Would you go to court for this speeding allegation
Discussion
I have a clean license, I just don't want an endorsement on my license for 5 years. I have 5 car insurance policies. That's my motive.
Accepting the conditional offer of 3 points and a £100 fine would open me up to premium hikes for the 5 years while I have the endorsement and that'll add up in extra premium over time. It would probably cost me more to fight it in court but winning would feel sweet, as it always does. It preserves my clean license for any future lapses if I'm successful.
My principle argument would be that the operator isn't following training or guidelines around the rules of a clear line of sight and target tracking, potentially lack of a steady lock. The catch22 is that you're not able to view the full video they have unless you proceed to court. I won my last speeding case when I challenged although the circumstances here are totally different. There is a second argument which I'll get to later.
Alleged speed was 34mph in a 20-limit.
You can see from the small snippet of evidence they've provided that the car comes around the corner and they've got a split second after it passes the traffic cones on the right before the car is obscured by the pelican crossing railings on the left. You can see the targeting dot is on the car while it is still cornering. Apparently they are not supposed to target a cornering vehicle. As a gamble I'm imagining if I go ahead, when the video is available for me to watch I will see that they had to be in a major rush (relatively speaking) to get the target and pull the trigger and this may show that they aren't using the equipment properly.
With the images they sent they also gave me a distance reading of 188.9m. I've been back to the site and measured the distance with a measuring wheel. I measured it twice and got around 204.5m each time. Google maps says something very close to that as well. You can doubt the accuracy of Google maps but as it matches the physical measurement I took at the scene it ends up being the case that there are two measurements that are the same and one which is different, the different measurement is probably wrong.
So the distance measurement seems substantially incorrect and the window for focusing, tracking and measuring is severely compromised.
I am very tempted to fight this in court but the statistics for drivers fighting these cases and winning are extremely poor. 1% of alleged offences are elected by the driver for court challenge and about 50% of those challenges result in a conviction... which is a happier statistic but still seems like a gamble.
If it goes to court I risk a slightly higher endorsement because 34mph is quite a lot more than the 20mph limit if it is proven accurate. Plus court costs. Plus my legal bill.
What do you all say, be honest!
Accepting the conditional offer of 3 points and a £100 fine would open me up to premium hikes for the 5 years while I have the endorsement and that'll add up in extra premium over time. It would probably cost me more to fight it in court but winning would feel sweet, as it always does. It preserves my clean license for any future lapses if I'm successful.
My principle argument would be that the operator isn't following training or guidelines around the rules of a clear line of sight and target tracking, potentially lack of a steady lock. The catch22 is that you're not able to view the full video they have unless you proceed to court. I won my last speeding case when I challenged although the circumstances here are totally different. There is a second argument which I'll get to later.
Alleged speed was 34mph in a 20-limit.
You can see from the small snippet of evidence they've provided that the car comes around the corner and they've got a split second after it passes the traffic cones on the right before the car is obscured by the pelican crossing railings on the left. You can see the targeting dot is on the car while it is still cornering. Apparently they are not supposed to target a cornering vehicle. As a gamble I'm imagining if I go ahead, when the video is available for me to watch I will see that they had to be in a major rush (relatively speaking) to get the target and pull the trigger and this may show that they aren't using the equipment properly.
With the images they sent they also gave me a distance reading of 188.9m. I've been back to the site and measured the distance with a measuring wheel. I measured it twice and got around 204.5m each time. Google maps says something very close to that as well. You can doubt the accuracy of Google maps but as it matches the physical measurement I took at the scene it ends up being the case that there are two measurements that are the same and one which is different, the different measurement is probably wrong.
So the distance measurement seems substantially incorrect and the window for focusing, tracking and measuring is severely compromised.
I am very tempted to fight this in court but the statistics for drivers fighting these cases and winning are extremely poor. 1% of alleged offences are elected by the driver for court challenge and about 50% of those challenges result in a conviction... which is a happier statistic but still seems like a gamble.
If it goes to court I risk a slightly higher endorsement because 34mph is quite a lot more than the 20mph limit if it is proven accurate. Plus court costs. Plus my legal bill.
What do you all say, be honest!
Fight those feckers every inch of the way.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/11/01/sadiq-...
Why do lefties hate cars so much?
Because they signify success. DB12 or getting stabbed in a gwr cartridge for your average Rolex.
Utter see you next Tuesdays quite honestly.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/11/01/sadiq-...
Why do lefties hate cars so much?
Because they signify success. DB12 or getting stabbed in a gwr cartridge for your average Rolex.
Utter see you next Tuesdays quite honestly.
There used to be a rule, not sure if its still used, along the lines that they are meant to suspect you are speeding before aiming so in the pictures you have provided prove that there is no way they could have suspected you were speeding before taking the first picture unless they had clear sight of you before you went behind the bus on the bend in which case, why didnt you see them and slow down.
foccer said:
There used to be a rule, not sure if its still used, along the lines that they are meant to suspect you are speeding before aiming so in the pictures you have provided prove that there is no way they could have suspected you were speeding before taking the first picture unless they had clear sight of you before you went behind the bus on the bend in which case, why didnt you see them and slow down.
That's interesting. I'll look into that. Thankyou. Alickadoo said:
godfearinglayman said:
What do you all say, be honest!
How fast were you driving?Foss62 said:
Alickadoo said:
godfearinglayman said:
What do you all say, be honest!
How fast were you driving?
The financial impact on you for 3 points will be negligible, even having multiple vehicles and policies. I personally wouldn’t bother fighting it. However, if you’re going to pursue it then I’d suggest you engage proper legal counsel and take their advice and let them do the talkijg / writing for you. Being a smart arse in court won’t end well for you and the tone of your OP would probably wind up the court.
I don’t think you’d be going to court anyway, you’ll get a SJPN and plead by letter. They’ll review your case in your absense and decide on a punishment. You’re unlikely to get your day at The Old Bailey playing Rumpole.
I don’t think you’d be going to court anyway, you’ll get a SJPN and plead by letter. They’ll review your case in your absense and decide on a punishment. You’re unlikely to get your day at The Old Bailey playing Rumpole.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff