Driving Offences

Morba · 3 Jun 2006 at 00:38

gutting tbh, tho im sure that unless it was really early in the morning, then the A1 has a lot of regular spots for coppers to park up and wait for speeders.

as much as we all do it now and then, i would like to think that we all would take the consequences that come with it.

paul@ - trivial wont work unless hes got some damn good reason and a decent solicitor / lawyer

[TW]Fox · 3 Jun 2006 at 00:41

Jenie said:
his regional manager has offered to go to court for him and put in a good word to explain that they dont want to loose him, so hopefully that will help!

I hope it doesnt, I find it rather miffing that some people get off crimes that we'd all get the book thrown at us for simply becuase they need a car for work.

Either let everyone off, or charge everyone regardless...

Townlea · 3 Jun 2006 at 01:28

I'm afraid this is not just to do with the speeding.

If he is insured on his mums insurance...

And he sais he needs the car for work... This shows hes the main driver...

Therefor he will have refused car insurance and having no isnurance... doesn't this lead to a driving ban?

Either way this is going to be a ban.

In my opinion, don't say you need the car for work, this will only extend the ban!

I stress to those that go on thier parents insurance just to lower the prenuims..

Insurance companys are cracking down on this and using as much data as possible.. You might notice some insurers ask how many cars are in the household... say you put down 3 (Father, mother and Yours) with this data it shows the parents arn't the main driver in some cases..

Your Brother is very silly...

Bald tyres!
False information on the insurance
3 points on his license
and doing 120 in a 70...

We are talking years here...

Raymond Lin · 3 Jun 2006 at 04:26

Townlea said:
Your Brother is very silly...

Bald tyres!
False information on the insurance
3 points on his license
and doing 120 in a 70...

We are talking years here...

They'll offer him a chance to do a course that can cut 1/4 off the ban, he'll need to pay for it thou, its about £100. The need for a motor vehical still could have a ban imposed upon the defendant. There was a case of a Taxi driver on the receiving of a ban and the need of the car still could not save his licence. The Clerk will reads this case out to direct the magistrates before the ruling.

Malachy · 3 Jun 2006 at 09:30

[TW]Fox said:
I hope it doesnt, I find it rather miffing that some people get off crimes that we'd all get the book thrown at us for simply becuase they need a car for work.

Either let everyone off, or charge everyone regardless...

i Agree completly if you need your license for work then why drive liek this knowing there is a posibility of losing it?
The reason why is because people have the view the court wont ban them because they need there license, BS imo treat everyone the same bring on communism.

Townlea · 3 Jun 2006 at 11:46

Malachy said:
i Agree completly if you need your license for work then why drive liek this knowing there is a posibility of losing it?
The reason why is because people have the view the court wont ban them because they need there license, BS imo treat everyone the same bring on communism.

Totally agree...

However!

If it was someone older say 40? who has that driving experience... correct insurance... no bald tyres...

and the person did... 120 in a 70... I think it would be fair not to ban them.

Some people might disagree.

Malachy · 3 Jun 2006 at 11:59

Townlea said:
Totally agree...

However!

If it was someone older say 40? who has that driving experience... correct insurance... no bald tyres...

and the person did... 120 in a 70... I think it would be fair not to ban them.

Some people might disagree.

why? i dont at all, i think everyone should be treated fairly, its 70mph for everyone not 70mph +5mph for every year you have been driving, Now i do often speed and i have got points,but its my fault and i accept that pay my fine get my points, if the law states 100mph shouldbe a ban then 100mph should be a ban if your schumacher or my gran, thats the bottom line and that should be stuck to.

if the law was changed then thats fine it should not just be.........
oo the defendant has green eyes and is ginger thats his reason for doing 140mph on the m25, ok thats fine give him 3 points and a slap on the wrist.

Townlea · 3 Jun 2006 at 12:09

Malachy said:
why? i dont at all, i think everyone should be treated fairly, its 70mph for everyone not 70mph +5mph for every year you have been driving, Now i do often speed and i have got points,but its my fault and i accept that pay my fine get my points, if the law states 100mph shouldbe a ban then 100mph should be a ban if your schumacher or my gran, thats the bottom line and that should be stuck to.

if the law was changed then thats fine it should not just be.........
oo the defendant has green eyes and is ginger thats his reason for doing 140mph on the m25, ok thats fine give him 3 points and a slap on the wrist.

lol haha nice ending.

140.. i agree is a ban

I have been making it a habbit of speeding these days and vary in the 100s.

Like I said, you might not agree but when a person has points already then yea its a ban...

Malachy · 3 Jun 2006 at 12:14

Townlea said:
lol haha nice ending.

140.. i agree is a ban

I have been making it a habbit of speeding these days and vary in the 100s.

Like I said, you might not agree but when a person has points already then yea its a ban...

answer is simple thoug, if your worried about getting banned slow down, if your not dont and acept it when/if you do,
alex fergeson excuse ispathetic, ok he hadthe runs, then why go on a drive on a motorway where you know there will not be a toilet ? then when you needa dump put other peoples lives at risk because of it, shouldnt of got out of bed let alone drive and then if he had, tough mate crap ya pants or pull over dont risk my life because your a selfish idiot who needs to dump.

and i think the diana and fayed prove what happens when you speed away from paparazi thats enough evidence alone to prove such actions and stupid and a threat to life, becks should be banned too.

Alibaba99 · 3 Jun 2006 at 12:50

There are some bits of this that we cannot comment on fully. Whilst 120mph may well be a safe speed for a Supra there are no other details as to what the road, weather and traffic conditions were at the time of the incident, so cannot say if the speed was even sensible.

No details are given as to the mechanical condition of the car, two bald tyres certainly but has other servicing work been missed as well?

The insurance issue is interesting. Being the regular driver of the car, but insured as the named driver on someone elses policy he is technically defrauding the insurance company. Also he requires the car as part of his job so should have business cover as well, but is this present?

Doesn't look too good in court, young with points already, massively over the limit, car has illegal tyres and potentially driving without insurance.

The_Dark_Side · 3 Jun 2006 at 12:57

Alibaba99 said:
There are some bits of this that we cannot comment on fully. Whilst 120mph may well be a safe speed for a Supra there are no other details as to what the road, weather and traffic conditions were at the time of the incident, so cannot say if the speed was even sensible.

exactly what difference does any of the above make?
sensible or not he was driving well over the posted limit.
safe doesn't come into it.
whether you agree with a posted limit or not is a totally different argument.
yes there are many roads where you could drive at 90mph and be just as safe as if you were at 70mph, but until they're changed, rules is rules and every driver on the road knows that breaking them (any not just speeding) carries the risk of being fined/banned.
choose to break any traffic law and you're well aware you may be caught and "done".

Berger · 3 Jun 2006 at 12:59

The_Dark_Side said:
exactly what difference does any of the above make?
sensible or not he was driving well over the posted limit.
safe doesn't come into it.
whether you agree with a posted limit or not is a totally different argument.
yes there are many roads where you could drive at 90mph and be just as safe as if you were at 70mph, but until they're changed, rules is rules and every driver on the road knows that breaking them (any not just speeding) carries the risk of being fined/banned.
choose to break any traffic law and you're well aware you may be caught and "done".

If its packed with traffic and snowing then its a little bit more dangerous than if it was bone dry, slightly warm and completely clear...

The_Dark_Side · 3 Jun 2006 at 13:03

Berger said:
If its packed with traffic and snowing then its a little bit more dangerous than if it was bone dry, slightly warm and completely clear...

120mph in a 70 limit on a busy road is just as endorseable as 120 in a 70 limit on a quiet road.
of course a quiet straight road scenario is much safer, but the offence isn't driving unsafely, it's speeding.
if you drive over xxx mph on this road we will fine you and give you points/ban you....that's about as complicated as the legal standpoint gets on this offence.

Berger · 3 Jun 2006 at 13:05

In this case it is, but if it was busy, it could be dangerous driving due to excessive speed surely?

Alibaba99 · 3 Jun 2006 at 13:05

The_Dark_Side said:
exactly what difference does any of the above make?
sensible or not he was driving well over the posted limit.
safe doesn't come into it.
whether you agree with a posted limit or not is a totally different argument.
yes there are many roads where you could drive at 90mph and be just as safe as if you were at 70mph, but until they're changed, rules is rules and every driver on the road knows that breaking them (any not just speeding) carries the risk of being fined/banned.
choose to break any traffic law and you're well aware you may be caught and "done".

Its more is response to some of the earlier posts claiming that 120 is a safe and sensible speed to be doing in a Supra. It can make quite a difference between just being in court for a speeding offence, and being up for one of dangerous driving.

The_Dark_Side · 3 Jun 2006 at 13:09

Berger said:
In this case it is, but if it was busy, it could be dangerous driving due to excessive speed surely?

true, but that would my example the minimum and not the maximum penalty.
if traffic was hectic then they may impose a harsher penalty, but the converse cannot be true in that they would hardly let you off if the road was empty.

The_Dark_Side · 3 Jun 2006 at 13:10

Alibaba99 said:
Its more is response to some of the earlier posts claiming that 120 is a safe and sensible speed to be doing in a Supra. It can make quite a difference between just being in court for a speeding offence, and being up for one of dangerous driving.

the car is more than capable of those kinds of speeds, however the car wouldn't be on trial it'd be the driver, and this is absolutely the wrong person to ask about his ability/judgement or lack thereof.

Alibaba99 · 3 Jun 2006 at 13:13

Generally the let off occurs at the time of the offence. The officer stops the car, has a word with the driver but taking into account the traffic and weather conditions plus the car in question doesn't press the charges.

There have been occasions where a guy has been up for a dangerous driving offence and the court has lowered it to one of just speeding as they ruled that under the conditions at the time of the offence the speed in question wasn't dangerous.

Von Smallhausen · 3 Jun 2006 at 13:36

Jenie said:
My brother has been caught speeding and had two illegal tyres, the police officer has only charged him for one tyre tho, he has now been told he has to go to court, and we just wondered if anyone knows anything about this kind of thing?? We were wondering if anyone knew what kind of sentence he would be given best and worse case scenario??

He already has points on his licence for speeding.

Any advice would be gratefully received.

Thanks
Jen x

What generally happens with traffic offences like this is the person is reported for the most serious of the offences disclosed, in this case the illegal tyres and by illegal I am assuming you mean the tread is below the prescribed limit ? The speeding will be on file probably but will not be pursued for reasons given.

I would say minimum he is looking at is 6 points and a 2-300 fine, although if he goes not guilty and is convicted at court then he can expect more.

How many points does he have ?

Axis64 · 3 Jun 2006 at 21:05

his insurance is all above board, has already been checked out for us, and he is fully covered for driving that car, as for people saying he shouldnt be trying to get out of it, he isnt he has held his hands up and said yeah sorry it was me you caught me i was being stupid, he has pleaded guilty and is due in court on the 22nd of june, he just doesnt want to loose his licence because he doesnt want to loose his job.

thanks for everyone who has added useful contributions, he is going to seek legal advice and see what happens.

Jen x