Near Miss of the Day 855: Driver dangerously overtakes on the wrong side… is let off the hook by the police because she lives abroad

Could they not put a mark on the passport close the case, next time they return to the uk. A lovely welcome Committee

Even if the driver was a foreign national, no excuse for overtaking when there is someone coming down the road. Doubt they would have tried that manouver if there had been a bus trundling down the road. 

If they were an overseas visitor, then they probably don't have a UK driving licence - prosecuting them would therefore (quite literally) be pointless, but they could at least have fined them.

Visitors to the UK can drive for 12 months without having to apply for a UK licence. That timescale resets everytime they leave and then return. So, as long as you visit your home country once a year, you could be driving perpetually on UK roads without ever passing a UK test.

Quite a nasty one that, not sure if seeing it coming was better or worse!

I'm taking this as an opportunity to display one of my newly uploaded videos- even though it's an old case, matters have not improved here as shown on this morning's assault by Astra PO17 ROU

https://upride.cc/incident/p40htn_audi_closepassdwlcross/

Driver is beyond the reach of the law? Then seize the car.

Edit - if they can't seize the car, put a marker on their passport; always assuming the story is genuine, unless this was their one and only visit then they can be arrested on their next visit. Given that they were not driving a hire car, I guess they were visiting friends or rellies and would be likely to want to visit again.

Waaaiit a minute...

Probably crashed into a cycle storage rack shortly after.

A consecutive Near Miss of the Day from London. Surprised?

A little. I sent you two last summer from Birmingham that ended up in court but you haven't used either.

Still think NMOTD is very important though and it is what brought me to Road.cc in the first place.

And which version of Nigel will make themselves conspicuous by not being able to resist blaming rendal for this?

Or perhaps Martin's new username, which I do hope is tin foil Dave.

Good reactions from you and the 4x4 driver.

However, the request couldn’t be fulfilled due to reasons of GDPR cited

I have already bored people on here with the GDPR dodge used by Lancashire and Sussex, at least, in which they force people to promise that they're 'informing people that they're being filmed'  in order that the police deign to accept the report, even when that's almost invariably untrue. I have never even seen such a notification on any vehicle or bike up here, and I certainly don't carry one- accepting this police misuse of GDPR would open the way to interminable further dodges from the Guilty Offender's Shyster Lawyer : m'lud, how could my law-abiding Audi/ BMW driving client see such a notification when passing this invisible cyclist who is undoubtedly always passing traffic lights at red?

In addition, I have begun the long process leading to the Information Tribunal over this case, where I received the joke LC 'action letter' (this was before OpSnap Lancs stopped responding in any way to reports), but they later refused, in response to FoI, to tell me anything about what they actually did, citing the police omni-dodge GDPR. 

https://upride.cc/incident/4148vz_travellerschoicecoach_closepass/

This was despite having previously, admittedly in a different case, written to me stating that if I wanted to know what had happened to an RLJ driver

https://upride.cc/incident/mf09hyk_chevroletaveo_redlightcross/

I would have to submit a FoI request. 

"...he had reflective Proviz Night Rider jacket and fluorescent yellow gloves and helmet on. To top that off, he had a strobing daylight running light on the front of his bike too. Well, there goes any arguments of the driver being unable to see him!"

Well I guess that leaves the cycling on the public highway in less than perfect conditions loophole currently being trialled by IoM Police.

That's ridiculously bad driving and the Met police are not fit for purpose if they can't enforce the law even when provided with clear video evidence.

It's about time that failing police services are completely sacked and people brought in that actually care about doing their jobs.

Just for interest [sic], these are the questions I asked in my FOI request which was met with the predictable "can't answer - GDPR" response:

A) What proof was offered by the registered keeper that the alleged driver resides abroad? Was s/he simply taken at their word?

B) Did the police check that the alleged driver was licensed and insured to use the vehicle in the UK?

C) If one or neither of the above (insurance/licence) was in place, why was the registered keeper not prosecuted for allowing unlawful use of their vehicle?

D) Was the age and sex of the alleged driver supplied by the registered keeper and did it accord with the fact that the vehicle at the time of the incident was being driven by a relatively young woman?

E) Was the alleged driver resident in the UK at the time the NIP was sent and left subsequently?

F) Have any measures been implemented to charge the alleged driver should they return to the UK and/or attempt to drive on UK roads?  

G) Is the alleged driver a British passport/licence holder who resides abroad or a foreign national? If the former, why was no action taken against them in absentia?

The only thing that I would add to this is that in Canada if you lend someone your car and they commit an offence with it, you face sanctions as well. That would seem to be a good way of closing this loophole.