Points On license
Discussion
You will find there is a limit. But I would say that limit probably has not been reached yet. Something like 6 months sounds more like the sort of timescale I remember.
I know the amount of time between you being flashed and notified is quite short. 6-weeks or something. But when it gets transferred to the DVLA for them to endorse your license that could be effected by a backlog and so that part of the process could be delayed. That's probably what you're waiting for now.
I think the fact you've had the letter from the police means you will get fined and pointed.
I know the amount of time between you being flashed and notified is quite short. 6-weeks or something. But when it gets transferred to the DVLA for them to endorse your license that could be effected by a backlog and so that part of the process could be delayed. That's probably what you're waiting for now.
I think the fact you've had the letter from the police means you will get fined and pointed.
i got done for dd years ago, 5 months after i commited the offence id heard nothing back. my mother (the bright spark that she is) called the police station to find out why, they said it had been forgotten about and thanked her because if it had been another month they wouldnt have been able to prosecute me.
I suspect the delay is because they're processing the paperwork to take them to court - rather than just administer a fine/points.
They have 14 days to issue NIP (which is what he received) - they then have 6 months to issues a summons relating to the offence.
That's not a hard-and-fast thing either - but it's hard to see any reason for extending it in a speedcamera/admitted liability situation.
I'd prepare your friend for a court visit and a possible ban tbh - they might want to track down a solicitor if they need their car for work or whatever.
They have 14 days to issue NIP (which is what he received) - they then have 6 months to issues a summons relating to the offence.
That's not a hard-and-fast thing either - but it's hard to see any reason for extending it in a speedcamera/admitted liability situation.
I'd prepare your friend for a court visit and a possible ban tbh - they might want to track down a solicitor if they need their car for work or whatever.
Prof Prolapse said:
What is "Mum's net"?
Not many 30mph limits you can do 56mph in safely.
Why shouldn't a child be in the road? Are they not entitled to cross roads?
Children should be locked up in a box for the convenience of everybody else. Children can cross roads but they dont, they just run out without looking because they havent been taught to cross a road properly, and if they cant do it properly then they should be accompanied by a parent, preferably tied to them with a piece of rope.Not many 30mph limits you can do 56mph in safely.
Why shouldn't a child be in the road? Are they not entitled to cross roads?
The point i was making was the whole mentality of 'lower the speed limits to protect our children' when theres only two people who have the responsibility to protect a child. Ive met parents who really feel kids should be allowed to play football in the road and if they get run over its all the motorists fault. These are people we can do without.
Prof Prolapse said:
What is "Mum's net"?
The foremost arm of the middle-class in the UK today - aka a social network for the entitled and short-sighted.Prof Prolapse said:
Not many 30mph limits you can do 56mph in safely.
There's a dual-carriageway near here - fenced on both sides, crash barriered and it has a 2 mile 30mph stretch...Prof Prolapse said:
Why shouldn't a child be in the road? Are they not entitled to cross roads?
When people say "a child in the road" they're thinking an unsupervised toddler just wandering into traffic - not a 14-year-old with an iPod banging out some klaxon sounds and an iPhone in-hand texting who decides to wander into traffic (although arguably that's the same thing!!)johnpeat said:
I suspect the delay is because they're processing the paperwork to take them to court - rather than just administer a fine/points.
They have 14 days to issue NIP (which is what he received) - they then have 6 months to issues a summons relating to the offence.
That's not a hard-and-fast thing either - but it's hard to see any reason for extending it in a speedcamera/admitted liability situation.
I'd prepare your friend for a court visit and a possible ban tbh - they might want to track down a solicitor if they need their car for work or whatever.
The nip was issued outwith the 14 days though?They have 14 days to issue NIP (which is what he received) - they then have 6 months to issues a summons relating to the offence.
That's not a hard-and-fast thing either - but it's hard to see any reason for extending it in a speedcamera/admitted liability situation.
I'd prepare your friend for a court visit and a possible ban tbh - they might want to track down a solicitor if they need their car for work or whatever.
shambolic said:
The nip was issued outwith the 14 days though?
I've not looked at this stuff in ages but I thought that the 'were you driving' thing was assumed to be the NIP - e.g. they're telling you that you're may be prosecuted IF you admitted the offence.If you deny it's you (as the owner) and nominate someone else, that person would need to receive NIP within the 14 days ofc.
martin84 said:
Prof Prolapse said:
What is "Mum's net"?
