Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Can the police charge you? [Vic]

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by Eddo, Jul 10, 2009.

  1. You have a minor accident with a car. The police dont attend but the driver reports the matter to the police alledging you are lane splitting. Can the police charge you even if they didnt attend the scene?


     
     Top
  2. i dont think so..

    i had an accident with a truck driver. i reported it to police, they didnt do anything. u actually dont have to report it to them anymore.... they dont care, i think its only if there is a write off...
     
     Top
  3. Charge you! Your lucky if they don't pepper spray then shoot you.

    Probably get you for neg driving.

    Is it just him saying you were LS?

    Like has been said, as long as he hasn't proof of LS, turn it back on him.
     
     Top
  4. Report him to the police for changing lanes without indicating or giving way. The police will then have no evidence with which to resolve the matter. They will wash their hands of it (if they haven't already).

    The driver is trying to get the police to back up his insurance claim, IMHO. Be glad you are not in NSW or you would both get charged regardless.
     
     Top
  5. If it was the cause of the accident then they can charge you or send you a ticket. If the splitting was surplus to the incident, then they still can, but the ground is shakier, as they are relying on a single witness without attending the accident.

    It's unlikely they would do either without talking to you.
     
     Top
  6. Moved this to the correct forum with the state labelled clearly.
    OP, next time you have a legal question post it in the correct forum with the correct state in it to get the best response.
     
     Top
  7. With regards to police charging you with an offence when not there, here's something to consider.

    My wife was driving home along the freeway. She was overtaken by two young chaps on P plates. They were chopping and changing lanes. They forced my wife to brake and eventually to run off the road to avoid a collision. The kid gave her the bird when she sounded the horn.

    She noted the rego numbers and car descriptions. She rang the local police (mistake - she should have called 000). The coppers there weren't interested as "we didn't see it happen".

    She then wrote to force command and some other mob and lodged a complaint.

    Two days later the OIC of the local cop shop called her to address her complaint. He said that such offenses were evidence based so they would need solid evidence before proceeding with charges. Read: we need to have seen the offences occuring.

    She said that she had the details of the vehicles and would appear in court, if necessary. Nope, cops weren't interested. Well, how about having a word to these idiots, let 'em know that they're on notice, or something. Nope, not interested.

    So, the Op really has nothing to worry about. Unless he's had a visit from the police and there were allegations more serious than what he's letting on about then I'd say that it's run its course. And naturally, if push comes to shove, make counter allegations. Then it becomes a matter of his word against that of the car driver. And as far as property damage goes, it then becomes a matter for each party's insurers to deal with.
     
     Top
  8. I disagree. There have been many instances of the police issuing a T.I.N to the offending driver for 'negligent driving' after a report was made involving a rear end collision. I do not believe for a minute that the police have to witness the crime.
     
     Top
  9. Disagree all you like. It happens. And that is my beef - that police don't chase up reports such as this.

    With a rear ender, though, if police attend, then the evidence is fairly clear when you see two vehicles with damage to front and rear, respectively.
     
     Top
  10. Unless the police are present they won't issue a TIN.
     
     Top
  11. ^^^ That is incorrect Smee

    They can and will issue TIN's when not present.

    It is whether they want to, is the only option.
     
     Top
  12. Q: Can the police charge you.
    A: Yep.

    Q Will they charge you?
    A: Whole different question. Probably not unless they are saticfied they have solid evidence which would lead to a conviction, i.e. reliable witnesses. Even with reliable witnesses they generally seem unwilling to act. Lots of paperwork and effort and the prospect of a win is probably uncertain. Usually will take a lot of effort to get them to act - someone making noise which brings the chain of command down on them, how serious an offecnce etc. But occasionally they either get sympathetic towards the "victim" or outraged by the actions of the person in the wrong and decide to take things further.

    However if the matter comes down to two parties disputing the fact of what happened it's unblikely they would take it further.
     
     Top
  13. Once had a very minor accident where I hit the back of a car at an intersection. Very small mark on their can and next to none on mine. We exchanged details and I notified my insurance and didn't expect to hear any more about it.

    Got a call later that day from the police and they requested I come in so they can look at my car. They said there was substantial damage to their can and they were surprised there was no damage to mine.
    I explained that there was very little to no damage to theirs when i had left them.

    At the end of the day they charged me with following too closely and I got a fine....
     
     Top
  14. I would think a witness or multiple witnesses would be required to verify either parties account of what happened for you to be charged. Although reading others experiences, its entirely upto the police discretion if they do or not.

    GuJohnno I think if the person tries to claim medical expenses through tac for saw neck or whatever they need to issue a charge/fine for tac to payout, maybe why you got a fine.
     
     Top
  15. A number things would need to fall into place. It would have to be a ticket directly related to the accident. It doesn't have to be, but the cops would be reluctant otherwise.

    Secondly they would have to be very confident about it. This would mean they would have to talk to both parties and form a case from what they have been told. alternatively they would need one or more independent witnesses.

    In this case the OP is asking about filtering. he doesn't indicate whether that was the cause of the accident or not. Either way it introduces a whole level of vaguery to the incident.

    So I say unless the cops talk to the OP he is very unlikely to get a ticket.

    If he does it should be pretty easy to get it thrown in court.
     
     Top
  16. Yes, is the simple answer.

    As ibast said, they should talk to you first, unless the other driver had reliable independant witnesses - ie they were confident of the veracity of the allegation. Still not a dire problem to fight in court if necessary.

    The rest depends of what you say should they talk to you. I gather from your OP that the other car was moving at the time, wasn't it. Hitting a stationary car is prima-facie careless driving. If your stories conflict and they don't have the witnesses then nothing further will happen.

    Anyway, its still early in the month, they won't be busting a gut for booking numbers yet :wink: .
     
     Top
  17. Short answer yes they can. But may may not.

    Long answer, it depends on the type of offence and the level of or type of evidence necessary to prosecute.

    EG: The police won't charge a person with speeding, and certain traffic offences, because an expert witness (police) has to see it occur, so that if it goes to court they can testify.
    These are offences that are matters of observation and opinion.

    With other offences that don't require "expert" opinion, the facts are black and white, the courts will take anyones evidence.

    I'd say "lane splitting" would be borderline in favour of requiring an "expert", but just.
     
     Top
  18. Particularly if the rider denies doing it. The "informant" has then the job of proving the offence in the witness box.

    Probably why the cops fobbed off my wife and why they wouldn't even have a "chat" to these d-ckwads about their shocking road behavior.
     
     Top
  19. Exactly. A copper would be believed, Joe public? No way.
     
     Top