Caught doing 113mph....pleading not guilty?

[drjhill]

Liokault said:

The office we're sitting in is about 270 miles from his house, so his ability to drive is important to him.

At the risk of getting all "holier than thou" that is why he needs to pick where/when he goes hooning more carefully. That's likely to be a somewhat less convenient commute using public transport

[Sheepshanks]

Liokault said:

rgw2012 said:

Having recently had a ban (14 days), I can assure you he won't have to retake his test - they didn't even take my licence off me, just reminded me that it was illegal to drive whilst banned

Google is telling me that a ban over 56 days probably needs a retake

Over 56 days he has to beg for his licence back.

I thought you might come back and said he's been driving less than 2yrs - if so and you get 6 points you have to retake. Oddly the same doesn't apply automatically for a ban.

[Sheepshanks]

simonrockman said:

I'd also make testing annual.

With 45 million licence holders in the UK there would need to be quite a lot of examiners.

[KevinCorvetteC6]

Sheepshanks said:

With 45 million licence holders in the UK there would need to be quite a lot of examiners.

Soon be down to 40 million or less if this was a requirement!

[Ali Chappussy]

Liokault said:

The office we're sitting in is about 270 miles from his house, so his ability to drive is important to him.

If his licence means so much to him, why was he doing 113mph in the first place? Sorry, I have no sympathy for him, hope he gets a long ban and a huge fine.

Before you flame me, I know someone who was killed by a speeding motorist doing well in excess of 110mph.

[DMN]

Ali Chappussy said:

Liokault said:

The office we're sitting in is about 270 miles from his house, so his ability to drive is important to him.

If his licence means so much to him, why was he doing 113mph in the first place? Sorry, I have no sympathy for him, hope he gets a long ban and a huge fine.

Before you flame me, I know someone who was killed by a speeding motorist doing well in excess of 110mph.

(113 x 2) - 270 = just 44 more miles till home.

[agtlaw]

Liokault said:

Nice input. I forgot why I stopped bothering making threads, I remember now.

So what is correct in law?

56+ day ban means your licence is revoked. No retest. Just complete a form. From memory, Form D1.

[blueg33]

y2blade said:

your "friend" ???? or you?

Does it matter? The question is still the same.

Or were you preparing the ground for someone's pompous ass diatribe.

[johnwilliams77]

Liokault said:

Nice input. I forgot why I stopped bothering making threads, I remember now.

So what is correct in law?

Why did you stop making threads? You don't want facts from people in the profession?!!?

[cmaguire]

johnwilliams77 said:

Why did you stop making threads? You don't want facts from people in the profession?!!?

AGTLaw's one (or two) word posts are not very constructive.
If he doesn't expand on them they are often totally pointless and appear dismissive (which perhaps is the intention)
If he does expand on them then he might as well have done that in the first instance and saved himself some time.

Maybe he's boosting his post count.

[snorky782]

cmaguire said:

AGTLaw's one (or two) word posts are not very constructive.
If he doesn't expand on them they are often totally pointless and appear dismissive (which perhaps is the intention)
If he does expand on them then he might as well have done that in the first instance and saved himself some time.

Maybe he's boosting his post count.

What's he supposed to write? If it's wrong it's wrong.

[agtlaw]

johnwilliams77 said:

Why did you stop making threads? You don't want facts from people in the profession?!!?

A fair question. Like many threads on PH, this is yet another example of a discussion where the OP is not actually seeking advice. It couldn't be because a legal 'team' has been instructed, and its always a friend/relative/work collegue in any event. OP appears to be looking for something quite different. Not sure what he wants though.

[JonV8V]

Liokault said:

Unclear, but I think it’s based on the difference in ban between sub 110 and over 110 mph...

Is there a difference? I thought there was at under/over 100, but not 110

[johnwilliams77]

agtlaw said:

A fair question. Like many threads on PH, this is yet another example of a discussion where the OP is not actually seeking advice. It couldn't be because a legal 'team' has been instructed, and its always a friend/relative/work collegue in any event. OP appears to be looking for something quite different. Not sure what he wants though.

Apparently he started the thread because a legal team has advised someone to please not guilty to doing 113mph but he wants to check ON A FORUM if he’s better off ignoring THE LEGAL ADVICE and pleading guilty to speeding, then arguing that it was less than 110. He also wants to know if he is 'understanding it wrong'.

[OzzyR1]

cmaguire said:

johnwilliams77 said:

Why did you stop making threads? You don't want facts from people in the profession?!!?

AGTLaw's one (or two) word posts are not very constructive.
If he doesn't expand on them they are often totally pointless and appear dismissive (which perhaps is the intention)
If he does expand on them then he might as well have done that in the first instance and saved himself some time.

Maybe he's boosting his post count.

Either that or the OP could employ him or another specialist motoring lawyer to give the advice needed, rather than expecting freebies from experts in their field on the internet.

He stated it was wrong because it is wrong, why should he expand?

[Liokault]

johnwilliams77 said:

agtlaw said:

A fair question. Like many threads on PH, this is yet another example of a discussion where the OP is not actually seeking advice. It couldn't be because a legal 'team' has been instructed, and its always a friend/relative/work collegue in any event. OP appears to be looking for something quite different. Not sure what he wants though.

Apparently he started the thread because a legal team has advised someone to please not guilty to doing 113mph but he wants to check ON A FORUM if he’s better off ignoring THE LEGAL ADVICE and pleading guilty to speeding, then arguing that it was less than 110. He also wants to know if he is 'understanding it wrong'.

Guys, it's really not me, if it was I would have no problem in saying so.


My posting here isn't seeking advice to aid the case in question, it's purly for my interest as the advise offered to my desk mate seems counter intuitive.

[johnwilliams77]

Liokault said:

Guys, it's really not me, if it was I would have no problem in saying so.


My posting here isn't seeking advice to aid the case in question, it's purly for my interest as the advise offered to my desk mate seems counter intuitive.

I would think the best advise would be to get the opinion of 1 or 2 road traffic lawyers. Wish your friend good luck!

[zebra]

DMN said:

Ali Chappussy said:

Liokault said:

The office we're sitting in is about 270 miles from his house, so his ability to drive is important to him.

If his licence means so much to him, why was he doing 113mph in the first place? Sorry, I have no sympathy for him, hope he gets a long ban and a huge fine.

Before you flame me, I know someone who was killed by a speeding motorist doing well in excess of 110mph.

(113 x 2) - 270 = just 44 more miles till home.

Really, you do the maths rather than ask a fundamental question?

I'd be asking who drives a total of 540 miles a day to go to work. That's totalling virtually 130k miles a year allowing for four weeks holiday, adding up to about 13k a year on fuel.

Really? Must be a frickin' awesome job to put up with that. None of the figures include weekend and other social travel.

And let's say he doesn't have to reach 70, he can just do it that speed door to door, he is spending 38 hours a week minimum in his car.

And for those that go, ah yes but he was doing 113mph, he would still be spending 28 hours during the working week, not including weekends.




Disclaimer: I'm in a far flung time zone so if my maths is off, I apologise. It's very early morning for me at the moment.

[Monty Python]

Probably one of those people who travels to work on a Monday, stays the week in a hotel and travels back on a Friday.

[Liokault]

zebra said:

DMN said:

Ali Chappussy said:

Liokault said:

The office we're sitting in is about 270 miles from his house, so his ability to drive is important to him.

If his licence means so much to him, why was he doing 113mph in the first place? Sorry, I have no sympathy for him, hope he gets a long ban and a huge fine.

Before you flame me, I know someone who was killed by a speeding motorist doing well in excess of 110mph.

(113 x 2) - 270 = just 44 more miles till home.

Really, you do the maths rather than ask a fundamental question?

I'd be asking who drives a total of 540 miles a day to go to work. That's totalling virtually 130k miles a year allowing for four weeks holiday, adding up to about 13k a year on fuel.

Really? Must be a frickin' awesome job to put up with that. None of the figures include weekend and other social travel.

And let's say he doesn't have to reach 70, he can just do it that speed door to door, he is spending 38 hours a week minimum in his car.

And for those that go, ah yes but he was doing 113mph, he would still be spending 28 hours during the working week, not including weekends.




Disclaimer: I'm in a far flung time zone so if my maths is off, I apologise. It's very early morning for me at the moment.

Yes, that is the only conclusion to draw. I mean in this world of no rent by the night accommodation, what else could he do?

Saying that, I'm doing 200 miles a day and 16 hours a week driving to the site right now!!!