Discussion
Not sure about this one, so thought I'd ask on here - plenty of experienced hands & a few BIB to boot, so let me know what you think!
I pulled away from traffic lights at a roundabout, around midnight, floored the car to pass a line of slow traffic. Passed them, pulled in, trundled along. The limit was 40mph, it's possible I got up to 50mph but as the line of traffic was 3 vehicles headed by a van, unlikely I went any faster; I settle to a decent trundle at 40mph.
Why? It's late, I'm tired, and I can't be bothered trying to see if there are any potential hazards up the road, so I'm driving sensibly.
Next thing I know, blues & twos flashing in the distance, behind; they catch up, flash me, I stop. They tell ask me what speed I was doing, I say 40mph, they say more like 70mph, I say don't think I was going that fast, to which they say well we've got you on tape doing 70mph.
Now they didn't invite me to watch the video; it was night time so even if there is a video, how can they prove it was my car, even assuming they had line of sight the whole time; and if I was doing 70mph in a 40mph zone at night, why did they chose to deal with it by way of a fixed penalty? Of course them doing 70mph to catch me doesn't mean I was doing 70mph, and they stopped me within 60secs of me pulling away from the lights, so it's not like they spent ten mins speeding to catch up.
It sounds dodgy to me, and I was wondering what other people thought. The ticket says "131" for the offence code, don't know what that means; also don't know what would happen if I challenged it?
I've already got 3pts, for doing 85mph on the m/way which was fair cop (although it was dry, sunny and the road was empty...)
What are people's views?
I pulled away from traffic lights at a roundabout, around midnight, floored the car to pass a line of slow traffic. Passed them, pulled in, trundled along. The limit was 40mph, it's possible I got up to 50mph but as the line of traffic was 3 vehicles headed by a van, unlikely I went any faster; I settle to a decent trundle at 40mph.
Why? It's late, I'm tired, and I can't be bothered trying to see if there are any potential hazards up the road, so I'm driving sensibly.
Next thing I know, blues & twos flashing in the distance, behind; they catch up, flash me, I stop. They tell ask me what speed I was doing, I say 40mph, they say more like 70mph, I say don't think I was going that fast, to which they say well we've got you on tape doing 70mph.
Now they didn't invite me to watch the video; it was night time so even if there is a video, how can they prove it was my car, even assuming they had line of sight the whole time; and if I was doing 70mph in a 40mph zone at night, why did they chose to deal with it by way of a fixed penalty? Of course them doing 70mph to catch me doesn't mean I was doing 70mph, and they stopped me within 60secs of me pulling away from the lights, so it's not like they spent ten mins speeding to catch up.
It sounds dodgy to me, and I was wondering what other people thought. The ticket says "131" for the offence code, don't know what that means; also don't know what would happen if I challenged it?
I've already got 3pts, for doing 85mph on the m/way which was fair cop (although it was dry, sunny and the road was empty...)
What are people's views?
If you are sure that you weren't speeding, or that they can't prove you were speeding then you could fight it. However, if you think that they will be able to prove that you were speeding at all (ie 41 or above) - something which you've admitted in this thread - then you've got a bargain with your 3pts and £60 fine.
luvyalizzy said:
someone's just told me that the offence code 131 is a non-endorseable motoring offence code for ignoring a police stop sign!!
what's going on?
how do I contest it then? can't I just close my eyes & make it go away...
The codes vary from force to force. The ticket usually has an offence written on it by the officer as well as the offence code. The ticket also usually fully explains how to go not guilty / request a court hearing. This normally involves filling in one side of the bottom of the ticket and sending it to the address stated. what's going on?
how do I contest it then? can't I just close my eyes & make it go away...
Ok, thanks guys.
I'm going to appeal it because I don't believe I did anything wrong, I wasn't a danger and I don't believe they can prove I exceeded the speed limit. As I was watching the road, I can't definitely say I didn't go over 40mph, but as a point of principle it's not speed that kills - it's accidents, speed only makes it worse, and you're better off watching the road than trying to make sure you don't stray 1mph over the limit.
I do alot of track days, my car is well looked after and very capable of doing significantly higher speeds & stopping in very short distances - why should I accept a penalty when I wasn't doing anything wrong? They pulled me over because they heard the noise, and had to floor their 4x4 to catch up, and thereby deduced I must have been speeding (which is incorrect given the time delay before they could persue and their ability to accelerate versus mine)
I'll probably lose but you have to stand up for what you think is right don't you.
Thanks for the advice chaps, much appreciated
I'm going to appeal it because I don't believe I did anything wrong, I wasn't a danger and I don't believe they can prove I exceeded the speed limit. As I was watching the road, I can't definitely say I didn't go over 40mph, but as a point of principle it's not speed that kills - it's accidents, speed only makes it worse, and you're better off watching the road than trying to make sure you don't stray 1mph over the limit.
