Emergency Services vs Flooded Rufford Ford. The Police Become A FAIL Victim And More!! 

that was so funny

Hypocrisy at it's best, they're not called pigs for no reason.

Yeah, but that implies INTELLIGENCE!!

​@@ivornotion38071 officer had an error not all

Nice to know where my tax money goes.

do yew have a LOICENSE for that splash?

The ambulance service?

yep you getting it. Rules for thee but not for me is what the police stand by.

This is how police works in the UK. Corruption, breaking laws, lies, incrimination of people who did nothing wrong but the worst is abusing their powers.

@@sledziuchxD And making false statements to get a prosecution.

i can't believe the morons that drive too fast and damage their vehicles just for the sake of making a splash. Its fine those that have vehicles that are designed or capable of doing so such as the 4x4's with snorkels or high sitting vehicles like HGV's (depending where the air intake is) and tractors.

​@James_Rivett I might argue that some people drive fast not to make splashes but because they think it's the best option. I witnessed a friend doing it and I said the faster you drive through water the more damage you are likely causing. I'm still not sure it registered in her brain 😂

Apparently the locals weren't too happy. Adam C did a video about it after it was closed down - search Adam C Rufford

The most fascinating thing for me is trying to understand why not build a bridge there

@@renatomota9830 simple question, gets a simple one word answer. MONEY! (or if you want a longer answers, a lack of money). When the ford was built, by running the mill stream over it, the only vehicles it was likely to encounter were horse drawn.

1: Its in a different location, meaning different police patrol the area 2: Speed limits might be different 3: The van was by a residential area and i guess he thought pieces of debris might injure somebody, while the other place was in the country with not much around 4: That cop might not like fun, I do know most cops probably wouldn’t care 5: They hungry for power so they sit there waiting cause they know people like zooming through the water

@@green29373 It's the same location hence my comment.

@@Duncan94ok they might be nearby, but what about my other points?

@@Duncan94 Pretty sure it's the speed limit that they are using as an excuse to pull people over: the van at 2:55 was going 30, but made a big splash because of the deep water. The van at 3:00 looked like it was doing ~35-40.

@@kiranclarke869 It'll be 'words of advice' no doubt, any excuse to to pull someone over.

😂

@@DlaCzegoJaa thats not funny

Its funny because its true

These are criminals

@@BladedFish they contravened an act not a law

That was some brave police! I would not try to stop those criminals! They could have children in the rear seat or some mad chihuahua pupets!

LMFAO 😂

30 grand 🤣 it's a 5 year old astra, you can pick them up direct from police auction for less than 10 grand

😂😂

​@@wilfbm9067Yeah, after it's been beaten to hell and back by the cops

has been for years

add why they won't build a bridge on it!😂

😂😂😂😂😂😂

.....and if a car went out of control at speed - tyres are aquaplaning under the water, no grip - and mowed down your kid, you'd say 'where were the police?'

​@@johnlennox-pe2nqplease show any evidence of that ever having happened in the history of ever. Nope? Cos it's never happened. The police are crime-phobic.

@@johnlennox-pe2nq If a car goes out of control here, it's going down the river or into the side of the bridge. Literally everyone there is going there to get splashed or watch cars get fucked by the water - they know the risks. Everyone there wants them to speed through it. Why do the police need to ruin the fun?

@@RawMilkEnthusiast theres a first time for everything... inc kids/passengers in the speeding vehicles in danger; under the water there's concrete lintels, as the tractor found

your kid should not be standing on the bridge watching this in the first place@@johnlennox-pe2nq !

There’s nothing entertaining in this, how sad does your life have to be that you sit and watch vehicles drive through a legit puddle all day long.

@@abdulwadood.8 well i like the videos and thats all that matters to me.

@@abdulwadood.8 So you must have watched it, then bothered to put a negative comment, how sad are you?

Its like the policeman from Lowestoft, clipped a car on Barnaby Bends when returning to the police station at the end of his shift, and failed to stop. He got away with it because he suffered memory black outs meaning he couldn't remember the incident, that was court on several cameras with undeniable proof the accident took place. He didn't even get any disciplinary action against him. After a suspension on full pay he was allowed to return to duty I believe. if the police do something that needs investigating, who investigates the complaint? The police, and how many times do they say they did wrong? very few, just the same of the complaint system at GP practices.

So you'd like the ambulance crew on their way to an emergency to be punished?

@@wilfbm9067 they shouldn't be driving through a ford at all. The ambulances are simply not made for it ... If I cam across a ford while responding to an incident I'd turn around ...

There is no excuse going through that Ford so fast because there is a significant risk of vehicle failure and the ambulance not getting to the emergency.

@@wilfbm9067 no just drive properly in the vehicle that is paid for by the taxpayer. If they can't slow down to cross the ford safely they shouldn't be driving.

You'd change your tune if you were in the ambulance or if it was your house on fire...

yet the house up the road was burgled and the police wouldn't be interested lol.

High end, a Skoda?

@@joecarrolljnr oh 😂

When I was a boy in the 1980s & 1990's@@joecarrolljnr the local panda cars were bog standard Austin Metro's or a Ford Escort. Most were just painted white with POLICE in orange on the doors with a single blue light on the roof (or if you was lucky 2 blue flashing lights and a sign saying police), but of course back then, most places still had a local cop shop. I bet those old coppers would think they had died and gone to the flying squad in the sky if you gave them a Police Skoda from today..... but then look at the skodas from back then haha 🙂

and if they got hit they would blame the other person.

Also parking on the pavement, parking right next to a junction.. and.. they drove through a ford while chasing down cars for driving through a ford. 🤷🏻‍♂️

This is apparently much more efficient.

that isnt a real police car

how? @iLikeCars485

​@iLikeCars485i think its just an ex police car from the 80's or something

The police might have an emergency and need to go fast if you look back there was one blue lighting with sirens ti an emergency

@JordanPickford-yb3pf they didn't have blue lights activated at any time? When it's about fining drivers for splashing, you can't do the very same just because your in a police car

Do as I say, NOT as I do. Thats what we was told when we was kids lol

They are going to fast through the water,i guess.

Under section three of the Road Traffic Act 1988, it is illegal to splash someone as it amounts to driving “without reasonable consideration for other persons.” Those found guilty of deliberately driving through puddles and splashing pedestrians will likely be hit with a £100 fixed penalty notice and three penalty points if caught by police. However, should motorists be deemed to be driving in a manner that “amounts to a clear act of incompetence, selfishness, impatience, and aggressiveness” then the maximum punishment of a £5,000 fine could be levelled. If drivers fail to pay the £100 fixed penalty or refuse the penalty notice they could also face the maximum £5,000 fine if the case is taken to court.

@zo7782: Driving through water is an offence in this case as people got wet which is a assault and battery. It goes back to the old case law of Pursell v Horn [1838] and driving like that is considered to be Caseless driving. I don't necessarily agree with it but those are the facts.

@@andrewmaiden3738it’s fine if the cops do it though!

@@andrewmaiden3738 But as with anything, you would think police discretion should be used. Everyone on that bridge clearly wants to get splashed - you can hear the kids on the side of the bridge loving it. If you don't want to get splashed, you'd be better off finding something to do with your day that doesn't involve standing on a bridge over a flooded ford.

Probably Due care and attention, that’s normally the go to when they haven’t got anything more concrete to charge the driver with.

The police cars there are often pretty visible, just the drivers are morons.

Ranger had no front plate, that's why they stopped him.

@@hazmataz5427 ah fair enough

Take a look at a map of countries that drive on the left.

You need to get out more.

Oh my gosh, I was kidding people! :P

@@EpicATrain welcome to youtube comments lol.

@@TheAussieRepairGuy That's a weird thing to say unless you agree with the statement, because two thirds of the world drive on the right clearly shown by any map. Of course though, driving on the left is right.

I dont think that's necessary with modern vehicles.

​@@SleepExportsIt still is

Disc brakes self-dry. Only drum brakes need that old technique.

Its been closed off for 4-5 months now. Think this video is a year or more old?

You can easily remove the concrete barriers if you have a vehicle that is strong enough to remove said concrete... The concrete would be better off on the East Coast, protecting villages and towns from coastal erosion.

@@TheSpotify95 I would bet a penny to a pound, that plod have got cameras set up there, so probably not a good idea to mess with the barriers? Seems a very strange thing to block the ford though, given the fact that no access for emergency vehicles, and could result in death or serious injury, if emergency services take 20 minutes longer to get to an incident.

@@humourless682 Someone would have to take a visit and see if there are actual cameras guarding the concrete barriers in place. I reckon the only cameras there are the CCTV for the pub, who won't give two s about the road, and will focus on ensuring the pub is secure. Given that Hemsby Beach is being constantly eroded, the concrete would be better used there to protect the coastline.

@@TheSpotify95 Given how easy and cheap it is to put up temporary cameras, and as the ford is such a high profile location, I would be astonished if its not got several cameras sited there?

For dangerous driving

​@@twizzlestickx7I didn't see any but the police Driving Dangerously Obstruction to Entrance of both Carparks & Twice the speed to catch up to apparent criminal I can even see a sign that states *It's 30 for a reason*

Under section three of the Road Traffic Act 1988, it is illegal to splash someone as it amounts to driving “without reasonable consideration for other persons.” Those found guilty of deliberately driving through puddles and splashing pedestrians will likely be hit with a £100 fixed penalty notice and three penalty points if caught by police. However, should motorists be deemed to be driving in a manner that “amounts to a clear act of incompetence, selfishness, impatience, and aggressiveness” then the maximum punishment of a £5,000 fine could be levelled. If drivers fail to pay the £100 fixed penalty or refuse the penalty notice they could also face the maximum £5,000 fine if the case is taken to court.

@@andrewmaiden3738 This is a Ford! Not a Puddle!! So CANNOT be Fined for Splashing. Big difference in Claims due to Location. Everything at a Ford is at Personal Risk and Expense of those involved. Only thing to be gained here is a Fraud case to the Claimant. 👍

and loitering is also an offence@@andrewmaiden3738 The police would have to prove it was A possible to drive without making a splash, B that it was done with intent, and C that the pedestrians were walking and no bystanders. Warrants no more than a warning, and is a complete and utter waste of resources HOWEVER I do think most of those who drive through this ford do so like complete moronic idiots with little care for their vehicles or others property. The section you refer to (section 3 of the RTA 1988) states Careless, and inconsiderate, driving. If a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place, he is guilty of an offence. The example given is "Driving through puddles causing water to splash on pedestrians". You would have a hard time finding a judge who would prosecute for splashed coming from a FORD @andrewmaiden3738 normally as many were, but those who drove through like idiots to make a big splash justify a warning.

It is, until next year after the temporary closure time has ran out which is 18 months since it closed on December 2nd. The closure should end mid June next year

@@TomSunderland So this is old footage?

Then the pedestrians can be fined for obstructing a public highway.

But the police wont do it as we have seen so many times with idiot protesters glue themselves to the road@@Perseus7567 HOWEVER, its is a criminal offence to obstruct a police officer in the line of his.her duty.

Unfortunately not yet