speeding fine

[kirkgas]

I think it must have been a mobile. Some sad copper getting paid overtime to cop speeders. If you go past a gatso and you see the flash in your mirror then at least you know you've been done and adjust your driving in future. No doubt sad plod will be back behind his desk eating chips on Monday.

given that it took dizzy all week to realise she was speeding i'm not so sure she would have realised, and remember the gatso has to flash twice to get you, a lot of them are set up to flash but have no film in them, it gives you a fright for a few days
stop being a knob head about this and tell the girlfriends daughter to grow up or give up the car.

she broke the law once, of which there is proof cause she has a ticket, and another 4 times by her own addmision when she realised she had done it all week.
so what is your beef with the copper who confirmed she broke the law, he/she was sent out set up the camera and recorded everyone who speeded therough the village what is wrong with that? 37 in a 30 is a lot worse than 77 in a 70, have you seen the ad where the kid gets knocked down at 30 in a 30 and dies and if hit at 20 will prob survive, so the driver is an inconsiderate, incompetant who should be banned from driving for having the arrogance to drive dangerously without realising, as it shows a distinct lack of observation and awareness therefore she is dangerous and you should shut up bleating about her maybe getting 5 tickets in a row, FFS she should be banned for driving like that.
and as i posted before i have been done for speeding so i am not just bleating on about her doing it, the difference with me was i took my fine and points as i was guilty and deserved them. do you know anyone who has been mowed down by a speeding driver who was too arrogant to place everyone elses safety above their need to get somewhere 5-6 minutes faster?

 

[masona]

My road is 20mph and there're still idiots doing 35-40mph including going over the speed humps, the only way is speed cameras.

I disagree, but please hear me out...

Agreed we need more police traffic force in action which I rather have than speed cameras and because it's not happening we got no choice but to use speed cameras instead.

Those drivers don’t need to be done for speeding; they need to be done for the much worse offence of Dangerous Driving or Driving without due care and Attention. They are both much worse offences than speeding and accurately describe what they are doing. The penalty is far worse too, so they will get stung far more in their pockets which you should be pleased about, I hope?

I agreed, the problem today is the cut back in police dept so it's easier and cheaper to use speed cameras, I blamed the government policies, I remember in my days there were police cars everywhere

I assume you would not be pleased if you saw someone doing the 20 mph speed limit past a parked car where children are playing on a frosty winter’s day? It would be dangerous, to state the obvious, and at that point a walking pace would be safer until the danger has passed IMO; not something as quick as 20 mph.

It is this fixation on speed instead of what is actually safe which has duped a generation into believing that ‘so long as I am not speeding I am driving safely’ The fallacy of this indoctrination thanks to the ‘Speed Kills’ campaign has taught drivers nothing about a safe speed for the conditions sadly.

This is where a lot of motorists don't understand regarding speed signs, the maximum speed limits is not a target speed and not a minimum target therefore you can drive up to maximum speed limit providing it's safe to do so.

I would like to keep the speed cameras but instead of fines, just add a point system and when reaches the maximum points then they must do a driving day course say within 28 days, failing that then 1 month ban, the motorists will still moan

 

[joe-90]

Look you dizzy dullard. She didn't realise she was speeding and simply slowed down too slowly. There have been no follow up tickets so it's just an isolated incident. 37 in a 30 zone on one occasion? Didn't you say you'd been booked EIGHT times??? FFS - I think we can all see who the real ****** is eh? (Masona got in the way)

 

[kirkgas]

Hi masona

You’re right about the second time you get done but it only increases by something in the order of £20.
but remember they want to know about the last 5 yrs, so in effect the 1st £20 gets put on your premium, then next year your premium goes up by even say 2-3% it still puts the base price up before they add the %, so it must cost you £20 x 5 plus the extra price increase % each year

 

[kirkgas]

Look you dizzy dullard. She didn't realise she was speeding and simply slowed down too slowly. There have been no follow up tickets so it's just an isolated incident. 37 in a 30 zone on one occasion? Didn't you say you'd been booked EIGHT times??? FFS - I think we can all see who the real ****** is eh? (Masona got in the way)

no you listen up f**k face the dizzy bint either admitted she was speeding all week or didnt know, hence your post about what was going to happen to her, that shows a distinct lack of brains/common sense awareness.

yes i have been done 7-8 times cant remember, over a period of 32 years, driving motor bikes, cars and vans. no excuse for it and i'm not trying to justify it, but what is worse, on a motorbike, 79 on the motorway, 3am virtually no other traffic, 60? in a 60 etc or a dozy bint not knowing how often she speeds into a village, as someone else has posted speeding itself is less dangerous than reckless or dangerous driving, where the actual situation can make some numbers less relevant. i know someone who was done at 58 in a 50 through a restriction on the motorway who was ordered to appear in court, he was fined £100 with 6 points due to the danger he caused to the workies (and so he should) but at least he knew he had done it

 

[masona]

Hi masona

You’re right about the second time you get done but it only increases by something in the order of £20.
but remember they want to know about the last 5 yrs, so in effect the 1st £20 gets put on your premium, then next year your premium goes up by even say 2-3% it still puts the base price up before they add the %, so it must cost you £20 x 5 plus the extra price increase % each year

This is why most motorists won't tell them and it's important to tell them as I didn't know this until a company lorry went into the back of my car, to cut a long story short, the company lorry is insured but the driver wasn't because of the penalty points he kept quite about without notifying the company insurance therefore the driver was not insured because the of incorrect premium Got my car repaired but it was a long battle and I don't know what happened to the driver in the end

 

[Big Tone]

I think it must have been a mobile. Some sad copper getting paid overtime to cop speeders. If you go past a gatso and you see the flash in your mirror then at least you know you've been done..

That must be quite a distraction when you should be concentrating on the road ahead?

she broke the law once, of which there is proof cause she has a ticket, and another 4 times by her own addmision when she realised she had done it all week.

Proof of exceeding a ‘dumb’ speed limit isn’t proof of danger. This is the point I am trying to make. Perhaps it was safe for her to do 37mph or perhaps it wasn’t safe to do half that speed.

37 in a 30 is a lot worse than 77 in a 70

Is it? It is precisely this kind of glib rhetoric which is being used to try and make a case for speed being the killer.

What if it’s snowing on the motorway? What if you are being tailgated by someone at 50mph? What if you are ****ed? What if your car has bald tyres in the wet?

Circumstances my friend, it’s all about circumstances not just speed.

have you seen the ad where the kid gets knocked down at 30 in a 30 and dies and if hit at 20 will prob survive

I have and very emotive it is too. Of course there does have to be a child actually there in the first place. If you have clear visibility and no child there, then no child is going to get knocked over unless one springs out from under a manhole cover.

so the driver is an inconsiderate, incompetant who should be banned from driving for having the arrogance to drive dangerously without realising, as it shows a distinct lack of observation and awareness therefore she is dangerous and you should shut up bleating about her maybe getting 5 tickets in a row, FFS she should be banned for driving like that.

Ah, now we’re getting somewhere… He would be “inconsiderate”, “incompetent” and most definitely should “be banned from driving for having the arrogance to drive dangerously “.

as i posted before i have been done for speeding so i am not just bleating on about her doing it, the difference with me was i took my fine and points as i was guilty and deserved them

So getting done for speeding tells us that you are a dangerous driver who most likely has a history of accidents? I don’t know you but I somehow doubt it.

I have no points, no accidents and have held a clean licence for over 30 years yet I am a habitual speeder. How can it be that I have not killed or seriously injured someone?

Hint: The clues are all here in my past few posts…

 

[kirkgas]

Hi masona

You’re right about the second time you get done but it only increases by something in the order of £20.
but remember they want to know about the last 5 yrs, so in effect the 1st £20 gets put on your premium, then next year your premium goes up by even say 2-3% it still puts the base price up before they add the %, so it must cost you £20 x 5 plus the extra price increase % each year

This is why most motorists won't tell them and it's important to tell them

why do you think insurance companies will take info over the phone or the net without asking for proof? simples, in effect they hope you lie to get a cheaper quote as it is free money to them (think about it, insurance is a gamble for us and them, you pay your cash, you dont crash you lose money, but if you do crash then you get sorted, its the reverse for insurance companies) but go online and say you have 3 points when you actually have 9 is pointless (no pun intended) because you pay them discounted cash then have a claim, they will soon check into your licence and take great delight in telling you your claim is void as you lied/made a mistake with info, so you lose your cash, lose your claim and get done for having no insurance. when i get insurance i am paranoid about getting info right, DOB's of drivers, how long driving, exact details of any current offences etc etc, cause they dont care if its wrong its a win win situation for them , and i cant believe anyone would be so stupid as to lie to them,

 

[Big Tone]

i know someone who was done at 58 in a 50 through a restriction on the motorway who was ordered to appear in court, he was fined £100 with 6 points due to the danger he caused to the workies (and so he should) but at least he knew he had done it

I quite agree, if there were actually workies there.

I saw a similar situation over by Telford where a 50 limit was down to 20 and a slogan "Kill your speed not our workers".

But there wasn't a single worker in sight! Perfect visibility on a DC road. So I used a speed to suit the conditions...

 

[Big Tone]

why do you think insurance companies will take info over the phone or the net without asking for proof? simples, in effect they hope you lie to get a cheaper quote as it is free money to them

No, it doesn’t work that way or at least I didn’t use it that way by telling fibs.

The quote you get is guaranteed and valid for a month, I think it was a month.

If you submit honest details you get a quote based on those details, so my figures do stack up. I agree the £20 is compounded year after year but only for three years, after which it is it is ‘spent’.

So in effect you end up paying the same as the speeding fine on your insurance. Not a huge amount and represents how low down on their list of dangerous driving…

 

[masona]

why do you think insurance companies will take info over the phone or the net without asking for proof? simples, in effect they hope you lie to get a cheaper quote as it is free money to them,

I believe when phoning or online quoting, you will still have to sign and check the insurance documents with the correct details with points etc & accidents but the biggest problem is when they don't tell the insurance company regarding points after you signed it and that's down to the motorists to tell them which is a small price to pay for in the long run

Sometime ago my wife got 3 points and phoned the insurance company but annoying they update their database with the details and my wife have no record of it of knowing until the next premium

 

[joinerjohn]

Agreed we need more police traffic force in action which I rather have than speed cameras and because it's not happening we got no choice but to use speed cameras instead.

Sorry to disagree with you Masona. What we need these days are more police officers concentrating on real crime.
Motorists are a very soft target and when caught doing a few miles over the speed limit, they get a fixed penalty notice or a court summons. These then get in-putted into the national crime figures as crimes which have been solved.
No wonder Nu Labour kept saying crime was down, when all they had to do was massage the figures with nonsensical data.
As I said in a previous post, even Cameron has come to realise that speed cameras are nothing but a cash cow and do nothing for road safety figures.
The traffic police round here will stop motorists, yet ignore people parked on double yellow lines, parked at junctions, parked on the pavement and double parked. These are a bigger road hazard than someone going 35mph in a 30mph zone.
Perhaps with ANPR cameras, the police should really be concentrating on the uninsured, no tax and no MOT brigade. Insurance companies freely admit that these people cost the average motorist around £50 + more in insurance.

 

[snico]

Look you dizzy dullard. She didn't realise she was speeding and simply slowed down too slowly. There have been no follow up tickets so it's just an isolated incident. 37 in a 30 zone on one occasion? Didn't you say you'd been booked EIGHT times??? FFS - I think we can all see who the real ****** is eh? (Masona got in the way)

Any driver who doesn't realise they are speeding should not be driving at all. The amount of times I have heard that excuse is pathetic. If you are a competent driver, then you will know what the speed limit is on a any given road, and how can she not realise she was speeding after getting flashed the first time? Does she have a short memory?

People seem to forget that the speed limit is not the speed you MUST adhere to, drivers must take into acount the weather, road conditions, traffic etc.

 

[Big Tone]

my missus was caught by two cameras on the same road. they want two fines and six points.

we are trying to argue that it was one offence as she was speeding the whole way!

I asked this very question recently. If the two offences were on the same road and on the same trip it is classed as one offence.

If a place that has never had an accident suddenly has one or two and you put a camera up there, or a rubber chicken, you may well find that there will not be an accident there next year or for years after. See RTTM

This is the ‘proof’ they have and use as an argument that a speed camera, or rubber chicken, has cured the problem to make our roads safer. We actually had the safest roads in Europe in the 80s, before the proliferation of speed cameras.

Another arrow in their quiver is Selection Bias, (or Bias On Selection). http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Selection_bias


I want to prove that big dogs frighten children so I hand pick a couple of big dogs which are barking mad from my local Blue Cross centre, arm myself with a clipboard and impartial professional observer, whose department relies on funding from my office, and head for the nearest junior school.

Each kid is subjected to Rommel and Slasher and the kids reaction observed with a simple tick box questionnaire afterwards for the little cherubs.

A) Loved it.
B) Hated it.
C) Nearlly **** myself!

Two thousand children were tested but it’s always good to back it up with a graph or pie chart for impact…

Convinced now?

 

[snico]

I asked this very question recently. If the two offences were on the same road and on the same trip it is classed as one offence.

Not always true. If you get caught twice you will be presented with each individual offence. You can argue that the 2 offences are the same in court and the chances are you may be ok.

You could take the points and fine, or risk arguing the case in court where you could end up on a loser if they dont agree.

If you slow down between the cameras, if you stop at traffic lights, slow down to pick your nose, then the 2 offences will remain and you would have 2 offences to deal with.