Driving offences and court

TangoSixteen said:
THATS THE WHOLE PROBLEM!!

The lights do NOT change fast enough, forcing most of the people that have their lives dictated to them by a small light to either slow down dramatically, or stop completely, while the stupid, rubbish light decides wtf its going to do.

Or in my case I check to see whats what, and just do the red light completely. No slowing, I get there faster, and its better for the environment.

Its win win. A double win no less. I think I have trumped you in Traffic Light top trumps here.

*rushes out to atent this new gaming genre*
Click to expand...

You know what....you're right! I'm not going to let a little red light dictate my driving anymore! On my way home - red lights be damned!

Seriously, T16 - give up. I mean....even lolstockhausen has flamed you for being a div!!

Surely that's got to be a sign to stop... (;) :p)
 
TangoSixteen said:
THATS THE WHOLE PROBLEM!!

The lights do NOT change fast enough, forcing most of the people that have their lives dictated to them by a small light to either slow down dramatically, or stop completely, while the stupid, rubbish light decides wtf its going to do.

Or in my case I check to see whats what, and just do the red light completely. No slowing, I get there faster, and its better for the environment.

Its win win. A double win no less. I think I have trumped you in Traffic Light top trumps here.

*rushes out to patent this new gaming genre*
Click to expand...

Again if you re-read my post, the delay is caused because a lot of lights default to green in one direction, then red in the other. If you arrive at the red, the lights have to assume that a car 'may' have just entered the green light and so have to allow time for it to safely pass before turning your light green.

If both lights had defaulted to red (with no traffic), then when you arrived, the lights could have safely changed to green immediately. However, not all lights will default to both red with no traffic around, as they risk 'missing' a car arriving and then sitting on red indefinitely. This is why most lights will continuously cycle, even when there is no traffic about.

You trumped me because you're prepared to run a red light because you get there faster and it's better for the environment? I'm sure the police would love that reasoning.
 
You still can't fly through the lights if they're all amber... You will need to slow down to check that it is safe... You will still have the same situation of both cars approaching the lights in different directions at the same time. At least with the one default green and the other default red one motorist gets through without stopping or slowing at all.

It's simple over here... Main roads stay green, smaller roads joining default red.

If you're on the main road just drive.. no stopping required.

If you are joining the main road though just roll towards the lights and they will change by the time you get there... No stopping required.
 
9 points and a £660 fine so could have been worse. 9 points for driving without due care and attention. 0 points for the lights due to it being classed as the same event and being temporary lights. He managed to keep his licence due to needing it for work. A lesson learnt the hard way!
 
Beerbaron said:
9 points and a £660 fine so could have been worse. 9 points for driving without due care and attention. 0 points for the lights due to it being classed as the same event and being temporary lights. He managed to keep his licence due to needing it for work. A lesson learnt the hard way!
Click to expand...

Man that is harsh!!!
I got 6 points and £750 fine for doing 124mph on the A19!
 
photoshop said:
Man that is harsh!!!
I got 6 points and £750 fine for doing 124mph on the A19!
Click to expand...

It's not harsh at all - what you were doing probably wasnt that dangerous, this guy actually got charged and convicted of driving without due care. This is quite a serous offence and requires some proper idiot-style driving.

The fact somebody who'd drive like that was allowed to keep driving because of his job when one of us would get a ban for 102mph on an empty motorway is pathetic.

I think a ban should be a ban - if you lose your job then perhaps overtaking cars to drive through red traffic lights ought to be something you give a tad more thought to.
 
It's not harsh for DWDCA, which is what he was found guilty of (presumably I guess without an early guilty plea - i.e. he contested it).

Mags are advised to apply points for the most significant offence in cases where several motoring offences are committed at once - so it's not unusual that he got 0 points for the traffic light offence.

Difficult to be sympathetic really, people driving through traffic lights that are green to them have an expectation that they're not suddenly going to run into someone who has jumped them the other end. It's a serious offence in principal irrespective of whether the lights are faulty, "too slow" or whatever.

[TW]Fox;17581560 said:
I think a ban should be a ban - if you lose your job then perhaps overtaking cars to drive through red traffic lights ought to be something you give a tad more thought to.
Click to expand...
Without knowing the specifics of the case it is possible he wasn't banned because he has dependants who would be unfairly penalised by him losing his licence and by extension his job. Mags allow "exceptional hardship" arguments such as this to sway them to giving points instead of an outright ban. In fact judging by the number of points given I would assume that they were minded to avoid giving a ban so they punished him harder in points terms.
 
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;17581560 said:
It's not harsh at all - what you were doing probably wasnt that dangerous, this guy actually got charged and convicted of driving without due care. This is quite a serous offence and requires some proper idiot-style driving.

The fact somebody who'd drive like that was allowed to keep driving because of his job when one of us would get a ban for 102mph on an empty motorway is pathetic.

I think a ban should be a ban - if you lose your job then perhaps overtaking cars to drive through red traffic lights ought to be something you give a tad more thought to.
Click to expand...

he was doing 10 -15 mph if that whilst overtaking and going through the lights in a quietish country lane. he was hardly driving like a mad man.

hes self employed so surely he would just claim benefits for the duration of the ban. the tax payer would then pay for most of the fine from his benefits. not sure how this helps anyone :confused:
 
Durzel said:
It's not harsh for DWDCA, which is what he was found guilty of (presumably I guess without an early guilty plea - i.e. he contested it).

Without knowing the specifics of the case it is possible he wasn't banned because he has dependants who would be unfairly penalised by him losing his licence and by extension his job. Mags allow "exceptional hardship" arguments such as this to sway them to giving points instead of an outright ban. In fact judging by the number of points given I would assume that they were minded to avoid giving a ban so they punished him harder in points terms.
Click to expand...

he takes my nan (a pensioner) shopping and to collect her pension. he also drives me and my brother to the station. the judge did ask if there were 2 other people that this would effect. he also said that if he did anything else in 3 years he would get a minimum of a 6 month ban
 
Beerbaron said:
he was doing 10 -15 mph if that whilst overtaking and going through the lights in a quietish country lane. he was hardly driving like a mad man.
Click to expand...

He overtook queuing traffic which were waiting at a red traffic light in order to drive through the red traffic light!
 
[TW]Fox;17582573 said:
He overtook queuing traffic which were waiting at a red traffic light in order to drive through the red traffic light!
Click to expand...

This much is obvious

Despite his protestations he's been sat at a line of queing traffic, its been stationary for too long with no traffic comming the other way. He cant see the tempoary traffic lights, so got impatient and decided to overtake.

he overtook the lines of queing traffic with no clear view of the road ahead (along with somebody else by the sounds of it) who then both found themselves on the wrong side of the road attempting to drive through red lights in front of a police car. They realised this, bricked it, and stopped before actually going completely through the red lights. But the coppers had already seen them so threw the book at them.

CD10 for that sounds about right. And theres no point in arguing as he's been found guilty of careless driving by a court. End of.
 
MrLOL said:
This much is obvious
Despite his protestations he's been sat at a line of queing traffic, its been stationary for too long with no traffic comming the other way. He cant see the tempoary traffic lights, so got impatient and decided to overtake. He was following the car in front.
Click to expand...

Thats not correct. He queued up behind the women for a few seconds that also went through the red light. He didnt queue behind the other cars.

He did what he did but personally seems very harsh for 9 points. I think 3 points for going through the red light would have been sufficient.

I assume she pleaded not guilty as she had her solicitor with her. I didnt find out what she got.


photoshop said:
Self employed people are not allowed to claim benefits for the first 6 weeks are they not?
Click to expand...

Im sure he would have got more than a 6 week ban.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom