Lawful or unlawful traffic stop.

[disgruntled2007]

I was stopped today by an unmarked police vehicle as a result of a perceived slight the occupant felt I had provided....

 

I pointed at my rear view mirror having been held up behind her for a good half mile on a dual carriageway when she had ample opportunity to yield left and let me pass. She was travelling at 65 initially and slowed to 60 whilst climbing a long hill. The speed limit is 70.

 

At this point I did not know it was unmarked and that wouldn't have affected my action anyway.

 

When she eventually illuminated blue lights I pulled over and was confronted with a woman in civilian clothing who immediately stated that had she been in uniform she would be giving me a ticket.... I don't know for what, tbh, and she didn't suggest a reason for it. At no point did she state she was a police officer or attempt to show me any identification nor did she ask me for any.

 

It is my understanding that a Police officer must be in uniform to perform a vehicle stop, according to road traffic regulation. There is certainly plenty of suggestion on official websites et al to support this.

 

To this end, was the stop lawful or not?

 

I have already reported the event to the IPCC but would always welcome more information...

 

Thanks!

[dx100uk]

a speed limit is no a target.

simply giving sensible driving advice?

dx

[disgruntled2007]

I understand that.

My question is simply that whilst out of uniform and driving an unmarked car by illuminating blues and executing a traffic stop did she act lawfully or unlawfully.

 

I was giving her sensible driving advice by recommending she use her mirrors more frequently, after all, the outside lane is a passing lane, is it not?

[dx100uk]

I believe in or out of uniform they are still a police officer and have the powers to do as necessary

 

the old days of 'oh you've not got your traffic hat on'

 

have long gone.

 

p'haps its a lesson learned on both fronts?

 

regardless to the fact that you though the car should move out of your way

its not the way to drive.

 

likewise though.

there was quite a news item some time ago regarding lane hoggers though I believe this was in regard to the centre land only?

 

if I were to be honest

I think you are being a bit pigheaded...

 

complaining that you might have been unlawfully stopped rather suggests your driving manner was the more important issue here and you are trying to justify your 'right' to assert someone moves out of your way.?

 

for all you know

#that officer could have been observing a criminal under ops or WHY and you compromised the operation?

 

dx

[disgruntled2007]

Thankyou for your lesson in morality, dx.

[dx100uk]

might be all it really is....

dx

[disgruntled2007]

Are morals universal or relative?

 

That being said, I am more interested in stimulating debate and opinion on the matters of law.

 

I feel that I was acting reasonably as a driver and that the vehicle holding me up was not by virtue of failing to move to the left lane despite more than one opportunity to do so.

 

Once I was parallel to the vehicle I pointed at my rear view mirror and mouthed "use your mirrors" at the driver and continued my journey.

 

I was aware that this vehicle was behind me and we travelled a further four miles or so before she chose to illuminate blue lights and attempt a stop.

 

Herein lies my legal question.

https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q587.htm

 

This is extrapolated from S163, RTA.

 

So... this lady, who only ever alluded to being a Police Officer, was not wearing a uniform and used an unmarked car to execute a traffic stop in direct contradiction to the requirements of this act.

 

In my opinion, based upon my understanding of legislation, she was acting unlawfully and may well have been committing malfeasance in public office.

 

Furthermore, when executing this unlawful vehicle stop she also unlawfully detained me by blocking my car into a parking space by positioning her vehicle directly behind mine. The list of "offences" she has committed grows ever longer....

 

Public servants are naturally expected to be held to a higher standard than the general public, and this has, indeed, been stated clearly in case law.

 

Now, this lady perceived a slight in that she assumed I'd given her the finger when pointing at my rear view mirror.

 

If she is then prepared to break the rules in order to have a word with me in reaction to this, despite presumably knowing better (as a Police Officer) then I would certainly question her commitment (and ability!) to upholding the law.

[dx100uk]

so lets say this is correct and you shouldn't have been stopped...

 

why is it such a big deal that it happened to you?

 

oh she did wrong...

 

what would it achieve by doing so...?

 

i'm puzzled as to why you can't simply take the view that it happened, ca la vie

move on?

 

dx

[mariner51]

that would be 'c'est la vie'.

[Man in the middle]

Road Traffic Act 1988, Section 163:

 

 

163Power of police to stop vehicles.

(1)A person driving a [F1mechanically propelled vehicle] on a road must stop the vehicle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform [F2or a traffic officer].

(2)A person riding a cycle on a road must stop the cycle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform [F3or a traffic officer].

(3)If a person fails to comply with this section he is guilty of an offence.

 

It has been held that for a stop to be lawful where the police vehicle is unmarked at least one officer inside the vehicle must be in uniform, clearly identifiable as a police officer. Police guidance to drivers asked to stop otherwise (and who think they may be in danger) is to proceed to a populated area (e.g. a service station) and indicate to the police vehicle their intentions (not easy I know, but that’s their guidance). The driver cannot be prosecuted for failure to stop immediately in such circumstances.

[king12345]

Did you say that she didn't show you her badge?

That's very unusual for a police officer, maybe she was the runaround girl from a garage who had repaired the copper's car and she was returning it.

That would explain why it took her 4 miles to work out how to put the blue lights on, or maybe she was doing a number plate check on her radio.

Anyway, next time as soon as you are stopped ask the reason and if they haven't got any ask them if you're being detained.

When they say no, drive off.

They go for easy preys nowadays, the polite, the families, the elderly.

They make up numbers much quicker than drug dealer with a boot full of gear and they comply fully.

[disgruntled2007]

so lets say this is correct and you shouldn't have been stopped...

 

why is it such a big deal that it happened to you?

 

oh she did wrong...

 

what would it achieve by doing so...?

 

i'm puzzled as to why you can't simply take the view that it happened, ca la vie

move on?

 

dx

 

I am not aware that we live in a Police State, dx, and as previously alluded, I am not prepared to accept Law enforcement staff riding tough shod over the regs.

 

I hope to achieve at least a record on her personnel file that she is willing to break the rules at the drop of a hat. Perhaps she will then think twice before taking the law into her own hands again.

 

"Public servants are naturally expected to be held to a higher standard than the general public, and this has, indeed, been stated clearly in case law.

 

Now, this lady perceived a slight in that she assumed I'd given her the finger when pointing at my rear view mirror.

 

If she is then prepared to break the rules in order to have a word with me in reaction to this, despite presumably knowing better (as a Police Officer) then I would certainly question her commitment (and ability!) to upholding the law."

[disgruntled2007]

Did you say that she didn't show you her badge?

That's very unusual for a police officer, maybe she was the runaround girl from a garage who had repaired the copper's car and she was returning it.

That would explain why it took her 4 miles to work out how to put the blue lights on, or maybe she was doing a number plate check on her radio.

Anyway, next time as soon as you are stopped ask the reason and if they haven't got any ask them if you're being detained.

When they say no, drive off.

They go for easy preys nowadays, the polite, the families, the elderly.

They make up numbers much quicker than drug dealer with a boot full of gear and they comply fully.

 

No attempt to confirm her identity or prove her ceredentials at all.

 

She may well have been the tea lady having a laugh with a borrowed police car...

 

I am awaiting the IPCC response to my initial complaint,

[Homer67]

So let me understand this - you pulled over because the car behind you put on a siren and blue lights and when you pulled over the person told you they were a PC but didn't provide any ID?

 

I would have insisted on seeing the ID (having made sure my car was locked first), if they refused then I'd be driving off and I wouldn't stop for them again until I saw a marked Police Car or PC on the beat.

 

The law regarding audio visual warnings is stupid, it is legal to fit them but if you use them without being legally authorized to do so, the penalties are harsh.

 

Criminals don't care about penalties though or the prisons would be empty.

[disgruntled2007]

So let me understand this - you pulled over because the car behind you put on a siren and blue lights and when you pulled over the person told you they were a PC but didn't provide any ID?

 

I would have insisted on seeing the ID (having made sure my car was locked first), if they refused then I'd be driving off and I wouldn't stop for them again until I saw a marked Police Car or PC on the beat.

 

The law regarding audio visual warnings is stupid, it is legal to fit them but if you use them without being legally authorized to do so, the penalties are harsh.

 

Criminals don't care about penalties though or the prisons would be empty.

 

That's pretty much it! I try to be a law abiding citizen.... it's instinctive to pull over for a blue light...

 

I was taken aback, TBH, and all those clever thoughts just left my head....

[Man in the middle]

Yes it’s easy to say what you would do in such circumstances whilst typing away at your computer. In reality when faced with an unexpected and unusual occurrence people act in ways which may seem strange to an observer who has had a nice long time to digest the facts. (That’s why I have little time for lawyers who suggest in court that this or that should or should not have been done. They’ve spent six months in their agreeable chambers musing over the matter whereas the person who was said to have behaved stupidly or illegally had half a second to decide what to do).

 

It depends how much time you have and how involved you want to become with this matter. From what you say it seems quite clear you were subject to an illegal stop and more than that the officer (if indeed that’s what she was) failed to comply with even the most basic of procedures. Personally, as I’ve got (quite a bit) older, I now take the view that life is a bit too short to waste much time on matters like this. In the past I would take every such incident by the scruff of the neck and give whoever upset me (or usually their governors) a bit of stick. Having said that, although I’ve mellowed in my dotage, occasionally something really gets my goat and I pursue it to the bitter end. So I would not be at all surprised if you feel that way about this incident and give it all you can.

[obiter dictum]

Have to ask, and not being obnoixous.

 

Why are you blowing this all out of proportons? Slap on the wrist for a few moments and move on. No doubt the copper was more interested in lecturing with road safety than being a Fascist Barsteward

 

If the copper was of the opinion your standard of driving falls below what is normally expected they have every right to pull you over. Be that either in or out of Uniform

[Man in the middle]

If the copper was of the opinion your standard of driving falls below what is normally expected they have every right to pull you over. Be that either in or out of Uniform

 

Quite so. And if they attempt to do so whilst out of uniform you have every right to drive on. Should you be kind enough to stop the very least you can expect is for the officer to properly identify him/herself.

[obiter dictum]

If the copper suspect an offence has been comitted they can stop you under section 1 of PACE 1984

 

It is an offence to fail to stop for the Police, but if you have genuine grounds to believe it is not the Police, that would be a defence. Since when was it law that the police had to drive in marked cars or be in uniform?

[Man in the middle]

So S163 of the RTA has no bearing then?

 

I would not normally advocate taking police advice on matters of law but here’s some advice on the matter from Leicestershire Police which seems quite sound. I think most police forces have similar guidance:

 

https://leics.police.uk/contact-us/faq/Q587

 

“An unmarked police car can stop vehicles, but it must contain a constable who MUST be in uniform in order to carry out the stop.

If a car flashing for you to pull over or stop is unmarked, unless you are 100% certain it is the police, do not stop. Drive steadily to the nearest public place (for example a petrol station where they are open till late, a police station or somewhere there are a lot of people) and then stop. If you are in a relatively deserted area, as a last resort, consider looking for a house that is obviously occupied and pull into the driveway. You can always apologise to the householder afterwards. Try and signal that you have acknowledged the request to stop and indicate the action you are taking (put your flashers on or signal by pointing from the driver's window etc.). Don't drive off at great speed making the police think you are trying to get away.”

 

We.re not talking about the apprehension of armed robbers here. We’re talking about a motorist who might, just might, have driven a little carelessly or without consideration for other road users. Apart from the dodgy stop the officer’s failure to properly identify herself shows a very unprofessional approach and has all the hallmarks of a police officer acting as an aggrieved party following a driving incident and using her position to browbeat the other driver. All in all not a very good advert for the boys and girls in blue.

[obiter dictum]

Setion 1 of PACE does not require you to give details, only stop and account yet under section 50 Police Reform Act with reasonable suspicion you have to give name and address

 

Aggressive driving as an example can be seen as anti social behaviour

Edited July 1, 2017 by obiter dictum

[obiter dictum]

There are powers other than the Road Traffic Act that don't require a police constable to be in uniform.

[disgruntled2007]

If the copper suspect an offence has been comitted they can stop you under section 1 of PACE 1984

 

It is an offence to fail to stop for the Police, but if you have genuine grounds to believe it is not the Police, that would be a defence. Since when was it law that the police had to drive in marked cars or be in uniform?

 

My reading of section 1 is that they have the power to stop and search if they have REASONABLE GROUNDS to suspect they will find something dodgy in my car... so, unless she had reasonable grounds to assume I was carrying stolen goods, weapons or drugs then she could not rely on the powers of stop and search under section 1.

 

Yours second point is also mute and has been addressed. Section 163 RTA clearly states that an unmarked car must contain a uniformed officer to execute a stop.

[disgruntled2007]

Have to ask, and not being obnoixous.

 

Why are you blowing this all out of proportons? Slap on the wrist for a few moments and move on. No doubt the copper was more interested in lecturing with road safety than being a Fascist Barsteward

 

If the copper was of the opinion your standard of driving falls below what is normally expected they have every right to pull you over. Be that either in or out of Uniform

 

IMHO, Obiter, I'm not blowing it all out of proportion. I expect those charged with maintaining law and order to follow those very laws they uphold. This lady's actions, assuming she is in fact a Police Officer, fall way below the standard one is entitled to expect of a public servant.

 

As I've already said, she didn't attempt to identify herself. She didn't attempt to identify me. She didn't accuse me of any crime; she merely stated as she stood over me that were she in uniform I'd be getting a ticket. For what? You tell me...

 

At best, very unprofessional. At worst, criminal.

 

I'm awaiting the IPCC response to confirm she is a serving officer and on what grounds I was stopped.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

Personally, it sounds like she was in the right.

You were gesturing and staring at her after passing which means you were not paying attention to the road as you were mad at her for the perceived lane hogging.

 

In or out of uniform, a police office can stop you and have a chat.

If she were to give a ticket, you might be able to question it as she wasn't in uniform.

As it was, she gave an informal chat.

 

IMHO, if I were you, I would be hoping she didn't have dash cam, as if she has it recorded, she could hand it over for processing and you could land yourself with a driving without due care and attention or similar offence.

 

A verbal slap on the wrist for an aggressive attitude and you are blowing it out of proportion.

 

It just sounds like you were in the wrong, and are now trying to get your own back.

Sounds childish to me.