# Coppers



## Sara (Mar 4, 2006)

I got pulled over on the motorway last week, thinking I was speeding, my initial thought was it had to happen eventually 

Much to my horror the copper accused me of not having any insurance and I did not have my certificate with me.

He then went on to tell me how they could compound my car, what it would cost to get it back  I was in floods of tears by this point. I had been broken into two weeks ago and the insurance paid out.

Eventually after phoning my insurance company and they confirmed I did indead have insurance and their database was incorrect. He told the person on the phone he said "I will dust her down and send me on my way" :evil:

Talking abou it to the guys at work they said he should not of put me in the back of the police car as he was on my own and I should report him.

Is this right ...

Sara


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

Not been pulled in age thankfully, but don't they just give you a seven day wonder still?


----------



## Hilly10 (Feb 4, 2004)

Think he was trying to pull you :roll:


----------



## Sara (Mar 4, 2006)

I should be so lucky 

Sara


----------



## Ikon66 (Sep 12, 2003)

digimeisTTer said:


> Not been pulled in age thankfully, but don't they just give you a seven day wonder still?


don't do producers anymore for insurance, if you are not on the database or cannot prove on the roadside then they can impound your car


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

So what happens if some spod hasn't put you on the database?

or they'd posted it on a disc to head office :lol:


----------



## Sara (Mar 4, 2006)

They pull you over on the motorway and make you cry 

Well they doif your a girlie, I am just pleased I didn't get done for speeding  
Sara


----------



## Lisa. (May 7, 2002)

I have been put in the back of a police car twice and I was on my own both times. I don't think being female gives you special treatment if they have reason to stop you, they usually still sit in the front seat anyway.


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

Sara G said:


> Talking abou it to the guys at work they said he should not of put me in the back of the police car as he was on my own and I should report him.
> 
> Is this right ...


No, it's not right. In fact it's a complete load of rubbish.

There is a national car insurance database. The vast majority of the time it is very reliable, however some insurance companies are very poor at updating the records and so there is something like one in 5000 cars that are insured that don't appear on the database. Mostly these are vehicles that have just recently had insurance with a new company and the database is a little late catching up. Sometimes it's just that the insurance company has cocked up.

Given that there are so many uninsured drivers out there it is only right that the police make efforts to deal with it. If the officer had checked the database and it had told him there was no current insurance for the vehicle then you can't really expect him to do other than he did. It sounds like when you told the officer that you were in fact insured the matter was resolved at the roadside - so presumably quite quickly. What he could have done was just issued you with a production document, putting you to the inconvenience of having to take your insurance certificate to a police station. That would have been much easier for him, but instead he's gone the extra mile to make phone enquires with your insurer to check if you did indeed have insurance. In the meantime he was obliged to advise you what action would be taken if his further enquires did indeed reveal you were not insured - that your car would be siezed.

Many people would be upset at the prospect of losing their car, especially if it is due to a mistake - and for some that upset will bring them to tears. That DOES NOT mean the police officer was doing anything more than his job, nor does it mean he was in any way officious or aggressive. I've had drivers burst into floods of tears the second I've said, "Good morning. Could you switch your engine off please".

The bottom line is that your insurance was not shown on the database, and that is the fault of your insurance company, not the police (it is the insurance companies database, not ours). The officer acted on the information he was given and made every effort he could to resolve the issue, sending you on your way. What more would you expect him to do?

And while he was making the enquiries where would you expect him to put you? Sat in the driver's seat of your car, with the keys, ready to to do a runner? When dealing with drivers it is obviously standard practice to take them out of their cars and put them into the police vehicle.

Obviously I'm going to have a different point of view, but I understand the task in hand, and no doubt if you put yourself in the place of the police officer you'd see things rather differently.


----------



## whiteshirt (Jul 19, 2007)

No legal right to put you in the rear of the Police car, but why not if you have nothing to hide!


----------



## Lockwood (Mar 17, 2006)

If your car was impounded but later proved to be insured. Would there still be a charge for towing?


----------



## Wolfsburger (Oct 21, 2002)

Mark Davies said:


> Obviously I'm going to have a different point of view, but I understand the task in hand, and no doubt if you put yourself in the place of the police officer you'd see things rather differently.


I`m sure if you put yourself in her shoes then you`d have been annoyed as well!


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

Wolfsburger said:


> I`m sure if you put yourself in her shoes then you`d have been annoyed as well!


Well no, I wouldn't - and haven't been when I've been stopped - because I have a little perspective and understand that there is a job to be done. The point I'm making is this - is there really anything to be so annoyed about? What has the police officer actually done wrong?

Whenever anyone has any involvement with the police they are always very reactionary. It's understandable. People find themselves in an unfamiliar situation, one in which they will naturally feel very vulnerable. People are quite understandably instantly nervous and defensive. When someone is in that state it is very difficult as a police officer to get them at ease - regardless of how friendly and amiable your approach is.

I've stopped cars that I've seen with some issue - say a puncture - with no more intention than to let the driver know about something they might not have been aware of, with a view to preventing an accident and maybe saving their life. I'll approach the car with a big, beaming smile and my first words will be, "Don't worry, you're not in trouble", yet when the driver gets out of their car they will be quaking in their boots! Does that mean I'm wrong to have stopped them and should have left them alone to kill themselves in an accident?

From what Sara has described this officer was simply doing his job and nothing more - which was the point I was trying to make. *Nothing* in what she posted suggested the officer had screamed and balled at her, bullied her or anything. He simply became aware that there was no insurance listed for the car, he stopped it, spoke with the driver, explained the situation and what the possible courses of action would be, listened to what the driver had to say, made some enquiries, verified no offences had been committed and then, with minimal delay and inconvenience caused, sent the driver on her way. What's the problem?

Okay, *she* was upset by it - some people will be regardless of how you deal with the situation - but that does not mean the officer did anything wrong or that Sara has any actual cause for complaint. There's a job to be done, and most of us do it with sensitivity - and I've heard nothing to suggest this officer didn't - and just because some people can be more sensitive and get upset _simply_ because the police have stopped them *cannot* be cause for us to not do the job at all.

None of us want uninsured drivers on the road, crashing into our pride-and-joy and leaving us with huge bills to meet. We want these people taking off the road. If that is what we want then we have to allow the police to get on with it. If for quite legitimate reasons the police take a few minutes of our time in their efforts to do that for us, should we be complaining about it?

What it comes down to is that we'd all say we want the police to do their job - but only so long as it never has anything to do with us. Well, that's just not realistic. At times it is going to be inevitable that police officers will be speaking with people who, after enquiries are made, are found not to have committed any offences. Sure, we don't want a situation where people are constantly being asked to account for themselves even when the police have no cause for suspicion - but that wasn't the case here, and isn't the case in general. The initial information indicated that there may not have been insurance for the car. Where there have been grounds to make enquiries we surely have to be prepared to allow the police to do that - and as long as the police do that efficiently and curteously (and all the indications are that this was how it was done in this case) then we really are simply hypocritical to complain about them


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

Lockwood said:


> If your car was impounded but later proved to be insured. Would there still be a charge for towing?


No - the bill would be met by the police.


----------



## FinFerNan (Feb 28, 2007)

Mark Davies said:


> Well no, I wouldn't - and haven't been when I've been stopped - because I have a little perspective and understand that there is a job to be done. The point I'm making is this - is there really anything to be so annoyed about? What has the police officer actually done wrong?
> 
> Whenever anyone has any involvement with the police they are always very reactionary. It's understandable. People find themselves in an unfamiliar situation, one in which they will naturally feel very vulnerable. People are quite understandably instantly nervous and defensive. When someone is in that state it is very difficult as a police officer to get them at ease - regardless of how friendly and amiable your approach is.
> 
> ...


He's right you know :lol: :lol:


----------



## Roadhog (May 4, 2007)

[/quote said:


> He's right you know :lol: :lol:


Have to fully agree with the above comment,might well have been stressfull for Sara at the time,but all is well at the end 

There are far to many Muppets running around with no insurance,and the
knock on effects can be devastating for those involved after an accident.

The police did there job, "would we be having this conversation had she
not been insured" its not his fault the information required was not updated,thats down to the Ins Co.

Happy & Safe TTing


----------



## SVStu (Dec 11, 2006)

Why not check to see if you are insured here, if you are worried

http://www.askmid.com/askmid.aspx

Some friends with company insurance or multi-car insurance full details are not up so they are always getting pulled.

Stu.


----------



## Wolfsburger (Oct 21, 2002)

Mark Davies said:


> Well no, I wouldn't - and haven't been when I've been stopped - because I have a little perspective and understand that there is a job to be done. The point I'm making is this - is there really anything to be so annoyed about? What has the police officer actually done wrong?


I`m sure at some stage the lady was told she was driving without insurance by the copper. At this point I`m sure she felt pretty helpless as she knew she had insurance but had no way of prooving this.

Now, I know uninsured drivers are rife and that coppers are usually the first line of attack but to depend on a database that is not accurate isn`t really desirable is it?

Is your "little bit of perspective" when you`ve been stopped your copper`s warrant card? I`m sure once it`s been established that you`re "in the job" there`s plenty of back slapping and mirth!


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

Wolfsburger said:


> Now, I know uninsured drivers are rife and that coppers are usually the first line of attack but to depend on a database that is not accurate isn`t really desirable is it?


He didn't depend on a database, did he? When Sara told him that she was insured he got onto the phone to her insurance company and verified that she did have insurance and sent her on her way.

Are you just determined to try and dish out criticism of the cops, even where it isn't warranted?



Wolfsburger said:


> Is your "little bit of perspective" when you`ve been stopped your copper`s warrant card? I`m sure once it`s been established that you`re "in the job" there`s plenty of back slapping and mirth!


Your previous comments indicated a prejudice against the police and this little gem just confirms it. No, whenever I've been stopped I've never declared I was in the police because that is one sure-fire way of ensuring you get prosecuted - quite the opposite of what you obviously expect.


----------



## Wolfsburger (Oct 21, 2002)

Mark Davies said:


> He didn't depend on a database, did he?


Really? Why did she originally get stopped?

I`ve really nothing against coppers, I`ve no points and I`ve never been stopped in 17 years of driving.

I hope you don`t make too many assumptions when you`re at work!


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

Wolfsburger said:


> Really? Why did she originally get stopped?


Because the database _suggested_ there wasn't any insurance, but he didn't then just go straight ahead and impound her car and dose her for it, did he? He merely used the database as an indicator and then made further enquiries. In what way is that 'depending' on the database?

What part of this are you not getting? The reason I make the observation that you seem to have something against the cops is not assumption - it's based on the obvious evidence that you seem determined to find some cause to criticise despite all the information indicating that in actuality the officer simply did his job and did it well!

As for the rest of my work, I base nothing on assumption. The best senior detective I ever worked for taught me the ABC of policing: *A*ssume nothing, *B*elieve nobody, *C*heck everything. It would be an equally good code for those reading rants about the police on internet fora - everyone in such a situation has an agenda and what you read is never really the entire truth.


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

I read this with interest and can see the officer had every reason to pull Sara based on the info available.

What does worry me is what IF Sara had been insured and the officer had been unable to verify this at the roadside?

I assume it would have resulted in her precious car being towed away and all the inconvenience that may have caused, especially if she was many miles from home. What safe guards are there to prevent this happening?????


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

mighTy Tee said:


> What does worry me is what IF Sara had been insured and the officer had been unable to verify this at the roadside?
> 
> I assume it would have resulted in her precious car being towed away and all the inconvenience that may have caused, especially if she was many miles from home. What safe guards are there to prevent this happening?????


It's not that likely. Everybody asumes cops are unreasonable idiots who enjoy nothing more than to cause chaos for people. Sure, as in all walks of life there will be examples of those who are, but the vast majority of us are people you'd be perfectly happy to associate with. Putting on a uniform doesn't automatically make you a tw*t.

Cars are generally only seized once it is verified there is definitely no insurance, or if there is other information available to corroborate the indication that there isn't - such as if the tax disc is out of date too. If we take the vehicle and it turns out you are insured we have to foot the bill, and an officer who regularly costs the job money like that will very soon get it in the neck. If there's any doubts you'll probably just be issued with a production notice and allowed to go on your way


----------



## whiteshirt (Jul 19, 2007)

Mark Davies said:


> mighTy Tee said:
> 
> 
> > What does worry me is what IF Sara had been insured and the officer had been unable to verify this at the roadside?
> ...


SPOT ON!!!!!!!


----------



## fut1a (Dec 28, 2006)

The insurance companies should get fined for wasting Police time


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

So we should carry our insurance certificate around with us at all times - can't really keep it in the vehicle? :?


----------



## TTwiggy (Jul 20, 2004)

Mark Davies said:


> all the information indicating that in actuality the officer simply did his job


that really is text-book copper speak right there :lol: :wink:


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

Well if it means they are clamping down on un-insured drivers . i'm all for it


----------



## whiteshirt (Jul 19, 2007)

Good idea to carry Cert of Insurance with you at all times (Can save you a lot of aggrevation)!
Or why dont Ins co. issue credit card size Insurance cert lot easier!


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

whiteshirt said:


> Good idea to carry Cert of Insurance with you at all times (Can save you a lot of aggrevation)!
> Or why dont Ins co. issue credit card size Insurance cert lot easier!


Zurich used to do just that ,don't know if they still do, they got far too expensive.


----------



## Molehall (Jan 8, 2003)

digimeisTTer said:


> Well if it means they are clamping down on un-insured drivers . i'm all for it


I am in total agreement. We'll quite happy to rant about uninsured drivers and "Why don't the police do something about them?".

Here's a copper who's checking a driver's insurance and using common sense (both at the same time; multi-taskinng?  ).

I think a promotion is overdue! 8) 8) 8)


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

I've read this with interest and can see both sides' arguments quite easily.

Having been stopped a lot when I was younger, I was very frustrated, but took it more as a 'fuck you' when it turned out that my car was taxed, insured and fully MOT'd.

Having read Mark's comments, there was one of those programmes on a while back where precisely this happened.

Girl was driving back with her young family and a weekly shop. Database flagged that she didn't have insurance - despite her insisting that she did.

Anyway, they stickered up her car with signs that read something like 'Impounded for driving without insurance' and turfed her out on to the street. WIth children and all her shopping.

In a bizarre twist however, a passing 'good samaritan' stopped to give her a lift. About 200 yeards up the road, SHE was then pulled over because she had no insurance.

In the end, the first woman to be stopped DID have valid insurance (but the was only found out once the car had been impounded) but the second one didn't and had been stopped several times previously for the same thing.

I'm not sure why I'm telling you this other than it's not true to suggest all coppers do the right thing, some are a bit harsh. But then by the same token - they did then show that this method does catch genuine offenders.

Some sort of producer would work in most instances, but only if the person involved is carrying other forms of ID so that the police can verify their identity. THe second woman for instance, denied being who she actually was because she been stopped before, but it didn't take them long to work out that the information was incorrect.

I guess the biggest problem is the fact that the Police are relying on a source which is not reliable.

:?


----------



## A3DFU (May 7, 2002)

jdn said:


> So we should carry our insurance certificate around with us at all times - can't really keep it in the vehicle? :?


In Germany it is the law that you carry valid and up-to-date ID with you at all times (even a a "footy"). As a driver you have to carry with you:
passport, driving license, owners documets and insuarance papers. The police is allowed to stop you at any time, search your car if they suspect any mis-deed or criminal involvement. So why can't you carry proof of insurance with you in this country, if only a copy?

ps: I only ever had good interactions with police officers (as some of you on here will know). To me, it very much depends on how you react when stopped. After all, they are only doing their jobs!!!!!

And for the records: I did something silly only last Friday: i stopped at a junction on double yellow lines, holding up the traffic, and phoned someone I needed to see and get directions of. A police van came past, saw this, one of the officers told me to follow them. I got a very light telling off ,,,,, and then they showed me the way to where I needed to get to. Thanks officers


----------



## Jac-in-a-Box (Nov 9, 2002)

Kell said:


> I guess the biggest problem is the fact that the Police are relying on a source which is not reliable.
> 
> :?


In a nutshell.

I was stopped recently for driving an "untaxed car"...according to DVLA's database :roll: Taxed in April for 12 months, just surprised that I hadn't been pulled before with all these ANPR camera's about :?

Subjected my tax disc to all sorts of scrutiny, but eventually conceeded it was real.

I don't blame the BiB ...hard to do the job properly if they're fed crap info'

Dave


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

A3DFU said:


> jdn said:
> 
> 
> > So we should carry our insurance certificate around with us at all times - can't really keep it in the vehicle? :?
> ...


Dani

I find this utterly insane. Imagine losing your *passport*  , driving license, car documents, insurance papers, valid ID, to a mugger, car jacker, bent copper or any other 'chancer'.

No thanks

Joe


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

Kell said:


> I guess the biggest problem is the fact that the Police are relying on a source which is not reliable.


It's a better situation than we had when I joined the job and we had nothing. The only way we could check if you were legal was either you had to have all your documents with you or you'd have to produce them at a police station. These days we have an insurance database, a driver's database and access to DVLA records. That's only come about in the past couple of years. Now we are able to check everything at the roadside, and as long as the records for you and your car are up to date (as they are in the vast majority of cases) you can be on your way with no further inconvenience. We hear so much about police harrassing 'law abiding citizens' so anything that reduces the impact on said citizens of our efforts to deal with the law-breakers has got to be a step in the right direction.

Of interest, we are one of only a few countries that don't require you to display a small insurance certificate (much like a tax disc) on your windscreen. I think it would be a good idea if we did do it.



A3DFU said:


> To me, it very much depends on how you react when stopped. After all, they are only doing their jobs!!!!!


And that's just the situation in a nutshell. It's not coincidence that certain people seem to have more problems when encountering the police than others. If you come flying out of the car with a confrontational, "What are you stopping me for? Have you not got anything better to do?" attitude you just give the officers the impression that you are trying to deflect their attention and have something to hide. Those people simply tend to talk themselves into trouble from something that otherwise would have been nothing more than a simple routine stop.

Best advice is just be curteous and polite. It's almost certain that you are _not_ being picked on, harrassed or victimised - it's just police officers doing their job. Nothing more.


----------



## Roadhog (May 4, 2007)

In over 55yrs driving,and God knows how many miles. I've been stopped

3 times :-

Recent. No Plate. (just get it changed Sir )

Suspect Drink. That many years ago,it was walk 10ft,one foot in front

off the other. (Sorry to have bothered you )

And the 3rd. Its that long ago I can't remember 

When all is said & done, Its no big deal,you will be on your way in notime. Unless your guilty :roll:

Happy & SafeTTing


----------



## A3DFU (May 7, 2002)

TTCool said:


> A3DFU said:
> 
> 
> > jdn said:
> ...


Why would you lose those things? Men carry these in ther back pockets, women in their handbags. 
I am always carrying my papers when in Germany, and certainly my driving license here in England. 
For some time I also carried py passport and other documents with me here in England when adviced to do so by a police officer to always have these items handy for a quick get-away after I suffered physical attack by my ex. It is now a habbit again that I have those documents with me most of the time. 
You can always keep copies at home?


----------



## s3fella (Jan 31, 2007)

Mark Davies said:


> Wolfsburger said:
> 
> 
> > The best senior detective I ever worked for taught me the ABC of policing: *A*ssume nothing, *B*elieve nobody, *C*heck everything. .
> ...


----------



## CHADTT (Jun 20, 2007)

Anyone know if foreign vehicles (non UK) are tracked for their insurance being on a database somewhere?


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

CHADTT said:


> Anyone know if foreign vehicles (non UK) are tracked for their insurance being on a database somewhere?


No, it's an absolute pain in the arse trying to get hold of insurance details for a foreign registered vehicle.


----------

