefer video
Turns out they prefer video evidence to prove beyond doubt a car is parked on zig zag lines; a still won’t do
They ‘prefer’ what you haven’t got! When you give them that they simply don’t respond.No, but I know what would
No, but I know what would happen if I did:0
Telegraph readers have a
Telegraph readers have a collective meltdown. Is there a max iq to read the telegraph?
“the all-too-powerful cycling lobby”!
These people are both malevolent and dim. You will recall the Torygraph fashion journalist declaring that she’d like to kill all cyclists. The ‘cycling lobby’ has achieved virtually no improvement in cycling safety over, say, the last 10 years, in Lancashire at least. The best we can say is that close-passing is not becoming less popular, and in Lancashire driving schools are even teaching it as the right thing to do:
https://upride.cc/incident/ej65pff_greenpass_closepass/
Yep! True to form. Surely,
Yep! True to form. Surely, they can’t be dim enough to sit on it for as long as possible and then claim ‘something…something..GDPR..etc’? Can they?
