Last week going down the A23 and got photoed allegedly doing 81 mph - thought I was only dong 75 according to my TOM TOM - At what level would you deny or contest the offence ??
|
81? or 75?
On what grounds are you planning to contest it?
|
|
I don't think "I was only doing 75" is much of a defence.
|
I think 'I'm sorry' is the plea you're looking for.
Pat
|
|
75 might get a smaller fine than 81. But they will probably prefer to trust the speed camera and ignore yr bongo drum.
|
>> I was only dong 75 according to my TOM TOM - At what level would
>> you deny or contest the offence ??
>>
at whatever was the speed limit in that section?
|
|
Definitely contest it. Those speedguns are notoriously inaccurate whereas you should easily be able to prove the accuracy of the Tom Tom. Let us know how you get on!
|
|
The tomtom speed is no defence either, that was over!
|
>> Let us know how you get on!
>>
Naughty! :-)
|
|
Wooster's post is from the horse's mouth I believe wotspur. So go for it.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Thu 16 Dec 10 at 17:22
|
You have addmited you were speeding - should be the end of the thread. It would have been different if you were convinced you were doing 70. I can't even see any signage loop holes applying here because 70 is the national speed limit anyway.
Fess up and pay the fine it will be a lot less agro in the long run. If it goes to court you could end up getting a lot more than a small fine and three points.
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Thu 16 Dec 10 at 17:24
|
Oh do stop it Sheikha. There are more than enough po-faced posts stating the bleeding obvious already, and there are sure to be more.
Where's your youthful spirit of adventure and rebellion?
Honestly.
|
ratto, Where did he say the limit was 70 where he got done?
I agree with Woodster's suggestion.
Last edited by: John H on Thu 16 Dec 10 at 17:33
|
Well I had assumed otherwise I really don't see the point of the thread at all. If it was in a 60 zone even at 75 it is way over. But to make a useful point sat navs speed readings are not always accurate.
]
|
Do you know what your speedo was indicating?
I only ask because I tend to use the speed on my TomTom rather than the speedo. I do try to stay at around 70 on the TomTom, which tends to be about 77-78 on the speedo.
Just wondering how much of a gap there is between your TomTom and speedo.
|
|
Was it speed gun or a GATSO? The laser devices are known for their inaccuracy, some models. ACPO guidelines mean that you could get away with speed limit +10% + 2 mph which puts you in the clear at 75 mph. Have you had a NIP yet? If you are offered a speed awareness course take it, it is less hassle than points and a fine
Last edited by: Perky Penguin (p) on Thu 16 Dec 10 at 18:44
|
>> Was it speed gun or a GATSO? The laser devices are known for their inaccuracy,
>> some models. ACPO guidelines mean that you could get away with speed limit +10% +
>> 2 mph which puts you in the clear at 75 mph. Have you had a
>> NIP yet?
NO it doesn't put you in the clear. That speed limit +10% +2 is a guideline whereby they can decide not to issues a summons, NOT a limit where you cant be found guilty.
They have decided you were doing 81 and have issued a summons, your defence is you were only doing 75. Go to court and that and they will do you for 75.
|
|
COULD put you in the clear ie not have a case brought against you - if the guidelines were applied!!!!! Has OP had a NIP or is this just hypothetical, at this stage?
Last edited by: Perky Penguin (p) on Thu 16 Dec 10 at 18:51
|
No
NO could about it, it wont get you off by claiming the guidelines,
In fact its worse, The guidelines are there to ensure those who were not aware due to speedo issues dont get caught.
The OP KNOWINGLY broke the speed limit accurately.
|
|
In the situation described, and if the ACPO guidelines were applied OP might not get a ticket.
Last edited by: Perky Penguin (p) on Thu 16 Dec 10 at 18:56
|
Perky - ACPO guidelines are just that. They're not law, no defence, nor do officers have to abide by them. In any case, they are not there to allow for any inaccuracy in the devices used. The devices are Home Office approved, just like an intoximeter.
Moving on somewhat, I think that seeking advice on a forum like this is frankly ludicrous. We can't possibly assess the evidence because we don't have it. We don't even know what the limit on the section of road is! I'll have to admit to trolling in my last post. My honest opinion is for the original poster to be honest with himself. If he was speeding (and needs to be certain of the limit) then take the cheapest option. I'm sure it offends many driver's sensibilities when they're 'done' , but I'm not convinced that the near autonomous reaction of seeking to fight the apparent injustice is the most sensible one. For certain it's often the most expensive one, even with a not-guilty finding. The point about fixed penalty tickets is to give drivers a cheaper, court free option, and some time to consider if they really want the court hearing. It's an entitlement, of course, but perhaps requires some sensible thought before exercising the option. This last para isn't aimed at you Perky, just my thoughts. And I agree with you about taking the awareness course option, if available.
|
Today I received a NIP - manned equip (automatic camera device/speed detection device) evidence provided by photgraph or other speed detection device.
There is no mention of a speed awareness course offered, so whats the likelihood of fine etc
I haven't had a ticket for 15 yrs and then it was by a copper on a bike - although he still gave me a ticket - he was still open to discuss the situation with.
I must admit I thought 70 +10% + 2mph, so 81 was hardly flouting this drastically - who doesn't do this on a motorway I'd be surprised and as I mentioned I thought I was doing 75 so well under the 10%+2mph
|
|
Wotspur: 'I thought I was doing 75' is NOT a defence. If you plan on stating that in court you might as well tell them your preferred choice of curry instead! You need to be absolutely sure what the limit on the road is and then determine an objective defence. I think you can still obtain an advance disclosure i.e. what the evidence is, from which you might then mount a defence when you've found some flaw - assuming you can do so. There are specialist solicitors that will advise you on this but be under no illusion, they're selling something and will happy take your money to look at your case. God forbid there might be some unscrupulous ones out there (No!!!) who may well tell you you've got a good chance of winning in court, put on a lovely theatrical show for you, and then commiserate with you as they bank your cash. They might win too!
|
...God forbid there might be some unscrupulous ones out there (No!!!) who may well tell you you've got a good chance of winning in court, put on a lovely theatrical show for you, and then commiserate with you as they bank your cash...
I've seen scrupulous barristers do that, let alone unscrupulous ones. :)
Sometimes, of course, the punter is his own worst enemy, insisting on running a defence which has no realistic prospect of success.
I'm not saying that applies in this case.
|
|
Where does the +2mph come from? At the end of the day the limit is 70 as said by others... The 10% discression may of may not be used... but I've never hear of any extra on top of that!
|
>> I must admit I thought 70 +10% + 2mph, so 81 was hardly flouting this
>> drastically - who doesn't do this on a motorway I'd be surprised and as I
>> mentioned I thought I was doing 75 so well under the 10%+2mph
To be fair, I don't think that many people regularly do an actual 81 on a motorway. Certainly I often do close to an indicated 80 mph, but that is probably an actual 70-72.
I certainly don't get loads of people overtaking me. Definitely some, but not many.
If you really did 81, your speedo must have been close to 90 which, IMHO, is pushing it.
If you speedo was nowhere near 90, then your speed was probably nowhere near 81, and trying to fight it might be a good idea.
But, of course, once you are "caught", then arguing you were closer to 70 is no good, but arguing that the equipment is faulty might be.
Have you tried pepipoo.com?
|
...Certainly I often do close to an indicated 80 mph, but that is probably an actual 70-72...
SS,
Your speedo may be more accurate than you think.
We both have newish Fords, I think with the same engine and possibly the same instruments.
I've checked the speedo of the CC3 against the roadside warning boxes which flash up your speed measured by a radar trap.
My reading of 40mph usually equates to between 38mph to 40mph on the box.
Last edited by: Iffy on Thu 16 Dec 10 at 19:34
|
>> ...Certainly I often do close to an indicated 80 mph, but that is probably an
>> actual 70-72...
>>
>> SS,
>>
>> Your speedo may be more accurate than you think.
>>
>> My reading of 40mph usually equates to between 38mph to 40mph on the box.
Oh...well my understanding was that speedos were set to over-read by about 10%. I also reckoned that my TomTom is fairly accurate. When I put the two together, they seem to match (assuming that the 10% thing is correct).
In other words, if my speedo is on around 77 then the TomTom typically reads 70.
Of course, it could be that I have put 2 and 2 together and got 7.
Could well be that the speedo is accurate and the TomTom reads under.
Well, if I get pulled over my excuse will be "sorry officer, but me TomTom's got a computer inside it...so it must be right...innit"
I'll have to go and find one of those roadside boxes you mention and give it a try.
Maybe that's why not many people overtake me. :S
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Thu 16 Dec 10 at 19:44
|
...I'll have to go and find one of those roadside boxes you mention and give it a try...
Yes, a harmless enough experiment.
I'm not sure why many people instinctively believe their car's speedo will be less accurate than a ninety quid sat nav from Halfords.
My instinct is the other way around.
After all, isn't this the box of tricks which will send you along a canal tow path if you let it?
|
>> ...I'll have to go and find one of those roadside boxes you mention and give
>> it a try...
>>
>> Yes, a harmless enough experiment.
>>
>> I'm not sure why many people instinctively believe their car's speedo will be less accurate
>> than a ninety quid sat nav from Halfords.
>>
>> My instinct is the other way around.
Your instinct is completely wrong. The sat Nav is always more accurate than the speedo,
Those "roadside box things" are notoriously variable.
|
>>Those "roadside box things" are notoriously variable.
I occasionally pass one that only seems to operate in 'Slow Down' mode, and I've tried it at 10 mph when there's been nowt behind me.
|
>> ...I'll have to go and find one of those roadside boxes you mention and give it a try...
When they were first introduced, way back in my boy racer days, my friends used to compete to see who could get them to read the highest figure...
There's one near my son's house, it normally shows "28 THANK YOU" as I drive past, and "34 SLOW DOWN" for the car zooming up behind me. I had to pick him up in a hurry one night a few months ago, and can confirm that in the wee small hours at 45-ish it simply says "SLOW DOWN" with no speed figure. Spoilsports :)
|
The ones near me keep flashing slow down at me even though I am doing an indicated 29/30 in a 30.
Then I realised they are not connected to anything and seem to be on all the time.
I remember when I had first past and driving my purple MK4 Fiesta I was going down a road I thought was 40. Because I was a wreck I had missed the 30 signs and was doing an indicated 36 in a 30 and went straight past a Gatso. The second time I did the same journey I noticed all the 30 signs and I was panicking for weeks.
The Fiesta according to the satnav was well out, if it was reading 30 I was actually doing 27. It turns out that probably saved my driving licence.
My Panda is basically accurate at lower speeds, if it says 30mph I am doing 30mph. Not a problem as I am a lot of observant of speed limits and assume all urban roads are 30mph unless I see signs saying otherwise.
|
Earlier this week a Premiership footballer wanted to plead guilty to 98mph, he was charged with 105mph.
Magistrate believed the speed gun and so he will be walking for 56 days or paying a chauffeur.
|
Quote for ACPO Guidelines at
www.acpo.police.uk/asp/policies/Data/speed_enforcement_guidelines_web_v7_foi.doc
SPEED Fixed Pnlty Summons
20 mph 25 mph 35 mph
30 mph 35 mph 50 mph
40 mph 46 mph 66 mph
50 mph 57 mph 76 mph
60 mph 68 mph 86 mph
70 mph 79 mph 96 mph
May not be used much but the summons figures fit the limit + 10% + 2 mph formula
Last edited by: Perky Penguin (p) on Thu 16 Dec 10 at 20:00
|
|
Premiership footballer probably hiring a pilot.
|
|
Sorry - fixed penalty figures fit the formula, IF used!
|
>> seeking advice on a forum like this is frankly ludicrous. We can't possibly assess the evidence because we don't have it. We don't even know what the limit on the section of road is! I'll have to admit to trolling in my last post. My honest opinion is for the original poster to be honest with himself. If he was speeding (and needs to be certain of the limit) then take the cheapest option.
Woodster, you evil fellow. Suppose wotspur had gone for it and cost himself anarmanaleg? With MY encouragement as well as yours?
I'll never trust a copper again so I won't.
|
It's a bit like being charged with murder and pleading:
"but I only hit him twice with the hammer, not four times" :-(
|
I know that up to 96mph on a motorway is probably a fixed penalty. From that speed up it's a court summons.
The defence of I wasn't doing 81mph because I know I was only doing 75mph won't stand up in court will it? And it's a trip to court that would be needed. And they then may ignore your speed figure and give a bigger fine/penalty. For that speed of 81mph it is almost certainly only 3 points and a £60 fine. Pay it and move on.
Go to court to admit speeding in front of magistrates is probably going to get you the same 3 points and £60 fine. And a day off work will be needed. And depending on where the offence was committed it might mean using public transport too. Turn up in the car and be seen by the magistrates and it tells them something about your attitude to the offence and they may up the fine.
P.S. I think the trigger points for the NIP is the 10%+2mph. Anything that is 25mph or more over is a summons.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 16 Dec 10 at 23:32
|
>> Go to court to admit speeding in front of magistrates is probably going to get
>> you the same 3 points and £60 fine. And a day off work will be
>> needed.
And costs, and does it attractive the victim surcharge?
|
Forgot about the victim surcharge... to admit to 75mph is going to get points for speeding. Especially as indicated speed at 75mph will have been over 80mph.
On the cars I have had since having a sat nav unit, the speedometer is accurate at lower speeds and deliberately gets less accurate at higher speeds. The Mondeo I had showed more accurate speed in the digital display when it was switched into diagnostic mode. The speedo tended to have a bit of lag programmed into it - and it's a digital device and not true analogue anyway. The computer tells it where to point the needle.
|
My experience is that TomTom is accurate - it was showing 81 when I got my only ticket (for 81 about 6 years ago). Note: it is affected by gradients.
Car speedos can be accurate as well,
Laguna pool car speedo showed 91 with TomTom showing 90 - was close all the way through the range.
Tomtom can be very inaccurate - over 750 mph recorded on the A38 near Burton-on-Trent about four years ago, speedo said 60 at the time - I do have witnesses to this. Speed kept rising until I reset the unit and good order was restored.
You will not win by arguing that your uncalibrated tomtom is more accurate than their calibrated device, even if you can show it to be accurate the day you are at court it does not proove it was accurate the day of the offence.
Unless they have not followed procedure correctly you will not win, suggest you seriously consider the £60 and 3 points.
|
So how do you prove your Tom Tom reading at Court??????? Word of mouth...errmmm.
Admitted 75 mph = 5mph above. ACPO Guidelines are just that - not law. Shut the cell door.
So you go to Court, plead NG and have a right grilling at Court with a possible outcome of a Guilty verdict.
Sentence: Fine - most probabably over £60, plus
CPS prosecution costs anywhere from £40 -60, plus
Victim Support supplement at £15, plus
3 points,plu
Day (or days if adjourned) lost attending Court, plus
Cost of travel to Court.
Currently your standing on a CO - £60/3 points. End of.
Unless you have a stonewall defence consider your position (and wallet)
dvd
|
contesting a speeding ticket - Zero
