[98selitb]

I think that Watchdog report was too quick to brush over any blame attributed to the police. Yes, it is entirely the fault of the insurer for not putting motorists' details onto the MID quickly enough. While the police are not to blame in the slightest for that, they are fully aware of the problem yet still use the system religiously, and they pretend if the computer says no, then it means no. They deliberately ignore the known fact that the MID can be inaccurate because to do otherwise would reduce their arrest/conviction statistics.

The police obviously will not stop using this faulty system because then there will be a drop in fines and conviction rates, which is their real aim; the small matter of innocent or guilty is not a priority to them.

The easiest way of ensuring 100% security for those who take the time and money to insure their cars would be to change the MID update limit from a week to an hour. The insurers take your money instantly, so they can put your details on the system instantly too. If, say, your insurance becomes valid not straightaway, but within an hour after buying it, there would be no problems. That is not much to ask of the person at the other end of the phone/computer to kindly put your details onto the MID once you have paid them another several hundred pounds to do nothing.

[Snowball]

The police and associated bodies are more than ready to crucify a motorist who puts a foot wrong, so why should not there be a stiff financial penalty against the bodies responsible for keeping accurate records, if a motorist being wrongly accused of his/her documents not being in order?

Let's have a little more 'give' and less 'take'.
From heads of government down, there is keenness to put regulations in place, but total disinterest in rectifying any system failures that disrupt the lives of innocent citizens; citizens who, by the way, through their taxes,pay the salaries of these people.

[smudger]

Aye! its the same with life in general, if a so called professional person makes a mistake, they get away with it! Same applies for politicians!

Yet, if a tradesman makes a mistake, he gets hammered for it:(

I've seen it happen so many times during my years in the oil construction business:mad:

[wagolynn]

The only redress I can see at the moment is suing them, I will if I am ever involved.

[Snowball]

Originally Posted by wagolynn

The only redress I can see at the moment is suing them, I will if I am ever involved.

Any blatant incompetence would deserve just that.
Problem is, can/would you trust a court to be impartial and not close ranks with the police?
After all, anyone receiving an FPN from the police does get, in that notice, a caution to the effect that taking it before a court may, on conviction, increase the amount of the penalty.
if the courts were truly impartial, and not prepared to cosy up to the police, should not that caution have been refuted by the courts administators long ago?

[98selitb]

Originally Posted by wagolynn

The only redress I can see at the moment is suing them, I will if I am ever involved.

I agree, and I would do the same if it happened to me, though the chances of winning even the most blatant case would be small.

I been through the court system as an innocent, wrongly accused defendant. Judges, magistrates etc. do indeed automatically close ranks and shout you down whenever even the slightest suggestion is raised about the police misbehaving in any way. Any complaint about a police officer is pretty much taken with a pinch of salt, whereas anything a police officer says in court is gospel and its authenticity cannot be questioned. If you openly question the testimony of a police officer, you are told it constitues contempt of court, and if convicted, it can get a few weeks or months added to your sentence because of your 'attitude'. In court, the police are God.

Think about it - if a policeman can get away with the motiveless and unprovoked murder of an innocent passer-by in front of a video camera watched by millions, what are the chances of a successful lawsuit against the police over a much less serious matter?

There have been 1,200 deaths in police custody since 1992, yet despite guidelines clearly stating the police have duty of care over people held in custody (due to the enormous amount of control they have over those people), no-one has ever been held liable for any one of these deaths. There was an extremely rare case a few months ago where a Wiltshire policeman actually got convicted and jailed for attacking a woman in his custody. Yet when he appealed, he was allowed out until the appeal date, and he is still employed by the police until (if) his conviction is upheld. For any other prisoner whatsoever, you are not allowed out of prison just because you have lodged an appeal, you are only released if the appeal is successful.

[smudger]

I was also involved in a suing case, mind you that was for my accident at work, that left me disabled and unable to work at the age of 50.

The lawyer I had was totally useless, and made it last for years, which was my downfall in the end, as I ended up with a fraction of the original claim!

Another case of professional incompetence, so you can see the reason for my bitterness:rolleyes: