40 year old grandad driver just got three speeding fines in 1 week and 1 from 2 years ago. Own business and employees who rely on me to be with clients.

Does anyone know a way of paying fine without losing license for doing 37 on a 30 limit?

Originally posted by Rayko
40 year old grandad driver just got three speeding fines in 1 week and 1 from 2 years ago. Own business and employees who rely on me to be with clients.

Does anyone know a way of paying fine without losing license for doing 37 on a 30 limit?

How about sticking to the speed limit in the first place? One reaps what one sews....

Originally posted by Rayko
40 year old grandad driver just got three speeding fines in 1 week and 1 from 2 years ago. Own business and employees who rely on me to be with clients.

Does anyone know a way of paying fine without losing license for doing 37 on a 30 limit?

Is the Grandand due in court regarding this incident?

I have known instances in the past where people have sent a pleading letter to court explaining that they need the licence for the nature of their work. They have subsequently been penailised to a lesser extent with regards to penalty points and escaped a ban. No gurantees of course but well worth a try.

Good Luck.

Originally posted by t020
One reaps what one sews....

Do you mean like repaired clothes?

I have to agree with t020...three speeding fines in one week?

I don't mean to be hard on the guy, but perhaps losing his licence would make him think twice before speeding again.

Imagine the outcry if he did not get a ban, then had a major accident shortly after.

You don't get an automatic ban until you reach 12 points. If one of the speeding tickets is 2 years old (how is that possible?) then keep your nose clean for another year and that one at least is "spent" and you'll have a bit more breathing room!

The police do allow a certain leeway before issuing a ticket. In a 30mph zone I believe it is up to 37mph, so you were very unlucky!

I was recently caught on camera doing 41mph going through Buxton on my way to Liverpool. It was right on the edge of town, literally yards after a 50mph zone ended, it was midnight and there was not a sole about... now that's annoying!:evil: What was strange was that I hadn't even driven across the lines used to measure my speed when the camera went off?!? Does anyone know if they can now turn these cameras around and somehow use the lines on the other side of the road (there was acamera there too) to measure speed?

What makes me laugh is that 99% of drivers will break the speed limit every time they drive. Can it really be that so many of the other 1% are regular participants on this forum or is that a whiff of hypocrisy I smell?!?:?

Originally posted by Zamo
What makes me laugh is that 99% of drivers will break the speed limit every time they drive. Can it really be that so many of the other 1% are regular participants on this forum or is that a whiff of hypocrisy I smell?!?:?
No, it's the whiff of schadenfreude you smell.

Incidentally, this sole that wasn't around, it was probably busy swimming the other way.:)

Originally posted by Zamo
The police do allow a certain leeway before issuing a ticket. In a 30mph zone I believe it is up to 37mph, so you were very unlucky!

Wasn't there something published last year which said they don't do that anymore? I think it said you can be caught for anything over 10% of the speed limit now... so 33 would be your upper limit for a 30 mph zone. I'll try to find this report if I'm not too busy at work!!!

I think I remember getting the 37mph figure (whilst looking for a way out of a ticket!) from a police website but I don't remember which one.

I found this anyway...

"Even if speed is measured correctly the display may not be accurate, so a speedometer error is allowed. Because of this, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) have an official formula for calculating a speeding offence. It allows a leeway of 10% plus 2mph. In reality, most speed traps are triggered at higher speeds than this because if they were set bang-on those guidelines, the sheer amount of paperwork generated would overrun the police speeding departments."

source (http://www.speed-trap.co.uk/Accused_Home/Rules_useage/The_Law.htm)

People shouldn't speed! So those who moan about getting points on their licence tuff you deserve them for speeding!

I rotate between driving the car to work and catching the bus to work. When driving the car to work I encounter a number of speed limits, these being 60 - 40 -60 -30 -60 -40

Now what I often find is people will quite happily drive at 35-45mph in the 60 zone then they completely forget they have a brake in the car and speed through the 30 and 40mph areas.

Altho' in terms of speed cameras I find gatso's to be dangerous and SPECS to be safest and best form of catching speeding motorists. People tend to brake at the last minute for gatso's causing accidents to happen from.

Skatie

I agree - you shouldn't speed at all BUT some of the speed limits are incorrectly imposed in areas that don't really need them to be so low.

I come from a village on a 'A' road in essex and it was decided to impose a 30 mph limit on the stretch of road in front of my old house. This was way too strict and basically the limit lasted 300 yards. The Police (essex) loved it as they caught lots of people speeding, and therefore made enourmous amounts of 'funds' from the signs... a 40 or 50 mph sign would have been vastly preferable, or even just one that warned of the crossroads round the corner (where most of the accidents happened)...

What I'm trying to say is that since the money from speeding fines now goes directly to the local police force it's in their interest to catch as many as possible regardless of safety issues and - T020 - that's a tory policy for you!!

God do I hate Essex police - they've even stuck a camera on the M11 - at one point it was catching over 2000 people a week iirc. Mind you Essex is one of the countys where installing speed cameras increased the amount of accidents, idiots.

As for the guy who started the thread, if they don't have a photo of you in the car taken from the front then just refuse to sign the declaration that you were driving. If you don't admit you were driving and they don't have a photo as evidence then all they can do is fine you for withholding information/evidence - you'll probably get fined but they can't give you any points as they don't know who was driving. I can't remember what the maximum fine is though, you may want to check...

Originally posted by Skatiechik
People shouldn't speed! So those who moan about getting points on their licence tuff you deserve them for speeding! Skatie
I agree we need to have speed limits but you must admit it's not always fair!

For example, if someone is driving a beat up old escort at 70mph it will take twice the distance to stop as someone doing 100mph in a BMW M3 with huge ventilated disc brakes with ABS and who can also steer and brake with the help of electronic traction and stability controls.

Equally, in most urban areas the speed limit is 30mph because there are lot's of pedestrians and other vehicles about. But at 2am, when there are no pedestrians and hardly any other vehicles about, how does the road differ from a country lane where the national speed limit of 50mph would apply? If anything it is safer to do that speed in an urban area where peripheral vision is better.

The reason we do not have variable speed limits is simply because it would be too complex and expensive to administer/police and un-variable speed limits are better than no speed limits. However, this system is far from perfect and I reserve the right to moan about it!

I'm sure I heard something a few months ago about Tories wanting to introduce variable speed limits. Increasing them late at night when the roads are quiet. Not such a bad idea - makes a change :)

Why is everyone in such a rush?

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Why is everyone in such a rush?

Up until recently I travelled over 2000 miles a week all over the UK installing products at customers premises. The quicker I travelled the quicker I got home - it made the difference between a 60 hour week and an 80+ hour week.

Originally posted by fnkysknky
Up until recently I travelled over 2000 miles a week all over the UK installing products at customers premises. The quicker I travelled the quicker I got home - it made the difference between a 60 hour week and an 80+ hour week.
That's part of the problem isn't it? Employers are expecting their employees to work further away from home and for longer hours. With fewer people joining trades unions there are fewer barriers to employers exploiting the workforce.

For instance, I'm travelling to Esher tomorrow for a 6 hour meeting. That's 6 hours meeting plus, probably, 8 hours travel. I'm expected to do this as a normal day with no allowance for the travel. It's not far enough away to warrant an over-night stay but I can't claim travelling time.

Give me the protection afforded by a unionised working environment every time.

Problem is I was self employed. Driving to Aberdeen to work for 5-6 hours to then travel all the way home again without anything more than a toilet break was fun. On more than one occasion I was at work for over 24 hours. Believe it or not though I loved that job, shame the manufacturers cocked up big style and had to get rid of some of the contractors.

Originally posted by max
That's part of the problem isn't it? Employers are expecting their employees to work further away from home and for longer hours. With fewer people joining trades unions there are fewer barriers to employers exploiting the workforce.
On one hand, as employees, we want to work less and get paid more. On the other hand, as consumers, we expect better services/products and want to pay less for them.

With such demanding employees and consumers it's the evil bosses I feel sorry for!;)

Originally posted by Zamo
On one hand, as employees, we want to work less and get paid more. On the other hand, as consumers, we expect better services/products and want to pay less for them.

With such demanding employees and consumers it's the evil bosses I feel sorry for!;)
Zamo, you have opened my eyes. All these years I have been wrong, I will now repent and vote tory for the rest of my life.;)

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Why is everyone in such a rush?

Deadlines to meet perhaps?

Originally posted by max
That's part of the problem isn't it? Employers are expecting their employees to work further away from home and for longer hours. With fewer people joining trades unions there are fewer barriers to employers exploiting the workforce.

For instance, I'm travelling to Esher tomorrow for a 6 hour meeting. That's 6 hours meeting plus, probably, 8 hours travel. I'm expected to do this as a normal day with no allowance for the travel. It's not far enough away to warrant an over-night stay but I can't claim travelling time.

Give me the protection afforded by a unionised working environment every time.

Yes, Employers are part of the problem. Too demanding.

Originally posted by Abby
I have to agree with t020...three speeding fines in one week?



It's quite possible that those 3 fines could have been obtained on one journey and on one stretch of road though.

I got a speeding ticket (my first ever) on Chesterfield Road South, just after the Moat House.

A bus moved over from the stop by the hotel, and decided he was moving in to my lane to take the filter road on the right. The bus was coming whatever happened. I had a choice - get rammed by a bus, or accelerate.

As soon as I was clear of the bus a camera got me!

When I got the ticket I wrote to the Police to explain the circumstances. They wrote back and said "hard cheese" - or words to that effect!

Originally posted by Lickszz
Deadlines to meet perhaps?

That's no excuse - that's bad planning.

Nomme

Originally posted by nommedenet
That's no excuse - that's bad planning.

Nomme

That would depend on who is making the deadlines. I'm not saying it's an excuse for speeding but it's an excuse for been in a rush which is the question I was answering.