How far can you push it?
Discussion
No seen this done before, although I am surprised that I haven’t but how far can you push it in the UK?
Now I never ever speed of course but those that do would be very interested to hear the answer to this I am sure.
So, traffic is light and the road dry, taking 50, 60 and 70 limits in turn, at what speed do you leave the relative, well the worst I’ll get is £80 and 3points and enter the buspass zone?
Plotloss said:
Do you mean what are the limits for the NIPs?
In a 70
Prosecution by NIP offer starts at 79mph (70mph+10%+2mph)and ends at 96mph, court thereafter officially, though I believe there is an element of officer discretion here. So if you are going to do 80mph you may as well do 96mph...
Prosecution by FPN can start below 79mph,it is up to the individual officer.
They can start at any speed above the limit capable of proof, it's their decision.
Plotloss said:
Makes a bit of a mockery of the ACPO guidelines then doesnt it?
Would the CPS run with such a case if you elected court?
It is a misconception that the ACPO guidelines say that prosecutions shouldn't start until 10%+2mph over the limit. They do not say that.
They say that officers can start proceedings below 10%+2mph where they deem it suitable to & (unless in exceptional circumstances) the miniumum action that should be taken at 10%+2mph over the limit is issue of a FPN. In other words ordinarily you shouldn't be warning anyone for speeds over that threshold but prosecuting instead.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 2nd May 16:32
The ACPO Guidelines said:
The guidance to police officers is that it is anticipated that, other than in the most exceptional circumstances, the issue of fixed penalty notices and summonses is likely to be the minimum appropriate enforcement action as soon as the following speeds have been reached
Which seems ambiguous and could be interpreted as 79mph is the minimum speed which would result in a NIP unless there are exceptional circumstances.
Plotloss said:
The guidance to police officers is that it is anticipated that, other than in the most exceptional circumstances, the issue of fixed penalty notices and summonses is likely to be the minimum appropriate enforcement action as soon as the following speeds have been reached
Which seems ambiguous and could be interpreted as 79mph is the minimum speed which would result in a NIP unless there are exceptional circumstances.
Here is what it actually says
ACPO speed enforcement guidelines said:
Driving at any speed over the limit is an offence. The differing speed limits are generally related, and proportionate, to the risks to all road users using that road. Where police officers consider that an offence has been committed i.e. that a motorist has driven at any speed over the relevant speed limit, they should consider whether it is appropriate to take enforcement action against the offender.
The Police Service now uses technology that enables it to prove that an offence has been committed as soon as a driver exceeds the relevant speed limit by a very small margin. Motorists will therefore be at risk of prosecution immediately they exceed any legal speed limit.
The guidance to police officers is that it is anticipated that, other than in the most exceptional circumstances, the issue of fixed penalty notices and summonses is likely to be the minimum appropriate enforcement action as soon as the following speeds have been reached:
(snip-table)
This guidance does not and cannot replace the police officer's discretion and they may decide to issue a summons or a fixed penalty notice in respect of offences committed at speeds lower than those set out in the table.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 2nd May 16:40
Plotloss said:
I know, I have the entire document open in front of me as well.
Still seems ambiguous and I would be very suprised if automated detection triggered at anything outside the ACPO guideline speeds.
In most cases prosecution can be expected at about those limits, but you can't be sure & rely on that.
Where Police consider it necessary & suitable, they can prosecute below that threshold & still be acting entirely within the guidelines. So your best bet (& only sure way to avoid prosecution for speeding), is to not be over the limit. There is no ambiguity about that.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 2nd May 16:50
Plotloss said:
I know, I have the entire document open in front of me as well.
Still seems ambiguous and I would be very suprised if automated detection triggered at anything outside the ACPO guideline speeds.
In most cases prosecution can be expected at about those limits, but you can't be sure & rely on that.
Where Police consider it necessary & suitable, they can prosecute below that threshold & still be acting entirely within the guidelines. So your best bet (& only sure way to avoid prosecution for speeding), is to not be over the limit. There is no ambiguity about that.
With all due respect and as an occasional poster I would have to observe that Mr Vonhosen's replies border on the robotic - precise, authoritative and a little pedantic - the "parent" (perhaps headmaster) admonishing his naughty children. Correct though it may be, there does not appear to be much fun in this approach. Ignoring the impersonal precision instruments for enforcement (aka Gatso's) I would be very interested to learn how the BiB interpret the ACPO guidelines and what instruction they are given for handling the wayward children who break the law particularly when the conditions otherwise are "safe". Where does discretion come in and what tactics should we adopt to be beneficiaries of it?
>> Edited by Beggarall on Tuesday 2nd May 17:46
>> Edited by Beggarall on Tuesday 2nd May 17:46
Beggarall said:
With all due respect and as an occasional poster I would have to observe that Mr Vonhosen's replies border on the robotic - precise, authoratitive and a little pedantic - the "parent" (perhaps headmaster) admonishing his naughty children. Correct though it may be, there does not appear to be much fun in this approach. Ignoring the impersonal precision instruments for enforcement (aka Gatso's) I would be very interested to learn how the BiB interpret the ACPO guidelines and what instruction they are given for handling the wayward children who break the law particularly when the conditions otherwise are "safe". Where does discretion come in and what tactics should we adopt to be beneficiaries of it?
The guidelines are those in the speed enforcement policy above. If you break the law you are rolling the dice, because you are leaving yourself open to the vagaries of personal opinion/discretion & that will always leave you open to disappointment if you put yourself in that position & your view of things is not reflected by the perosn who has the power to prosecute you for your offence.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 2nd May 17:24
A traffic officer once made it very simple to me as to who get's pulled.
he said 'Who would YOU pull?'
If Mr Plod was travelling at 70MPH in the inside lane, and you overtook at 75, then you're being a bit cheeky, and are asking for a pull.
If you're on a clear motorway dry, calm, blah blah blah, at 95 but driving discretely you're left alone.
actually, who WOULD you pull?, I bet you couldn't find anything to do them for though, except if they were speeding which is why speeding is such a good tool to be used by the police. Not exploited by machines for money.
he said 'Who would YOU pull?'
If Mr Plod was travelling at 70MPH in the inside lane, and you overtook at 75, then you're being a bit cheeky, and are asking for a pull.
If you're on a clear motorway dry, calm, blah blah blah, at 95 but driving discretely you're left alone.
actually, who WOULD you pull?, I bet you couldn't find anything to do them for though, except if they were speeding which is why speeding is such a good tool to be used by the police. Not exploited by machines for money.
Hmm, a little clarity then.
Everyone knows that unless you are being a total Wayne Kerr most bib offer a little discretion and that there is usually a little tolerance with the scameras.
The main question is though, that if you were to roll the dice but were willing to bet, say £80 and 3 points, but no more, how far could you realistically take the gamble before you’d overstepped the mark and bet the house? Be it scamera or traf pol, et al?
Everyone knows that unless you are being a total Wayne Kerr most bib offer a little discretion and that there is usually a little tolerance with the scameras.
The main question is though, that if you were to roll the dice but were willing to bet, say £80 and 3 points, but no more, how far could you realistically take the gamble before you’d overstepped the mark and bet the house? Be it scamera or traf pol, et al?
rude-boy said:
The main question is though, that if you were to roll the dice but
were willing to bet, say £80 and 3 points, but no more, how far
could you realistically take the gamble before youd overstepped
the mark and bet the house? Be it scamera or traf pol, et al?
I couldn't possibly advocate breaking the law, but in practice
I've been driving twenty years and I drive at an indicated 90 mph
on UK motorways. I would not recommend this speed to all drivers.
The results of this wild folly is that I've always had a clean
licence. Never any points ever.
That tells me that police across the country don't
seem to bother until at least 90 mph indicated.
A friend of mine got done for 96 mph [ about 100 mph indicated]
in his Nissan Micra. I'd say that was a pretty silly speed in a
Micra, less so in other cars.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff