Speed awareness course inbound
Discussion
SCEtoAUX said:
If these courses are so damned good, why aren't all drivers required to attend one?
I often think the same.Also those doing silly Speeds don’t get the educational course. Just a penalty.
It’s the people caught a few mph over an ‘arbitrary’ speed limit that get lectured about speed awareness. Seems a bit crazy.
wilwak said:
SCEtoAUX said:
If these courses are so damned good, why aren't all drivers required to attend one?
I often think the same.Also those doing silly Speeds don’t get the educational course. Just a penalty.
It’s the people caught a few mph over an ‘arbitrary’ speed limit that get lectured about speed awareness. Seems a bit crazy.
The wilful get punished, the careless get diverted.
Over Threes years ago.... so i can go on another one now!!! Done at 35 in a 30 by a Gatso Just 0.1 slower and .......
The course was 'in the main' informative.
However watch out for the BS remarks, that are said with so much conviction, you query your own sanity
Two in partiicular stick out , i had to get onto the AA before i went mental were
1) Whenever there was a SLOW written in the road it was there 'because there had been a fatal accident'
2) there are only 5 mandatory road signs that have to be put on a road ( i forget what they are now)
'So if you see signs, other than these, it is because there has been an accident there'
My tongue was bleeding by this point
One chap on here who designs roads, said it was BS, as even on a road that has not yet been opened for traffic road signs are erected!!!
I rang the AA and 'queried' this, To their credit, they looked into it and rang back to tell me the person concerned, had 'gone for retraining'
No doubt others will give their horror stories on the courses, but what i cannot fathom are the ones who say when givin a choice
'I'll take to points'..... WHY?
surely 90 quid and out after three hours and honestly answering the question 'Have you ever been convicted of a driving offence'
is better that £100.00 and three points. do that once a year in the next three years and its ' A return to Nottingham please' for a while
As regards getting thrown out i do recall one poster who when attending a course, answered incorrectly and was admonished by being told smugly
'You must listen carefully to the question'
IIRC, Later on in the course a picture of a dead straight DC/Mway came up with the question
'What maximum speed can you do on this?'
He answered 'About 150mph'
An invite for a corridor chat was given and the presenter really had a pop at him. threatening dismissal and 100/3 points
He then said
'I listened to the question carefully 'My vehicle can do 150mph so that is the answer. IF you had said what is the Maximum LEGAL speed you can do. i would have said 70mph'
Presenter was stopped dead in their tracks, and just said ok watch it '
Be interesting to see what 'facts' they come out wit on yoursh, but yes i was frightened by the lack of knowledge shown by many of the class, nd answer now and again, they dont like silent attendees..and NO smart arse questions
The course was 'in the main' informative.
However watch out for the BS remarks, that are said with so much conviction, you query your own sanity
Two in partiicular stick out , i had to get onto the AA before i went mental were
1) Whenever there was a SLOW written in the road it was there 'because there had been a fatal accident'
2) there are only 5 mandatory road signs that have to be put on a road ( i forget what they are now)
'So if you see signs, other than these, it is because there has been an accident there'
My tongue was bleeding by this point
One chap on here who designs roads, said it was BS, as even on a road that has not yet been opened for traffic road signs are erected!!!
I rang the AA and 'queried' this, To their credit, they looked into it and rang back to tell me the person concerned, had 'gone for retraining'
No doubt others will give their horror stories on the courses, but what i cannot fathom are the ones who say when givin a choice
'I'll take to points'..... WHY?
surely 90 quid and out after three hours and honestly answering the question 'Have you ever been convicted of a driving offence'
is better that £100.00 and three points. do that once a year in the next three years and its ' A return to Nottingham please' for a while
As regards getting thrown out i do recall one poster who when attending a course, answered incorrectly and was admonished by being told smugly
'You must listen carefully to the question'
IIRC, Later on in the course a picture of a dead straight DC/Mway came up with the question
'What maximum speed can you do on this?'
He answered 'About 150mph'
An invite for a corridor chat was given and the presenter really had a pop at him. threatening dismissal and 100/3 points
He then said
'I listened to the question carefully 'My vehicle can do 150mph so that is the answer. IF you had said what is the Maximum LEGAL speed you can do. i would have said 70mph'
Presenter was stopped dead in their tracks, and just said ok watch it '
Be interesting to see what 'facts' they come out wit on yoursh, but yes i was frightened by the lack of knowledge shown by many of the class, nd answer now and again, they dont like silent attendees..and NO smart arse questions
Take away the obvious revenue stream, I’m still astounded by the attention minor motorway speeding is given. I set the cruise in 30s & 40s as IMO, those speeds need to be observed (even though the knobs 6’ from my arse think otherwise). Yet there’s next to FA being done about those who use phones on the go, and use the wrong lane on DCs and motorways. I guess they can’t be enforced unless plod gets off their backside and starts to patrol. In my trip from the midlands to the West Country where I got the ticket, I never saw one cop car. That’s about 230 miles each way.
fatboy b said:
Take away the obvious revenue stream, I’m still astounded by the attention minor motorway speeding is given. I set the cruise in 30s & 40s as IMO, those speeds need to be observed (even though the knobs 6’ from my arse think otherwise). Yet there’s next to FA being done about those who use phones on the go, and use the wrong lane on DCs and motorways. I guess they can’t be enforced unless plod gets off their backside and starts to patrol. In my trip from the midlands to the West Country where I got the ticket, I never saw one cop car. That’s about 230 miles each way.
The patrols do deal with mobile phones, they don't bother much with MLMing because it isn't a great problem/threat (it isn't even a specific offence).You don't speed in 30/40s - so not a lot of point enforcing the set limit there then.
You do speed on DCs & motorways - so rather more point in enforcing the set limit there then.
All be it not to zero tolerances & with a graduated disposal dependent on circumatnces.
Patrols cut because Roads Policing is not a high priority when you've got to cut back Billions from the budget.
The bloke who did my course was a police driving instructor and very sensible and practical. The course was informative.
Most of the other punters were Mrs Suburban Lady. There were a couple of stereotypical PH sneerers at the back, who burned rubber out of the car park in their bling Audis at the end.
Most of the other punters were Mrs Suburban Lady. There were a couple of stereotypical PH sneerers at the back, who burned rubber out of the car park in their bling Audis at the end.
MLMing is a big issue, so I’ll disagree with you there. It causes one of the biggest (IMO) causes of crashes and road rage. And that’s frustration. All too often I’ll see people undertaking and pulling into non-existent gaps. That’ll end in a collision or a display of bravado from the people involved. That then has a knock-on effect to the immediate surrounding cars having to avoid cars heavy braking or swerving. Proactive policing will help stop this, but as you say budgets are being cut. That can be accepted (as is the case apparently), or it can be fought appropriately if so desired.
Edited by fatboy b on Monday 22 January 17:30
fatboy b said:
Take away the obvious revenue stream, I’m still astounded by the attention minor motorway speeding is given. I set the cruise in 30s & 40s as IMO, those speeds need to be observed (even though the knobs 6’ from my arse think otherwise). Yet there’s next to FA being done about those who use phones on the go, and use the wrong lane on DCs and motorways. I guess they can’t be enforced unless plod gets off their backside and starts to patrol. In my trip from the midlands to the West Country where I got the ticket, I never saw one cop car. That’s about 230 miles each way.
I drive most weeks from the NW to the SE and it's rare that I'll see a marked police car. Most trips I'd see someone being stopped by an unmarked car on the M6 Toll, but haven't seen that for some time. There's often a camera van on the M40 though - last week's trip it was in a very sneaky place, tucked behind a barrier on a left hand bend.Did a trip up to the NE last Saturday, and maybe it's weekend motorway drivers, but MLMing was far worse than I normally experience.
fatboy b said:
MLMing is a big issue, so I’ll disagree with you there. It causes one of the biggest (IMO) causes of crashes and road rage. And that’s frustration. All too often I’ll see people undertaking and pulling into non-existent gaps. That’ll end in a collision or a display of bravado from the people involved. That then has a knock-on effect to the immediate surrounding cars having to avoid cars heavy braking or swerving. Proactive policing will help stop this, but as you say budgets are being cut. That can be accepted (as is the case apparently), or it can be fought appropriately if so desired.
I drive on these roads (my work is all about driving on our roads) & I do it all over the country. MLMs aren't a huge problem, I just uneventfully pass them & carry on with my journey. My sat nav when projecting my journey time doesn't know there are MLMs there & if they are it doesn't take me any longer than what the sat nav said it would when I started out hours earlier. They don't cause me to pull into inappropriate gaps either, I choose the gaps I pull into, I'm responsible for the move.It's only a big issue in people's heads because they make it a big issue, or it's big issue of they wish to travel consistently at speeds considerably beyond the speed limit. The authorities don't do much about it because it isn't a huge deal in your journey time for somebody observing the speed limits. You don't really expect them to use resources enforcing it so that people can easily exceed speed limits when they already have resources trying to make sure people don't exceed limits.
Fatboy
If you have elected for SAC, I think that is the sensible response.
