landsurfer wrote:So a third party interpretation of the video would be good ... maybe the CTC / CUK Legal department could give their considered judgement.
If they agree with you a case to proceed would be expected, if they agree with the Police then accept that opinion and consider your riding style.
Positive result both ways ..
My main question about the police view is "what constitutes an overtake"?
We can argue about the initial space she left because that's difficult to work out from the camera footage but what we can work out is whether she actually passed and the maths agrees with me.
The Fly12 camera has a 135 degree FOV, her car is 4m long.
Her so called overtake (just before I'm supposedly undertaking again) isn't visible on the camera, in order for that to be true some basic trig says she needs to have left a minimum of 10m when overtaking - now I'm pretty certain she didn't because that would put her in the opposite lane and conflicting with on coming traffic plus.
That 10m assumes her back end is exactly level with the camera which excluded my front wheel and any extra space - add 2m as a bare minimum there and she'd need to be 15m over which would have put her in the gardens of the adjacent properties.
A quick experiment I did suggests I was around 2 meters (worst case 3) behind the Audi so she never had the space to begin the overtake anyway.
Which all brings me back to my initial point - what constitutes an overtake?
To me it's a complete manoeuvre, pull out, pass, pull in. Most definitely it isn't pull out and pull alongside and then assume the vehicle to your side is going to make itself scarce.
Unless I've misinterpreted the plod's email they've simply assumed she pulled past me into the available space and then I sped up.
My video simply shows my keeping pace with the Audi so how is that speeding up?
All in all their interpretation is poor at the least and given the circumstances quite suspect.
Apart from her being an ex-plod they'd also have to admit they were wrong - which they should have done anyway since even if their interpretation was correct how do they explain not taking a statement nor viewing my footage and basing their decision not to do anything entirely on the drivers view of what occurred?
Nah, the whole thing stinks. I expected better in particular I expected some evidence of impartiality and an iota of common sense not a fairy tale that can't possibly match the evidence.
Of course if an overtake is defined as simply getting your bonnet in front of the other vehicle then all bets are off.