Done For Speeding

[Jono]

104mph lowest average means you deserve to lose your license to be honest.

That's retarded, in my opinion.
There are plenty worse ways to drive, other than "too fast". I've managed to get 6 points on my licence so I'm no angle. 94.7mph was the fastest average I got done for, and I believe mr Policeman in that instance did me a favour.

I think the law should be changed. You should be allowed 6 points in a 12 month period. Go over that and you get banned (not necessarily for a full year).

3 points for getting done for speeding - I think the thresholds should be set pretty high here, other than in residential areas with a known accident blackspot - but then is that driving more with undue care and attention than pure speed?

3 points for being on your sodding phone (held in hand).

etc. etc... All of these offences should carry a £100 fine.

I would be more in favour of financial penalties than points. Sure, rich people can afford to get away with more fines. But they can afford lots of other things too. Maybe poor people shouldn't break the laws if they can't afford it. Society's like that anyway.

Sure, stealth tax the drivers, but not all of them, just the ones that break laws - that includes me. But for god's sake, fix the roads with the extra money, since stupid amounts of road tax aren't enough... although they might be if they were spent on the roads.

@OP - silly sod for driving so fast. Hope you don't get banned. Take it easy in future, and look forward to becoming more paranoid about sticking to limits

 

[Bobbler]

Dont worry too much mate, my missus was pulled mid afternoon just before returning over the bridge from Wales.
She was clocked at 102mph along with two others she was in the middle of.
A court summons was sent. She pleaded guilty by post and got 3 points and £60 on her license.
Its not always a case of 100+ = ban like some think.
Similarly speed != dangerous driving IMO

Whatever you get, take it on the chin, no-one else is to blame, learn the lesson to not take for granted that the car behind is not a police vehicle.
Also I would recommend not getting too caught up in the comments on here about it. Speeding just rubs a certain contingent up the wrong way for some reason - the OMG child/puppy killer crew -
Then theres the ones like me, fair cop, we all do something silly (despite that some like to think they are impecible drivers when in fact to err is human), unlucky.

 

[Corasik]

I didn't think you could get a Ban, points and a fine I thought you could only get two of them

Friend of mine got a £600 fine, ordered to pay court costs, 6 points on his driving license, and a 2 week ban. So they can give all three no problem. (This was in england). He was booked at 107MPH, although I have no doubt that the highest reading would have been a lot faster, as he was hammering his BMW 730 (top speed 143) downhill at the time.

 

[Overlag]

I have not driven on a single road in the UK that I would say is suitable for over 100mph.

People keep comparing us to Germany but honestly look at their road infrastructure compared to ours. They spend billions on building and maintaining roads that can be used for high speed with minimal traffic. Our roads are under funded, overcrowded, poorly maintained and unlikely to improve with all the tree hugger demonstrations.

never driven on a motorway then?

M25, M11, certain areas on the A127/A12/A13 all fine to do 100mph.


the 70mph speed limit is there because of the old days of motorway traffic when motorways had no safety features, and cars would murder you at 30mph, let alone 70mph. And when 70mph was brought in most cars couldnt get to 70mph in the first place.

these days things are different. Rarely do cars cross over to the oposite side of carrage way. Cars are geared to cruise faster etc etc.


Speed limits on motorways are stoneage....

 

[Durzel]

See I think you should drive as fast as you feel safe but when you get nicked, take the fine and shut up. Crying, bitching and whinging about how important your license is and how it was deserted apart from all the cars on it is totally pointless.

You cruised at over 100mph. You got nicked. Life sucks, doesn't it? Thats all there is too it.

That's basically my view on it too.

I don't think 100+ is dangerous given the right conditions, and a near-deserted motorway in the middle of the night certainly qualifies. That said the limit is 70, everyone knows what the limit is, if you get caught just take it on the chin like a man (in the absence of blatently obvious miscalibration of equipment).

As has already been remarked - if a licence is so important to someone that their "life is ruined" without it, then clearly they shouldn't do anything which would risk it being taking away.

 

[Dashik]

Why? He didn't crash, the road was empty () and he wasn't doingn it sideways. Obviously I don't know how competant a driver the OP is, and I don't know if he was crusing at 100+ steadily in his lane or using att 3 lanes of the motorway.

To be honest, if he was driving sensibly albeit over the speed limit (by a long way) it's not so bad as someone driving erratically at say 30 in a 70.

I'd have thought he'd lose his license though, my brother got done at 96, got 6 points (I think), a court apperance and a large fine. Afterall it's the OP's fault that he was doing more than the limit, so nobody else can be blamed and he can't really shift it with 'I have to drive to work', as already has been said they'll just say 'you should have thought about that before you started speeding!'.

Everytime I've been involved with the police, I've admitted I've been in the wrong if I have been, as there is no point in denying it, and sometimes nice police officers let you off a little bit.

InvG

LOL Because like it or not driving over the speed limit is ILLEGAL. Once again a license is a privilege and comes with terms and conditions etc.

Diving at night with a car behind doing the ton is not particularly smart. If you know you need you license to maintain your job why risk it?

Personally I think too many people think its ok to selectivly break laws that they dont agree with rather than try and get them changed.

Its a tough one but it was the OP who pressed the gas pedal. Nobody made him do it and he was aware of the consequences so he deserves whatever he gets tbh!

 

[Dashik]

That's basically my view on it too.

I don't think 100+ is dangerous given the right conditions, and a near-deserted motorway in the middle of the night certainly qualifies.

Fortunatly its not your opinion that counts. The limits are there for the benifit/protection of all not just an inconvenience to a few.

Just because YOU think its safe does not make it so.

 

[Durzel]

He "deserves what he gets" certainly, but simply because the Law is black-and-white, not because he's a "bad driver". Also, I don't even think the cops were "wrong" to pull him over - 100 is a fair whack higher than the limit - the whole "omg havent you got rapists or murderers to catch" argument is a load of crap.

That said if you've ever driven on a motorway in a modern car in the middle of the night when it's just lorries in the inside lane (or nothing at all for miles) then 100+ really isn't that big a deal. On the odd occasions when I've been driving back in the early hours from friends houses I've pretty much always done at least 100 on the motorway... it feels so different at night, serene.. symbiosis between man and machine, etc.

 

[Durzel]

Fortunatly its not your opinion that counts. The limits are there for the benifit/protection of all not just an inconvenience to a few.

Just because YOU think its safe does not make it so.

Limits are arbitrary decisions made by committee back when cars were made of wood. Sorry, I don't subscribe to the belief that going 5mph over the limit in a 40 is a night and day difference between safe driving and recklessness.

The only speed limits I stick to are 20s and 30s (residential areas) simply because there is statistical proof that hitting someone at 40+ results in a vastly higher chance of death, etc. Also, I'm not a boyracer who enjoys making residents lives a misery by hooning through their streets...

Having said that I can, do, and will continue to do whatever speed I consider safe for the prevailing conditions (traffic density, weather, etc) anywhere else. If/when I ever get caught (Ive never had points or a ban) I'll take it on the chin like a man.

 

[InvaderGIR]

snip

I think if you actually read my post you'll find I said he should lose his license

And I know that driving anything over a limit is illegal, otherwise they would not be a law, but a guideline.

Well if you think about it, the guy behind was the one that wasn't being smart, say the OP spun off (for whatever reason), the guy behind (in this case a police car) could then end up hitting the OP 'cause he was going just as fast.

Do you seriously think it's possible to change the overall speed limits? If you do, you my friend are rather deluded.

InvG

 

[flump]

Having said that I can, do, and will continue to do whatever speed I consider safe for the prevailing conditions (traffic density, weather, etc) anywhere else. If/when I ever get caught (Ive never had points or a ban) I'll take it on the chin like a man.

We bow to your superior judgement!

If a speed limit is treated simply as a suggestion what about insurance, give way signs, red routes, traffic lights and all the other laws of the road?

I can't see a difference sorry

 

[Hawk Tuah]

Well if you think about it, the guy behind was the one that wasn't being smart, say the OP spun off (for whatever reason), the guy behind (in this case a police car) could then end up hitting the OP 'cause he was going just as fast.
InvG

I'm presuming the OP didn't overtake a police car, which would lend me to think the police car must have been going faster than the OP to be able to catch him.

 

[Durzel]

We bow to your superior judgement!

If a speed limit is treated simply as a suggestion what about insurance, give way signs, red routes, traffic lights and all the other laws of the road?

I can't see a difference sorry

Now you're being pedantic. There's clearly a World of difference in safety for you and others between going through red lights, not respecting Give Way priority, driving without insurance (its effects on others) and doing 5mph over some arbitrary limit that someone decided upon way back when.

Who is to say that 70 is the "right" speed for the motorway? Yet, you swallow it as gospel and tow the line like the rest of the sheep. Hows that free will working out for you?

There's a World of difference between being wantonly reckless in a car (speed & other factors) and doing a speed which is no more or no less "dangerous" other than the fact you're breaking some arbitrary limit set in stone, applicable to every driver regardless of skill, car technology or road conditions. Presumably you would have no problems with someone doing 70 on the motorway if it was covered in black ice, or raining heavily... I mean, they haven't broken any Laws have they?

The OP is guilty as charged and should take his punishment like a man, but that doesn't alter the fact that as circumstances go he is hardly a "nutter on the road".

 

[Third Opinion]

never driven on a motorway then?

M25, M11, certain areas on the A127/A12/A13 all fine to do 100mph.


the 70mph speed limit is there because of the old days of motorway traffic when motorways had no safety features, and cars would murder you at 30mph, let alone 70mph. And when 70mph was brought in most cars couldnt get to 70mph in the first place.

these days things are different. Rarely do cars cross over to the oposite side of carrage way. Cars are geared to cruise faster etc etc.


Speed limits on motorways are stoneage....

M25/M11 you have got to be joking. They are at a standstill most days. I drive on the M25 daily and it has got to be the most unpredictable road. You are lucky to average 30mph on that road nowadays let alone talk about raising the limit.

 

[flump]

Now you're being pedantic. There's clearly a World of difference in safety for you and others between going through red lights, not respecting Give Way priority, driving without insurance (its effects on others) and doing 5mph over some arbitrary limit that someone decided upon way back when.

Surely it's simple - if it's in the statute book then thats it? Start a campiagn for sure but don't go around just saying it's wrong and you are going to ignore the limits. I think tax is too high but I pay up. So I vote. And so on...

So lets say 100mph is not always *absolutely* dangerous then, but it would take a fool to ever say 100mph is not more dangerous than 70mph whatever the conditions with the following exceptions:

* Trying to jump over an opening bridge over a deep river.
* When every other car is doing 120mph.
* When driving to escape water/objects travelling between 70 and 99 mph.

Quite happy to be enlightened

 

[djcj]

Just got up out of bed after not getting to sleep past 6am with worry...

The ironic thing about having a car behind me and not knowing it was police is.......when i noticed headlights i immediately started to slow down incase it was police, then i noticed the car only had 1 working headlight and thought, there's no way a police car would be driving about with 1 headlight broke, i'm sure thats against the law, so i put my foot down again.

Is it possible for me to plead by post? I was going to plead guilty either way, there's not much i can say to defend it as its pretty much indefensible. Although might i get a slightly more lenient sentence doing it face to face in court?

 

[Durzel]

Is it possible for me to plead by post? I was going to plead guilty either way, there's not much i can say to defend it as its pretty much indefensible. Although might i get a slightly more lenient sentence doing it face to face in court?

I think it's possible to plead by post, but I'd highly recommend against it as it gives a very bad impression - basically that you don't really care for the Courts due process and aren't contrite etc. Pleading by post is not something I'd recommend if you're looking for any kind of compassion.

 

[Hawk Tuah]

The ironic thing about having a car behind me and not knowing it was police is.......when i noticed headlights i immediately started to slow down incase it was police, then i noticed the car only had 1 working headlight and thought, there's no way a police car would be driving about with 1 headlight broke, i'm sure thats against the law, so i put my foot down again.

Is it possible for me to plead by post? I was going to plead guilty either way, there's not much i can say to defend it as its pretty much indefensible. Although might i get a slightly more lenient sentence doing it face to face in court?

To be honest I'd of done exactly the same. But then I guess I've got a court appearance too.

When I got my summons it clearly says on there that I am not eligible to plead guilty by post. I'd of prefered to do that, simply because I would be saving courts time. I really dont see the point in the whole 'show'. Just give me the default sentence and be done with it. Dont need some cloth headed old git telling me what a bad man I am.

 

[Fr0dders]

Using a car for your livelihood defense is only likely to work if you're actually driving for a living I would have thought, but I'm not a lawyer so it's better to seek professional advice.

Your last paragraph will help but not an absolute defence to for the speeding,

but nowadays I'm not sure the whole "need car for job" plea is taken into consideration simply because at the end of the day if your licence was so important to your job you shouldn't/wouldn't have been speeding in the first place.

All wrong

why does the same rubbish come out whenever we have one of these threads ? Lopez has already posted time and time again about how he managed to evade a driving ban doing a ton on the motorway. He brought a signed letter from his employer stating that if he was to loose his license, he would loose his job.

If your commute to work is short, like 10 miles or whatever, you are going to be wasting your time. But if you drive say 40 miles, with no direct train or bus routes, you can use the argument that banning you would have far greater implications for you than not being able to drive. Lopez has no dependants, and still evaded a ban, he also isnt a taxi driver or courier.

In terms of the punishments, the judge can give you any combination of the following for doing a ton

14-56 day ban
£60 - £1000 fine
10 Points

They can give you any combination of the above they like. If they dont ban you, expect a large number of points and a large fine. If you do get banned, there will be likely no points and a fine. THe size of the fine is up them, but expect about 33 % less if you please guilty, rather than trying to get off on a technicality (challenging the calibration of the police officers equipment etc..)

In terms of declaring it to your insurers, you have nothing to declare at the moment. You will receive a summons to court, to which you will have to reply, and indicate whether you will plead guilty or not guilty, by post and not attend, or attend and plead in person (recommended, dont expect any favours if you dont bother to turn up)

Yes it was harsh that you were caught at 1am. Yes its the safest time to do this sort of speed, but in future keep below 95, and all you'll get is 3 points and a £60 fine. Its when you go above 95, the police are likely to refer it to the magistrates.

To the OP, what have you received from the police officer that pulled you ? did he take your license or anything like that ?

im currently awaiting prosecution for the same offence (i was doing 107) but its been 3 months and ive still heard nothing, and only have a tiny white slip of paper to show that anything has in fact happened, which has in big writing at the bottom "this does not signify that proceedings will follow". So im well confused ...

 

[[TW]Fox]

I think I should get a job where I need my car then I can speed with impunity