I did a SAC a few years ago and found it interesting. Nobody insulted me, or spoke down to me.
I think if you go with an open mind and don't try to be clever, you will come out at the end of the day, a little more knowledgeable.
It's not too bad, better than 3 points.
If you have elected for SAC, I think that is the sensible response.
I did a SAC a few years ago and found it interesting. Nobody insulted me, or spoke down to me.
I think if you go with an open mind and don't try to be clever, you will come out at the end of the day, a little more knowledgeable.
It's not too bad, better than 3 points.
I've been on two, so I must be doubly thick 
They were very different indeed. The first was so stuffed with absolute bulls
t, the guy running it was a complete twerp. I kept on interrupting and pointing why he was wrong. So yes I was that smartarse, but he was a moron.
The second was much cleverer and much more considered. The objective of the course was to show that driving slightly over the limit as we all had done was dangerous. Some of the key points were the Tiff Needell vid where going 1 mph over 30 meant you smacked in to the dummy. That vid has a point which is to show the speed you are carrying when the car that was not speeding has stopped. Nice physics. This was taken as proof that being slightly over the limit meant you'd smack into people. Then the role play about how all the players felt in a fatal RTA. Pretty powerful stuff.
So put that together...drive slightly over the limit and you'll smack into someone and likely kill them and the consequences of that are pretty serious. Ergo slight speeding is a really bad thing!
So how did we fare? Who agreed that marginal speeding was bad? At the beginning noone. At the end everyone..... except me.
People are so biddable. No wonder so many people fell for the brexit bks
They were very different indeed. The first was so stuffed with absolute bulls
t, the guy running it was a complete twerp. I kept on interrupting and pointing why he was wrong. So yes I was that smartarse, but he was a moron.The second was much cleverer and much more considered. The objective of the course was to show that driving slightly over the limit as we all had done was dangerous. Some of the key points were the Tiff Needell vid where going 1 mph over 30 meant you smacked in to the dummy. That vid has a point which is to show the speed you are carrying when the car that was not speeding has stopped. Nice physics. This was taken as proof that being slightly over the limit meant you'd smack into people. Then the role play about how all the players felt in a fatal RTA. Pretty powerful stuff.
So put that together...drive slightly over the limit and you'll smack into someone and likely kill them and the consequences of that are pretty serious. Ergo slight speeding is a really bad thing!
So how did we fare? Who agreed that marginal speeding was bad? At the beginning noone. At the end everyone..... except me.
People are so biddable. No wonder so many people fell for the brexit b
ks You're the man BertBert,
I think they should add some special effects to the Tiff Needell video so when the car hits the dummy children they explode. Better still, make it like the A-Team so that if you look carefully you can see the dummy children explode just before Tiff runs into them.
I think this would make it far more memorable for the attendees.
I think they should add some special effects to the Tiff Needell video so when the car hits the dummy children they explode. Better still, make it like the A-Team so that if you look carefully you can see the dummy children explode just before Tiff runs into them.
I think this would make it far more memorable for the attendees.
mickmcpaddy said:
vonhosen said:
Not everybody needs one, those who demonstrate they do..........
If speeding is so fraught with danger you would have thought that those who have managed it without crashing are in less need of a course than others.There are other courses for that.
You're on it because you exceeded the limit.
silverfoxcc said:
Over Threes years ago.... so i can go on another one now!!! Done at 35 in a 30 by a Gatso Just 0.1 slower and .......
The course was 'in the main' informative.
However watch out for the BS remarks, that are said with so much conviction, you query your own sanity
Two in partiicular stick out , i had to get onto the AA before i went mental were
1) Whenever there was a SLOW written in the road it was there 'because there had been a fatal accident'
2) there are only 5 mandatory road signs that have to be put on a road ( i forget what they are now)
'So if you see signs, other than these, it is because there has been an accident there'
My tongue was bleeding by this point
One chap on here who designs roads, said it was BS, as even on a road that has not yet been opened for traffic road signs are erected!!!
I rang the AA and 'queried' this, To their credit, they looked into it and rang back to tell me the person concerned, had 'gone for retraining'
[b]No doubt others will give their horror stories on the courses, but what i cannot fathom are the ones who say when givin a choice
'I'll take to points'..... WHY?
surely 90 quid and out after three hours and honestly answering the question 'Have you ever been convicted of a driving offence'
is better that £100.00 and three points.[/b] do that once a year in the next three years and its ' A return to Nottingham please' for a while
As regards getting thrown out i do recall one poster who when attending a course, answered incorrectly and was admonished by being told smugly
'You must listen carefully to the question'
IIRC, Later on in the course a picture of a dead straight DC/Mway came up with the question
'What maximum speed can you do on this?'
He answered 'About 150mph'
An invite for a corridor chat was given and the presenter really had a pop at him. threatening dismissal and 100/3 points
He then said
'I listened to the question carefully 'My vehicle can do 150mph so that is the answer. IF you had said what is the Maximum LEGAL speed you can do. i would have said 70mph'
Presenter was stopped dead in their tracks, and just said ok watch it '
Be interesting to see what 'facts' they come out wit on yoursh, but yes i was frightened by the lack of knowledge shown by many of the class, nd answer now and again, they dont like silent attendees..and NO smart arse questions
I can answer that one with another question, why would anyone do one of these courses? £100 and 1/2 a day of your time to sit in a room full of idiots whilst someone drones on and on about how wonderful they are. From what I've heard everything they spout is made up bThe course was 'in the main' informative.
However watch out for the BS remarks, that are said with so much conviction, you query your own sanity
Two in partiicular stick out , i had to get onto the AA before i went mental were
1) Whenever there was a SLOW written in the road it was there 'because there had been a fatal accident'
2) there are only 5 mandatory road signs that have to be put on a road ( i forget what they are now)
'So if you see signs, other than these, it is because there has been an accident there'
My tongue was bleeding by this point
One chap on here who designs roads, said it was BS, as even on a road that has not yet been opened for traffic road signs are erected!!!
I rang the AA and 'queried' this, To their credit, they looked into it and rang back to tell me the person concerned, had 'gone for retraining'
[b]No doubt others will give their horror stories on the courses, but what i cannot fathom are the ones who say when givin a choice
'I'll take to points'..... WHY?
surely 90 quid and out after three hours and honestly answering the question 'Have you ever been convicted of a driving offence'
is better that £100.00 and three points.[/b] do that once a year in the next three years and its ' A return to Nottingham please' for a while
As regards getting thrown out i do recall one poster who when attending a course, answered incorrectly and was admonished by being told smugly
'You must listen carefully to the question'
IIRC, Later on in the course a picture of a dead straight DC/Mway came up with the question
'What maximum speed can you do on this?'
He answered 'About 150mph'
An invite for a corridor chat was given and the presenter really had a pop at him. threatening dismissal and 100/3 points
He then said
'I listened to the question carefully 'My vehicle can do 150mph so that is the answer. IF you had said what is the Maximum LEGAL speed you can do. i would have said 70mph'
Presenter was stopped dead in their tracks, and just said ok watch it '
Be interesting to see what 'facts' they come out wit on yoursh, but yes i was frightened by the lack of knowledge shown by many of the class, nd answer now and again, they dont like silent attendees..and NO smart arse questions
ks anyway so they are not even useful. The last time I got nabbed I got a letter to name the driver which took 60 seconds of my life to reply to and then an offer of a course which took 0 seconds to do anything about followed by the FPN which took all of 2 minutes to sort. And that was that, it was over, free to do what I want.
The FPN was about the same cost as the course so nothing to save there, sure my insurance has gone up by about £30 or £40 a year if you shop about so over the 5 years it cost me £200 extra, that was worth every penny not to sit in that room. I dont see it any different to paying extra for decent shoes that won't give you bunions, life is just too short.
And if I ever get a 6 month ban for totting up, well I've always wanted to see Australia, being free and single and not giving a f
k has its upsides.edit : why has the not worked?
vonhosen said:
The course is about promoting behavioural change in relation to speed choice, not whether you have had a collision or not.
There are other courses for that.
You're on it because you exceeded the limit.
So are you on the course because you are a danger or because you made a clerical error?There are other courses for that.
You're on it because you exceeded the limit.
mickmcpaddy said:
vonhosen said:
The course is about promoting behavioural change in relation to speed choice, not whether you have had a collision or not.
There are other courses for that.
You're on it because you exceeded the limit.
So are you on the course because you are a danger or because you made a clerical error?There are other courses for that.
You're on it because you exceeded the limit.
You may or may not be a danger, but you've put yourself up for the course with your own actions.
You're on it for a clerical error if you ticked the wrong box (you ticked take the course instead of FPN).
vonhosen said:
You are on it because you got caught exceeding the speed limit.
You may or may not be a danger, but you've put yourself up for the course with your own actions.
You're on it for a clerical error if you ticked the wrong box (you ticked take the course instead of FPN).
Would you not say speeding is a clerical error, all you have done is point a needle at the number 35 instead of a number 30.You may or may not be a danger, but you've put yourself up for the course with your own actions.
You're on it for a clerical error if you ticked the wrong box (you ticked take the course instead of FPN).
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff