When I done my test back in 2005, you ARE allowed within 10% of the speed limit, any more is classed as a major and you fail.

So.......33mph in a 30mph zone would give you only a minor!

As far as I remember.....

Note to self (and all): Dont try it when the police are behind you!

And you have to wait 4 years for 3 points to come off and pay £22 for you license to be wiped!

Theres beer-bellied Brownies scams again!

:slayer:

That 10% is all bull. It's all down to the copper. Simple as, but usually the case now....traffic cops don't have a good cell in their body

Although the other week I was going round a bend on the A1 at about 95 and there was a Scooby marked police car, parked on the hard shoulder. Didn't even move. (Probably cos after I'd finished braking after seeing him i was doing about 10mph)

dannyb-with-a-gp said:

That 10% is all bull. It's all down to the copper. Simple as, but usually the case now....traffic cops don't have a good cell in their body

Click to expand...

http://www.speedlimit.org.uk/faq.html

try again

mad4it said:

she could have argued her case gaz.as speedo's aren't callibrated when they leave factory they have to give you 10percent +.if they do you at 32mph especially if you are in a new car you could argue that it's the manufactures fault for putting faulty equipment in the car hence the 10% plus.know this because i spent days on sites reading about the allowed speeds and court cases because i thought i'd been done by a mobile camera

Click to expand...

mad4it, with respect that's junk.:spam:

You don't "know this" coz it aint so.

the BBC reported a case when a motorist was successfully prosecuted for doing 32mph in a 30mph zone in Manchester.

Speed limits are the limits and the authorities only need round-down their measure of a vehicle's speed to the nearest mph. The manufacturer's generally make their speedomoters over-read specifically to ensure they don't under-read.

The 10% 'rule' is notin more than an old guide. Some areas still use it but they dont have to.

Just a quick question, can a cop get you done if theyr moving and on the other side of the road or do they have to be stationary. i mean like a fine and all that jaz through the post not stop ya
cheers

a fixed penalty notice in the post wont be possible if they drove past on the other side of the road.

A Fixed Penalty Notice is basically an offer to settle the offence out of court in return for a known penalty. In the case of speeding that will be £60 and 3 points on your licence. If you go to court, they could find in your favour or still fine you the same and still penalise you with 3 points. A court could still find you guilty but return a penalty of a conditional discharge, or even an absolute discharge. However, most likely the Magistrates would almost certainly award 3 points and probably a fine of £90 - £120, plus costs. But, in order for you to accept a FPN, you would have to be offered one which can't be done via the post. Most traffic cars are fitted with VASCAR which can work out your speed from a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction. Section vehicles such as Astras and Transits are not fitted with any speed detection equipment.

Speeding NIPs and 1st class post

Some folks may not be aware, but when the "safety" partnership post the NIP letter its deemed to have been served. Pretty dodgy because everyone else has to use recorded delivery or serve the letter of notice in person.

At least some folks are sticking up for real justice rather than self-supporting empires that do no-one any good except themselves.

Can you tell that I think speed cams are a cheap, nasty and poor way to improve road safety.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/reports/article6909751.ece

Re: Speeding NIPs and 1st class post

WhiteSei said:

Some folks may not be aware, but when the "safety" partnership post the NIP letter its deemed to have been served.

Click to expand...

Not true.
If the SCP can produce evidence of having posted a NIP to the right address, it creates a presumption of delivery which can be denied. In other words the intended recipient can go go to court, give evidence on oath, and say that it wasn't received.

Bear in mind the prosecution must prove all aspects of their case beyond reasonable doubt and the defence only have to introduce an element of reasonable doubt to get a not guilty. Also bear in mind that penalty for lying on oath is a jail sentence.

Re: Speeding NIPs and 1st class post

WhiteSei said:

Some folks may not be aware, but when the "safety" partnership post the NIP letter its deemed to have been served. Pretty dodgy because everyone else has to use recorded delivery or serve the letter of notice in person.

At least some folks are sticking up for real justice rather than self-supporting empires that do no-one any good except themselves.

Can you tell that I think speed cams are a cheap, nasty and poor way to improve road safety.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/reports/article6909751.ece

Click to expand...

The Clerk at (in GMP's case) The Central Ticket Office will, at the same time as the NIP is produced, make a statement to the effect that the letter was sent out by 1st (or 2nd) Class mail on a particular date.

As it happens, I tend to agree that Safety Cameras are a cheap, nasty and poor way to improve road safety. While I have little sympathy for those who get caught by them, I firmly believe that there are too many drivers who get away with it by using cloned plates or not registering a vehicle in their own name. There would have been less resistance to cameras from the media, and from then on from the general public if they had been sighted with more discretion and with a more obvious safety message.

Sighting a camera on a straight stretch of road with no history of collisions or with an enhanced risk ( such as a school, bridleway or Hospital) nearby is sheer folly, and it is that kind of thing that has given them such a bad name.

johnw said:

Not true.
If the SCP can produce evidence of having posted a NIP to the right address, it creates a presumption of delivery which can be denied. In other words the intended recipient can go go to court, give evidence on oath, and say that it wasn't received.

Bear in mind the prosecution must prove all aspects of their case beyond reasonable doubt and the defence only have to introduce an element of reasonable doubt to get a not guilty. Also bear in mind that penalty for lying on oath is a jail sentence.

Click to expand...

Last year, a man got out of a speeding charge because he was able to show that the NIP was sent too late.

If the post mark on the envelope or the date on the NIP are too late then its a sure not guilty, if it gets that far. if the defendant is saying he didn't receive it in time then its up to him to convince the court.

dannygp said:

That 10% is all bull. It's all down to the copper. Simple as, but usually the case now....traffic cops don't have a good cell in their body

Click to expand...

How can you say that? They are enforcing road traffic laws and use lots of discretion. If you have an accident and its not your fault, you want them to arrive and help you, and to prosecute the other driver. Most people dont like them because they have been caught speeding, or flouting the road laws and are dealt with in a positive manner. And as someone has said already, they do have memorys like elephants.
As for the speeding debate all roadside cameras are set at a tolerance higher than the 10% + 2mph. When I read about people being prosecuted for less than that I have severe reservations as to there accuracy of their speed.You have a better chance of being let off if stopped by traffic at the side of the road as a camera doesnt have ANY discretion.

Just quick question...can the yellow average speed camera's do you for speeding?! this confuses me! some people say they do and others say they dont!

xSianx said:

Just quick question...can the yellow average speed camera's do you for speeding?! this confuses me! some people say they do and others say they dont!

Click to expand...

Of course they do. Why wouldn't they, be pointless installing them if they can't be enforced

Most Easterly Pandas said:

Of course they do. Why wouldn't they, be pointless installing them if they can't be enforced

Click to expand...

Thank you...i thought they did but its confusing when you have one person saying one thing and another saying different!

if you go past one at 20 mph over the limit though but slow down to well under the limit before the next one you shouldnt get done, may be thats what they meant? you wont get instantly done like with a gatso.


average speed always confuses me now on the satnav, it says an average speed and an average driving speed and they both well under the speeds i have done or am doing

Right long story short:

November 2009 declared van SORN
Took van to garage early december 2009
April 2010 van is reported for being on the road (still under the control of the garage)

I've filled in various forms etc since then until now each time stating the van was entrusted to garage

I've now received a magistrate hearing date and the likelyhood of a fine

Biggest problem is that the hearing date is whilst I am supposed to be on a charity drive accross Europe.....

The van was used on a public road without my concent or knowledge I've filled in all the forms the DVLA have sent me (foolishly I've never sent them recorded :bang: )

What are my options?? appart from bankruptcy and lots of crying?

(The van is still at the same garage - they've not tried to contact us at all in the time they've had the van, and nor have we tried to contact them )

sent form back saying you intend to plead not guilty and a new date will be set.
normally it says this on the form from magistrates

It would appear from your post that one thing you should have done is contacted the garage in question. Was the van in there for some kind of work or just laid up for the duration.

If it was there for some kind of repair/maintenance work to be carried out, is it possible the vehicle was being road tested prior to the work being done, for instance to get a better idea as to what the problem is? On the other hand it might just have been used for the chippy run.

I don't suppose you got any kind of paper work saying when you took the van to the garage or when they were supposed to give it back. If it was used for the chippy run, I would be surprised if they thought it had been SORN'd, or perhaps they just thought they wouldn't get caught.

Do you have any kind of corroborating evidence? For instance, did someone follow you to the garage and give you a lift home?

On the face of it, you must plead Not Guilty and elect a Magistrate's Court hearing. Have you thought about sending a PM to johnw as he's a Magistrate?

Good luck.

dave said:

sent form back saying you intend to plead not guilty and a new date will be set.
normally it says this on the form from magistrates

Click to expand...

It's a rather pants form to be honest, I've re-read it several times, and no where does it say a new date will be issued. I'll ring the magistrate clerk and see what they say.

The Beard said:

It would appear from your post that one thing you should have done is contacted the garage in question. Was the van in there for some kind of work or just laid up for the duration.

If it was there for some kind of repair/maintenance work to be carried out, is it possible the vehicle was being road tested prior to the work being done, for instance to get a better idea as to what the problem is? On the other hand it might just have been used for the chippy run.

I don't suppose you got any kind of paper work saying when you took the van to the garage or when they were supposed to give it back. If it was used for the chippy run, I would be surprised if they thought it had been SORN'd, or perhaps they just thought they wouldn't get caught.

Do you have any kind of corroborating evidence? For instance, did someone follow you to the garage and give you a lift home?

On the face of it, you must plead Not Guilty and elect a Magistrate's Court hearing. Have you thought about sending a PM to johnw as he's a Magistrate?

Good luck.

Click to expand...

Should have would have could have - but through stupidity / work related stress never found the time and didn't

The van was in for engine repairs as it would barely run and I would have said in an unsafe state to drive on the roads. I have absolutely nothing no receipt or paper work, it was my dad who took the van there as I was in work, my step mum followed in her car to take him home.

I fully intend to plead no guilty on the form and appear at the hearing. I'm a tad worried about the possible outcomes but I'll seek legal advice from a solicitor ASAP.