speeding

[coppershoe]

Hi I have just been clocked doing 71mph in a temporary 40mph motorway section . Will I get an automatic ban?

[JudgeJ]

Were you stopped by police or caught on camera? Were you offered a fixed penalty?

Have you any points on your licence?

[Loosehead]

You won't get a ban just for that. Probably fixed Pen, �60 + 3points

[ursula62]

You deserve one. The speed limits are there for a reason.

[JudgeJ]

Sorry, loosehead, but if coppershoe was stopped by the police there is a good likelihood that he will not have been offered a fixed penalty. The same applies if he was caught on camera, though he will not know the decision taken as yet.

Over seventy in a 40 limit is viewed in the same light as over 100 in a 70 limit. You may be asked to appear before the magistrates as the speed is usually considered to be too high for a fixed penalty to be offered.

gary baldy’s answer (to the same, but separately posted) question) is not quite correct. High speeds such as those mentioned do not, alone, lead to a charge of dangerous driving. This is a serious offence which must involve other elements apart from excessive speed. (In fact excessive speed is not a required element of the offence). It carries a maximum sentence of two years imprisonment and is one of the very few motoring offences which carry a custodial sentence.

Excessively high speed alone is still prosecuted as speeding, but magistrates can invoke penalties in excess of the �60 and 3 points that the fixed penalty option provides.

Hence that is why I asked the circumstances surrounding coppershoe’s experience.

[spaced]

how do you know you were doing exactly 71mph? Whatever punishment you get, you should not have been speeding. End of.

[jake-the-peg]

For goodness sake Coppershoe went through roadworks on a motorway where there way a temporary speed restriction and was caught by a camera.

Pretty much any of us could be guilty of the same with only a lapse of attention.

I'd save my venom for all the 100mph fast lane drivers if I were you all. That's a matter of intentional disregard.

[spaced]

thats exactly what another speeder would say. chill out mate!

[trotsky]

71 MPH IN A 40 LIMIT !!! if the limit was 70 you would probably doing about 101 mph ,so just think of the fuel you ve saved , and put it towards your fine and costs : )

[trotsky]

you should change your name to lead boot instead of copper shoe : )

[spaced]

hahahaha very good! ;-)

[jake-the-peg]

I think you're missing the point Trotsky ( point- ice pick - Trotsky - geddit? :c))) never mind it's as good as your copper/lead shoe gag)

It was a temporary speed limit - if it hadn't have been there he'd have been 1 mph over.

You can't assume that he'd have been doing 101 if it hadn't have been there - he still should have noticed and reduced his speed and he'll get done for it. But treating the offense as severe as somebody who's doing 100 in a 70 is simply unjust because you can't say it was an accident and you didn't notice the speed limit was 70 in the latter case.

There's a perspective here

[JudgeJ]

Unfortunately, jake, magistrates’ sentencing guidelines treat the two exactly the same.

The “top” category of speeding is:

for 20-30 mph limits, exceeded by 21mph or more
for 40-50 mph limits, exceeded by 26mph or more
for 60-70mph limits, exceeded by 31mph or more

So, 71 in a 40 limit is really viewed as more serious than 101 in a 70 limit. Both +31mph, but seen as more serious.

[trotsky]

if you get banned let me know i may be interested in buying your car

[spaced]

i like it, trotsky, i like.

jake, you talk about assuming...we shouldnt assume that he was actually doing 71

[spaced]

he may have been doing more. either way, and wether it was a temp speed redution or not, he should be reading the road and signal ahead, thus allowing him to slow down, way before reaching the speed change.

Tut tut coppershoe, tut tut.

[coppershoe]

Hi no I was not stopped I was caught on camera, I have no points on my licence and I drive about 25000 miles a year as a medical rep. It really was a silly mistake I try never to go over 70 on motorways I just missed the signs and there were no other cars around to slow me down...no excuse I know.

[kepla]

So there was NO other traffic about ? That is good as, based on case law, you can use it to show that you were doing nothing dangerous. Whatever you do, make you don't admit ANYTHING in any way. Google for the SafeSpeed web site and follow through the details of the various advice you will get. Make sure you don't do anything to incriminate yourself. When you are sent the questionaire asking who was driving, you must BY LAW give the driver's name (yourself) but you DON'T have to sign it. So DON'T sign it. If offered a fixed penalty, then you can either cough up the dosh and accept the points on your license or let it go to court. If it goes to court ask for dismissal as the evidence as to who was driving will be inadmissable as it will not be signed.

[ccollins108]

It sounds as if you have received a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) which gives you a fixed amount of time to reply, and asking you to provide details of who was driving the car. This is because they have to identify you, personally, as the driver, in order to prosecute. Please note that, if you have only been caught on a Gatso camera (which cannot identify you, personally, as the driver), providing your details on the NIP is tantamount to self-incrimination (although, as you will find elsewhere on the web, these defences have failed, in the past). From personal experience, I can confirm that the best way is to provide the details of someone living overseas. I have provided other posts on this website outlining this in detail. You do not have to provide ANY OTHER information. They may write back, asking you for additional confirmation, etc, but you ARE NOT obliged to provide any more information. On this basis, they CANNOT prosecute you - they could, in theory, still take you to court, but they could not convict you without having further evidence.

[ccollins108]

Further to the above post, in case you were wondering, they will not try to pursue anyone overseas - I have used someone on a different continent - nor will they even bother writing to that person, they will just ask you to let them know when that person is due to come back into the country, so that they can be 'brought to justice'.

Obviously, this approach works best when the car is your own and you have the discretion of allowing someone else to drive the car. Questions regarding insurance will not arise firstly, and most importantly, because they won't ask you and, secondly, because the theoretical (overseas) driver had their own insurance, right!

[ccollins108]

Sorry, I forgot to mention, providing details of an overseas driver is a much, much better, safer method than not signing the NIP - although it is true that, legally, you are not obliged to sign it, this is clearly a 'ruse' and does leave you open to court action, from which you may or may not escape unscathed. Please re-post if you need any further clarification on the subject.