Discussion
Hello all - I think I know the answer to this one but wanted to check anyway.
Two days ago a NIP arrived with the figure of 79 on it. Yes, it was me and as there seemed no point in arguing I filled in the form and sent it off.
Then a friend advised me that the ACPO guidelines are 10% + 2, which is 79. If true, is there any case for appeal on the grounds that the guidelines weren't followed, and has the fact I returned the form scuppered that case? At the end of the day 79 is more than 70 so there's no point in going to court I think.
Two days ago a NIP arrived with the figure of 79 on it. Yes, it was me and as there seemed no point in arguing I filled in the form and sent it off.
Then a friend advised me that the ACPO guidelines are 10% + 2, which is 79. If true, is there any case for appeal on the grounds that the guidelines weren't followed, and has the fact I returned the form scuppered that case? At the end of the day 79 is more than 70 so there's no point in going to court I think.
Ah right, thanks.
It is all very silly because it was a new 3-lane carriageway, traffic was light, weather was dry, visibility perfect - in no way dangerous or a blackspot. But the little man in the van isn't paid to think.
Cruise control next time!
PS I was aware of my speed so maybe I don't need the course
It is all very silly because it was a new 3-lane carriageway, traffic was light, weather was dry, visibility perfect - in no way dangerous or a blackspot. But the little man in the van isn't paid to think.
Cruise control next time!
PS I was aware of my speed so maybe I don't need the course
spangle82 said:
Two days ago a NIP arrived with the figure of 79 on it.
Then a friend advised me that the ACPO guidelines are 10% + 2, which is 79. If true, is there any case for appeal on the grounds that the guidelines weren't followed.
So, you were doing 79 in a 70 mph zone. Then a friend advised me that the ACPO guidelines are 10% + 2, which is 79. If true, is there any case for appeal on the grounds that the guidelines weren't followed.
70 + 10% + 2 = 79 mph.
So I am not sure what guidelines you think weren't followed.
E-bmw said:
So I am not sure what guidelines you think weren't followed.
Before the first three replies I thought that '70+ 10%+2' was the speed allowable *before* incurring a penalty. A tolerance if you like. Thanks to those I now know it's the speed at which penalties *start*. A subtle but important difference in this case.covboy said:
"Guidelines" are just that Not set in stone anyway. Clocked at 79, was speedo showing 80+ ?
80 indicated, when I saw the van. More accurate than I thought; in my experience most over-read by a few mph.Durzel said:
Playing with fire setting your cruise (or your foot) to the limit that enforcement begins, as you have discovered.
No, I wasn't using cruise, I said 'next time'. I normally set it to 77, I just didn't bother that day for some reason.spangle82 said:
E-bmw said:
So I am not sure what guidelines you think weren't followed.
Before the first three replies I thought that '70+ 10%+2' was the speed allowable *before* incurring a penalty. A tolerance if you like. Thanks to those I now know it's the speed at which penalties *start*. A subtle but important difference in this case.At least it's just a speed awareness course though.
donkmeister said:
It's a common misconception, I think because we're used to thinking "you can do 70", so when 10% +2 is rattled off without further qualification it is often interpreted as "you can do 79". At least it's just a speed awareness course though.
Well, as 78 is deemed acceptable, it would seem more sensible and clearer to everyone to make the actual limit 80, in the knowledge that if you do 81 you get nobbled.When arranging insurance I've been asked about speed awareness courses as well as points. Are they actually less injurious to premiums than 3 points, and do they stay on the record for the same time?
spangle82 said:
Well, as 78 is deemed acceptable, it would seem more sensible and clearer to everyone to make the actual limit 80, in the knowledge that if you do 81 you get nobbled.
When arranging insurance I've been asked about speed awareness courses as well as points. Are they actually less injurious to premiums than 3 points, and do they stay on the record for the same time?
If the limit were 80, people would do 90 as the belief would be that enforcement begins at 10%+2 (or greater, in the OP's case)When arranging insurance I've been asked about speed awareness courses as well as points. Are they actually less injurious to premiums than 3 points, and do they stay on the record for the same time?
That's why discussions of raising the motorway limit are broadly pointless, because it's just people being disingenuous about how they would suddenly stick to the limit if it were higher. People will always go faster than the limit if they think they can get away with it, myself included.
spangle82 said:
Durzel said:
Playing with fire setting your cruise (or your foot) to the limit that enforcement begins, as you have discovered.
No, I wasn't using cruise, I said 'next time'. I normally set it to 77, I just didn't bother that day for some reason.
I sympathise though, doing 80 doesn't feel any different/worse than 70.HantsRat said:
spangle82 said:
Then a friend advised me that the ACPO guidelines
Just to note ACPO doesn't exist anymore. The guideline do still exist but they're exactly that... Guidelines and not a legal requirement. So whilst it is just guidance, if it ended up in a prosecution, failure to follow it could get the prosecution thrown out. But it wouldn't as prosecutors apply the guidelines.
spangle82 said:
When arranging insurance I've been asked about speed awareness courses as well as points. Are they actually less injurious to premiums than 3 points, and do they stay on the record for the same time?
Who are you using? The comparison sites don't ask this and I've never been asked when taking out an actual policy (bikes and cars).Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff