almost 16 years with out points, it had to end :(

[KFC]

Driver101 said:

It probably would work out cheaper by the time you pay for the course and take a day off work.

We don't get the speed awareness courses up here in Scotland, but I just think they will be mostly a waste of time. We all know the dangers and have seen the shock videos before, yet always think that we are safe.

It's a bit patronising turning up for speeding course knowing you've only accepted it to avoid points and probably won't start driving like a saint.

Yeah... i grew up in scotland and now living in EU and don't envy that system at all. Out here its cash fines all the way and no points or any nonsense (unless you kill someone or do something really horrific)

[ToothbrushMan]

in 16 years its perfectly possible to have had almost a licence rammed full of points right up until the 11th year when they begin to drop off. then you arrive at year 16 with a blemish free one. it might look or sound good but can hide a multitude of spent convictions.

i often hear of folk who say oh ive had a clean licence for 120 years. never been stopped or ticketed once......yeah, right from members on this type of forum? .......OK.

[Jonsv8]

I took the course, you can do them on a Saturday, they're half a day and cheaper than the fine, but if you're only interest is a few quid you're missing the point.

I didn't think I'd learn anything, and while I didnt learn much, I did learn something. The majority of the people on the course didn't even know the speed limits, and those that did for a car didn't for other vehicle types (not massively relevant unless you're stuck behind a large van and wonder why they're going so slow). Just one example. Stopping distances and more importantly the way cars slow down was the one that got me, I'm leaving a slightly longer gap to the car in front as a result.

If you think you know it all then you've lost a sat morning but saved £15.

[btcc123]

I have been driving for 38 years and had a clean licence for all that time but got caught doing 80 in a 70 late last year and had the choice of £100 fine and 3 points or a SAC that cost £85.

Anyone who takes the points instead of the SAC is making the wrong choice in my opinion as most people can fit it in their schedule if they want to and can take it in their town/city.I thought I would not learn much but in reality as I have not read the highway code for 38 years there have been some changes that I knew but not all of them.The two ex traffic police were took the course were good,it was quite amusing that some people there did not have a clue about most things.The first half of the course was a bit boring but the second half was based on advanced driving and was quite interesting so during the course I thought I would change my driving quite a bit but in reality after the course you just do the same things you always did but in my case are a lot more aware than I used to be.

If you have a clean licence you may think whats 3 points its not a problem but what happens if in 6 months you get a other 3 points and then again shortly after.Now your are on 9 points and that will take some enjoyment from your driving in the knowledge that 3 more points and you could lose your licence.Do you need your car for work,insurance will increase etc so take the SAC if you have the chance.

Edited by btcc123 on Monday 6th April 10:48

[Sheepshanks]

KFC said:

Yeah... i grew up in scotland and now living in EU and don't envy that system at all. Out here its cash fines all the way and no points or any nonsense (unless you kill someone or do something really horrific)

Where do you live?

Colleague in Germany got banned for a month for being caught twice within a fairly short space of time. The speeds, while in built-up areas, seemed very minor for such a penalty. One was at night too, caught by a cop with a hand-held speed gun.

[Dr Jekyll]

ToothbrushMan said:

in 16 years its perfectly possible to have had almost a licence rammed full of points right up until the 11th year when they begin to drop off. then you arrive at year 16 with a blemish free one. it might look or sound good but can hide a multitude of spent convictions.

i often hear of folk who say oh ive had a clean licence for 120 years. never been stopped or ticketed once......yeah, right from members on this type of forum? .......OK.

Points come off your licence after 4 years not 11. In any case of it's perfectly possible to go for decades without being being stopped or getting points, I've had neither in 30 odd years. I suspect the ones who expect points every few years are the same ones who criticise others for not exceeding 30 in 30 limits and waiting until passing the NSL sign before accelerating.

[Flibble]

AMArchie said:

40?!?!?!
This road needs to be marked NSL - just ridiculous.

Yes it's a daft limit; most people drive through there at 50-60 mph I'd estimate. It's really not helped by being just off the end of the M56 so people come flying down at motorway speeds and don't bother to slow down much until they get past the M60 junction and into the urban area half a mile or so further along.

[JJ55]

Driver101 said:

KFC said:

You need to pay for the course though... isn't the 3 points the cheaper option?

It probably would work out cheaper by the time you pay for the course and take a day off work.

We don't get the speed awareness courses up here in Scotland, but I just think they will be mostly a waste of time. We all know the dangers and have seen the shock videos before, yet always think that we are safe.

It's a bit patronising turning up for speeding course knowing you've only accepted it to avoid points and probably won't start driving like a saint.

The course is better as the points affect your insurance for 5 years

[silverfoxcc]

KFC

I had the option a few months ago

Pay 100.00 and get three points

Or keep mostly schtum for 3 hours and pay 90.00 and keep a clean licence

PLUS is you use one of the more nosey ins Co you can say with hand on heart

Yes i attended a course but it was voluntary to see what training i could use to keep my clean licence....

This statement is 100% true as you can go on one without the invite from plod.. now not many people know that, and you have not told the ins co any lies as it was your choice. that, or pay 100.00 and get three points, which you cannot waffle away on the renewal

Besides, some of the bullst they spout is worth the 90.00

i quote


Whenever there is a SLOW written on the road, it is where a has fatality occurred


and on my course

Only 4 road signs must be used at all times ( i forget which ones at the moment) and all others, eg junction, low bridge,wild animals etc are only erected when there has been an accident at that location

[Bigends]

Dr Jekyll said:

ToothbrushMan said:

in 16 years its perfectly possible to have had almost a licence rammed full of points right up until the 11th year when they begin to drop off. then you arrive at year 16 with a blemish free one. it might look or sound good but can hide a multitude of spent convictions.

i often hear of folk who say oh ive had a clean licence for 120 years. never been stopped or ticketed once......yeah, right from members on this type of forum? .......OK.

Points come off your licence after 4 years not 11. In any case of it's perfectly possible to go for decades without being being stopped or getting points, I've had neither in 30 odd years. I suspect the ones who expect points every few years are the same ones who criticise others for not exceeding 30 in 30 limits and waiting until passing the NSL sign before accelerating.

Points and accident free since 1972 here

[Jonsv8]

How good a SAC is really depends who you get I think. I've head the pleasure of doing 2 of them. The first was great. Not patronising, even started the pitch with "I'm not going to tell you speed causes accidents, but I will tell you that generally speaking the faster you're going if you have an accident, the more it hurts"

The old chap who said he was caught speeding was because his car won't do 30 when its in top gear was a worry. Another old chap who was done for about 70 in a 60 was although he thought the NSL was 50 (lucky for him)

But the bit that I found interesting was stopping as I mentioned earlier. Its an approximation but 2 cars, side by side, one doing 70 and the other 50 both slam on their brakes. How fast is the car that started at 70 still doing at the point on the road where the car doing 50 came to a halt? I thought maybe 30? The answer was 50.

The other course was awful and factually incorrect. Showing a picture of a motorway gantry showing 50 and asking what is the speed limit where you are. I said you don't know, there's nothing on the gantry to say its the start of a 50 zone (repeaters on roads are smaller then the start) so you could already be in it or you could be in a 70 and about to enter it. But anyway, I had a good chat with the fire engine driver who was made to go on the course over tea and biscuits.

[BertBert]

silverfoxcc said:

KFC
PLUS is you use one of the more nosey ins Co you can say with hand on heart

Yes i attended a course but it was voluntary to see what training i could use to keep my clean licence....

So if I have this right, somehow this is an allowable lie to the ins co that asks for speed awareness course attendance?

They say "any courses?". You say "yes, but it was voluntary, I just decided to go on one and it wasn't coz I got invited to one by way of being caught over the speed limit as an alternative to a prosecution, no siree."

Bert

[robinessex]

Go to the course. Have the free cuppa and chocky biscuit. Sleep through the course. Go home at max warp speed.

[Jim1556]

Jonsv8 said:

But the bit that I found interesting was stopping as I mentioned earlier. Its an approximation but 2 cars, side by side, one doing 70 and the other 50 both slam on their brakes. How fast is the car that started at 70 still doing at the point on the road where the car doing 50 came to a halt? I thought maybe 30? The answer was 50.

That sounds like the biggest load of bks I've heard this year!

But, looking at the physics, and remembering they were on about distance, they're not far off...

Although, technology hasn't improved much:

In 1947 (bearing in mind drum brakes, crap suspension etc), the highway code states it'd take 125ft to brake from 50mph + 50ft thinking distance = 175ft

Today's highway code still states the same...

I reckon I could halve that with my RS29s!

[Jonsv8]

Jim1556 said:

Jonsv8 said:

But the bit that I found interesting was stopping as I mentioned earlier. Its an approximation but 2 cars, side by side, one doing 70 and the other 50 both slam on their brakes. How fast is the car that started at 70 still doing at the point on the road where the car doing 50 came to a halt? I thought maybe 30? The answer was 50.

That sounds like the biggest load of bks I've heard this year!

But, looking at the physics, and remembering they were on about distance, they're not far off...

Although, technology hasn't improved much:

In 1947 (bearing in mind drum brakes, crap suspension etc), the highway code states it'd take 125ft to brake from 50mph + 50ft thinking distance = 175ft

Today's highway code still states the same...

I reckon I could halve that with my RS29s!

I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me or not. He even mentioned the Highway Code and said it didn't really matter if stopping distances had improved. If both cars could stop in half the Highway Code distance, the same logic applies.

[Phatboy317]

Jonsv8 said:

But the bit that I found interesting was stopping as I mentioned earlier. Its an approximation but 2 cars, side by side, one doing 70 and the other 50 both slam on their brakes. How fast is the car that started at 70 still doing at the point on the road where the car doing 50 came to a halt? I thought maybe 30? The answer was 50.

That's only relevant in the extremely unlikely event that 2 cars, one doing 70 and the other 50, both have occasion to slam on their brakes in the fleeting moment during which both of them happen to be side by side, because of a hazard which just happens to appear at that precise moment at a distance equal to the slower car's stopping distance ahead.

Edited by Phatboy317 on Tuesday 7th April 06:02

[BertBert]

silverfoxcc said:

KFC
PLUS is you use one of the more nosey ins Co you can say with hand on heart

Yes i attended a course but it was voluntary to see what training i could use to keep my clean licence....

So if I have this right, somehow this is an allowable lie to the ins co that asks for speed awareness course attendance?

They say "any courses?". You say "yes, but it was voluntary, I just decided to go on one and it wasn't coz I got invited to one by way of being caught over the speed limit as an alternative to a prosecution, no siree."

Bert

[silverfoxcc]

BertBert

You posted twice

You posted twice


What i meant was if you said yes, you ins may go up. ( as they assume you have been done speeding) By adding the rider you did it voluntarily, you are not lying but being economical with the truth.i.e you dont have to tell them it was that or 100.00 and three points

[Who me ?]

Jim1556 said:

That sounds like the biggest load of bks I've heard this year!

But, looking at the physics, and remembering they were on about distance, they're not far off...

Although, technology hasn't improved much:

In 1947 (bearing in mind drum brakes, crap suspension etc), the highway code states it'd take 125ft to brake from 50mph + 50ft thinking distance = 175ft

Today's highway code still states the same...

I reckon I could halve that with my RS29s!

Top gear took a trio of cars to Australia and asked same question . I seem to remember best car halved the distance , with the others close behind.OK- these were top of the range models, but these days no modern car would sport drums all round, cross plies on all four ,but the constant factor remains the driver.
But hey ho- we don't drive Ford Anglias with drum brakes/ cross ply tyres with no ABS these days. I remember that lots of years ago ,I had an old Vauxhall which I'd fitted larger tyres to and tweeked the next model servo . It was fitted with the larger brake master, and one day I had to stop in a hurry, when a kid on a zebra decided he couldn't wait for traffic to clear. Several cars behind, including one taxi ,had problems stopping. That was in the 70's, long after most Anglias had gone to the scrap heap . perhaps this section of the HC) and it's followers should head that way ). But ,hey the PMB employment agency would have less propaganda to peddle.

[btcc123]

[quote=Who me ?]

Top gear took a trio of cars to Australia and asked same question . I seem to remember best car halved the distance , with the others close behind.OK- these were top of the range models, but these days no modern car would sport drums all round, cross plies on all four ,but the constant factor remains the driver.
But hey ho- we don't drive Ford Anglias with drum brakes/ cross ply tyres with no ABS these days. I remember that lots of years ago ,I had an old Vauxhall which I'd fitted larger tyres to and tweeked the next model servo . It was fitted with the larger brake master, and one day I had to stop in a hurry, when a kid on a zebra decided he couldn't wait for traffic to clear. Several cars behind, including one taxi ,had problems stopping. That was in the 70's, long after most Anglias had gone to the scrap heap . perhaps this section of the HC) and it's followers should head that way ). But ,hey the PMB employment agency would have less propaganda to peddle.

[/quote]

Your example of the Top Gear cars in Australia where they stopped in half the distance is not representative as in this case the drivers knew that when they reached a certain speed they would hit the brake peddle and stop as quickly as they can.

If a member of the public was in the same car in a real life situation and were not expecting to emergency brake but suddenly had to the reaction time would be a lot longer than the Top Gear presenters and depending on the driver stop anywhere between 50% to 100% more distance.