greengrass said:
SP80 does not exist. And I have a photo copy of the pictures without an explanation on how to work out how far I had travelled in the 5secs between the photos. A motor cyclist proved he was travelling at 18mph when the camera recorded 42mph... in his photos it showed a coach passing in the opposite direction and they still claim viberation doesn't interfear with the cameras even though it's proved that viberation 'bounce' does cause false readings as with the hand held jobbies.
I suggest you get one thing straight in your mind - you were breaking the law. Everyone that happens from that point onwards results from that, so you deserve what you get.
greengrass said:
Softus your wrong if it's their licence then why did they not DEMAND by feear of prosecution when I refused to return it.
How should I know? Perhaps you should ask the people who didn't issue the demand. Your belief that absence of a demand equates to you being the owner of the license is really quite bizarre.
greengrass said:
I have now but did not straight away until I made some enquiries.
Bravo - I'm sure that 'they', whoever they are, are highly impressed by your refusal, and that they now hold you in very high esteem.
greengrass said:
As for the 'Clerical error' comment. Say you were in custody for a minor offence and a tiny clerical error on your charge sheet placed you in the position of a custodial sentence wouldn't that tiny clerical error bother you then?
If I've understood you correctly, you're asking me if I would be bothered in a hypothetical scenario that would bother anyone. I've seen some fatuous questions on this forum, but that takes the biscuit.
Returning to reality, the clerical error in your case did NOT occur on the charge sheet, but on the record of the conviction, that you deserved, for a charge to which you pleaded guilty (I surmise). You've had car insurance for 40 years, but you claim that you don't know that you're supposed to notify the underwriter if you've been notified of an intended prosecution.
For some reason you're all het about this. Most likely you're just upset that your clean license is now blemished, and are closing your mind to everything that goes on around it. Well, it's time to wake up - IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT.
greengrass said:
On receipt of my returned licence I checked and accepted the code as I was unaware what a speeding code is.
I find it hard to believe that the license was not accompanied by an explanatory document. But if it didn't, then why didn't you seek the knowledge that you lacked?
greengrass said:
I searched the net for insurances and each one selected checked the 'Convictions' list and did not find SP80 so assumed it was an offence they weren't interested in.
A crasser assumption I cannot currently imagine. You were speeding - why would your insurers not be interested in that?
greengrass said:
Only telephoning the 5th one, Nationwide, did I find the code should have been SP30. and had I taken the cover on the net [you don't speak to anyone] I would have had a risky insurance cover albeit unwittingly. GET IT I WAS UNAWARE THAT THE CODE SHOULD HAVE READ SP30.
Oh I certainly get it - you're not only a fool, but an ignorant fool.