Some advice on speeding incident please

[mattski]

Hi, Today I received a summons for a speeding incident that happened on the 19th of March this year. The sitation was as follows: On the A45 near Coventry airport I was driving a Subaru Impreza and a rash decision resulted in me putting my foot down. It was 9:00pm at night and the road is well lit, it was very quiet traffic-wise. A marked T5 traffic car then pulled me about a mile - 1 1/2 miles later. The officers claimed I was doing 95mph in a 60 zone. I wasn''t shown any evidence of this at all and I doubt that my speed was that high. Anyway, the summons has arrived and the officers statement makes it sound worse, he claims gritters where out on the road that night. The officer also stated that the road was poorly lit, something that I would disagree with. Surely the highways agency decide what is appropriate lighting wise, not the police. The worst of it all though is that they are trying to do me for 95 in a 50 zone as the road was recently revised. I realise that I was wrong and am going to plead guilty to the charge but my questions are: 1. I doubt I was doing 95, is there a way to say ''I was speeding but doubt it was that quick''? How does the 10% + 2mph rule work, is it possible to say I was doing 86mph? The officers statement states ''from a point near the courtyard hotel carried out a speed check, maintaining a safe distance we followed the subaru at 95mph''. *IF* I hit 95mph it as for a split second as when they flashed me over I made a point of looking at the speedo, which read 80mph. Don''t they have to follow you for 1/4 at 95mph for it to constitute speeding at that speed? Not only that but how did they carry out the speed check? 2. It is my first offence and I have just got a new job in London after being made redundant, in fact I will have been there two days when I appear in court. Part of the job is going to customers premises throughout the country, I *really* need my car and the loss of my license will result in my livelyhood being completely destroyed. In addition, I am currently the only driver in my house and will have to commute from Coventry to south london. I realise that this is probably ban territory but can I play for 5 points and a large fine??? 3. It is my first offence and I have a clean license. However, I have had my license for about 16 months, this is under the two year rule where 6 points and your out applies. Given my new job situation and amount of miles I drive are they likely to be particularly heavy upon me? 4. Is it worthwhile getting a solicitor? 5. The limit on the stretch of road was technically 60 at the time, I have newspaper clippings informing the public that the revised limit and cameras''s (further up the road) had officially come into force on midnight the 20th of March. The officer stated that it was 50, how does this stand? (clutching at straws perhaps). 6. I sold the Subaru shortly after the incident, will the magistrates look favourably upon this? In addition, I have literally just spent £13,000 on a new car (pick it up tomorrow), of course this is because of the new job etc. What tips have you got for presenting mitigation in order to try and get points and a fine? Any advice or comments any of you may have are most welcome. It may sound terribly cliche but I have *really* started to drive differently, it has shook me up quite considerably. regards matt Edited by mattski on Thursday 9th August 22:25 Edited by mattski on Thursday 9th August 22:30

[bob clenton]

In my opinion unless you are confident to stand up in court and argue your case convincingly its worth getting a solicitor on the job. If you have evidence the speed limit was 60 when the police say it was 50 you have an opportunity to bring their credibility into question. Edited by bob clenton on Friday 10th August 08:35

[mattski]

Thanks for the reply Bob. I have just spoken to the Contractors and Highways Agency. They both confirm that the law came into effect on midnight Monday the 20th, a full 27 hours after I was stopped. This may be clutching at straws but surely the traffic police would have known the situation with the road? Clutching at straws? regards, Matt.

[nmilton]

Sounds like you might also want to check that their paperwork is in order. If this is the first you've heard about it following an incident in March then it sounds like they've missed the 14 day window for issuing the NIP. But John Robson would be better placed to comment on that. You might struggle with the argument about the speed limit change because, like it or not, you were exceeding the speed limit whether that be a 50mph or 60mph limit - that's what you're being prosecuted for, not how far over the limit (although that might determine any penalty / fine the court issues). It might, however, be useful in order to cast doubt on the officer's evidence.

[mattski]

Hi, Good point about the NIP although they did give a verbal one at the scene, and apparently they have a full six months to do something from there. I am getting paperwork from the Highways Agency regarding the limit change. I was technically still speeding but if I can reduce the severity of the offence somewhat I think that may help, although they might be harsh on me for trying to wriggle! ta, Matt

[mel]

Yes get a solicitor or go lucky dip on the duty one on the day at court. The speed limit change is important from a credibility point of view but if the old bill get wind of it they will just change the paperwork and claim a typo or if you go for that in court the magistrates a likely to adjourn and give the prosecution opputunity to represent or dismis it altogeather if they have the hump with police cock ups !!!!! (I once got done for doing 67 in a 70 !) But troll the websites (Ted has some good links read everything you can) write it all down and go for it. Very often Magistrates are more leaneant on a well prepared well researched case that a scroat simply because they can see your taking it seriously and that it truly will effect your life.

[john robson]

From my experience unless you are going to convince the magistrates you were doing less than 60 you have little chance of getting off with it. Limit change is an error on the part of the Police if you have done your homework correctly ( there will be a traffic order which will settle that point) If I were the cop I would just admitt the limit error at court, magistrates usually accept small errors like that. Re the following check we all write it up differently I usually put in "I followed the car for a total of ***mls durring which time the speed was recorded at **mph or varied between **mph and **mph". May be worth a solicitor, the choice is yours.

[Tony Blair]

If you really need your license plead NOT GUILTY! Why hand a conviction to them on a plate? My experience of the court system is that there is no such thing as justice, only the law. The best thing to say is that the officers involved were mistaken and that you were travelling at the prescribed speed limit. If they have not shown you any evidence it is likely they have none and are reliant on 'their word' only. The way the legal system works is that if you can create reasonable doubt the case will be thrown out. It would be better to avoid the court altogether (in case of speed cameras) by acting at the letter stage by giving them the name of a imaginary friend who loaned the car on that day. Politicians lie on a regular basis and you being taken to court has nothing to do with safety, you're just a meal ticket for the Government, so take control and don't let them get away with it! Good luck. Edited by Tony Blair on Saturday 11th August 10:40