I got caught...
Discussion
to be honest if you have no other points. 3 points and 100 shekels is less painful than a speed awareness course imo
just to clarify
some insurers treat sac,s the same as 3 points
you have to pay for the course (isn't it more than 100 pounds now?)
time off work (lost income /use of holiday)
4 hours of being scolded like a child gets very boring ( yes I admit some parts are very worthwhile but don't question when they state that only 5% of people speed)
just to clarify
some insurers treat sac,s the same as 3 points
you have to pay for the course (isn't it more than 100 pounds now?)
time off work (lost income /use of holiday)
4 hours of being scolded like a child gets very boring ( yes I admit some parts are very worthwhile but don't question when they state that only 5% of people speed)
HantsRat said:
This is rubbish. You will not get an NIP in the post. You will have been given the NIP at the time of the stop. No need to identify the driver, the police stopped you, they know you are the driver.
They do need to PROVE that the driver IS who the driver says he is.If the driver turns up in court and says it wasn't him, and they have not established it was actually him, the case could fold, and the driver be acquitted.
Edited by Mill Wheel on Friday 24th July 11:23
Mill Wheel said:
HantsRat said:
This is rubbish. You will not get an NIP in the post. You will have been given the NIP at the time of the stop. No need to identify the driver, the police stopped you, they know you are the driver.
They do need to PROVE that the driver IS who the driver says he is.I think if the old bill had at the time any doubts about the drivers identity he would have arrested the op so old bill could have made sure down at the station just who the op was.
so dfo with your freeman of the loom tinfoil hat t
ttery the op will not be wriggling out of this fair copMill Wheel said:
They do need to PROVE that the driver IS who the driver says he is.
If the driver turns up in court and says it wasn't him, and they have not established it was actually him, the case could fold, and the driver be acquitted.
The spoke to the driver. They would have written down their details on the ticket at the time of the offence and also in the officers notebook. You'd have to be completely stupid if you decide to go to court and say you were not driving in this circumstance. If the driver turns up in court and says it wasn't him, and they have not established it was actually him, the case could fold, and the driver be acquitted.
Edited by Mill Wheel on Friday 24th July 11:23
Edited by HantsRat on Friday 24th July 11:31
citizensm1th said:
to be honest if you have no other points. 3 points and 100 shekels is less painful than a speed awareness course imo
just to clarify
some insurers treat sac,s the same as 3 points
you have to pay for the course (isn't it more than 100 pounds now?)
time off work (lost income /use of holiday)
4 hours of being scolded like a child gets very boring ( yes I admit some parts are very worthwhile but don't question when they state that only 5% of people speed)
Without wishing to derail, my wife has just the course up in Northumberland, she already has some points but doing the course was by far the better option. Up here, the course was either £10 or £20 cheaper than the £100 SP30 fine, and she was able to sit the course after work so didn't drag here away from her patients. If the insurance is effected by the conviction regardless, then that's a non-issue and I would agree about the limited educational value of the course. She came back full of interesting quotes, but is still a terrible driver....just to clarify
some insurers treat sac,s the same as 3 points
you have to pay for the course (isn't it more than 100 pounds now?)
time off work (lost income /use of holiday)
4 hours of being scolded like a child gets very boring ( yes I admit some parts are very worthwhile but don't question when they state that only 5% of people speed)
If it was me, I'd certainly sit the course if offered it.
HantsRat said:
Mill Wheel said:
They do need to PROVE that the driver IS who the driver says he is.
If the driver turns up in court and says it wasn't him, and they have not established it was actually him, the case could fold, and the driver be acquitted.
The spoke to the driver. They would have written down their details on the ticket at the time of the offence and also in the officers notebook. You'd have to be completely stupid if you decide to go to court and say you were not driving in this circumstance. If the driver turns up in court and says it wasn't him, and they have not established it was actually him, the case could fold, and the driver be acquitted.
Edited by Mill Wheel on Friday 24th July 11:23
Edited by HantsRat on Friday 24th July 11:31
Vehicle was registered to him, and the driver claimed to BE William Stobart... but the defendant's solicitor asked the officers in court if they had satisfied themselves that he driver WAS Stobart - which they had not, so Stobart was acquitted.
Wikipedia said:
the driver of a car allegedly doing 116 mph (185 km/h) on the M6 claimed he was William Stobart: but was he the same William Stobart who exercised his right not to attend the hearing at Penrith Magistrates? The court decided the prosecution had not proved the driver was Mr Freeman’s client, Cumbrian haulage tycoon William Stobart
Mill Wheel said:
They do need to PROVE that the driver IS who the driver says he is.
If the driver turns up in court and says it wasn't him, and they have not established it was actually him, the case could fold, and the driver be acquitted.
Surely this is a load of b0llocks, I gave the officer my photo ID, ie my licence, he could see it was me? Is that no proof enough? If the driver turns up in court and says it wasn't him, and they have not established it was actually him, the case could fold, and the driver be acquitted.
Edited by Mill Wheel on Friday 24th July 11:23
I expect the car had a camera in it as well or do no all traffic cars have cameras?
raddish said:
Surely this is a load of b0llocks, I gave the officer my photo ID, ie my licence, he could see it was me? Is that no proof enough?
I expect the car had a camera in it as well or do no all traffic cars have cameras?
In your case, you have identified yourself, but had you not provided any license or ID, then the officer SHOULD have satisfied himself that you WERE who you claimed to be before letting you on your way.I expect the car had a camera in it as well or do no all traffic cars have cameras?
Stobart was allowed to go without the relevant check being made, and Nick Freeman was able to cast doubt on WHO the driver actually was... IIRC it was at night.
silverfoxcc said:
SidJames said:
I've had an SP50 (66 mph) 3 points & £100, and an SP30 (34mph) course and £100 fine, in the last two fecking weeks!
I call custard on the sp30You do not get a speed awareness course and a fine.
The Surveyor said:
citizensm1th said:
to be honest if you have no other points. 3 points and 100 shekels is less painful than a speed awareness course imo
just to clarify
some insurers treat sac,s the same as 3 points
you have to pay for the course (isn't it more than 100 pounds now?)
time off work (lost income /use of holiday)
4 hours of being scolded like a child gets very boring ( yes I admit some parts are very worthwhile but don't question when they state that only 5% of people speed)
Without wishing to derail, my wife has just the course up in Northumberland, she already has some points but doing the course was by far the better option. Up here, the course was either £10 or £20 cheaper than the £100 SP30 fine, and she was able to sit the course after work so didn't drag here away from her patients. If the insurance is effected by the conviction regardless, then that's a non-issue and I would agree about the limited educational value of the course. She came back full of interesting quotes, but is still a terrible driver....just to clarify
some insurers treat sac,s the same as 3 points
you have to pay for the course (isn't it more than 100 pounds now?)
time off work (lost income /use of holiday)
4 hours of being scolded like a child gets very boring ( yes I admit some parts are very worthwhile but don't question when they state that only 5% of people speed)
If it was me, I'd certainly sit the course if offered it.
in retrospect I would cop the 3 points and fine
silverfoxcc said:
SidJames said:
I've had an SP50 (66 mph) 3 points & £100, and an SP30 (34mph) course and £100 fine, in the last two fecking weeks!
I call custard on the sp30Also, OP, was the 66mph in a temporary speed restriction on a motorway? (SP50 does NOT refer to exceeding a 50mph speed limit on ordinary roads, but to exceeding the speed limit on a motorway
).btcc123 said:
Also you either get 3 points and a £100 fine or a speed awareness course that costs £85.
You do not get a speed awareness course and a fine.
Jeez, some pedants on here today.You do not get a speed awareness course and a fine.
The cost (read fine) of a SAC varies by region, I paid a £100 "fine" for mine. Now go back to your homework, along with the other custard tosspots.
SidJames said:
I've had an SP50 (66 mph) 3 points & £100, and an SP30 (34mph) course and £100 fine, in the last two fecking weeks!
In the last two weeks?Cool - can you post up (with details censored of course) the 34 in a 30 one?
Prove to me once and for all that you can get a NIP for less than 35 in a 30. It's just I've heard so many people getting a NIP at 31-34, I'm just yet to see one.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff