Had My Day in Court - Speeding

[barrisimo]

Well finally had my day in court for getting caught speeding on the A3 Northbound back in July. Was caught doing 113.19MPH by an unmarked Jag. End result 28 day ban and £600 fine + £43 costs. I guess that could have been much worse. Pleaded guilty, apologised a lot explained my situation no real hardship case to put forward - I think it was more than fare and I have certainly learned from the experience. Anyone wanting to get any advise from my point of view are more than welcome. Glad that's over with!!

[ledaig]

barrisimo said:

I think it was more than fare

or at least it will be for the next 28 days

Still, good result - at least you didn't get banged up!
Any idea of the insurance implications cost wise?

[barrisimo]

My insurer basically stated that the ban was 30% extra and 15% extra for the SP60. Annoying but it's self inflicted so only myself to blame!

[superlightr]

Why is it fair?

You can bet they would have done you for dangerous driving/careless driving if you had put others at risk. So why is exceeding a limit safely and then losing a licence fair?

Its not, its a load of old crock.

[towman]

Made me think...................

Does a 28 day ban just remove one very repentant driver from the road for month, at which point he can resume his high speed antics again. Shirley a more harsh fine would be 11 points leaving the driver with three years of crawling around on best behaviour.

Bit of a result I`d say !

[trev r]

superlightr said:

Why is it fair? You can bet they would have done you for dangerous driving/careless driving if you had put others at risk. So why is exceeding a limit safely and then losing a licence fair? Its not, its a load of old crock.

Exactly.

[outrider]

I would have had my barrister closely question the #13.19mph speed cameras or the other stuff they use cannot be that precise. A crap result imo. I would have sat in their bloody Jag and demanded to read PACE (which is your right I beleive)that would have kept them sitting at the side of the road for a good 2-3 hrs with their fingers up their arses while you read carefully through it.

[MrsMiggins]

barrisimo said:

My insurer basically stated that the ban was 30% extra and 15% extra for the SP60. Annoying but it's self inflicted so only myself to blame!

Why is it an SP60? Is that correct?

[purpleheadedcerb]

outrider said:

I would have had my barrister closely question the #13.19mph speed cameras or the other stuff they use cannot be that precise. A crap result imo. I would have sat in their bloody Jag and demanded to read PACE (which is your right I beleive)that would have kept them sitting at the side of the road for a good 2-3 hrs with their fingers up their arses while you read carefully through it.

You get those rights if you are taken into custody (i.e. arrested). Being processed for a traffic offence doesn't involve any requirement for you to be allowed legal advice etc (at the scene). Obviously, if you are carrying a chair leg then its a whole different scenario

Just so you know.

[Prof Beard]

MrsMiggins said:

barrisimo said: My insurer basically stated that the ban was 30% extra and 15% extra for the SP60. Annoying but it's self inflicted so only myself to blame! Why is it an SP60? Is that correct?

I'm certain SP60 is WRONG - there's been discussion of this on SafeSpeed and Pepipoo. I not sure what the implications of being given the wrong coding are though... (Other than, IIRC, it can have a bad effect on insurance premiums)

[Dwight VanDriver]

I think you are right Prof. I tried to find out the criteria for using SP60 when SP10 to 50 seems to cover all transgressions. It has been said on here that Insurance Companies take a dim view on a 60 and hike up. Just wondering if it is being used by Courts etc to identify a ban being imposed.

dvd

[Prof Beard]

Dwight VanDriver said:

I think you are right Prof. I tried to find out the criteria for using SP60 when SP10 to 50 seems to cover all transgressions. It has been said on here that Insurance Companies take a dim view on a 60 and hike up. Just wondering if it is being used by Courts etc to identify a ban being imposed. dvd

There is a table of these codes on the web somewhere - SafeSpeed had an XL spreadsheet of them. I seem to recall that SP60 covers really weird things like "speeding in parkland" and such. I'm sure it has nothing to do with bans etc

[MrsMiggins]

That's what I thought. I think the OP should question it. From what I've read over on PPP and SS the SP60 is enough for a lot of insurers to refuse to quote.

I found the thread on PPP. OP, IMO, it's worth your while trying to get this corrected.

http://pepipoo.com/NewForums2/viewtopic.php?t=8070&a

[pjac67]

Got 28d a few years back - SP50, no insurance increase BTW.

[barrisimo]

I think I was wrong on the SP60, have to wait a few days until I get my documents back from the court. My insurer said it should be an SP30.

[Prof Beard]

barrisimo said:

I think I was wrong on the SP60, have to wait a few days until I get my documents back from the court. My insurer said it should be an SP30.

Be sure to check - SP60 is often issued by courts IN ERROR

See:

www.safespeed.org.uk/pr124.html

and

www.dvla.gov.uk/drivers/endorsem.htm