Speeding driver ordered to pay £11,000!!
Discussion
GreatGranny said:
Typical Abersoch holiday home owner from Wilmslow.
Reason why I don't go there anymore.
The reason I don't go to Suffolk for pleasure any more is the roads are gridlocked with moronic slowsters making every journey twice as long as necessary. Perhaps I'll take a look at Abersoch if this is typical.Reason why I don't go there anymore.
speedking31 said:
But he had no control over those costs. I suppose the court has decided that they are proportionate, doesn't seem so to me. Who in their right mind spends >£10k to prove a <£1k offence? If there had been an accident or a death then yes, but just for speeding.
It sends a message to everyone else who thinks they can challenge the accuracy of equipment in order to dodge a fine / points / ban.Could end up saving money in the long run.
I think this also didn't help his plea:
Muppet deserved all he got.
Wales Online said:
He denied breaking the 70mph speed limit and said that a number of people from Cheshire had second homes in Abersoch, which he called a millionaire’s paradise.
He said a number of luxury Audi R8 vehicles regularly used the A55.
Pickup questioned whether it was his car that had been clocked.
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/speeding-businessman-ordered-pay-11000-9255004He said a number of luxury Audi R8 vehicles regularly used the A55.
Pickup questioned whether it was his car that had been clocked.
Muppet deserved all he got.
Hackney said:
It sends a message to everyone else who thinks they can challenge the accuracy of equipment in order to dodge a fine / points / ban.
Could end up saving money in the long run.
Not "everyone else", just R8 drivers, who probably make up a very small proportion of revenue income.Could end up saving money in the long run.
Hackney said:
speedking31 said:
But he had no control over those costs. I suppose the court has decided that they are proportionate, doesn't seem so to me. Who in their right mind spends >£10k to prove a <£1k offence? If there had been an accident or a death then yes, but just for speeding.
It sends a message to everyone else who thinks they can challenge the accuracy of equipment in order to dodge a fine / points / ban.Could end up saving money in the long run.
speedking31 said:
Hackney said:
It sends a message to everyone else who thinks they can challenge the accuracy of equipment in order to dodge a fine / points / ban.
Could end up saving money in the long run.
Not "everyone else", just R8 drivers, who probably make up a very small proportion of revenue income.Could end up saving money in the long run.
Devil2575 said:
Hackney said:
speedking31 said:
But he had no control over those costs. I suppose the court has decided that they are proportionate, doesn't seem so to me. Who in their right mind spends >£10k to prove a <£1k offence? If there had been an accident or a death then yes, but just for speeding.
It sends a message to everyone else who thinks they can challenge the accuracy of equipment in order to dodge a fine / points / ban.Could end up saving money in the long run.
Also, consider the milkfloat clocked at 80mph or whatever it was, the bus, the courtroom wall etc. Slip error happens with laser devices and it seems the only defence is that the speed "measured" is impossible. If you dare to question it today you're slapped with a 10k fine as a lesson.
Nope, this is not British at all, rather more American, very poor state of affairs indeed.
supermono said:
It would be mine too if it wasn't nonsense. Under what circumstances would it be your view? And what's your view?
Also, consider the milkfloat clocked at 80mph or whatever it was, the bus, the courtroom wall etc. Slip error happens with laser devices and it seems the only defence is that the speed "measured" is impossible. If you dare to question it today you're slapped with a 10k fine as a lesson.
Nope, this is not British at all, rather more American, very poor state of affairs indeed.
I'm not sure what you're rambling on about.Also, consider the milkfloat clocked at 80mph or whatever it was, the bus, the courtroom wall etc. Slip error happens with laser devices and it seems the only defence is that the speed "measured" is impossible. If you dare to question it today you're slapped with a 10k fine as a lesson.
Nope, this is not British at all, rather more American, very poor state of affairs indeed.
My view is that they did this in order to show people that there were willing to demonstrate accuracy if they were challenged.
I don't know the details of the case but my guess would be that the defence questioned the accuracy of the speed detection device under the circumstances in question so the prosecution set up a test to demonstrate it was accurate.
All this stuff about slip errors is a diversion. Your reason for argument has nothibng to do with concerns over accuracy and everything to do with a dislike of being caught and prosecuted for speeding. This was a bloke who was caught bang to rights and his defence team tried to be clever and it ended up costing him. As far as I can see that's all there is too it.
supermono said:
Devil2575 said:
Hackney said:
speedking31 said:
But he had no control over those costs. I suppose the court has decided that they are proportionate, doesn't seem so to me. Who in their right mind spends >£10k to prove a <£1k offence? If there had been an accident or a death then yes, but just for speeding.
It sends a message to everyone else who thinks they can challenge the accuracy of equipment in order to dodge a fine / points / ban.Could end up saving money in the long run.
Also, consider the milkfloat clocked at 80mph or whatever it was, the bus, the courtroom wall etc. Slip error happens with laser devices and it seems the only defence is that the speed "measured" is impossible. If you dare to question it today you're slapped with a 10k fine as a lesson.
Nope, this is not British at all, rather more American, very poor state of affairs indeed.
It would certainly stop those spurious claims (like this one), where someone knew they were in the wrong but thought they could talk it down by a few miles an hour. Or the people who think that if they challenge then the police will back down.
The message is, they won't back down, not even for £10k+ which you'll have to pay yourself.
If, on the other hand, you're driving a milk float clocked at 400mph then it's hardly spurious, the error will be noted and it won't be subject to £10k in costs.
BTW, this wasn't a £10k "fine" it was costs. Very different.
Devil2575 said:
supermono said:
It would be mine too if it wasn't nonsense. Under what circumstances would it be your view? And what's your view?
Also, consider the milkfloat clocked at 80mph or whatever it was, the bus, the courtroom wall etc. Slip error happens with laser devices and it seems the only defence is that the speed "measured" is impossible. If you dare to question it today you're slapped with a 10k fine as a lesson.
Nope, this is not British at all, rather more American, very poor state of affairs indeed.
I'm not sure what you're rambling on about.Also, consider the milkfloat clocked at 80mph or whatever it was, the bus, the courtroom wall etc. Slip error happens with laser devices and it seems the only defence is that the speed "measured" is impossible. If you dare to question it today you're slapped with a 10k fine as a lesson.
Nope, this is not British at all, rather more American, very poor state of affairs indeed.
My view is that they did this in order to show people that there were willing to demonstrate accuracy if they were challenged.
I don't know the details of the case but my guess would be that the defence questioned the accuracy of the speed detection device under the circumstances in question so the prosecution set up a test to demonstrate it was accurate.
All this stuff about slip errors is a diversion. Your reason for argument has nothibng to do with concerns over accuracy and everything to do with a dislike of being caught and prosecuted for speeding. This was a bloke who was caught bang to rights and his defence team tried to be clever and it ended up costing him. As far as I can see that's all there is too it.
GreatGranny said:
Typical Abersoch holiday home owner from Wilmslow.
Reason why I don't go there anymore.
He's a plonker for going into North Wales.Reason why I don't go there anymore.
I got done there in what I feel where very dubious circumstances and was given a fixed penalty despite the alleged speed being well into summons territory.
I still wanted to challenge it but was advised not to as they will throw everything they can in trying to win, and this thread bears that out.
Vindictive b
ds. They are sending a very clear message: don't challenge us. Totally out of order. There is a very slim chance he was correct, and deserved the right to challenge. I bet if he was unemployed and a council houser renter, it would be payable at 50p a week forever. Because he is well off he gets caned. Did anyone die? No. Thought not.
ds. They are sending a very clear message: don't challenge us. Totally out of order. There is a very slim chance he was correct, and deserved the right to challenge. I bet if he was unemployed and a council houser renter, it would be payable at 50p a week forever. Because he is well off he gets caned. Did anyone die? No. Thought not.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff