Most recent activity
-
Just as an aside to the above, you should use the Data Protection Act rather than the Freedom of Information Act to apply for CCTV footage. You should make a data subject access request under Section 7(1) of the DPA.
The Information Commissioner's Office provide a template for requests. The CCTV Code of Practice outlines an organisation's responsibilities for disclosure in section 19.2 (page 15).
Also, you should use the Data Protection Act (not the Freedom of Information Act which does not apply) to access case details from the police. However, the police can withhold information in certain circumstances.
HTH.
-
Just to be pedantic.... ;)
It's not 'right of way' (which relates to the ability to go somewhere) but 'priority' (who goes first).
-
I stand corrected - I may have been thinking about parking FPNs.
Or I may be talking out of my jacksie.
FPNs won't show up on a CRB check as they are not counted as 'convictions' - so you were partly right and not talking out of your jacksie.
-
If you took this to the limit, if somebody suddenly jumped out in front of you to commit suicide, it's conceivable that you could get an £80 fine for failing to yield to their right of way.
Unlikely. The important thing to note is that this happened at a junction, where the pedestrian always has priority, and on a crossing.
-
voidcore was given handed a Fixed Penalty Notice under Section 5 of the Public Order Act, if I;m not mistaken - Ant has already pointed out the offence and appropriate defence, although it may be worth pointing out again:
Plead not guilty, go to court, enter a defence, pass go, collect £200, I'm not a lawyer, this is not advice, seek legal counsel etc...
If you lose, there will probably be an increase in the fine, plus a "victim surcharge", and you will receive a "criminal record", inasmuch as there will be a record of it (it is not, as far as I know, something that will show up on a CRB check, nor would you be required to declare it - but, then again, I'm no lawyer, so my opinion may be incorrect, and you are best seeking professional advice. Or just paying the penalty now, and be done with the whole affair.)
Yes, a conviction for a Section 5 offence would show up on a CRB check and, yes, you would be obliged to disclose it if asked exempted or excepted questions under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. If the conviction resulted in a fine, then this would be 'spent' after 5 years - although for certain occupations and professions there is a requirement to disclose 'spent' convictions as well.
[FONT=Arial]If you are convicted during the rehabilitation period of an offence which can only be tried by a magistrates‘ court (a summary only offence), the new sentence will carry its own rehabilitation period and will not affect the earlier one. If the second offence is mre serious and you receive a sentence covered by the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 , the earlier conviction will become spent only when the later one becomes spent. If a person is given a sentence which can never become spent, this also prevents an earlier unspent conviction from becoming spent.
[/FONT] -
True, if a ped steps out on a crossing right in front of a car the car isn't at fault. He/She should have taken due care of her/himself...
The pedestrian will only be legally liable if it was a light controlled crossing. At zebra crossings pedestrians have priority and the onus is upon the vehicles to be travelling at such a speed that they can safely stop.
Indeed, a vehicle is not required to stop until the pedestrian has a foot on the zebra crossing. Bizarre - but true.
-
+1 IMHO there are far too many unwilling to take responsibility for their own actions.
+2. I agree. OK, the situation is tough but that's life.
-
Does anyone have contacts at LCC/CTC?
I'm a CTC National Councillor for London. This is an issue that I will be pressing CTC to work on, together with LCC. If anyone has suggestions they'd like to put forward please let me know.
Sorry BlueQuinn et al but the study to which you refer has been shown to be flawed and the results unreliable. Personally, I don't beleive there should be any change until there has been a properly structured, longitudinal study.