Reply to: Minor car accident on private land - legal aspects

[AtW]

Insurance might not be required but typical car insurance should still be valid.

[NotAllThere]

Exactly. Like the fully loaded tableleg case.

That was rather different. If you fail to do exactly what armed police tell you to do when they have guns pointed at you, and you get shot - then the shooting was legal.

Unfortunately, that means if you didn't quite catch what was yelled at you from a distance of 15m, and instead of lying on the ground, turn to face the shouter... you get shot.

If armed police are after you, you've already got quite a high chance of dying - regardless of your culpability.

[Old Hack]

Low IQ? Like to beat people up? Do it legally - Join the Police!

All the kids from our school whom we thought would join the Police did...

[Platypus]

Its complicated. The surgeon said there was extra damage but could not say for definite how it was caused. The police denied twisting his shoulder.

Worse they searched his car and found a knife. It was hidden and my friend was not aware it was there. An artist friend of his had dropped it in the car. He testified that it had been lost and showed the knife case with a knife missing.

But my friend had previous form. A very old conviction. If he challenged anything the police said in court his previous conviction would be raised.

That totally backs up my assertion that they are a bunch of the things I said before. And thugs too.

As for the Tomlinson case, my bet is that the copper will get away with it, as in so many cases.

Low IQ? Like to beat people up? Do it legally - Join the Police!

[BrilloPad]

I hope he's going to sue them, they really are a bunch of c**ts

Its complicated. The surgeon said there was extra damage but could not say for definite how it was caused. The police denied twisting his shoulder.

Worse they searched his car and found a knife. It was hidden and my friend was not aware it was there. An artist friend of his had dropped it in the car. He testified that it had been lost and showed the knife case with a knife missing.

But my friend had previous form. A very old conviction. If he challenged anything the police said in court his previous conviction would be raised.

[Platypus]

Insurance is not legally required if you are driving on private land...

Now, just one sec ...

Actually just to clarify that - this only applies to private space on private land.

If it is publicly accessible, then the provisions of the road traffic act apply, which includes insurance, speed limits, drink driving etc.

Car parks probably fall into that definition - although it might be a grey area if it has gated access.

Oh right. That sounds correct

My argument I was on private land was met with the above. I took it to court and lost as despite it not being legally accesible to the public, there was no barriers to stop the public from entering, so therefore it was publically accesible ...

If it is publicly accessible, then the provisions of the road traffic act apply, which includes insurance, speed limits, drink driving etc.

Its an insurance job, i know because i drove into someone in the pub car park we exchanged details and i just reported it to the insurance

Thanks guys. Some real world experience always cuts through the crap.

Now *I* can be the pub smartarse and correct those other smartarses

[BrilloPad]

Reading about that case, makes you fear for English justice. The chap was walking away, and still the cop said he thought he was a danger to him and wanted him to hit him. Unbelievable; the cop was spoiling for some action.

"A police officer accused of killing Ian Tomlinson hit him because he believed he was being deliberately obstructive, a court has heard."

BBC News - G20 death: Tomlinson 'was obstructive' - PC

Lets just say the officer was correct. If being deliberately obstructive deserves a hit then the police are no longer there to uphold the law. They are the law.

I appreciate the police had a bad day. But once they started to kettle people it was always going to end badly. If police officers can't maintain their calm under pressure then they in the wrong job.

[Platypus]

You got away lightly. A friend got stopped recently. Quoted the law at the young cop. Who called his mates. Who dragged him out of the car and twisted his shoulder despite his protests about his recent shoulder operation. Took him 3 months to recover.

I hope he's going to sue them, they really are a bunch of c**ts

[Old Hack]

You got away lightly. A friend got stopped recently. Quoted the law at the young cop. Who called his mates. Who dragged him out of the car and twisted his shoulder despite his protests about his recent shoulder operation. Took him 3 months to recover.

All of my contact with the police (which is quite extensive) has been very positive. But I hear of quite a few stories like yours and my mates. Then there is the Tomlinson case.....

Reading about that case, makes you fear for English justice. The chap was walking away, and still the cop said he thought he was a danger to him and wanted him to hit him. Unbelievable; the cop was spoiling for some action.

[BrilloPad]

Anything to help the policemans ball I guess. Rude prick too. When I was a younger, you could actually discuss stuff with a policeman, and it would nearly always be amicable. Common sense would dicate the end result. Now, it seems they just want their monthly brucey bonus. Then they complain no one respects them anymore.

You got away lightly. A friend got stopped recently. Quoted the law at the young cop. Who called his mates. Who dragged him out of the car and twisted his shoulder despite his protests about his recent shoulder operation. Took him 3 months to recover.

All of my contact with the police (which is quite extensive) has been very positive. But I hear of quite a few stories like yours and my mates. Then there is the Tomlinson case.....

[Support Monkey]

Its an insurance job, i know because i drove into someone in the pub car park we exchanged details and i just reported it to the insurace, she was a proper chav and wanted me to cough up privately as the insurance said her car was a write off, (side swiped it) obviously i said no and left it with the insurance companies to sort out and never heard anything of the matter again.

This was in the middle of the car park no where near the entrance.

[Old Hack]

At least you had a go - well done. If everyone challenged instead of just paying up the country would be a far better place.

Seemed to be the right thing to do. I don't use the phone in the car, not on the road, so thought it was manifestly unjust to be done for, what I assumed was, obeying the law. Anything to help the policemans ball I guess. Rude prick too. When I was a younger, you could actually discuss stuff with a policeman, and it would nearly always be amicable. Common sense would dicate the end result. Now, it seems they just want their monthly brucey bonus. Then they complain no one respects them anymore.

[BrilloPad]

If it is publicly accessible, then the provisions of the road traffic act apply, which includes insurance, speed limits, drink driving etc.

At least you had a go - well done. If everyone challenged instead of just paying up the country would be a far better place.

[Old Hack]

Actually just to clarify that - this only applies to private space on private land.

If it is publicly accessible, then the provisions of the road traffic act apply, which includes insurance, speed limits, drink driving etc.

Car parks probably fall into that definition - although it might be a grey area if it has gated access.

I was leaving a work place, driving through their car park speaking on my phone. The Police stopped me as I left the car park, now not on the phone, and gave me 3 points and £60 for being on the phone. My argument I was on private land was met with the above. I took it to court and lost as despite it not being legally accesible to the public, there was no barriers to stop the public from entering, so therefore it was publically accesible (and to be honest, lots of JP used the car park to double back on themselves). Fecking annoyed, as my £60 turned to £1000 and I couldn't shout at lawyer, who gave me the advice to go to court and challenge it in the first place....

So,

If it is publicly accessible, then the provisions of the road traffic act apply, which includes insurance, speed limits, drink driving etc.

[centurian]

Insurance is not legally required if you are driving on private land.

Actually just to clarify that - this only applies to private space on private land.

If it is publicly accessible, then the provisions of the road traffic act apply, which includes insurance, speed limits, drink driving etc.

Car parks probably fall into that definition - although it might be a grey area if it has gated access.