I do alot of track days, my car is well looked after and very capable of doing significantly higher speeds & stopping in very short distances - why should I accept a penalty when I wasn't doing anything wrong? They pulled me over because they heard the noise, and had to floor their 4x4 to catch up, and thereby deduced I must have been speeding (which is incorrect given the time delay before they could persue and their ability to accelerate versus mine)
I'll probably lose but you have to stand up for what you think is right don't you.
Thanks for the advice chaps, much appreciated
luvyalizzy said:
I wasn't a danger….it's not speed that kills….it's accidents……speed only makes it worse……and you're better off watching the road than trying to make sure you don't stray 1mph over the limit…..I do a lot of track days……my car is well looked after……very capable of doing significantly higher speeds…….stopping in very short distances
None of which has any relevance whatsoever.luvyalizzy said:
The limit was 40mph, it's possible I got up to 50mph
That’s the bit that will come back to haunt you.Be VERY careful that you don’t go into Court thinking that they will be interested in any of your beliefs. They aren’t. Only go in if you are certain that you weren’t speeding.
BFF
John57 said:
Dwight VanDriver said:
Cannot find 131 on my Traffic offence list.
Should be a four figure pre fixed E (Endorseable) or N (Non endorseable) ?
dvd
Depends what force .... Met only uses 3 figuresShould be a four figure pre fixed E (Endorseable) or N (Non endorseable) ?
dvd
i.e.
Home Office Offence Group 816 (Speed Limit Offences)
E1601 - Exceed 30 mph restricted road.
dvd
R_U_LOCAL said:
luvyalizzy said:
why should I accept a penalty when I wasn't doing anything wrong?
luvyalizzy said:
The limit was 40mph, it's possible I got up to 50mph
Does that answer your question?I'd certainly want to see the (I assume) VASCAR evidence they intend to produce as evidence. I'd also want to see the written statements/notebook entries.
No harm in taking this a bit further to see if they're calling your bluff, but beware getting sucked into a Peter Ward situation! Good luck.
No harm in taking this a bit further to see if they're calling your bluff, but beware getting sucked into a Peter Ward situation! Good luck.
Hi all, just a few thoughts on the issue, rather than an answer/solution to the issue, so feel free to rubbish my comments if you know different.
Am I correct in thinking that the Police have to confirm the speed to convict you for speeding?
It would appear unreasonable for them to say that you were exceeding the speed limit and then to not have to confirm in court the speed that they pulled you over for travelling at.
If they pulled you for 70, would they have to confirm in a statement you were travelling at 70? I understand that a traffic policeman's expert assessment of speed by sight alone is proof enough to convict, however, if he said 70mph and his video confirms 50mph, surely his evidence is wrong and can be argued in court?
Am I correct in thinking that the Police have to confirm the speed to convict you for speeding?
It would appear unreasonable for them to say that you were exceeding the speed limit and then to not have to confirm in court the speed that they pulled you over for travelling at.
If they pulled you for 70, would they have to confirm in a statement you were travelling at 70? I understand that a traffic policeman's expert assessment of speed by sight alone is proof enough to convict, however, if he said 70mph and his video confirms 50mph, surely his evidence is wrong and can be argued in court?
r129sl said:
R_U_LOCAL said:
luvyalizzy said:
why should I accept a penalty when I wasn't doing anything wrong?
luvyalizzy said:
The limit was 40mph, it's possible I got up to 50mph
Does that answer your question?The Police Officers stand in the box and say that the OP was definitely speeding.
The OP stands in the box and says that he thinks he wasn't.
The prosecution Solicitor asks him if it's possible that he was speeding.
OP answers honestly "Yes, it's possible".
Guilty as charged.
luvyalizzy said:
Of course them doing 70mph to catch me doesn't mean I was doing 70mph, and they stopped me within 60secs of me pulling away from the lights, so it's not like they spent ten mins speeding to catch up.
As you say, all their video proves is that they were doing 70 for some time.If it goes to court you need the video. It is a simple set of calculations to extract your approximate speed profile. If you were doing 70 the video should show several seconds of your car where the gap is neither opening or closing. If you 'floored it and then stuck at 40 you covered about 1130 yards in 60 sec. If their car was stopped and you were 200 yds ahead 'trundling along at 40 when they accelerated smartly to 70 they would catch you up in 21 secs by which you ( and they ) would have covered 430 yards or 1/4 mile. You have to figure out how far behind they might nave been to put the lights on. Or where they saw you.
There must be many threads which include the " we had to do x mile/h to catch you so you must've been too !" Too many magistrates will nod their heads in agreement. And the cPS are not up to this kind of puzzle. Pity these people are not taught this basic numeracy then isn't it.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff