Police "Winter Vehicle Checks"

[Muppetz]

Last night I had a call from one of my staff at about 7.30pm, he had been stopped by the Police in Harrogate on one of the main roads for a "Winter Vehicle Check".

Apparently there were plenty of Police there (3 or 4 cars) and they were stopping as many vehicles as possible, and checking them over for faults (and presumably the usual insurance/tax/licence/drunken etc).

All of which seems very good to me - however.....

He was found to have a headlamp bulb (side lamp one i think) out (Citroen Berlingo Van) and was told that it needed to be replaced..... As luck would have it they had Halfrauds on site with them at the side of the road and he was told that if he paid Halfrauds to replace it there and then "they would not take it any further"...... (£15)

Now I'm all for these checks etc, but this just had a smack of daylight robbery about it !

I thought that in these situations the police would give a 7 day notice informing the driver to have the defect repaired and then require them to return the notice stamped by a local garage. (I'm sure I had one of these in my younger days).


Any thoughts on the idea of having Halfrauds sat there with the Police and being strongarmed into using their services ?

 

[Gollom]

Last night I had a call from one of my staff at about 7.30pm, he had been stopped by the Police in Harrogate on one of the main roads for a "Winter Vehicle Check".

Apparently there were plenty of Police there (3 or 4 cars) and they were stopping as many vehicles as possible, and checking them over for faults (and presumably the usual insurance/tax/licence/drunken etc).

All of which seems very good to me - however.....

He was found to have a headlamp bulb (side lamp one i think) out (Citroen Berlingo Van) and was told that it needed to be replaced..... As luck would have it they had Halfrauds on site with them at the side of the road and he was told that if he paid Halfrauds to replace it there and then "they would not take it any further"...... (£15)

Now I'm all for these checks etc, but this just had a smack of daylight robbery about it !

I thought that in these situations the police would give a 7 day notice informing the driver to have the defect repaired and then require them to return the notice stamped by a local garage. (I'm sure I had one of these in my younger days).


Any thoughts on the idea of having Halfrauds sat there with the Police and being strongarmed into using their services ?

That stinks! Having the "option" is a good idea, but to be sorta "strongarmed" into it is not good!

 

[jaymanek]

although some bulbs are now expensive that is expensive... the most expensive headlamp bulb we sell is £8.99.

 

[Rory]

I thought Halfords fitted bulbs free, so a sidelamp bulb should have been next to nothing?

If it was a winter check, did they also test the vehicles anti-freeze?

 

[jamesmc]

My question is aren't random checks illegal?

I seem to recollect (again from a few years back) that if you are fully complying with the law then you should not be stopped randomly unless you had committed an offence... light seen to not be working, or some other motoring offence.

 

[glojo]

Are these 7 day thingies optional and could the police have issued a fix penalty instead?

John

 

[Ratz]

Sounds seriously dodgy to me, what if you had no money or Halfords didn't have the bulb in stock. Light bulbs can go at any time and indeed could have popped on that particular journey. Yet again normally law abiding citizens are easy targets, isn't it amazing how the police are always pleading poverty and yet resources for these 'initiatives' is found from somewhere.

 

[edthedead]

The police can stop any vehicle on the road in order to check ownership, vehicle documents etc etc. So no, it's not illegal.

When they said they would 'take no action' my guess is that the action they would have otherwise taken would have been a Vehicle Defect Rectification notice (VDRS) - 14 days to get the fault fixed and stamped by an MOT testing station.

Could the van driver not have just purchase the bulb and fitted it himself - save paying for Halfords to do it for him!

 

[Muppetz]

When they said they would 'take no action' my guess is that the action they would have otherwise taken would have been a Vehicle Defect Rectification notice (VDRS) - 14 days to get the fault fixed and stamped by an MOT testing station.

The way the option was presented to the driver didn't give that impression - but you are probably right (I thought the same thing, but did not know the name of the form)

 

[Ratz]

The police can stop any vehicle on the road in order to check ownership, vehicle documents etc etc. So no, it's not illegal.

When they said they would 'take no action' my guess is that the action they would have otherwise taken would have been a Vehicle Defect Rectification notice (VDRS) - 14 days to get the fault fixed and stamped by an MOT testing station.

Could the van driver not have just purchase the bulb and fitted it himself - save paying for Halfords to do it for him!

I think that your guess may well be correct, but I wouldn't have known that on the spot and I estimate from the responses so far that 90% of people wouldn't. This can be an intimidating situation for anyone and especially for someone with a limited knowledge of cars or the law. The times I have been stopped I have not objected particularly but the language and manner employed can lead to unnecessary worry.

 

[Carrotchomper]

I don't like the sound of this at all. I would be happier if there was the option of relacing bulbs there, or giving a VDRS- IE 14 days to get if fixed. This sounds like seriously dodgy territory and a bit unethical.

 

[crockers]

What if he had a set of bulbs on him -- would Halfords guy have fitted it free for him....???

 

[edthedead]

I don't like the sound of this at all. I would be happier if there was the option of relacing bulbs there, or giving a VDRS- IE 14 days to get if fixed. This sounds like seriously dodgy territory and a bit unethical.

I think that most places charge more than £15 to stamp the VDRS form anyway, some even insist on doing a full MOT and charge the cost of that, so it was probably a cheaper option to replace the bulb there and then...

All sounds a bit harsh to me anyway - I would have thought that if the only offence being committed was one side light bulb a verbal warning would have been appropriate!

 

[edthedead]

I think that your guess may well be correct, but I wouldn't have known that on the spot and I estimate from the responses so far that 90% of people wouldn't. This can be an intimidating situation for anyone and especially for someone with a limited knowledge of cars or the law. The times I have been stopped I have not objected particularly but the language and manner employed can lead to unnecessary worry.

I know that most officers have a 'script' that I run though every time they issue a certain piece of paperwork, a Producer or ticket for example. There are certain things that you must tell the driver and sometime it can sound quiet officious because of the language and terms used, but it has to be said!

It often the case that you have to tell people what might happen in the worse case e.g. "if you fail to produce with 7 days or the documents that you do produce are not in order you will be reported for the offences and will be summons to court." is one that I use everytime I issue a producer, can sound worrying, but has to be said and to a certain degree is intended to sound worrying to make sure people realise that they must produce or there will be consequences.

 

[CrysAk]

personally think its a good thing, a little inconvenient for most ppl but gets the crap off the road that shouldn't be there, see farrrrr tomany ppl driving with 1 headlight, esp in winter evenings

sure theres always the RARE occasion that it might of happened while driving that day, but common... you seriously believe that for the majority of the drivers out there

 

[robert.saunders]

I carry spare bulbs in the car, much simpler

 

[jaymanek]

I think that most places charge more than £15 to stamp the VDRS form anyway, some even insist on doing a full MOT and charge the cost of that, so it was probably a cheaper option to replace the bulb there and then...

We charge £5

 

[glojo]

I don't like the sound of this at all. I would be happier if there was the option of relacing bulbs there, or giving a VDRS- IE 14 days to get if fixed. This sounds like seriously dodgy territory and a bit unethical.

I think a bloke on t'internet would say it verges on the 'demanding money with menaces' type scenario and we only have one version of this incident.

What would have happened if the driver had no money?

What would have happened if the driver had a spare bulb sorry lamp?

What would have happened if Halfords was shut?

What would have happened if they did not sell the correct item?

What would have happened if the driver wiggled the lamp and it worked?

Ceratinly an interesting story but I would love to hear both sides of it.

Carrotchomper
If a driver gets lippy over an event like this could they simply be reported for the offence\given a fixed penalty, or is this VDRS thingie mandatory? Thanks in advance

Regards
John

 

[Muppetz]

I think a bloke on t'internet would say it verges on the 'demanding money with menaces' type scenario and we only have one version of this incident.

What would have happened if the driver had no money?

What would have happened if the driver had a spare bulb sorry lamp?

What would have happened if Halfords was shut?

What would have happened if they did not sell the correct item?

What would have happened if the driver wiggled the lamp and it worked?

Ceratinly an interesting story but I would love to hear both sides of it.

Carrotchomper
If a driver gets lippy over an event like this could they simply be reported for the offence\given a fixed penalty, or is this VDRS thingie mandatory? Thanks in advance

Regards
John

To be clear about this :

The stopping location was NOT at Halfrauds.

The Police had engaged/Partnered with Halfrauds and had them at the stopping location along with (one assumes) an amount of stock.

I assume that had they not been able to effect a replacement bulb then a VDRS would have been issued.

I take no issue at all with the stopping and checking.

My issue is this : in my opinion the police officer should have offered a VDRS AND the option of Halfrauds, thus enabling the person stopped to decide where to have the repair (or replacement) carried out. This is not what happened, the driver was told that "if halfords do the repair then we will not take it any further" - and this is the part I find wrong because the officer is imo pushing the driver into using halfords and paying money at the roadside when it is not necessary.

 

[Mr E]

From the local Harrogate paper:

"A CAMPAIGN piloted by traffic police in Harrogate is being rolled out to the rest of the district after impressive results in trials.
Operation Worship offers drivers the option of having minor defects repaired at the roadside, rather than facing fines. It was used in Harrogate and Ripon over the festive period, with support from local branches of Halford and Kwik Fit.

A further exercise from the officers behind the scheme last week resulted in 117 people being stopped for problems such as faulty lights.

PC Nick Widdowson said: "It has had a brilliant response from the public. All but two of the repairs have been dealt with straight away."

Parked in Trinity Road during a weekday afternoon and evening, the team stopped drivers to check lights, tyres and wipers. Staff from Halfords were on hand to carry out minor repairs such as replacing bulbs, charging only for the parts.

Police also took the chance to check the details of the cars they stopped for insurance, tax and MOTs. They breathalised drivers and carried out a full search of one car after smelling cannabis inside it.

Drivers who were pulled over for having faulty lights during the rush hour were positive about getting their lights fixed on the spot.

Louise Ward, from Jennyfield Drive, who was driving home from work, said: "You don't actually think about your lights. A couple of checks in the morning to stop this happening are worth i
t."

Carole McSorley, of Osmotherley, said: "It's a great idea. I travel up and down quite a bit so I'm glad it has been sorted. It's confusing when people have got their lights out and you think it's a motorbike but it's not, it's a car."

Jill Harrison, from Harrogate, on her way to collect her son from football, said: "It's a pain to go somewhere and have it done. I was expecting a fine when I got stopped so it's a pleasant surprise!"

An 18-year-old Vauxhall Astra driver from Harrogate, who did not want to give his name, said: "I think it's a good idea. I absolutely and completely agree with it. I didn't know and if I was out on a dark road, anything could have happened. They could have been picking me up in an ambulance."

Other drivers agreed the scheme was a good idea and it would encourage them to check their cars more regularly in the winter to avoid being stopped again."


To answers Glojo's question - a quick look on the Sussex Police site says that a VDRS is issued to give the driver an opportunity to fix the fault rather than be prosecuted. So I would assume that a VDRS is an option.

Was also interesting to note that (remember a thread about a young driver, number plates and attitude of a police officer) it says that it does not allow the car to continue to be driven with the fault and that, if stopped again, you would be prosecuted.