Just received a court date for a NIP do I get legal help?
Discussion
Hi all,
Im not normaly one for broadcasting my personal stuff all over the net but I thought I may need some help regarding this and this could be the place for advice.
Back in the summer I was flashed by a truvilo camera in a 70 going quite a bit faster.
I replyed to the nip stating it was me driving and have now received my 'day in court' with an option to plead guity by post also, the question is do i get some help in the form of a solicitor or do i go it alone?
I dont earn a fortune as ive just started my own business and things arnt great at the moment.
I realise I could risk losing my licence at this speed but cant afford that as it would put me out of business and jepodise my personal life too!
Im not sure where I stand as Ive allready got 3 points, (last year,my 1st ever!) and this doesnt bode well!
Any help much appreciated.
Im not normaly one for broadcasting my personal stuff all over the net but I thought I may need some help regarding this and this could be the place for advice.
Back in the summer I was flashed by a truvilo camera in a 70 going quite a bit faster.
I replyed to the nip stating it was me driving and have now received my 'day in court' with an option to plead guity by post also, the question is do i get some help in the form of a solicitor or do i go it alone?
I dont earn a fortune as ive just started my own business and things arnt great at the moment.
I realise I could risk losing my licence at this speed but cant afford that as it would put me out of business and jepodise my personal life too!
Im not sure where I stand as Ive allready got 3 points, (last year,my 1st ever!) and this doesnt bode well!
Any help much appreciated.
Its up to you.
You will need a good solicitor to not get a ban for 112.
Out of interest, where do they have a truvelo in a 70!!??
The solicitor will probably charge £200-£400. This you will definately not see again.
You will most likely get a ban of a few weeks, maybe a month or two.
Will this **** up your life? If not, I would take the heat.
If it does, work out how much the ****ing up will cost you financially. If the solicitor is less, I would go for it.
Alos remember the solicitor will only put forward your personal circumstances in the best way from his experience, he wont make them better. Many people would advocate that if you turn up smartly dressed and grovel well, and you have a real cause that a ban should be avoided for then you should have just as much chance avoiding a ban representing yourself.
Grounds for escaping a ban would be:
You have to give you elderly granparent/disabled person a lift for a scheduled appointment, or someone for dialysis or something like that.
The other reason may be for example if you were managing a company which would go bust if you were not on the road, and thus others would lose thier jobs.
If you manage to escape a ban you will still be looking at 6 points. Thus you would be left on 9 for a while. Still not the greatest scenario, but its up to you.
You will need a good solicitor to not get a ban for 112.
Out of interest, where do they have a truvelo in a 70!!??
The solicitor will probably charge £200-£400. This you will definately not see again.
You will most likely get a ban of a few weeks, maybe a month or two.
Will this **** up your life? If not, I would take the heat.
If it does, work out how much the ****ing up will cost you financially. If the solicitor is less, I would go for it.
Alos remember the solicitor will only put forward your personal circumstances in the best way from his experience, he wont make them better. Many people would advocate that if you turn up smartly dressed and grovel well, and you have a real cause that a ban should be avoided for then you should have just as much chance avoiding a ban representing yourself.
Grounds for escaping a ban would be:
You have to give you elderly granparent/disabled person a lift for a scheduled appointment, or someone for dialysis or something like that.
The other reason may be for example if you were managing a company which would go bust if you were not on the road, and thus others would lose thier jobs.
If you manage to escape a ban you will still be looking at 6 points. Thus you would be left on 9 for a while. Still not the greatest scenario, but its up to you.
BliarsGoing said:
Gently Bentley said:
Go see a solicitor now. 112 Wow.
Wow? It's only 49.28 Metres per second. It's not exactly fast, it's just illegal.It takes me 5 mins to get out my driveway in the morning and its not big. I think this is fast.
100m in 2 secs! 100m running takes me about 1/2 a minute. Like I said WOW
why not tell the judge that the last car you owned had an aluminium shell and you were not used to the effects of the earths magnetic field on your galvanised shell tell them you were being pulled along by a force unknown to you , then again that might p**s them off even more and you could end up picking up soap for thirty days
Nip across to the "pepipoo" site und if you can afford £99 (ist for the whole year) - you could perhaps register on Nick Freeman's web site und get some on-line und even telephone advice either from the gent himself or one of his asocciates (according to a feature in Auto Express the other week 
supermono said:
Gently Bentley said:
Go see a solicitor now. 112 Wow.
I think you're confusing 112mph with 212mph... You'll find most modern cars happily waft along at 112mph without any drama whatsoever.
SM
Well, I thought 'wow' too when I saw the speed.
Presumeably this was on a A road dual carriageway, and (I'm also assuming) it was at night as the OP didn't see the camera. Of course it's easy to waft along at 112MPH, but the main problem is that other road users aren't expecting that, so you go around a bend and there's a tractor doing a U turn etc etc. The problems arise when you need to 'unwaft'.
There was no mention of tractors, corners, junctions or for that matter children playing in the road.
I'm assuming that like the vast vast majority of road users (given the unbelievably low number of crashes they have) the OP was just travelling at a reasonable speed for the level of hazard... 112mph in and of itself needn't represent any increased risk over any other random speed. 212mph, however...
SM
I'm assuming that like the vast vast majority of road users (given the unbelievably low number of crashes they have) the OP was just travelling at a reasonable speed for the level of hazard... 112mph in and of itself needn't represent any increased risk over any other random speed. 212mph, however...
SM
chrisgr31 said:
justinp1 said:
Out of interest, where do they have a truvelo in a 70!!??
There was one on the A21 southbound just before the Tonbridge South junction. However it was burnt out recently and when I was it last week was covered by a blue sack.
Cheers, had never seen a truvelo in a 70 before.
Shame about the camera being burnt out.
I mean, shame is wasnt a while ago it could have helped you out!
supermono said:
I'm assuming that like the vast vast majority of road users (given the unbelievably low number of crashes they have) the OP was just travelling at a reasonable speed for the level of hazard... 112mph in and of itself needn't represent any increased risk over any other random speed.
I don't disagree - but the vast majority of magistrates will. All that will register with them is the fact that (a) it's over the psychologically important 100mph figure and (b) it's almost 50% higher than the prevailing limit.
A ban isn't inevitable - but the presumption is that any instance where you're doing more than 30mph over the limit should warrant a ban unless there are very good reasons why not. It can be done - my brother got away with 92 in a 60 (overtaking on a long straight section of road) and he just turned up on his own and did his own plea in mitigation.
Whether you engage a solicitor depends on how comfortable you are standing up and doing your own plea in mitigation. If you're even half-way competent at standing up and speaking on your own behalf, I'd do that and put the saved money towards the likely fine, or taxi fares for when you're banned. It's a matter of personal preference though.
BTW, if you try and plead guilty by post, they will probably just write back and say that you need to attend - you can't be banned in your absence as they need you there with your licence when they hand down the ban.
supermono said:
There was no mention of tractors, corners, junctions or for that matter children playing in the road.
He wouldn't have seen them, like he didn't see the camera.
supermono said:
I'm assuming that like the vast vast majority of road users (given the unbelievably low number of crashes they have) the OP was just travelling at a reasonable speed for the level of hazard... 112mph in and of itself needn't represent any increased risk over any other random speed. 212mph, however...
SM
Well, using your logic, why couldn't 212MPH be safe too?
Edited by deva link on Thursday 5th October 12:50
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff