olice powers, 2
Page 39
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
By Les Oldrid!
HEN AN accident takes place n the road it is the duty of the olice to discover whether any affic offence has been ommitted for which a driver hould be prosecuted.
They will ask searching uestions of witnesses and take atements from them if the cident is a serious one or one here a prosecution is ntemplated.
This brings me to the question f whether one should make a atement to the police after aving been involved in an cident. The answer will epend on the particular rcumstances.
When a driver is completely ameless I can see no reason hy he should not make a full d complete statement to the lice. This will help them in eir investigation and in suring that the guilty party is osecuted.
On the other hand, if at the me of the collision one's own iving was not of the highest andard, it may be better to say thing to the police — at least til a solicitor has been nsulted. The police have no wer to compel anyone to ake a statement.
Some employers issue structions to their drivers that no circumstances may ey make statements to the lice after being involved in an cident. This is understandable driver could easily admit bility for an accident involving s employer in a civil action for mages), but such a general struction prevents co eration with the police when e firm's driver is completely ameless.
It is better for drivers to be structed that they must not ake statements admitting any bility and that if they are in y doubt whether they ould make a statement they should refer the police officer to their employer.
Arrangements can then be made for the police interview with the driver to take place in the presence of a senior member of the staff in order to ensure nothing incriminating is said. Consultation by an employer with his insurance company may be prudent before a general instruction to drivers concerning the making of statements to the police is issued.
Duty of vehicle owners Section 168 of the Road Traffic Act 1972 requires "the keeper of a vehicle" to give information to the police as to the identity of the driver of that vehicle if it is alleged he has committed an offence against most sections of that Act.
Section 232 of the Road Traffic Act makes similar provisions in relation to offences regarding psv, operator's licences and driver's hours.
The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1967, Section 85, also gives similar powers to the police but also to the local authority in cases of parking offences.
Failure to comply with any of these provisions is an offence carrying a maximum fine of £50, but it is a defence if the owner of the vehicle satisfies the court that he did not know and could not have reasonably found out who the driver was.
Police powers Regulation 3 of the Removal and Disposal of Vehicles Regulations 1968 relates to vehicles which have broken down or have been allowed to remain at rest on any road in such a position, condition or circumstances as to cause obstruction or damage to other road users or in contravention of any offence specified in the Schedule to the regulations. (These relate generally to various illegal parking offences.) A constable may require the owner, driver or other person in charge or control of any such vehicle to move it or cause it to be moved. Failure to comply with the request of the police carries a penalty of a £20 maximum fine.
A constable has powers to remove any vehicle left in any of the circumstances described above by driving or towing it or by any other means thought necessary. Charges for such removals and storage are as follows: For removal in the Metropolitan or City of London Police Areas, £29 Removal from a motorway, £30 Removal from elsewhere, £27 Storage for each 24 hours or part thereof, E2 Disposal of vehicle, £6 These charges only refer to the services mentioned. Any fines for illegal parking are an additional payment.
Weighing To ensure the various weight limits are not exceeded, the Highway Authority is empowered to authorise various people to require vehicles to be weighed. Ministry examiners, consumer protection officers and policemen are those authorised.
Such authorisation is not automatic; each must be issued with an authorisation card which must be produced when drivers are asked to drive to a weighbridge for their vehicle to be weighed. Ministry examiners and consumer protection officers d not have the power to stop vehicles, so weight checks on roads are normally held in conjunction with the police, do, of course, have power to stop vehicles.
It is an offence to refuse to have a vehicle weighed, but thi person in charge of the vehicle cannot be required to unload it so that it can be weighed unladen. The Highway Authori is responsible to pay for loss (determined by an agreed arbitrator) caused by the weighing of the vehicle if the vehicle has to travel more than five miles to be weighed and th weight is found to be within thE limits authorised by law.
After weighing, a weight tick' must be provided to exempt th vehicle being weighed on the same journey with the same load. (Road Traffic Act 1972 Section 160.) There is a maximum fine of £400 for refusing to have a vehicle weighed.
When a vehicle is found to b€ overweight, a notice in writing GV160) is given to the driver prohibiting the driving of the vehicle until the weight is reduced to within the legal limit There may also be a direction requiring the driver to remove the vehicle to a place and in such conditions as are specifiec in the notice.
More about police powers in thi next article.