Heard, never seen. Nobody has.
Caught Speeding
- Thread starter No1newts
- Start date
Heard, never seen. Nobody has.
Depends on the force. If they follow the ACPO guidelines (and most do) it'll be a FPN at that speed. You're looking at having to hit 76 in a 50 for a summons.
What about the gap between e.g. 32 and 35?
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Jun 2009
- Posts
- 11,924
- Location
- London, McLaren or Radical
You don't get into trouble between 32 and 35
Some regions will get you for 34 though...
I've heard the odd strange story about someone being done for 33... But I find it hard to believe.
You definitely wouldn't get done for 32... This isn't Switzerland!
Some regions will get you for 34 though...
I've heard the odd strange story about someone being done for 33... But I find it hard to believe.
You definitely wouldn't get done for 32... This isn't Switzerland!
What about the gap between e.g. 32 and 35?
The guidance is that prosecution shouldn't be considered until you hit 10% +2mph of the limit.
The criteria for a SAC is strict so you won't get one for say 33 in a 30, I'd wager anyone attending one saying they got done under the guidelines is telling porkies
If you like to chance it and speed then it might be worth getting an app such as Camera Alert and a subscription to pocketgpsworld, at least that way you get a heads up. Useful in unfamiliar areas.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 13,300
- Location
- Near Winchester
Is RoadAngel any good and legal to use in the UK?
I was on the M40 towards Oxford at the weekend and saw what I think was a cooper with a gun in the middle of a double bridge. I was doing 80mph but the satnav said my speed was 77mph.
I was on the M40 towards Oxford at the weekend and saw what I think was a cooper with a gun in the middle of a double bridge. I was doing 80mph but the satnav said my speed was 77mph.
My ex wife got a 31 in a 30 points jobby a few years back. 12:03 am 1st January and they did her. I can't prove it as she's an ex but saw all the paperwork. Mitigating circumstances cited by Police included the camera was calibrated the previous day, it was New Years Eve and the road was busy....
Just to add this was in Southampton
Just to add this was in Southampton
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,747
- Location
- Southampton, UK
What year?
Sorry - but I simply don't believe you.
I know, that's really not fair. This is a forum, I don't know you and, as far as I can tell, you've got no reason to lie.
However nobody who has ever claimed less than 35 in a 30 has ever been able to back this up with any kind of proof.
So many, many people who:
A. Have received it themselves
B. Know a mate who it happened to
C. Saw the evidence themselves
But never once has such a NIP made it to the public forums - just why is that?
There are some extra bits to go with this - just so we're clear about it all. The women in question was involved in a totally unrelated accident a few weeks later and had received some documentation in the post (sorry I'm a bit sketchy it was pre me getting together with her) which because of the accident she failed to even acknowledge let alone sort out. It took a long time but the final outcome was rather than a more serious case of either driving with no insurance MOT or whatever the court applied the speeding fine and 3 points. So yes - she was done for 31 in a 30 but in reality she was being effectively punished for not complying with whatever happened post incident....
But yup she was done for 31 in a 30... I saw the court documents with fine and the rest of the documents and her solicitor effectively said take the speeding hit rather than anything else. So yes - maybe not as cut and dried as you think. The judge was lenient and perhaps that's the final conclusion as the police were pushing for much much more...
Now I CANNOT prove a thing, and yes I could possibly be wrong on some of the details. It was about 2005 I believe and I'm old now
But yup she was done for 31 in a 30... I saw the court documents with fine and the rest of the documents and her solicitor effectively said take the speeding hit rather than anything else. So yes - maybe not as cut and dried as you think. The judge was lenient and perhaps that's the final conclusion as the police were pushing for much much more...
Now I CANNOT prove a thing, and yes I could possibly be wrong on some of the details. It was about 2005 I believe and I'm old now
You don't in Switzerland either. They take 5kmh off your measured speed, so if you get caught going 51 in a 50 you were actually going 56.
Dad was done for 74 on the motorway by a copper who pulled him over.
There are some extra bits to go with this - just so we're clear about it all. The women in question was involved in a totally unrelated accident a few weeks later and had received some documentation in the post (sorry I'm a bit sketchy it was pre me getting together with her) which because of the accident she failed to even acknowledge let alone sort out. It took a long time but the final outcome was rather than a more serious case of either driving with no insurance MOT or whatever the court applied the speeding fine and 3 points. So yes - she was done for 31 in a 30 but in reality she was being effectively punished for not complying with whatever happened post incident....
But yup she was done for 31 in a 30... I saw the court documents with fine and the rest of the documents and her solicitor effectively said take the speeding hit rather than anything else. So yes - maybe not as cut and dried as you think. The judge was lenient and perhaps that's the final conclusion as the police were pushing for much much more...
Now I CANNOT prove a thing, and yes I could possibly be wrong on some of the details. It was about 2005 I believe and I'm old now
I'm quite sure it's not legally possible to get done for 31 in a 30 zone there is a law which prevents this because it's not possible to enforce the exact speed limit or some other laws which would make the enforcement more dangerous than the law itself i.e constantly looking at the speedo and not the road.
Obviously not being a lawyer I can't prove this LMAO but I'm sure it exists.
It is obviously not worth a 'not guilty' plea, but a few 'mitigating circumstances' wouldn't hurt, such as emphasising that it couldn't be considered to be dangerous driving, and that the safety of other road user was not affected, that it was a clear bright day with good visibility etc.
Basically, without being flippant, you are trying to make it look more like an unfortunate case of you being in the wrong place at the wrong time, as it were.
I am speaking partly from experience here, as when I was taken to court a year ago for being caught doing 50 in a 30 mph limit, in what was virtually open countryside, the 'judge' commented something along the lines of "why are you wasting my time on a case like this, which should have been dealt with under the fixed penalty system"?
The clerk to the court did try to enlighten her, (see the table posted above) and I ended up with a fine of about £80 and 4 points!
Basically, without being flippant, you are trying to make it look more like an unfortunate case of you being in the wrong place at the wrong time, as it were.
I am speaking partly from experience here, as when I was taken to court a year ago for being caught doing 50 in a 30 mph limit, in what was virtually open countryside, the 'judge' commented something along the lines of "why are you wasting my time on a case like this, which should have been dealt with under the fixed penalty system"?
The clerk to the court did try to enlighten her, (see the table posted above) and I ended up with a fine of about £80 and 4 points!
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,747
- Location
- Southampton, UK
It is possible if the officer can show beyond reasonable doubt that the speed is accurate.
But even then you can't be convicted in court?