Another Psycho Killer out there...well NIP actually
Discussion
A friend of mine commented a short while back that he thought a scammera had flashed him, but he pressumed it must have been for someone else as he was only going a fraction over 30 if at all.
Today the NIP confirms it... 35mph in a 30.
What time was this dispicable, evil act carried out? 5.00 in the morning, a highly dangerous time of day as the roads of course were absolutely jam packed with... ermm.. nobody whatsoever.
Anyway, enough of the sarcasm. He's not the sort of chap to contest this, unfortunately he's one of the people that will just accept it and keep the scammera people in business, but he has a concern that I'm looking for any thoughts on...
His drivers licence is not at his current address, it's still in his parents address, as he still hasn't decided if he will be staying away from his parents house or not. He moved out only a couple of years ago but due to instability at the place he rented has never been sure if its a very short term arrangement or not. My wife was told a while back when stopped that she could be fined very heavily for not having the correct address on her drivers licence, and he knows about the warning she was given by the nice policeman at the roadside. Being that there are no nice policeman with a speed camera, is he likely to be in line for a serious fine or will an explanation of living arrangements suffice if he's queried on the address?
Today the NIP confirms it... 35mph in a 30.
What time was this dispicable, evil act carried out? 5.00 in the morning, a highly dangerous time of day as the roads of course were absolutely jam packed with... ermm.. nobody whatsoever.
Anyway, enough of the sarcasm. He's not the sort of chap to contest this, unfortunately he's one of the people that will just accept it and keep the scammera people in business, but he has a concern that I'm looking for any thoughts on...
His drivers licence is not at his current address, it's still in his parents address, as he still hasn't decided if he will be staying away from his parents house or not. He moved out only a couple of years ago but due to instability at the place he rented has never been sure if its a very short term arrangement or not. My wife was told a while back when stopped that she could be fined very heavily for not having the correct address on her drivers licence, and he knows about the warning she was given by the nice policeman at the roadside. Being that there are no nice policeman with a speed camera, is he likely to be in line for a serious fine or will an explanation of living arrangements suffice if he's queried on the address?
Vaux said:
davi said:
...He's not the sort of chap to contest this, .....
Contest what?
contest the speeding fine, he didn't think he was going that fast - he's the sort that will sit staring at the speedo terrified of breaking the law, one of those motorists this ludicrous situation is breeding, nothing matters but the speedo, the speedo is god, if you follow the speedo, you'll never have an accident... It seems quite co-incidental that the speed they've clocked him at is only just over the excess needed to bring a prosecution.
davi said:
A friend of mine commented a short while back that he thought a scammera had flashed him, but he pressumed it must have been for someone else as he was only going a fraction over 30 if at all.
Today the NIP confirms it... 35mph in a 30.
What time was this dispicable, evil act carried out? 5.00 in the morning, a highly dangerous time of day as the roads of course were absolutely jam packed with... ermm.. nobody whatsoever.
Today the NIP confirms it... 35mph in a 30.
What time was this dispicable, evil act carried out? 5.00 in the morning, a highly dangerous time of day as the roads of course were absolutely jam packed with... ermm.. nobody whatsoever.
Chill out - it's a penalty, not even a conviction. It's a paltry £60 fine. Many insurance companies don't take any notice of points now. It really isn't an issue. He can even do it again a couple of times, but should try to keep it to once a year max.
davi said:
His drivers licence is not at his current address, it's still in his parents address, as he still hasn't decided if he will be staying away from his parents house or not. He moved out only a couple of years ago but due to instability at the place he rented has never been sure if its a very short term arrangement or not. My wife was told a while back when stopped that she could be fined very heavily for not having the correct address on her drivers licence, and he knows about the warning she was given by the nice policeman at the roadside. Being that there are no nice policeman with a speed camera, is he likely to be in line for a serious fine or will an explanation of living arrangements suffice if he's queried on the address?
How will they know he's not living at his parents house? Was the car's V5 showing his new address?
Whatever, all they're interesting in is seeing his licence and a cheque for £60.
deva link said:
How will they know he's not living at his parents house? Was the car's V5 showing his new address?
Whatever, all they're interesting in is seeing his licence and a cheque for £60.
Whatever, all they're interesting in is seeing his licence and a cheque for £60.
All other documents are at his weekday address, his licence is the only thing he hasn't changed as he didn't want a photo-licence. My comment to him was pretty much as yours, that all they are interested in is money, pay up and they will just go away rubbing their mits, but he needed to see someone else say the same thing.
deva link said:
Chill out - it's a penalty, not even a conviction. It's a paltry £60 fine. Many insurance companies don't take any notice of points now. It really isn't an issue. He can even do it again a couple of times, but should try to keep it to once a year max.
It's injust, its ludicrous and he's the kind of person that irritates most of us here because he drives EVERYWHERE at exactly the speed limit, come rain or shine, because he's been brainwashed into believing speedlimits are everything. Sorry if my post was a bit ranty, but it winds me up no end!! I'd be extremely surprised if he really was going 35, it must have been a lapse in his concentration on the speedo.
Edited by Davi on Friday 16th June 09:05
Davi said:
deva link said:
Chill out - it's a penalty, not even a conviction. It's a paltry £60 fine. Many insurance companies don't take any notice of points now. It really isn't an issue. He can even do it again a couple of times, but should try to keep it to once a year max.
It's injust, its ludicrous and he's the kind of person that irritates most of us here because he drives EVERYWHERE at exactly the speed limit, come rain or shine, because he's been brainwashed into believing speedlimits are everything. Sorry if my post was a bit ranty, but it winds me up no end!! I'd be extremely surprised if he really was going 35, it must have been a lapse in his concentration on the speedo.
Perhaps it's just a timely reminder *not* to "lapse"? Clearly he doesn't drive "EVERYWHERE at exactly the speed limit". A lot of very steady drivers just drive at the same speed all the time - so you're stuck behind them at 40 in a NSL, then next thing they catch you up as you drive at 30 through a village.
Of course we should all be able to decide what the appropriate speed is, but too many people on the road are incapable of such assessment, so it has to be decided for them.
deva link said:
Perhaps it's just a timely reminder *not* to "lapse"? Clearly he doesn't drive "EVERYWHERE at exactly the speed limit". A lot of very steady drivers just drive at the same speed all the time - so you're stuck behind them at 40 in a NSL, then next thing they catch you up as you drive at 30 through a village.
Of course we should all be able to decide what the appropriate speed is, but too many people on the road are incapable of such assessment, so it has to be decided for them.
That's the problem though, while I accept that some people are incapable of assessing an appropriate speed, photographing and issuing penalties for such minor lapses as this means they will just sit, glued to the speedo, oblivious of the world around them, which is WAY more dangerous than drifting a couple of mph over the speed limit but having 100% concentration on the road.
Can you honestly imagine any police officer would have stopped him for a brief, minor transgretion such as this at that time in the morning? Of course not, BIB are usually intelligent, easily capable of making an assessment of the persons overall driving. If for 90% of the time the offender has travelled at or below the speed limit before the mistake I would imagine at worst they might have pulled and suggested he might wish to err on under the limit in the future.
Davi said:
That's the problem though, while I accept that some people are incapable of assessing an appropriate speed, photographing and issuing penalties for such minor lapses as this means they will just sit, glued to the speedo, oblivious of the world around them, which is WAY more dangerous than drifting a couple of mph over the speed limit but having 100% concentration on the road.
Can you honestly imagine any police officer would have stopped him for a brief, minor transgretion such as this at that time in the morning? Of course not, BIB are usually intelligent, easily capable of making an assessment of the persons overall driving. If for 90% of the time the offender has travelled at or below the speed limit before the mistake I would imagine at worst they might have pulled and suggested he might wish to err on under the limit in the future.
Of course you're correct - but real life is that we have 30MPH limits, and they have cameras, and if you go past at a real 35MPH (poss 38MPH indicated) then you'll have your backside snapped.
There's an argument that if can't see a speed camera (that he presumeably knew was there) then he might not spot some other hazard. I've been done twice for speeding, but I'd be gutted (with myself) if I got snapped by a fixed camera.
I used the analogy the other day that it's like football - if you foul someone you get a yellow card. You probably didn't mean to do it (or at least you didn't mean to get caught), but do it again and you get a red card. In driving you get 3 yellow cards before a red.
deva link said:
Of course you're correct - but real life is that we have 30MPH limits, and they have cameras, and if you go past at a real 35MPH (poss 38MPH indicated) then you'll have your backside snapped.
I hope you meant slapped, or are the scamera pratnerships getting real heavy nowadays? 
I know what you mean, I just think it's all wrong, it's not serving to make the roads a safer place, it's making them more dangerous, its not in the interests of the public, its in the interests of the scammers wallets, we NEED to get this system abolished before the country ends up a bunch of dead heads bouncing their cars off kerbs and people in a bid to keep within the boundaries of a crazy law.
deva link said:
Many insurance companies don't take any notice of points now.
NO NO NO. This is untrue. Stop saying this. Get on line and try out some quotes. These b'stards have now jumped on the cash for speeding gravy train too.
I renewed my bike insurance last week and every company without fail increased the premium. I know this because I said first no convictions until they told me the quote, then I remembered. One went from 360 to 400 quid.
One of the online quoters telephoned me and I said I didn't buy because the premium increased for a speeding ticket. Initially the caller told me I was mistaken because a single 3 pointer doesn't make any difference, so they're propogating this lie.
SM
Davi said:
deva link said:
Of course you're correct - but real life is that we have 30MPH limits, and they have cameras, and if you go past at a real 35MPH (poss 38MPH indicated) then you'll have your backside snapped.
I hope you meant slapped, or are the scamera pratnerships getting real heavy nowadays? I know what you mean, I just think it's all wrong, it's not serving to make the roads a safer place, it's making them more dangerous, its not in the interests of the public, its in the interests of the scammers wallets, we NEED to get this system abolished before the country ends up a bunch of dead heads bouncing their cars off kerbs and people in a bid to keep within the boundaries of a crazy law.
I agree with you Davi, but the powers that be seem happy that there are more accidents as long as they are at a lower speed. Hit a child at 35 and they will die... hit a child at 29 and they will get up and run off to the park to play football... yada yada.
supermono said:
deva link said:
Many insurance companies don't take any notice of points now.
NO NO NO. This is untrue. Stop saying this. Get on line and try out some quotes. These b'stards have now jumped on the cash for speeding gravy train too.
I renewed my bike insurance last week and every company without fail increased the premium. I know this because I said first no convictions until they told me the quote, then I remembered. One went from 360 to 400 quid.
One of the online quoters telephoned me and I said I didn't buy because the premium increased for a speeding ticket. Initially the caller told me I was mistaken because a single 3 pointer doesn't make any difference, so they're propogating this lie.
SM
Mine (Liverpool Victoria / Frizzell) doesn't - they don't even want to be told unless the offence resulted in a ban. I went through the ususal round of quotes at last renewal and tried many with and without points. For most it made no difference. This may be different for other people though - insurance quotes are based on very complicated inter-related statistics.
I have a problem with this 'don't see a camera, might not see another hazard' attitude. Hazards are just that - things that grab your attention and demand action. Yellow or grey boxes (or snipers hidden in bushes) don't trigger the hazard reaction.
Most of our driving must be 'unconcious competence' - we are skilled at it and can leave it to our right brain. If something happens to demand anything other than routine action the left brain kicks in and we can take appropriate action. Think of a long journey - you may not remember every detail of it but you can be certain that you were alert and concentrating the whole time (if you are a half-way decent driver) as you arrived safe and well.
I think this is a major problem with numeric enforcement - you can't afford to leave speed to this 'unconcious competence' and therefore drive in a less alert state.
Anyway, enough babbling I have work to do!
Ken
Most of our driving must be 'unconcious competence' - we are skilled at it and can leave it to our right brain. If something happens to demand anything other than routine action the left brain kicks in and we can take appropriate action. Think of a long journey - you may not remember every detail of it but you can be certain that you were alert and concentrating the whole time (if you are a half-way decent driver) as you arrived safe and well.
I think this is a major problem with numeric enforcement - you can't afford to leave speed to this 'unconcious competence' and therefore drive in a less alert state.
Anyway, enough babbling I have work to do!
Ken
ashes said:
I have a problem with this 'don't see a camera, might not see another hazard' attitude. Hazards are just that - things that grab your attention and demand action. Yellow or grey boxes (or snipers hidden in bushes) don't trigger the hazard reaction.
There is of course also the old argument that most people dont treat a totally inanimate object as a potential hazard and are paying more attention looking for REAL hazards that might be hidden by inanimate objects. Of course that only makes total sense though, so has no place in an arguement about speed cameras.
ashes said:
I have a problem with this 'don't see a camera, might not see another hazard' attitude. Hazards are just that - things that grab your attention and demand action. Yellow or grey boxes (or snipers hidden in bushes) don't trigger the hazard reaction.
I agree on the last two, but you really ought to see a yellow box.
ashes said:
Most of our driving must be 'unconcious competence' - we are skilled at it and can leave it to our right brain. If something happens to demand anything other than routine action the left brain kicks in and we can take appropriate action. Think of a long journey - you may not remember every detail of it but you can be certain that you were alert and concentrating the whole time (if you are a half-way decent driver) as you arrived safe and well.
I guess that's the nub of the problem - *some* people do drive in an 'unconcious competence' state. I really noticed this on our works advanced driver training. I think I'm a good, safe driver, but the thing I can't do is the commentary. I believe that I see things, rate them for importance, and then act on them or dismiss them as appropriate. But I do this all in my head, and find it very difficult to 'verbalise' these thoughts.
I believe that most people drive in state of unconcious incompetence - watch people who are surprised by traffic lights 'unexpectedly' turning red etc. We're all car freaks, but most people are thinking about other things - driving is just a means of getting from A to B.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff