Reply With QuoteOr maybe an expensive lessons to actually read the paperwork instead of making assumptions... If only people took more responsibilites for their own actions.Originally Posted by adrianw
I know someone who got caught speeding for the first time recently 36 in a 30, local village policeman with a speed gun behind bush, she got the nip, accepted the offer and sent the 100, six months later she got the 100 back in the post with a letter saying she hadnt posted her license and now they were taking her to court, she is young and just expected them to do the points digitally and only read up to the 100 fine,
All she could do was plead guilty, 900 now that was a scam!
Or maybe an expensive lessons to actually read the paperwork instead of making assumptions... If only people took more responsibilites for their own actions.
She paid it, surely that is her only responsibility
Or, why did they keep her money for six months? or why dont they say send the license in the same place as they say send the money? like most government instructions in correspondence it isnt clear, its as bad as online road tax only in full months, it should now be to the day.
Didnt think these days you posted your actual licence. My wife had to just write the details on the form when sending the cheque off.
So she was correct in them being digital, but if she didnt complete the form in the letter then thats pretty hard to manage / get confused over as there are only 3-4 pieces of paper in the letter from memory!
How long ago was this, do people really still use cheques?
March this year, and yes many people still do - she works as a bank manager and they still deal with loads on a daily basis.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Id say scam. Its easier to target motorists than the gangs of balaclava wearing individuals, riding illegal scooters at crazy speeds, going through red lights and using pavements at will. 36 in 30 never deserves a 900 fine.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Please explain how the Police/Authorities are going to catch these individuals on stolen scooters with (often) no number plate?
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
One of these should easily do the trick.
It wasn't a 900 fine.
It was, and worse I found out she got five points.
There must have been another offence as well https://www.carwow.co.uk/guides/runn...-speeding#gref
According to the article it should have been 3 points and she must have annoyed the magistrates or been a high earner...or both, as she's close to the maximum penalty
Sent from my moto g(7) plus using Tapatalk
Well okay, eventually it was but only because she didn't (properl) pay a 100 fine and it went to court.
No, they treated it that she didnt accept the conditional offer, so went to court, she pleaded guilty by post,
About 15 years ago I opted to go to court for speeding in Chelmsford, he said he had me on a speed gun at a8 in a 40 but refused to show it to me, its Essex basically the magistrate said the police say you did it, you did it, 4 points and 600
Theirs no such thing as a 100 fine, its a conditional offer, if you accept it you dont get the big fine or lots of points
Not according to this: - https://www.gov.uk/speeding-penalties
Speeding penalties
The minimum penalty for speeding is a 100 fine and 3 penalty points added to your licence.
Indeed. Imagine a Venn Diagram, with three circles defining those portions of the population with a basic grasp of physics, those with a decent grasp of English and those with the ability to question what they are told. You'll find these pesky deniers at the intersection of all three circles.
The sudden transfer of kinetic energy to a body caused by a vehicle in a collision can kill. Inapropriate use of speed can make a collision more likely and in the case of a collision, there will be more energy to cause harm. But speed itself does not kill.
It's really not difficult, but there are people who struggle with the concept. Similarly there are people who struggle that exceeding a posted speed limit does not automatically equate to inappropraite use of speed and who believe they'll never be going too fast if they're travelling at the posted limit.
This is true, however the ability for most to judge an appropriate speed in any given situation is so poor that the least worse option for society is to set was is at best a maximum for any given road.
There are loads of country roads with a 60 limit which would be crazy to drive at 60 on ... similarly there are plenty of 20 sections where 30 maybe safe at times ... but given how poor many peoples judgements are the limits are the best we have ...
Those are the same people that think that when they cut in front of a wagon then slam on the brakes to exit at the junction they are passing think that A, the wagon at 44 tons can stop as quick as the car and B, The car will come out better in the accident than the wagon.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Come and spend a month on the roads in Wales with our new draconian speed limits, and then come back to me with this quote.
That's exactly my point.
It's a damn sight more dangerous doing 29 in a narrow 30 limit, with parked cars, approaching a school at kicking out time than it is to do 90 in a modern car on a deserted dry straight motorway.
There have to be limits because we the population can not be relied upon to behave sensibly without them.
Yet our speed limits are fairly arbritrary, the limit outside that fictional school should probably be lower, just as that fictional motorway limit could be higher.
The "Speed Kills" slogan is a poor one. It's demonstrably, factually incorrect. What I suspect was actually meant is "Exceeding the speed limit kills", which is slightly better, but still a bit of a fib. A truely accurate statement would be "Inappropriate speed increases the chances and severity of an accident.", or "Exceeding the speed limit is illegal", but I guess neither of those are very catchy slogans, so instead they opted for something the intellectually challenged could learn and repeat.
We have 20 limits where I live in Southampton, introduced last month. On a lot of roads it's appropriate (I wasn't going that fast anyway), but on some of the major routes it's stupidly low.
Last edited by mikeveal; 12th October 2023 at 12:45.
I can only imagine premiums will go up again next years off the back of the car park fire at Luton Airport!
Ross
Excess speed is way down the list of causes of accidents, its a shame they dont put as much effort into the causes of accidents, but theirs no easy money in that
Am with you here, just need proper policing to achieve but the ROI is lower and therefore not as easy vs a gantry camera or a van.
People that straight line a roundabout despite an inner lane will hopefully have a special place in Hell alongside the group that believe that because they have indicated, they can pull into your lane instantly.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Spot on and supported by the official statistics. Everyone (well, apart from me) has had at least one speeding fine. Compare that to the number of people you know who have been convicted of careless driving, without due care, and similar, which, from memory, are more common causes of accidents than exceeding the speed limit. The obsession with speeding is based on the fact that it’s easy to measure and ‘prosecute’.
And I say that as someone who was never one for speeding but now try to observe speed limits strictly. Grossly excessive speed is ridiculous but that’s not what most tickets are given for.
EDIT: And ANPR has a 3% error margin. That’s “up to 2.4 million inaccurate reads per day”!
https://www.gov.uk/government/public...ssible-version
Last edited by David_D; 12th October 2023 at 21:08.
Waiting for the bike shed perv to appear now.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Seems fair enough, if funded by fines and costs little, why not?
Weirdly, as someone who enjoys an open road I'd agree with that.
The overwhelming majority of the population habitually exceed the limits, largely without consequence (getting caught or causing accidents). If you get caught, 99.9% of the time it's because you weren't paying enough attention. Any scheme that seeks to make drivers pay more attention is a good thing.
Let's face it getting caught speeding and attending a speed awareness course & paying a fine is an annoyance at most. It's a fairly harmless slap on the wrist, handed out in return for committing a fairly harmless offence. Motorists know it and so do the authorities. Yet it does create a useful soft deterrent to stop people straying towards the more dangerous SP50 worthy offences (& worse).
Whilst people are in control of cars you'll never stop them exceeding the limits. I think the authorities accept that and I don't think they're actually trying to stamp speeding out. Current policy seem to be geared more towards moderately profitable ambilivlent coercion than frothy mouthed BRAKE supporting madness.
I picked up 6 points last year for speeding (guilty as charged_ my premium went up over 60% - lesson learned so I cant grumble but it appears across the board premiums have rocketed
https://www.gov.uk/government/statis...sualties-ras07
I had a look at the most recent statistics. If I read those correctly, exceeding the speed limit was a contributory factor (of possibly a number of factors) in 303 of 1,538 deaths (19.7%). That's the 8th highest contributory factor behind 7 other categories - all of which were some form of carelessness/recklessness/inattention/poor judgement.
I don't mind speed enforcement particularly as I try to stick to limits. However, the statistics suggest a zero tolerance approach to speeding combined with (effectively) a zero enforcement of other offences won't have a very dramatic effect on total deaths (and injuries, serious and less so), as valuable as each life saved is. I rarely have even a short journey without seeing someone driving like an idiot - whether above or below the speed limit.
If speeding fines are ploughed back into more speed cameras, why aren't fines for careless driving, etc., not ring fenced to fund more police traffic cars?
Last edited by David_D; 13th October 2023 at 17:53.
Car insurance companies are the worst charlatans and scam artists out there. In 30 years of my driving experience, any time something goes wrong, they absolutely shaft you. Anyone with good experience of a car insurer simply hasn't interacted with them enough.
Whether it's low balling you on a claim, screwing you on premium for a minor issue or minor complication.
Their industry is based on enticing you in the front and flipping you off as soon as you have an issue.
Posting Permissions