Mooseyb

Yes thanks I can see plenty of things in grey, however the fact remains that someone who breaks a law should be punished for breaking that law accordingly. If I speed, I take the risk of being punished for speeding. If I steal, I take the risk of punishment. Yes there is mitigation, but the fact remains, and it is a fact that you cannot dispute, that a law has been broken. Its that simple. Question for you then. If you allow one pensioner to escape punishment for whatever reason, where do you draw the line? Can then a pregnant mother be allowed the same liberty? What about a disabled driver? A nun? Where does it stop? The whole point behind fixed penalty offences is that they are minor and clear cut. You have either committed the offence or you havent. Fixed penalties free up Court time to deal with more important matters, where the "shades of grey" you mention can be considered. Yes there are a lot more issues to consider in more serious offences. I deal with them all day every day, but motoring is simply down to fact. If you want Courts or fine staff to consider one person raising an issue, everyone caught speeding will try it on. You will open the floodgates. Then more staff will be needed to consider these issues. Who is going to pay for that do you think? Higher taxes? Higher speeding fines? You? I suspect its one of the first two. Someone here said a few weeks ago that they would argue a fine because the Courts havent the time to bother investigating it. Quite right, they havent. They have more serious things to deal with. Thats why traffic offences are black and white.

Parkway has signs doesnt it? I tend to avoid it as it has more bumps and holes than I like my car to travel over! Its also lit if I remember correctly? Im trusting the driving instructor here! Mr Saxon most likely knows what hes on about!

Two things there. If he doesnt know the speed limits, should he be driving? And secondly, yes, the law is the law. Doesnt matter if the car in front was too stupid to pull forward, the fact remains that you could have waited till you could clearly leave the box junction (as it states in the highway code), and then entered it. I seem to remember the highway code says "do not enter a box junction until your exit is clear". Seems straightforward to me. Traffic law violation = penalty. Im sorry but you wont persuade me, or many others that your father is innocent. Its one speeding fine. Its not a conviction for murder. Live with it.

Thats different. Everyone KNOWS the speed limit. If you dont, how did you pass your test!

The urban myth strikes back. Police can not earn overtime to do duties such as that.

If you downloaded it from google image search that sometimes causes that problem. Save it as .bmp instead, open it in MS paint, then use file >saveas to save it as a jpg.

Precisely. Couldnt have put it better.

Sorry, but a law has been broken, and the penalty should stand. Would you have thought that it was equally unfair if someone was convicted of drink driving with say 50 micrograms of alcohol in their breath (the limit is 35)? Lets take it a stage further - a man sleeps with a girl he thinks is 16 but is actually 14? Slight mistake? Let it go? Its only a small percentage difference after all! (I am not, repeat, am not, saying that anyone here, there, or anwhere has done anything like that. I want to make that completely clear!!!! Its an example!!) Laws are set to be followed. Yes we all speed, I admit I do, but doing so means I have to take the risk I will be caught and fined. Its as simple and set in stone as that. Why should anyone be exempt because they have a clean licence for 50 years? I cant understand that argument. If theyve been driving that long, surely they should know better! The point is though that speed cameras are used to make money, and the speed limits, in my opnion are too low. That said, for the time being, they are set where they are and if we break them, we run the risk of being caught.

Agreed. I know loads of traffic officers. Just doesnt sound right.

Alternatively you could stop breaking the law

Sorry, but from experience, I just dont agree. Yes its a factual error, but any court in the interests of justice would simply overlook that. Not one of the magistrates in Sheffield is that generous, trust me. That said, the next fine you want to contest, feel free to instruct me and I will argue it for you...at my usual hourly rate...

Trust me, it is my line of work, just pay it. Chances of arguing it are zero. Sorry

Im going to disagree with this one. Facts are clear - going through a controlled bus gate, stopped by police officers who can give evidence in Court if need be, no defence or justification. Take it to a trial and any magistrate would say that it was clear enough, and a simple mistake by the police. The fine would stand. Similar to an indictment for murder listing a victims middle name wrong, or giving the address of a burglary slightly wrong. Also, sending 5p too much on the cheque wont work either. Have worked with the Courts for quite a few years now and these tactics are basically urban myths. Sorry.

That much is true, which is why I started my first post on this thread with the word "if"

No you wouldnt! Which solicitors have you been talking to??? It costs absolutely nothing to make a claim, or it shouldnt do. The car damage excess is nothing to do with the personal injury claim.

If your wife was injured she can make a claim for injury under the Motor Insurers Beaureu Untraced Driver Scheme.

Because its explorer.

I never understand this argument. I have a few friends on PAYG who say that Im paying 30 quid a month for the phone, but Im not, Im paying for the calls. Option one - latest phone, plus 200 mins anytime, plus 500 texts - £30 per month. Option two - either really old phone for cheap, or pay £100 for newer phone, then still have to pay loads for calls. 500 texts is £50 a month. 200 mins is say £60? Maybe its just me? I can see what the best deal is personally.

Where are you shopping!! Harrods?? Nokia 7610, 200 minutes any time plus 500 texts, 20 quid to buy, then 30 quid a month.

Depends really. My phone was free, so not for me. If you shop around you can get the latest phones at a good price anyway. Alternatively, just buy both

Can help with conveyancing if you need anything. Not allowed to comment on other firms, as its against solicitors conduct, but if you need help, give me a shout.

I have a 32mb one if you want one. PM me if you still want one. Will check in tomorrow morning. Ta.

Never been. Where is it? When you say rock pub are we talking decent rock, or are we talking darkness, busted, cheese crap rock?

Thats the Samsung D500, my wife has it, absolutely quality photos and way better than most other stuff on the market. New though and can be costly. Sharp GX30 is okay is you dont mind being stuck with vodafone (which I do, they were hopeless when i was with them). I have a nokia 7610 which is megapixel and very good.

There is a lot more to the story than the papers will have you believe, trust me. Regardless, a real tragedy for anyone concerned. That said, the papers will inevitably come up with some story about how this thing is a shame "at this time of year". As if its not a shame when someone dies in May or some other non Christmas time of year!!!