Discussion
http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/11245383.Motoristcaught_driving71mph_in_a_20mph_zone/?ref=var_0
leads to a 28 day ban and £288 fine...
leads to a 28 day ban and £288 fine...
If you know Brighton and Hove you will know that the council (guess the complexion) have imposed a 20mph limit over much of the area. Despite claims of residents' approval the limits are widely derided and ignored and merely replaced existing adequate 30mph limits. Fortunately the limits are rarely enforced but this joker obviously had it coming whatever the limit in place.
9mm said:
... Brighton and Hove ... council (guess the complexion) ...
Melons.And spinning Elm Grove as a residential road reflects this (it's a reasonably wide main road - or was before the "safety scheme" - it's not yer typical road on a housing estate). Not that this is any excuse for driving at 71mph up or down there
. what is the new spent time for a conviction resulting in a driving ban + a fine ?
i would have thought it would be a year
the interesting thing for me in this story is that he is the only person so far to have been convicted of breaking the 20mph limit, and he was well over a 30mph or even a 40mph limit
i would have thought it would be a year
the interesting thing for me in this story is that he is the only person so far to have been convicted of breaking the 20mph limit, and he was well over a 30mph or even a 40mph limit
Nezquick said:
I'd say a ban is always going to look much worse to insurers that points and a fine. Any sniff of a ban at renewal and i'd imagine the premium would significantly increase.
Depends on the company.I had a 1 week ban a few years back.
Some insurance politely declined my business.
Most added a few hundred.
Some added £20.
A lot if the middle group weren't able to handle a one week ban on their system so had to enter a 30 day ban.
aw51 121565 said:
Melons.
And spinning Elm Grove as a residential road reflects this (it's a reasonably wide main road - or was before the "safety scheme" - it's not yer typical road on a housing estate). Not that this is any excuse for driving at 71mph up or down there .
Article comments talk about the road having both a school and a hospital on it. Surely a good candidate for a 20mph limit irrespective of the time of day? And spinning Elm Grove as a residential road reflects this (it's a reasonably wide main road - or was before the "safety scheme" - it's not yer typical road on a housing estate). Not that this is any excuse for driving at 71mph up or down there
. 
5lab said:
i'm fairly impressed he managed to get a fiesta up to that speed going up tophe hill - its fairly steep and a standing start at the bottom
How do you know that he started at the bottom and was going uphill? The article linked to mentions neither the specific location in Elm Grove, nor the direction of travel. He could have been going downhill from the Queen's Park Road junction.As a matter of interest, when did Elm Grove itself have its limit reduced from 30mph to 20?
To get up to 71mph it would have to have been at a time of day when the street was deserted. Still an incredibly stupid thing to do though. I could just about understand it if he had been doing that speed in Lewes Road at Moulsecoomb at 05.00 on a Sunday morning but not in Elm Grove.
Red Devil said:
To get up to 71mph it would have to have been at a time of day when the street was deserted. Still an incredibly stupid thing to do though. I could just about understand it if he had been doing that speed in Lewes Road at Moulsecoomb at 05.00 on a Sunday morning but not in Elm Grove.
The Argus article says it was about 19.45 on a Tuesday night in late November.Durzel said:
aw51 121565 said:
Melons.
And spinning Elm Grove as a residential road reflects this (it's a reasonably wide main road - or was before the "safety scheme" - it's not yer typical road on a housing estate). Not that this is any excuse for driving at 71mph up or down there .
Article comments talk about the road having both a school and a hospital on it. Surely a good candidate for a 20mph limit irrespective of the time of day? And spinning Elm Grove as a residential road reflects this (it's a reasonably wide main road - or was before the "safety scheme" - it's not yer typical road on a housing estate). Not that this is any excuse for driving at 71mph up or down there
. 30mph up and down there was more than fast enough (and often unachievable) most of the day and evening back in the early '90s...
Nezquick said:
I'd say a ban is always going to look much worse to insurers that points and a fine. Any sniff of a ban at renewal and i'd imagine the premium would significantly increase.
It depends, if you somehow manage to get away with just a disqualification and no fine, it becomes 'spent' at the end of the ban period. ala no declaration to an insurer after that time. If you also get a fine then there is the obligatory 5 year declaration.
aw51 121565 said:
9mm said:
... Brighton and Hove ... council (guess the complexion) ...
Melons.20mph is, I believe, more polluting than 30mph. As is having to stop and start unnecessarily at traffic lights etc. So why do the "Greens" love those sorts of things so much? And why such a focus on car use all the time when there are plenty of other environmental issues that they seem to virtually ignore?
I know of people in Brighton who voted for the "Greens" thinking they would get a bunch of cuddly, good-natured, chilled out hippies who "cared" and would fight pragmatically for "ordinary people". They seem most surprised to have ended up with viciously intolerant, authoritarian, arrogant and unrepresentative councillors instead (even though they were warned), and have vowed never to make such a silly, gullible mistake again. Next year's council election there will be interesting.
LittleSwill said:
Durzel said:
Article comments talk about the road having both a school and a hospital on it. Surely a good candidate for a 20mph limit irrespective of the time of day?
Why do you have to drive slowly past a hospital? Limits which are only active during these times (less than 5% of the year in total) exist in places such as Grazeley (near Reading), denoted by flashing lights when they're in force. They are much better observed because drivers perceive them as a sincere and fair-minded effort to reduce casualties, rather than yet another unnecessary restriction motivated by spite (perish the thought).
GPSHead said:
aw51 121565 said:
9mm said:
... Brighton and Hove ... council (guess the complexion) ...
Melons.20mph is, I believe, more polluting than 30mph. As is having to stop and start unnecessarily at traffic lights etc. So why do the "Greens" love those sorts of things so much? And why such a focus on car use all the time when there are plenty of other environmental issues that they seem to virtually ignore?
I know of people in Brighton who voted for the "Greens" thinking they would get a bunch of cuddly, good-natured, chilled out hippies who "cared" and would fight pragmatically for "ordinary people". They seem most surprised to have ended up with viciously intolerant, authoritarian, arrogant and unrepresentative councillors instead (even though they were warned), and have vowed never to make such a silly, gullible mistake again. Next year's council election there will be interesting.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff