Caught 106mph on M25 - What to Expect
Discussion
These type of cases annoy me a little.
Here we have a young lad of similar age to me, who is going to lose his licence, because he didn't realise how aggressive and totalitarian the speed enforcement on the M25 has become.
It has gone way beyond normal speed enforcement and is now very obviously aimed at catching people out.
You can argue that people should pay more attention and they'd be aware of it, but then normal people have far too much going in their lives to waste time checking up on the government's latest camera enforcement trickery.
You could also argue 'don't speed', and you'd be right, but catch the M25 or any smart motorway on these days when the variable speed limit keeps jumping up and down....50 > 40 > 60 > 40 > 50, all within a handful of gantries. It's very clearly intended to catch people out, since you simply cannot spend that much time watching gantries and speedometers safely, it takes your concentration away from the road for longer than is ideal. Sooner or later you WILL get caught out if you use these roads daily.
On a number of occasions I've even seen 20 on the smart motorway gantries. Most recently happened near St Albans, seemingly because they were trying to retrieve something from the grass verge on the near side. I'm sorry, but taking a four lane motorway down from 70 to 20 in one gantry is bloody dangerous. I stuck to it because I am not getting points on my licence, but the trucks coming up your backside with horns blasting is scary and dangerous. I cannot believe it is necessary to slow to traffic to 20 just because someone is working in the wooded area to the left of the motorway. It can only be an attempt to increase conviction rates. Are HADECS even able to detect breaches of 20?
Anyway I digress, but the short version is, motorway camera enforcement is based largely on public ignorance and catching people out. Not the right way to do it.
Here we have a young lad of similar age to me, who is going to lose his licence, because he didn't realise how aggressive and totalitarian the speed enforcement on the M25 has become.
It has gone way beyond normal speed enforcement and is now very obviously aimed at catching people out.
You can argue that people should pay more attention and they'd be aware of it, but then normal people have far too much going in their lives to waste time checking up on the government's latest camera enforcement trickery.
You could also argue 'don't speed', and you'd be right, but catch the M25 or any smart motorway on these days when the variable speed limit keeps jumping up and down....50 > 40 > 60 > 40 > 50, all within a handful of gantries. It's very clearly intended to catch people out, since you simply cannot spend that much time watching gantries and speedometers safely, it takes your concentration away from the road for longer than is ideal. Sooner or later you WILL get caught out if you use these roads daily.
On a number of occasions I've even seen 20 on the smart motorway gantries. Most recently happened near St Albans, seemingly because they were trying to retrieve something from the grass verge on the near side. I'm sorry, but taking a four lane motorway down from 70 to 20 in one gantry is bloody dangerous. I stuck to it because I am not getting points on my licence, but the trucks coming up your backside with horns blasting is scary and dangerous. I cannot believe it is necessary to slow to traffic to 20 just because someone is working in the wooded area to the left of the motorway. It can only be an attempt to increase conviction rates. Are HADECS even able to detect breaches of 20?
Anyway I digress, but the short version is, motorway camera enforcement is based largely on public ignorance and catching people out. Not the right way to do it.
zarjaz1991 said:
These type of cases annoy me a little.
Here we have a young lad of similar age to me, who is going to lose his licence, because he didn't realise how aggressive and totalitarian the speed enforcement on the M25 has become.
No, you're completely wrong, we have a young lad of similar age to you, who is going to lose his license for a second time, and this time for doing 50% more than the speed limit (which was probably an indicated 115 on his speedo).Here we have a young lad of similar age to me, who is going to lose his licence, because he didn't realise how aggressive and totalitarian the speed enforcement on the M25 has become.
It's got nothing to do with aggresive and totalitarian speed enforcement, it's got to do with a complete disregard for speed limits. Don't get me wrong, I imagine most people here regularly hit speeds higher than the limit allows, but if you're going to exceed it by that much, you have to accept the consequences. I think most people on here agree that, aged 26, having already had a ban and been done for driving without insurance (unsure whether these were related), they wouldn't be risking speeds that put them in a ban territory. I imagine insurance will be fun for the OP for the next few years, assuming he bothers with it...
zarjaz1991 said:
On a number of occasions I've even seen 20 on the smart motorway gantries. Most recently happened near St Albans, seemingly because they were trying to retrieve something from the grass verge on the near side. I'm sorry, but taking a four lane motorway down from 70 to 20 in one gantry is bloody dangerous.
Which is why they don't do it. They take it down in stages over the preceding gantries.zarjaz1991 said:
I cannot believe it is necessary to slow to traffic to 20 just because someone is working in the wooded area to the left of the motorway. It can only be an attempt to increase conviction rates.
Of course it is, deeps.zarjaz1991 said:
You could also argue 'don't speed', and you'd be right, but catch the M25 or any smart motorway on these days when the variable speed limit keeps jumping up and down....50 > 40 > 60 > 40 > 50, all within a handful of gantries. It's very clearly intended to catch people out, since you simply cannot spend that much time watching gantries and speedometers safely, it takes your concentration away from the road for longer than is ideal. Sooner or later you WILL get caught out if you use these roads daily.
You're not really concentrating and haven't kept track of the current speed limit so you decide that it's 100+ for that section of road?I don't think lack of concentration (while worrying in itself) is the reason why this person has been caught.
Out of interest, what do you look at when you're driving? I'm always baffled by the number of people who find it so difficult to observe what's going on when they're driving, apparently with the excuse that they are trying really hard to observe what's going on around them.
Zigster said:
You're not really concentrating and haven't kept track of the current speed limit so you decide that it's 100+ for that section of road?
I don't think lack of concentration (while worrying in itself) is the reason why this person has been caught.
Out of interest, what do you look at when you're driving? I'm always baffled by the number of people who find it so difficult to observe what's going on when they're driving, apparently with the excuse that they are trying really hard to observe what's going on around them.
Driving should be predominantly about observing the road and other road users. Speed limit and speedo checks should be something done occasionally. Now it's every few seconds, to make sure they haven't sneakily dropped the limit again while you were focusing in something else.I don't think lack of concentration (while worrying in itself) is the reason why this person has been caught.
Out of interest, what do you look at when you're driving? I'm always baffled by the number of people who find it so difficult to observe what's going on when they're driving, apparently with the excuse that they are trying really hard to observe what's going on around them.
I can understand a 50 limit for a few miles due to congestion / obstruction etc. What I can't accept is 70 > 50 > 60 > 40 constantly over successive gantries. It can ONLY be designed to catch people out.
Edited by zarjaz1991 on Thursday 28th July 10:30
Alex said:
I wouldn't even bother turning up. Plead guilty by post. There are no mitigating circumstances, and if you don't turn up, no need to tell them about your previous.
I'd expect a 30 day ban.
DON'T do this. I always believe a no show at court doesn't look good. If they can see you making an effort to turn up, smartly dressed and apologetic I suspect it shall reflect better on you.I'd expect a 30 day ban.
Fermit The Krog and Sarah Sexy said:
DON'T do this. I always believe a no show at court doesn't look good. If they can see you making an effort to turn up, smartly dressed and apologetic I suspect it shall reflect better on you.
I'm pretty sure that if they are considering a ban, they require you to attend. I'm not 100% sure but I think that if, having written to you to advise you that you must attend, if you fail to show up they will issue a warrant for your arrest.Bans just aren't generally done in your absence, unless things have recently changed.
I always thought, If it goes to court, so long as you are not on enough points that would give you a totting ban, your driving history of points/ban(s) can't ordinarily be considered against you in consideration of the punishment dished out for the offence you are in front of the beak for, The only exception for the was drink driving??
zarjaz1991 said:
Driving should be predominantly about observing the road and other road users. Speed limit and speedo checks should be something done occasionally. Now it's every few seconds, to make sure they haven't sneakily dropped the limit again while you were focusing in something else.
I can understand a 50 limit for a few miles due to congestion / obstruction etc. What I can't accept is 70 > 50 > 60 > 40 constantly over successive gantries. It can ONLY be designed to catch people out.
Looking at the photo of a motorway gantry posted earlier on this page, I wouldn't really call that "sneaky". It would be hard to miss that if you were "observing the road".I can understand a 50 limit for a few miles due to congestion / obstruction etc. What I can't accept is 70 > 50 > 60 > 40 constantly over successive gantries. It can ONLY be designed to catch people out.
