Safe Speed Forums

Thats my point exactly, real police have the authority to demand compliance, and the powers to punish non-compliance. The real police have been cut back so far, in the case of motorway patrols especially, that the Highways Agency has had to employ these paper tigers out of their budget, as motorway caretakers effectively.

I certainly believe, for all the reasons you mention and more besides, that HATOs are in a position to have more information than a civilian, and one would be well advised to heed their warnings, but this does not come close to justification for prosecuting someone for overtaking a vehicle with flashing yellow lights.

Loads of civvie agencies have flashing yellow lights, RAC/AA/Green Flag and any one-man-show with a recovery vehicle, motorway maintenence vehicles, any vehicle to be driven on an airfield, rubbish trucks, salting trucks, wide loads, long vehicles, slow vehicles, I could even buy one for £10 and drive around with one stuck on my car. Noone should be expected not to overtake any of these vehicles when they are driving slowly on the motorway and it is safe to do so. Yellow lights are simply another method of alerting other drivers to your presence.

Nope, the TMA 2004 creates the following offence (S.10[2]), therefore it's mandatory:


A police officer gains their specific powers 24/7/52 from being attested in the Office of Constable, but other people also hold the powers of a Constable in certain circumstances - a Prison Officer whilst on duty, for example. There are lots of other situations where a civilian has various powers, including issuing mandatory instructions, and have been for years.

The TMA gives certain special powers to HATOs, and provides the teeth to back them up. Whether or not one agrees with their role, that is fact.

These powers are not some new creeping extension - the Fire Brigades Act 1947 gave powers to firemen and there were probably more types of office holder who could actually lock you up in the mid Victorian period than there are now!

On the subject of flashing lights on the highway, technically (Vehicle Lighting Regulations) police and HATO vehicles are the only ones which can carry red flashing lights to the rear - the only other red flashing light permissible IIRC is an identifying light (red/white checker) on a Fire Service control vehicle. Ambulances and other Fire Service vehicles do not actually have the authority, nor do the numerous recovery vehicles which carry them. There was a long debate, believe it or not, in the House of Lords about this very matter! http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200304/ldhansrd/vo040422/text/40422-13.htm

Incidentally, I think Fisherman is the sentencing guidelines oracle - not my field, I'm afraid.

Indeed, the sign in the back of the HATO vehicle said "STOP" and in my case "DEBRIS" (among other warnings). In this case there was obviously a situation ahead that demanded drivers to not travel at nominal motorway speeds. Yes the real police should have been the ones attending, but we had the pleasure of HATOs; does that make their knowledge of the situation any less valid? Would it have been safe to ignore their ‘advice’ and continue regardless?


That woman wasn’t prosecuted for failing to obey an officer; she was actually done for ‘driving without reasonable consideration for other road users’. While it is a sneaky law in a HATO’s favour (effectively turning 'advice' into a command), I don’t see how anyone could consider ignoring it to be appropriate.

but in some cases where safety might be compromised, ADVISABLE.

Failing to take heed of ANY safety related warning from any source could be construed as dangerous, hence my assertion that she got a lighter charge - which then begs the question why the heavier sentence?

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Oh yes, defiantly. But if this is a common occurrence and it is planned then they should plan for the police to do it. Then they'd get more respect.

_________________
Andrew.

But cleaning up debris and directing non emergency situations is their raison d'etre, thus freeing up police to carry out REAL policing.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

There is only one type of REAL police on the motorway IMO. Also, there is only one type of REAL policeman IMO. Unfortunately I never see them nowadays.

_________________
Prepare to be Judged

Absolutely R1Nut, Although the driver in question was a complete PRAT in not seeing or heeding the situation. We must be careful what we wish for. Cases like this will be used to give the "Mobile" Plastic Police.........REAL Powers!

If anything, this case shows that adequate powers exist.

I once telephoned police after seeing a driver overtake on a blind bend - three times.
I later got a telephone call to say they had been unable to find/stop him, but officers had visited him at his home, and were prepared to charge him with dangerous driving if I appeared as one of the witnesses. I agreed, and it went to crown court (his choice).
He got off on a technicality - NIP served to lease company not the driver, despite his verbal warning at his home, but at least it shows that the law CAN act when it wants to with adequate cause and witnesses prepared to come forward.

As we drove home from the court, we witnessed the same driver behaving dangerously on the Motorway!!
I gather he had another court case pending when he was done with the one we were involved in.

How many times have you asked youreslf "Why is there never a policeman about when you need one" having witnessed an appalling display of bad driving?

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!