Bowburn And Parkhill Green Matters Quiz
Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
speeding!
I got caught by fixed camera 3 times in one day. Each time i was doing 35 in a 30 zone. Last October I was given 3 points and a fine, again doing 35 in a 30 zone.
If i get another 3 points per offence does this mean i get a ban?
(I've been driving for 19 years with no problems whatsoever - lately i seem to be tarnished as a 'boy racer', even though i am a 36 year old mother of 4!)
If i get another 3 points per offence does this mean i get a ban?
(I've been driving for 19 years with no problems whatsoever - lately i seem to be tarnished as a 'boy racer', even though i am a 36 year old mother of 4!)
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by harriman. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
There's nothing inherently wrong with speed cameras after all you could as easily get a ticket from a police car.
However the totting up of multiple offences committed on one day or possibly on one journey is inherently unjust.
The whole point of the totting up system is to give fair warning to people to change their behaviour before imposing a fine.
We need a modification to the law such that if a second offence is committed before a notice of intended prosecution is received only the most serious offence is liable for points
However the totting up of multiple offences committed on one day or possibly on one journey is inherently unjust.
The whole point of the totting up system is to give fair warning to people to change their behaviour before imposing a fine.
We need a modification to the law such that if a second offence is committed before a notice of intended prosecution is received only the most serious offence is liable for points
If action is taken on each of the three offences that you mention you should receive a conditional offer to accept a fixed penalty (�60 plus three points) for each of them. When you return the third (assuming you accept the offer in each case) the conditional offer will be withdrawn and you will be asked to attend court. This is because you will, if you accept guilt for the third offence, have accumulated 12 penalty points within three years. Magistrates will have to hear your case and will have no option but to disqualify you for a minimum of six months upon conviction for the latest offence.
You may plead �special reasons� for them not to disqualify you. These have to be �exceptional� and simply needing to drive to get to work or to take children to school is not usually considered sufficient. If you do intend to plead special reasons you would be well advised to consult a solicitor. This is for two reasons. Firstly you will be told whether you have a realistic chance of success and secondly because the arguments have to be well put in order to have a chance of being successful.
You may plead �special reasons� for them not to disqualify you. These have to be �exceptional� and simply needing to drive to get to work or to take children to school is not usually considered sufficient. If you do intend to plead special reasons you would be well advised to consult a solicitor. This is for two reasons. Firstly you will be told whether you have a realistic chance of success and secondly because the arguments have to be well put in order to have a chance of being successful.
Whilst I have no sympathy for drivers convicted of individual speeding offences whether caught my camera or any other way I do have a certain sympathy with jake�s point of view, especially when he says that offenders should be given the chance to modify their behaviour after conviction.
This approach has been tried and has been rejected by judges on appeal for reasons which escape me at the moment. For other (non motoring) offences courts most certainly adopt a practice known as �sentencing in totality�.
For example, where an offender commits a number of offences of shoplifting in a single day he will be sentenced for the whole lot (and may even ask for other offences committed previously to be �taken into consideration�). In these circumstances he will probably receive a sentence hardly, if any, more severe than if he had committed only one offence. The sentences for each offence are certainly not aimed to be cumulative in the same way as penalty points are.
Unfortunately it is as it is, and it is another reason why adherence to the speed limits is all the more important. There is a simple way to keep the pounds in your pocket and the points off your licence - drive within the speed limits. This argument will not be won by those advocating anything else.
This approach has been tried and has been rejected by judges on appeal for reasons which escape me at the moment. For other (non motoring) offences courts most certainly adopt a practice known as �sentencing in totality�.
For example, where an offender commits a number of offences of shoplifting in a single day he will be sentenced for the whole lot (and may even ask for other offences committed previously to be �taken into consideration�). In these circumstances he will probably receive a sentence hardly, if any, more severe than if he had committed only one offence. The sentences for each offence are certainly not aimed to be cumulative in the same way as penalty points are.