Not many 30mph limits you can do 56mph in safely.
Why shouldn't a child be in the road? Are they not entitled to cross roads?
Children should be locked up in a box for the convenience of everybody else. Children can cross roads but they dont, they just run out without looking because they havent been taught to cross a road properly, and if they cant do it properly then they should be accompanied by a parent, preferably tied to them with a piece of rope.Not many 30mph limits you can do 56mph in safely.
Why shouldn't a child be in the road? Are they not entitled to cross roads?
The point i was making was the whole mentality of 'lower the speed limits to protect our children' when theres only two people who have the responsibility to protect a child. Ive met parents who really feel kids should be allowed to play football in the road and if they get run over its all the motorists fault. These are people we can do without.
Same goes for cars pulling out on junctions, if a car was exceeding the limit by so much you'd still pull out into them.
Children are children. They're f
king stupid, that's why they go to school. As a motorist it's up to compensate for their ineptitude, if you hit them don't be surprised if the family and court doesn't share you views on who is responsible. johnpeat said:
Prof Prolapse said:
What is "Mum's net"?
The foremost arm of the middle-class in the UK today - aka a social network for the entitled and short-sighted.Prof Prolapse said:
Not many 30mph limits you can do 56mph in safely.
There's a dual-carriageway near here - fenced on both sides, crash barriered and it has a 2 mile 30mph stretch...Prof Prolapse said:
Why shouldn't a child be in the road? Are they not entitled to cross roads?
When people say "a child in the road" they're thinking an unsupervised toddler just wandering into traffic - not a 14-year-old with an iPod banging out some klaxon sounds and an iPhone in-hand texting who decides to wander into traffic (although arguably that's the same thing!!)2) That's why I said "not many".
3) Don't have a clue what you're on about and I suspect neither do you... So it's OK to run down a child doing 56mph in 30mph as long as they're an unsupervised toddler?
A family of a child would never view things in a balanced unbiased way regardless of what happened. No matter how much of a little st their precious cherub is, he couldve stabbed someone the parents would still blame someone else. So a parents views are pretty much irrelevant to me.
The only person who has responsibility to make up for a childs idiocy is its parents, if they let their thick child navigate roads by themselves they deserve to have the kid delivered to them in a bag.
By the way i dont do 56 in a 30 but i know if i hit a child at 29 with him appearing out of nowhere leaving me no chance to stop i'd still get blamed for it.
t their precious cherub is, he couldve stabbed someone the parents would still blame someone else. So a parents views are pretty much irrelevant to me. The only person who has responsibility to make up for a childs idiocy is its parents, if they let their thick child navigate roads by themselves they deserve to have the kid delivered to them in a bag.
By the way i dont do 56 in a 30 but i know if i hit a child at 29 with him appearing out of nowhere leaving me no chance to stop i'd still get blamed for it.
It's the fact that the speed limit is too low on so many roads which causes people to be breaking the speed limit in the first place. The more ridiculous a speed restriction the more likely it is you will find someone ignoring it. Try 5mph in car parks on for size!
I drive around town a lot more often these days. I used to work in an office but have not done that for a few years. Traffic tends to move between 35 and 45 on most of the 30mph roads around here. You could argue that some roads don't support 30mph and so you should lower those ones to 20mph. Occasionally you will get stuck behind someone who is only prepared to travel between 25 and 29.5mph and that's when you have to overtake in a 30-limit. Not good. But when you've got things to do and miles of open road ahead being stuck behind some tit in a micra is a massive waste of time. It makes you feel good if someone behind you overtakes them as well as it validates your theory.
Mumsnet = horrified prudes. Everything is an outrage.
I drive around town a lot more often these days. I used to work in an office but have not done that for a few years. Traffic tends to move between 35 and 45 on most of the 30mph roads around here. You could argue that some roads don't support 30mph and so you should lower those ones to 20mph. Occasionally you will get stuck behind someone who is only prepared to travel between 25 and 29.5mph and that's when you have to overtake in a 30-limit. Not good. But when you've got things to do and miles of open road ahead being stuck behind some tit in a micra is a massive waste of time. It makes you feel good if someone behind you overtakes them as well as it validates your theory.
Mumsnet = horrified prudes. Everything is an outrage.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff