I know this is a potentially contentious topic so I will say straight away that the individual concerned knows they're in the wrong and was about to send of the fixed penalties until I told them to hang on.
As the title says, my Father was tootling (bless 'im) down to the West Country with my Mum along the A303. It seems he was tootling at 82mph (in a 70) and was caught at two mobile speed traps with a gap of just over 90 mins.
One was Hampshire constabulary, the other Avon and Somerset. So he's received two NIPs, two requests to send the licence in etc. Is this cut and dried and he should cough up or is there any leeway on this*
*my sort of logic being:
a). although the police snap you speeding at one moment in time, you could be done for speeding an infinite number of times over a given distance IYSWIM. Where is the line drawn?
b). what happens with, say the M25 cameras if you get done by a series of those - was it the case that people could lose their licence in a single journey by totting up or was that apocryphal?
|
Alas your logic is a little off the mark.
a: two parking fines in 90 minutes? the assumption is he probably passed changes in speed limit along the way (on the A303 he certainly did) so he has seperate offences to answer.
b: no idea but i have heard of people racking up multiple offences in minutes on the M25 variable speed sections.
Tootling? at 85? thats not tootling, thats "making progress"
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 29 Apr 10 at 16:23
|
|
I meant speeding fines of course.
|
Thank *God* for that, I mis-read that as "A30", which I've driven along recently at that-speed-plus.
IMO it *should* be one speeding offence, unless of course the speed dropped to "legal" between the "flashes". However, I think there's precedent and your father will be "done" for two. I don't like this, it's a wrongness.
|
If it helps some one else was asking the same question here :-
www.pistonheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=10&t=769272&mid=0&i=0&nmt=Got%20caught%20speeding%20twice%20in%2015%20minutes%20on%20motorway%20-%20Help!&mid=0
I think they would be treated separately hence not a good outcome.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
|
Yes, I think looking at the link and the time/distance between the two traps it looks like he's bang to rights...I'll tell him how naughty he's been.
Zero - I thought the order was:
Mimsing
Making Progress
Tootling
Tonking
|
not usually sympathetic on speed camera tickets but some of the ones on the A303 are pure revenue generators
For once my sympathies to your father
|
Thanks, commerdriver. Personally I haven't been on the A303 since I was done for speeding on it near Yeovil, I think, back in about 1994. On that occasion I went over some sort of rumble strip and a mile down the road I could see this copper in the middle of the road waving his arms at me.
He was very polite, told me that I was probably a very good driver and that the car was no doubt very safe at that speed but they'd had a lot of trouble with farmers pulling out onto the road in their tractors and cars bashing into them. And then he said, almost apologetically "And it is for that reason I am going to give you a ticket" (and you thought my logic was flawed).
Anyway, I digress. The (sort of) point is that I stuck to the speed limits for the rest of that journey and some time after. I probably wouldn't have done if it had been a hidden camera.
And I've made a point of depriving Yeovil of my tourist dollar ever since too!
|
>> And I've made a point of depriving Yeovil of my tourist dollar ever since too!
>>
Them doesn't take to strangers in Yeovil anyhow:-)
|
>> Zero - I thought the order was:
>>
>> Mimsing
>> Making Progress
>> Tootling
>> Tonking
>>
Shorely! It should be:-
INHO of course
Mimsing
Tootling
Making Progress
Tonking
PS I am not Zero
|
|
you are right of course duncan
|
|
Makes sense....I forgot about "haring". Just before tonking? i.e. is tonking the ultimate?
|
|
No good news from me I am afraid. A work colleague (years ago) was caught by the same trap near his house within 15 minutes, travelling in opposite directions. He had forgotten to take his passport to the airport. He was done for both.
|
...He was done for both...
In that case, it might be worth trying to get both offences listed at the same time before the same magistrate.
Plead guilty to both and mitigate on the basis it was almost the same offence.
I don't say you'd get 'two for the price of one', but I think you might be able to negotiate an overall penalty that was lower than if the offences were dealt with separately.
The OP has no such option because the offences were carried out in different counties.
|
>> Plead guilty to both and mitigate on the basis it was almost the same offence.
I still think it is a bit of a stretch to think that it is the same offence. If it had been within a couple of mile of each other, sure, but within 90 minutes, I think that is really pushing it.
If such a mitigation is ever accepted, I want to know about it, so that if I ever do get flashed, I will just continue speeding for another 90 minutes on my "speeding free pass". :)
|
...Plead guilty to both and mitigate on the basis it was almost the same offence...
Steel Spark,
I was referring to Old Navy's post about someone who was done by the same camera twice within 15 minutes.
As I said, the OP's dad does not have this option because his offences, at the speed he was going, were more than 100 miles apart.
|
>> Steel Spark
>>
>> I was referring to Old Navy's post about someone who was done by the same
>> camera twice within 15 minutes.
Sorry, I was too lazy to do more than just briefly scan the thread, so didn't realise you were talking about a different situation.
|
must just be me that keeps to speed limits then
thats why i got a bullseye in my windscreen last week as another driver decided to overtake me at an illegal speed on the hatchings and send up a sharp projectile
tough -----------------------------
hope speeding person learns his lesson
put it this way how do you judge turning from a side road into a main road if someone is doing 82 mph rather than the mandatory 70 mph whether one be a tractor driver with turnips or a tourist unsure of the area?
|
>> hope speeding person learns his lesson
Well, they're both getting on a bit - he probably couldn't see what the speedo was reading. He tends to judge by engine note but of course the hearing's going a bit too ;)
Were you mimsing or tootling when your windscreen got hit?
Last edited by: WobblyDog on Thu 29 Apr 10 at 19:49
|
A customer got of mine got done twice in about 30 seconds. There is two speed cameras on a bendy bit of road near me and they are about 350 yards apart on the same side of the road. So if you're doing 40mph and you don't notice the first one you will probably get done.
I would have thought in her case it should be treated as the same offence though.
They are getting more sneaky, I was doing 30 in a 30 (so probably 29) a long straight road - most people do 35-40 and I went straight past a mobile speed camera. Audi behind tailgating, if I have probably saved Audi twit 3 points on his licence.
|
The cameras collect revenue. If they could catch you 6 times in an hour you'd receive 6 NIPs. No ifs, buts or maybes. It is not an approach that I support, but that's the kind of place that Britain is these days.
Even if you could come up with good excuses, extenuating circumstances, etc. the Poers That Be don't want to know.
|
It can happen to anyone......
Friend of mine got caught twice in half an hour in Exmouth - he had just moved into the area and was taking some rubbish to the tip - He got caught on the way there and on the way back.
Another friend is a community nurse and was caught speeding twice in a week after she was given a new area to cover, very embarrassing for her as she is also a local magistrate.........
Both had 6 points on the licence and hefty fines .
|
|
Strathclyde police used to set up two speed traps about a mile apart on Great Western Road in Glasgow, the second one was always the most busy, often with a queue! This was in the days when they would stop you.
|
I do the A303 from Stonehenge to the M3 and back a few days a week, there are occasionaly camera vans, most commonaly along the stretch between Thruxton and Solstice services heading west, also there are fixed cameras facing both ways at Solstice and another heading west at Amesbury a couple of miles past Stonehenge. I usually cruise at an indicated 78 ish.
I stopped to talk to the police the other day, they were pointing a radar gun at vehicles coming out of the 40 limit on the A344, i.e vehicles that had come off the A303 west bound by turning right at Stonehenge, had passed Stonehenge (on their left) in the 40 limit and were heading into the 60 limit.
I simply couldn't believe that they thought it more important to catch people who were accelarating a little early, though quite safely, onto a wide open stretch of road rather than catching those speeding past as visitors to Stonehenge crossed the road 1/2 a mile back.
|
>>>I stopped to talk to the police the other day..
Blimey.... how did they take your advice??
|
>> Blimey.... how did they take your advice??
>>
Advice? Yes I guess you could call it that, I said that I thought they were placed in an inappropriate place and they said they understood my point. I got the feeling that these two guys were under orders rather than acting on their own initiative.
Dont worry about telling the police what you think, we pay them after all.
|
|
Just don't tell them exactly what you think though !
|
>>
>> I simply couldn't believe that they thought it more important to catch people who were
>> accelarating a little early though quite safely onto a wide open stretch of road rather
>> than catching those speeding past as visitors to Stonehenge crossed the road 1/2 a mile
>> back.
>>
There's a regular safety camera van in our village about 2 or 3 times a month. It always parks up in the same place and stays for 2 or 3 hours before moving on.
It's one road (30mph) through the village, there are several places where exeeding the limit is very dangerous.
- a "blind hump back bridge with a petrol station and pub carpark on one side and a busy side road joins on the other side
- a place where parents & children cross the road to reach a village hall for playgroups etc
- a primary school
- a village shop that many elderly folk use - most houses are on opposite side of the road to the shop
- a church on a narrow bit of the road, there's often funerals or events taking place
However the "safety" van ignores all these hazards and chooses to park at the edge of the village beyond the built up area, beyond any houses or buildings, at a point where the speed limit changes to 50mph.
There is a narrow dead end lane that branches off the village road right by the 50 sign and then turns and runs parallel with this road and the van is able to park there and take advantage of the few trees and natural cover this affords.
The van is actually in the 50 limit area but it's camera is pointing back into the village and is able to pick off motorists as they pick up speed just before they enter the 50 limit.
There was a representative from either the camera partnership of council (I missed the start) talking on local radio the other day stating that cameras were only placed on stretches of road where exceeding the limit was very likely to cause an accident or where actual accidents had occured, and that the only reason for siting both fixed and mobile cameras was to protect the public.
He was - of course - lying.
Jacks
|
>> put it this way how do you judge turning from a side road into a
>> main road if someone is doing 82 mph rather than the mandatory 70 mph
I've always found it best to judge whether there's space for me to pull out based on the actual speed of approaching traffic, not what speed I believe it should be doing.
|
Part of the reason 70mph is mandatory, Bazza, is precisely to give other drivers emerging from junctions time to judge one's approach speed. I would suggest 82mph on a two-lane dual carriageway with side turnings is far more inappropriate than the same speed on a motorway, where sightlines are longer and nobody should be joining from a standing start.
As for not being able to read the speedometer, do I need to reset my irony filter?
|
Quite right Bazza. It is up to the emerging driver to judge the speed of the approaching vehicle, whatever it is, 82 or 182 come to that.
The trouble with the blanket 70 limit and the pathetic view that it is a real moral law has infantilised drivers to such an extent that a lot of them just pull out into your path however close you are and however fast you are going. Quite often they then add insult to injury by accelerating very slowly for reasons of economy. I imagine they think that if someone hits them it won't be their fault. So that's all right then.
There is no good reason for open road speed limits. They are just interfering rubbish, and they have subverted driving until it is almost no good and no fun any more.
Can't begin to say how much I despise these pathetic rationalisations justifying the limit. Damn nursery rubbish.
|
Quite so AC. It would be an advance indeed if there was to be a five yearly compulsory test to establish if drivers could safely maintain an average 85mph in heavy traffic while smoking, concurrently eating a sandwich ( preferably one with an unstable filling ) , making a phone call, drinking a coffee and simultaneously writing something detailed relating to the phone call left handed on a pad on the passenger seat. The final part of the exam would involve parallel parking in no more than three moves, one handed while finishing the sandwich. Points would be deducted for mayonaisse stains or cigarette burns on shirts or car upholstery. Anyone who failed would have their licence revoked until they had successfully passed a re-test.
In that event there would be no further excuse or need for speed limits as only reasonably competent drivers would be permitted to use the roads and traffic densities would by default reduce.
There.
Last edited by: Humph D'bout on Fri 30 Apr 10 at 13:31
|
|
What was in you sandwich Humph ?
|
No, that was in your cheek ...
|
Or in his pie when he tried driving like that with Mrs H in the front seat.
|
You both got it wrong. His tongue was out. That post of his is the most boastful, vainglorious piece of posing I've ever seen on the internet or anywhere else, and an exact description of the general feel of the 100,000 miles he does a year in a mud-spattered, shoe-burdened Queequod.
Don't bother to deny it H.
|
Queequod?
You seem to think Humph Is Captain Ahab.
(I assume the mixing of the name Queequeg and Pequod was deliberate?)
|
>> Don't bother to deny it H.
Moi ?
:-)
|
Two speeding fines in 2 hours - Zero