Unfortunately it is as it is, and it is another reason why adherence to the speed limits is all the more important. There is a simple way to keep the pounds in your pocket and the points off your licence - drive within the speed limits. This argument will not be won by those advocating anything else.
sorry harriman - doesn't look good. Have yo had the letters through for all the offences, or just think you were caught (camera flash etc)? If not, you may be lucky and find one of them was a 'dud' and didn't record you.
I do think it's unjust accumulating points like that - I could lose my licence on one trip into Bedford from home, in fact just along a stretch of the A6 about 2 miles long!
I do think it's unjust accumulating points like that - I could lose my licence on one trip into Bedford from home, in fact just along a stretch of the A6 about 2 miles long!
Judge J 3x3 = 9 not 12 she would have needed to be caught 4 times to then face a ban. As for Harriman did the 1st flashing light not put you off and make you think that you better slow down.
For everybody out there that does not like fixed speed cameras then why not move to County Durham - they have none in the whole county and one of the best road safety records in the country
For everybody out there that does not like fixed speed cameras then why not move to County Durham - they have none in the whole county and one of the best road safety records in the country
Thanks for the answers - I have had the actual notices - 2 of the camera flashes were 2 minutes apart!.
I wholeheartedly agree that the speed camera's are there for a reason and that under NO circumstances should the speed limit be broken.
All i can say is that i was driving through unfamiliar territory and I was actually looking for traffic directional signs so I never noticed all of the cameras.
On my speedo it is a fine demarcation between 30 and 35 and I thought i WAS under the limit
I had 4 arguing children (all under 8) in the back.
Unfortunately it is an essential requirement of my job that I drive and provide a car.
I wholeheartedly agree that the speed camera's are there for a reason and that under NO circumstances should the speed limit be broken.
All i can say is that i was driving through unfamiliar territory and I was actually looking for traffic directional signs so I never noticed all of the cameras.
On my speedo it is a fine demarcation between 30 and 35 and I thought i WAS under the limit
I had 4 arguing children (all under 8) in the back.
Unfortunately it is an essential requirement of my job that I drive and provide a car.
Can I just point out that answers to this question - as so often happens includes some idiot who does not read the question before answering. It is obvious that we are talking about FOUR offences - the three in one day now PLUS one last October. So how on earth can homerthegreat get this to a total of only three?
Some points about this. Firstly, If you get any 'notice of intended prosecution' within two weeks of being 'flashed' then straight away write in response asking for copies of the evidence. Also, by law you have to complete the declaration of who was driving the vehicle but DO NOT under any circumstances sign it. By putting the drivers name and address on the form you are complying with the law, but there is NO legal requirement to sign it. By not signing it, it is not admissable in court as evidence. If you were 'flashed' three times in succession over a period of a few minutes then it sounds like you were driving at 35 mph for a period of time past three cameras. The offence is not 'going fast past a speed camera' but one of 'going fast'. If you only did this once, and it was observed by cameras three times, then you only actually committed the speeding offence once. There are just three pieces of evidence to that ONE offence, not three offences. This will need carefully putting in court, but should result in just the usual sixty quid fine plus three points. Of course, if you were caught three times by the same camera in quick succession, by repeating the same short journey thre times, then you really should have taken the first flash more seriously. As regards misbehaving children, well, no excuse I'm afraid. As the driver it is up to you to make sure that your passengers behave and do not distract you. I would suggest you try discipline. The correct level of discipline is just enough to stop the misbehaviour.
Well, kepla, the argument you put forward concerning the unsigned NIP form is a murky one and nowhere near as straightforward as you imply. It is a bit complex to go into fully here, but simply completing the form yourself and returning it unsigned is not the answer. You need to get a third party who cannot be called upon to give evidence against you (your spouse or solicitor) to complete it on your behalf. Needless to say, even this is not foolproof, or everybody would do it.
However, all this assumes that harriman is going to plead not guilty. If she pleads guilty the question of evidence does not arise as the case has no need to be proved.
As far as challenging the number of offences committed goes, it is not laid down in law what distance or time needs to elapse before a fresh offence of speeding is committed. Certainly two minutes (about one mile) seems a bit close and it could be argued that only a single offence occurred. It would be for the magistrates to decide whether more than one has been committed and they would rely on previous case law to help them. If this course is to be adopted, harriman must decline all of the Conditional Offers and defend all the cases in court.
However, all this assumes that harriman is going to plead not guilty. If she pleads guilty the question of evidence does not arise as the case has no need to be proved.
As far as challenging the number of offences committed goes, it is not laid down in law what distance or time needs to elapse before a fresh offence of speeding is committed. Certainly two minutes (about one mile) seems a bit close and it could be argued that only a single offence occurred. It would be for the magistrates to decide whether more than one has been committed and they would rely on previous case law to help them. If this course is to be adopted, harriman must decline all of the Conditional Offers and defend all the cases in court.
Just a quick afterthought, harriman. Most speedometers overstate your speed, sometimes by up to 10%. If the cameras have clocked you at 35mph, the chances are your speedo was showing nearer 38mph. If your speedo is such that you cannot differentiate between an indicated 30mph and 38mph it must be of seriously defective design.
On the subject of the children, I find it odd that in parts of the country local authorities only allow children to swim in a public pool when accompanied on a one to one basis by an adult, whilst drivers are allowed (and see fit) to drive around with four small children arguing in the back seat of their vehicle.
If you do decide to put forward any sort of case against disqualification, I should not mention this fact if I were you. Far from being a mitigating factor in your favour, it could well be viewed that you contributed to the commission of these offences by driving in circumstances where your concentration was almost certain to be disrupted. You will no doubt argue that transporting the children with no other adult present was unavoidable and necessary. This is unlikely to cut much ice with their Worships.
On the subject of the children, I find it odd that in parts of the country local authorities only allow children to swim in a public pool when accompanied on a one to one basis by an adult, whilst drivers are allowed (and see fit) to drive around with four small children arguing in the back seat of their vehicle.
If you do decide to put forward any sort of case against disqualification, I should not mention this fact if I were you. Far from being a mitigating factor in your favour, it could well be viewed that you contributed to the commission of these offences by driving in circumstances where your concentration was almost certain to be disrupted. You will no doubt argue that transporting the children with no other adult present was unavoidable and necessary. This is unlikely to cut much ice with their Worships.
Although having 3 speeding offences on one journey is a little harsh i am interested to hear how you managed to not see the repeaters on the speed limits or the cameras when you were looking so closely at the road signs?
Plus if it was an unknown road surely youd have paid even more attention to the road and its signs?
Plus if it was an unknown road surely youd have paid even more attention to the road and its signs?
with regards your 3 offences. did you stay above the speed limit from before the first camera untill after the third camera? if you did the you only comited one speeding offence. BUT you may find that you have comited other offences by travelling so far staying over the limit. i.e. due care & attention (not seeing the warning signs and camera flashes )
what ever the outcome you need to learn to read the road better i would suggest doing an IAM or ROSPA course.
also, "unfamiliar territory"??? slow down for sure.
we've all got kids, give them a chance.
definately get a solicitor and make sure it's one who 'knows' motoring offences.
what ever the outcome you need to learn to read the road better i would suggest doing an IAM or ROSPA course.
also, "unfamiliar territory"??? slow down for sure.
we've all got kids, give them a chance.
definately get a solicitor and make sure it's one who 'knows' motoring offences.
You know harriman ,memorys can be funny things are you sure you weren't driving with a relative or partner in the car and didn't change drivers after having a row in the car?
It might be that they have fewer points and were actually driving when the first or last shot was taken.
If you get in touch with the authority before returning the letter and say you're arguing with your partner as to who was driving they'll probably send you a copy of the pictures and you may see that it's clear that you were driving or it might be from behind and not show the driver.
You might then recall it was somebody else who was driving for the last offense.
Just a thought
It might be that they have fewer points and were actually driving when the first or last shot was taken.
If you get in touch with the authority before returning the letter and say you're arguing with your partner as to who was driving they'll probably send you a copy of the pictures and you may see that it's clear that you were driving or it might be from behind and not show the driver.
You might then recall it was somebody else who was driving for the last offense.
Just a thought
And before you accept jake�s advice, harriman, bear in mind that if any misleading information you provide is discovered you could be charged with attempting to pervert the course of justice. This is a serious offence, triable only by judge and jury and carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. Even though a case like this would be viewed as being at the lower end of the scale, a custodial sentence would almost certainly be imposed.
As jake well knows from recent similar threads there have been numerous examples of people being sent to prison in exactly the circumstances he proposes you put yourself , and it is a high price to pay in an attempt to avoid a relatively short driving ban.
As jake well knows from recent similar threads there have been numerous examples of people being sent to prison in exactly the circumstances he proposes you put yourself , and it is a high price to pay in an attempt to avoid a relatively short driving ban.
That was not advice JudgeJ.
I did actually have a very similar occurence when I was flashed by a camra a bout 4 years ago which started a row, I pulled over and insisted my wife drive "if she was so smart" only when 2 notices came in a week later and we asked for the pictures did we find that she had then been caught 10 minutes later.
Of course claiming this incorrectly would be perverting but then again if the pictures don't show you what possible evidence could be offerred to support such a charge?
I did actually have a very similar occurence when I was flashed by a camra a bout 4 years ago which started a row, I pulled over and insisted my wife drive "if she was so smart" only when 2 notices came in a week later and we asked for the pictures did we find that she had then been caught 10 minutes later.
Of course claiming this incorrectly would be perverting but then again if the pictures don't show you what possible evidence could be offerred to support such a charge?
I have already signed and returned my notices.
I firmly believe that I must hold my hand up to this and take whatever the 'powers that be' see fit. I am not the type of person to shirk my responsibility. At the end of the day I WAS driving and I WAS speeding.
I hold this view as I am a law enforcement officer myself (an EHO). I wholeheartedly agree that I should have been paying more attention - but then doesn't every one have an off day?
A ban would ruin me because of several reasons:
- as an EHO I am responsible for food safety/health and safety in a large rural district. No car = no employment.
- my childrens school and nursery is 6 miles away. I have to drive them daily.
I am a Guide Leader and Scout volunteer as well as a Childrens Welfare Officer for a cricket club. I am one of the few who are fully CRB checked to transport children to events/A&E in emergency situations etc. It is extremely difficult to get volunteers for these organisations as it is.
I am already stressed enough about this issue and have certainly learned my lesson. Annoying thing is - people do 60mph past my house all the time (it is a 30 zone) - police/county council show no interest as there haven't been enough fatalities/major accidents. GRRR!!!!
I firmly believe that I must hold my hand up to this and take whatever the 'powers that be' see fit. I am not the type of person to shirk my responsibility. At the end of the day I WAS driving and I WAS speeding.
I hold this view as I am a law enforcement officer myself (an EHO). I wholeheartedly agree that I should have been paying more attention - but then doesn't every one have an off day?
A ban would ruin me because of several reasons:
- as an EHO I am responsible for food safety/health and safety in a large rural district. No car = no employment.
- my childrens school and nursery is 6 miles away. I have to drive them daily.
I am a Guide Leader and Scout volunteer as well as a Childrens Welfare Officer for a cricket club. I am one of the few who are fully CRB checked to transport children to events/A&E in emergency situations etc. It is extremely difficult to get volunteers for these organisations as it is.
I am already stressed enough about this issue and have certainly learned my lesson. Annoying thing is - people do 60mph past my house all the time (it is a 30 zone) - police/county council show no interest as there haven't been enough fatalities/major accidents. GRRR!!!!
Latest Posts
ChatterBank8 mins ago
News9 mins ago
ChatterBank11 mins ago
So It Was Just Another Dirty Con Trick...
News13 mins ago
