Safe Speed Forums

Where do they get the power? I mean which piece of legislation? I have it on authority from several serving policemen that they use Section 163. This states:




As far as I understand this piece of legislation it basically makes it an offence not to stop when instructed. What it does not do however, IMHO, is give a carte blanch right to stop anything they please for no reason.

So where do they get the power to decide to stop a vehicle, which would give rise to a Section 163 offence if the driver did not?

Additionally if a police officer stated that " I have stopped you under Section 163" has he infact carried out an illegal stop check?

As the ruling states, you have to stop for an office (in uniform). It is an offence not to stop when requested. However, the officer must have a valid reason for stopping a motorist!

Most of the police powers to stop vehicles and direct traffic are statutory. But as part of the overall common law powers and duties to protect life and property - the police have additional powers in the regard. For examply - could ask you to do something illegal like reverse up a one way street if in interests of protecting life - like saving you from unexploded doughnuts (per my cousin )

Under section 163 (1) and (2) of Road Traffic Act 1988 -

Person driving a mechanicaly propelled vehicle on a road must stop te vehicle on being required to do so my policeman in uniform.

and

Person riding a bicycle on a road must stop the cycle on being required to do so by policeman in uniform.

There are other specific powers to stop vehicles under certain circumstances, and this general power is extended to designated community support officers under sch 4 to the Police Reform Act 2002 within their relevant police area but only for the purpose of carrying out road checks.

In section 67 (3) of Road Traffic Act 1988 which relates to roadside tests - it says that "a vehicle shall not be required to stop for a test except for constable in uniform. " However, although it is not expressesd as a power (but rather a restriction on the use of any other powers to stop vehicles other than the general police power und S63 - the provision is extended to traffic wardens (Functions of Traffic Wardens Amendment Order 2002 (SI 2002 No 2975) and to all intents and purposes is treated as a power. It is also extended to designated community support officers and accredited employees under schds 4 and 5 to the Police Reform Act 2002.

On this basis; if a person is stopped under Section 163, given a specific reason for the stoppage, and that reason later proves to be false, has the Officer committed any offence? and does the motorist have any remedy under law? (e.g for time wasted etc)

General Police Duties give right to stop for routine road check

Sch 4 of Police Reform Act 2002 this power is also accorded to CSO within their relevant police area but only for purpose of a road check.

Um - we do run an audit or look-see before we decide to target an area.

Don't want to waste our time - do we!

Police do not stop a vehicle for no reason.

We employ Police to do exacly what it say's on the tin.....Police our society.

These powers of stop, should always be allowed so the Police can perform their duties.

Only the Guilty need be offended by being stopped.

_________________
Steve

Actually yes they bloody well do, you should try riding a motor bike, the police stop bikers to annoy us and to try to dissuade us from taking our bikes to particular areas/meets. They have publically announced this as a strategy for various areas including my local meet the Lord Derby where the head of traffic went on record statingf that the police would make it so that we did not want to attend this meet.

They pull every bike over at road checkpoints with no reason at all and have been known to hold people waiting for a "vehicle inspection" for upto an hour before waving on lawful bikers.

Don't tell me that police don't pull for no reason they do. and don't tell me that its because bikers are nutters aas well because they don't target.

[quote="Patch
Don't tell me that police don't pull for no reason they do. and don't tell me that its because bikers are nutters aas well because they don't target.[/quote]

If they stop you and do not process you immediately (or certainly within a few minutes) - you should ask if you are being arrested. If they say no you should ask if you are free to go. If they say no, you should ask by what right are they detaining you unlawfully.

They have powers to stop you, but they cannot detain you unless they suspect you of an offence, in which case they must arrest you.

What they are failing to make clear to those detained is that there is no legal requirement for them to stay.

Sorry, I disagree. Should only the guilty be offended if they are randomly arrested while walking down the street? What about having CCTV put in your home? Sounds like the motto of a police state to me. It ignores the issue that punishment is not people's only concern: there are also issues like privacy, freedom from interference, and inconvienience from being unfairly detained.

Also In Gear, can you confirm how soon after you stop for a police officer, when you become free again to drive off?

Yorkshire Ripper was caught by routine pull... sometimes we strike lucky

Zamzara - it depends what guy did - if he tests positive for anything, or we find he is uninsured, untaxed, DWD - then we simply cannot let the yob drive off as "free" man. But usually - we try to keep things moving along as quickly as possible - congestion causes frustration - which can result in mishap later on... So - about 5-10 minutes or so - once satisfied all is "above board" However, if on receiving end of my acid tongue - they usually stay put to calm down a bit before setting off - after I have moved off ....

If it is obvious that person is "decent chap/chappesse" (can usually tell - ) and providing they do not call us a rude name - usually keep them couple of minutes. We try not to inconvenience people too much - and most of us try to make some friendly polite conversation whilst you wait for us to breathalyse you or check your tyres. Just bad luck if someone happens to get pulled in same "block" on outward/return journey (As happened today Well - he he will drive a flash, but old car ..... )

I have no problem with being stopped, that's good policing and highly preferable to the bloody revenue cameras.

To put it how I understand it, if you are stopped under section 163, you have been stopped for not stopping

Surely, you just stopped, so the officers reasoning is invalid?

Glad to hear this .... we aim to please ..... At least we use some - ahem - cough - errmmm - discretion - so long as you all do not call us rude names ...

The exercise of powers to carry out road checks under Part 1 of Police Evidence Act 1984 is covered by s163. - ie - if you fail to stop when required by officer in uniform - you has broken the LAW!


It can be source of friction - stopping people going about their business - perceived as oppression and discrimination even . We are too aware of this - especially after the Stephen Lawrnece case .... in which various recommendations were made and we have to follow .

"Stop" under s163 means bringing vehicle to halt long enough fro officeror warden to exercise whatever powers they have under s163 and in compliance with instructions from He Who Rules Roost!

An officer in uniform may arrest if there is reasonable cause to suspect an offence has been committed after1/10/02 RTA 1988 163 (4)

Use of this power by officers tp detect dring/drug driving was endorsed by CC of Gwent v Dash 1986 RTR41

And Terrorism Act 2000 also give police specific powers tp stop any vehicle in relation to authorised stop and search operations under certain conditions....

Gotta go! @Er indors rules!

Getting pulled over by you must be like being stopped by Windsor Davies.

So InGear, by the sounds of things we can be stopped pretty much at random. If all a stop needs to be justifiable is "reasonable cause to suspect" a copper could stop someone with a made up excuse, keep 'em by the road for a while, and if the original cause doesn't turn anything up they can check for something else. Am I right?

The reason I ask is that I got stopped once in Surrey for a really feeble reason. As I think I've mentioned to you before, I was once tugged in Surrey while doing a legal 70mph (the car I had at the time would have had to be dropped from a plane to go any faster) as the goonstable supposedly didn't see my tax disc. Sorry about goonstable BTW, you know I don't usually badmouth the police, except for lighthearted use of the word plod, but this bloke deserved something less affectionate. I only used goonstable so I didn't have to write officious little bastard. Anyhow, it was a blatant random stop as he had ample opportunity to see the disc, and having it pointed out to him in the normal place he then decided to check my car over for anything else that might be wrong. Sorry goonstable, you didn't find a thing did you? No faulty lights, no bald tyres, no severed limbs on the back seat or whatever you were looking for. You didn't ****ing find my stereo that had been nicked a few months earlier either, did you? Sorry, ranting again.

So where do we stand with this sort of thing? If we're stopped for X and everything turns out okay, can we then be made to stick around while the officer tries his luck with Y and Z, or can we insist on leaving? And in reality if we could and did insist on leaving, couldn't the officer then argue that he had grounds to suspect Y and Z after that since we didn't want him to check it? We'd just end up going a few hundred yards before being pulled over again. Annoying as it is, it might just be easier to take the path of least resistance when being tugged. Most of the time anyway. The decent coppers will keep a reasonable motorist no longer than necessary, and the other type will just be even more of a pain in the arse if they think you're making waves. If they're obviously out to be a pain in the arse regardless of what you do... well, we can see his number, and presumably we have a right to know which nick they're from, name of the Chief Inspectintendant or whatever, and where to write to with a complaint? It's either that or start playing golf at the same club as the CC and become a mason.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

I try to keep some humour in the process

If you are unlucky enough to be stopped by someone we would rather not have employed - this could indeed be case - or even someone whose comments I have been reading with the mad lad and his wife elsewhere.... The Mad Lad and his wilder wife has been bending my ear holes back over this - just over this last holiday week end ...

I can always tell who is genuine and who is not - but then I have advantage of being trained in the "good old days" .......




Yes - I know we have them ..... some are like certain chap who likes to admire himself in shop windows ....... Dunno who I am thinking of ....




Er..... Nope - never have done this .... not me guv (Did try it on with the mad lad before he married into family ..... had whisper that my cous' fancied him and wanted closer look at that car to make sure she would be safe - of course ..... ) He had no idea who I was at time His face when I turned up as usher at his wedding was priceless ....




Safer to smile calmly and just say "Of course Officer. Take it to pieces. I make one stipulation. You put it all back exactly as you found it!" The wild lass cousin of mine said that once to a Customs Officer down in Dover .... he just let her go ... Suppose it depends how you say it. Gather "Liebchen" was said a lot too ..... Only person I know who could get away with murder .....





Well - that is why I play golf - managed to beat the mad lad over the Bank Holiday Suspect that is half the attraction for the mad lad too ...

Seriously - if you are stopped by PC Jobsworthiness - who has attitude with it - take his number and send polite letter on lines of training in courtesy and general professionalism .... goes down better than a whinge type letter

Personally - have always gone down the calm, courteous and polite route on basis that it means less aggro for me and incurs respect on both sides...

It is also less stressful and means less paperwork ...... And - strangely enough - our patch is quite good at solving crime and keeping law and order on the streets and roads ....