And you don't need to keep looking at your speedo every few seconds. There is plenty of slack in speed limits (10%+2mph) that even if you insist on always driving right at the speed limit, you would have room to get it slightly wrong.
The OP asked for advice, not to be judged.
I had a court summons for speeding last year, which offered me the option to attend in person or plead guilty by post (this all comes after you respond to the letter, identifying yourself as the driver). The speed was borderline ban / 5 or 6 points. I spoke to a lawyer who advised writing a letter of mitigation, however, if they were considering a ban, they would reject the letter and adjourn the case to call you in for sentencing (the ban). The lawyer also advised IN MY CASE appearing in person was of no benefit, quite the opposite, writing a letter took up less of the courts time.
I think the fine will be based on your disposable income, not just your salary, but it will be big so start saving (you will have time to save as my case took about 7 months to get to court)!
My best advice is wait for the summons, then discuss with a lawyer who will help you with your mitigation. They are worth the money, some cost lots, others significantly less but whatever you choose it is money well spent in my view.
Thankfully I 'only' got 6 points and a hefty fine, but my circumstances were different to yours (66 in a 40, no previous, mitigating circumstances presented against a ban).
Good luck.
I had a court summons for speeding last year, which offered me the option to attend in person or plead guilty by post (this all comes after you respond to the letter, identifying yourself as the driver). The speed was borderline ban / 5 or 6 points. I spoke to a lawyer who advised writing a letter of mitigation, however, if they were considering a ban, they would reject the letter and adjourn the case to call you in for sentencing (the ban). The lawyer also advised IN MY CASE appearing in person was of no benefit, quite the opposite, writing a letter took up less of the courts time.
I think the fine will be based on your disposable income, not just your salary, but it will be big so start saving (you will have time to save as my case took about 7 months to get to court)!
My best advice is wait for the summons, then discuss with a lawyer who will help you with your mitigation. They are worth the money, some cost lots, others significantly less but whatever you choose it is money well spent in my view.
Thankfully I 'only' got 6 points and a hefty fine, but my circumstances were different to yours (66 in a 40, no previous, mitigating circumstances presented against a ban).
Good luck.
zarjaz1991 said:
And yes I get the idea of slowing people down gradually over several gantries. This isn't that. It's a random jumping up and down of the limit. It's confusing and dangerous. And it can only be an attempt to bump up conviction rates by catching people out. Unacceptable.
I've noticed over several threads that you obviously have some kind of axe to grind with the law. Are you one of these people who resent law and lawfulness to such an extent that you can't talk to a police officer without your bile spilling over and prejudicing their attitude towards you? I know some of these. It's always the police's fault.
HustleRussell said:
I've noticed over several threads that you obviously have some kind of axe to grind with the law.
Are you one of these people who resent law and lawfulness to such an extent that you can't talk to a police officer without your bile spilling over and prejudicing their attitude towards you? I know some of these. It's always the police's fault.
No, but by the same token I'm not one of these people who submit blindly to all authority and never question whether they are right or wrong.Are you one of these people who resent law and lawfulness to such an extent that you can't talk to a police officer without your bile spilling over and prejudicing their attitude towards you? I know some of these. It's always the police's fault.
Speed enforcement on smart motorways is over zealous and out of proportion, and is starting to descend into obvious attempts to 'catch people out'. It's actually close to entrapment at times.
What was the previous ban for?
As for the pro three figure speed fans. It's not rocket science. We know where the cameras are. There are signs prominently displayed along with other background warning. If you are doing three figures you know in your own mind that it's ban territory so you'll know if you can afford a ban workwisetc. It's common sense. I'm out, when any of the speeding fans have attended a serious RTC and still feel they are qualified to speed let me know.
He wasn't looking for advice, basically if the previous offences will be spotted. That's not someone who has learnt their lesson just 'my hands in the cookie jar, how bad is it'?
As for the pro three figure speed fans. It's not rocket science. We know where the cameras are. There are signs prominently displayed along with other background warning. If you are doing three figures you know in your own mind that it's ban territory so you'll know if you can afford a ban workwisetc. It's common sense. I'm out, when any of the speeding fans have attended a serious RTC and still feel they are qualified to speed let me know.
He wasn't looking for advice, basically if the previous offences will be spotted. That's not someone who has learnt their lesson just 'my hands in the cookie jar, how bad is it'?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff