Driving disqualification - Confused
- Thread starter agnes
- Start date
To put my 2 pence on the situation and opinion on the guilty thing.
I had indeed been caught red handed by a fairly nice officer and bike enthusiast. He was polite and stated he will be putting down only the excess of 50mph. Not my mirror visor, nor the double white line overtake... All could have been used to truly throw the book at me.
Instead, I pleaded guilty. I was clearly in the wrong. I broke the law. I'm now paying my price. And due to my attitude, I got off fairly lightly!
I said my bit, sorry for wasting officials time, being wreckless etc. Dressed smartly and spoke politely. Remember doofer, I'm flat out in the wrong here. I COULD have dragged it out. But why? The costs and effort involved will be more expensive than the jump in my premium and more time than the short 28 days I have to hoof it or jump on my push bike to the local train station. Or at worse, ride with my girlfriend in her car
I had indeed been caught red handed by a fairly nice officer and bike enthusiast. He was polite and stated he will be putting down only the excess of 50mph. Not my mirror visor, nor the double white line overtake... All could have been used to truly throw the book at me.
Instead, I pleaded guilty. I was clearly in the wrong. I broke the law. I'm now paying my price. And due to my attitude, I got off fairly lightly!
I said my bit, sorry for wasting officials time, being wreckless etc. Dressed smartly and spoke politely. Remember doofer, I'm flat out in the wrong here. I COULD have dragged it out. But why? The costs and effort involved will be more expensive than the jump in my premium and more time than the short 28 days I have to hoof it or jump on my push bike to the local train station. Or at worse, ride with my girlfriend in her car
Last edited:
No, it expires in 3 days. Car is parked up on a private drive which is about 300 yards away from the road.
Dont think there is any point... I'll obviously have to declare it when I renew in a month.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,655
Especially on the A4074...!!
Was this near the overpass heading from Reading toward Fox's?
You didn't do that speed through the "Thirteen Bends Of Death", did you?
After the overpass heading back to reading. It used to be my Sunday bike route to and from Reading for brunch at fox's yea. And maybe I did. Maybe I didn't? I certainly won't be anymore!
As opposed to "Hi Doofer, I'm at the Police Station and they have CCTV footage of me doing it and 3 witnesses, can you help"?
"Yes, tell them you didn't do it, you'll get away with it"?
Yeah, because there's no difference between actual CCTV Footage with three Witnesses and just the 'Hearsay' of a Police Officer, right? I mean the Police would never lie or twist the truth a bit to get a Prosecution, right? They wouldn't want to trick you in to just 'Admitting' it to save them the hassle of having to prove it and all that Paperwork and stuff, right?
But, hey if 'Boot-Licking's your thing and you just like bending over to anyone with 'Authority' then I guess you deserve what you get. Just remember the next time some Plod pulls you over for something he 'Thinks' you've done (They'll even make you think they're doing you a favour!) to readily admit it then come straight Online to whine about it on Forums.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,655
Yeah, that's one of those 'well-known' spots for cops to monitor and set up speed traps, especially the bridge/overpass - There's markings on the road but no permanent speed cameras actually installed, because the cops like to set up on the bridge itself - In fact it's so well known, that people often forget to pass the information on, assuming everyone already knows - It's the main reason why you don't (or rather, shouldn't) turn right out of Fox's and nail the throttle... which a number of riders always do anyways, of course!
Weekends are an especial favourite, as they'll have spotters on the bridge and interceptors who pick up marked perpetrators.
They know many bikers are out and tearing up that road, particularly on Sunday mornings, so they target the ones either doing seriously excessive speeds and/or riding dangerously.
If it makes you feel any better, a former friend of mine got caught doing over 130mph down that stretch!!!
And if you're such a glutton for punishment that you'd "make them work for it", thus inviting them to get the taxpayer's money's worth out of such effort by slamming you for every single tiny infraction applicable, then you similarly deserve everything you get.
The difference here being when you and the copper both *KNOW* what you've done wrong and you've been caught red-handed.Just remember the next time some Plod pulls you over for something he 'Thinks' you've done (They'll even make you think they're doing you a favour!) to readily admit it then come straight Online to whine about it on Forums.
On a road like the A4074, with all the other Sunday bikers out on their jollies, you'd need to be doing something blatantly and seriously wrong for the cops to even bother!!
Yeah, because there's no difference between actual CCTV Footage with three Witnesses and just the 'Hearsay' of a Police Officer, right? I mean the Police would never lie or twist the truth a bit to get a Prosecution, right? They wouldn't want to trick you in to just 'Admitting' it to save them the hassle of having to prove it and all that Paperwork and stuff, right?
The Police officer's evidence is not hearsay. It's his direct evidence. Speeding offences require corroboration, the corroboration will either be the partial VASCAR recordings or a speed follow calculation which is a very simple distance/time calculation. If the OP had only been a small amount over the limit than the margin for error in the calculation could be argued as reasonable doubt.
He was doing between 30 and 50MPH over the limit, a follow on a police bike with a calibrated speedo is sufficient.
Your advice is poor, unfounded and based from seemingly no knowledge or experience. Nobody is saying "Don't bother with legal advice", but the fact of the matter is pleading Not Guilty to an offence which is so cut and dry will end up landing you a harsher sentence.
The question you have to ask is, despite the overwhelming evidence do you:
Risk it, plead not guilty, lose your mitigation from a guilty plea and end up with a significant ban and fine?
OR
Plead guilty, get your mitigation from such and get off lightly as the OP has done?
I would put money on doofer pussying out of a Not Guilty plea in the same set of circumstances, despite his assertions he would fight it till the end.
'Hello, DanielMMS? I'm at the Police Station and need Legal Representation immediately, can you help?'
'Yes, just admit everything and I'll be there shortly...'
If that's your Professional 'Legal Advice' no wonder you're advising so many Clients to plead guilty.
You have no idea how this Legal Advice thing works, do you? If the disclosure given to a legal representation is such that it's OBVIOUS a charge will be brought and a successful prosecution rendered then the legal representative will advise suitably. If admitting guilt, pleading guilty and cooperating will result in the best outcome then that will be the advice given. Or are you somehow advocating that all persons maintain a Not Guilty Plea at all times and go to trial ignoring the fact everyone knows the outcome before it even begins? I think you have watched too much TV.
Last edited:
But it affects you right now, therefore you need to declare it now.
Unless you have also declared the car SORN then it has to be insured.
Correct, it does effect me from today, but what is the point in declaring it on insurance on a vehicle which is now parked up for the next 28 days? Why pat the 'admin fee' of £55 and what ever other charges they stick on just to cover a car which isn't being used nor on public highway for 3 days?
It's entirely pointless.
I pay monthly for tax, so I will be.
Wouldn't say the OP has got off lightly as such - he held his hand up to what he did wrong and got an appropriate judgement for the situation and factors to which neither side can really complain - I'm actually more shocked to see justice working as intended.
The whole better call Saul attitude here is bizarre. The cost of employing someone to look at evidence available would likely far outweigh what has been received in way of a fine and premium increase assuming the op has quite a few years driving experience/no claims.
Were this a situation where he would have lost his job or been otherwise totally cut off without a vehicle then the cost might well have been worth it, but in a position of clear guilt why would the OP spend thousands(you do realise what proper representation costs?) and still risk having the book thrown at him?
Were this a situation where he would have lost his job or been otherwise totally cut off without a vehicle then the cost might well have been worth it, but in a position of clear guilt why would the OP spend thousands(you do realise what proper representation costs?) and still risk having the book thrown at him?
As stated multiple times, they knew his speed and he's not a politician, you know.
Or a ****-stable
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6103494/Policeman-caught-speeding-at-100mph-because-he-was-late-for-work.htmlDoofer is right in a way.
You really shouldn't answer anything at the side of the road other than giving them your name.
"Do you now how fast you were going" and "do you know why I pulled you over" are not questions you are obliged to answer as they are loaded questions that are designed for you to incriminate yourself.
You really shouldn't answer anything at the side of the road other than giving them your name.
"Do you now how fast you were going" and "do you know why I pulled you over" are not questions you are obliged to answer as they are loaded questions that are designed for you to incriminate yourself.
