a little advice please..

[Vadge, Seymour]

98mph in a 70; dual carriage-way, A11, near Snetterton, Norfolk

Anybody got any experience on likely fine/points/disqualification.

I'm thinking (hoping) less than £500 and six points...but, did get disqualified around 10 years ago for 1 month for doing 101mph in a 70, albeit, in a different County.

All advice/information welcome.

Thanks
Vadge

[Mr Trophy]

Hi Welcome,

What where you caught by?

[Vadge, Seymour]

Sorry. Static Camera in Van.

[supermono]

Ah you were caught on the recently built sensational dual carriageway which bypassed the original road that had accident history. The camera scum were collecting tax on there right from when it opened yet their website clearly says they only collect from dangerous roads.

I tried in vain to get their boss man to tell me how they justified this but just got the expected spin and BS in defence of their profits. I was curious how the most up to date modern road design and engineering knowledge could create something so dangerous from the start that they needed to operate there. And if they were sueing the contractors for getting it wrong.

Driving the road it's obvious that being straight, well surfaced, perfect visibility etc it was a guaranteed high profit zone for them. I guess the motorsport connection with Snetterton right there made it one of the most profitable spots in the country.

But to the point, have you been summonsed yet or just a NIP? You might get an FP offer.

Very very best of luck anyhow, it's a disgrace.

SM

[14-7]

supermono said:

Ah you were caught on the recently built sensational dual carriageway which bypassed the original road that had accident history. The camera scum were collecting tax on there right from when it opened yet their website clearly says they only collect from dangerous roads.

I tried in vain to get their boss man to tell me how they justified this but just got the expected spin and BS in defence of their profits. I was curious how the most up to date modern road design and engineering knowledge could create something so dangerous from the start that they needed to operate there. And if they were sueing the contractors for getting it wrong.

Driving the road it's obvious that being straight, well surfaced, perfect visibility etc it was a guaranteed high profit zone for them. I guess the motorsport connection with Snetterton right there made it one of the most profitable spots in the country.

But to the point, have you been summonsed yet or just a NIP? You might get an FP offer.

Very very best of luck anyhow, it's a disgrace.

SM

Cut off point for a FPN is 96mph isn't it in a 70 zone? Over that its a court summons.

I know what you mean about it's a disgrace.

The limits 70mph but I should be able to do at least 100mph because that's what I think is OK.

[petermansell]

bad luck in getting caught - lets hope the punishment isn't too draconian

[vonhosen]

14-7 said:

supermono said:

Ah you were caught on the recently built sensational dual carriageway which bypassed the original road that had accident history. The camera scum were collecting tax on there right from when it opened yet their website clearly says they only collect from dangerous roads.

I tried in vain to get their boss man to tell me how they justified this but just got the expected spin and BS in defence of their profits. I was curious how the most up to date modern road design and engineering knowledge could create something so dangerous from the start that they needed to operate there. And if they were sueing the contractors for getting it wrong.

Driving the road it's obvious that being straight, well surfaced, perfect visibility etc it was a guaranteed high profit zone for them. I guess the motorsport connection with Snetterton right there made it one of the most profitable spots in the country.

But to the point, have you been summonsed yet or just a NIP? You might get an FP offer.

Very very best of luck anyhow, it's a disgrace.

SM

Cut off point for a FPN is 96mph isn't it in a 70 zone? Over that its a court summons.

I know what you mean about it's a disgrace.

The limits 70mph but I should be able to do at least 100mph because that's what I think is OK.

[arclight]

I think your best bet is to try and get a court appearance, and avoid a FPN. They can go easier on you if you put a compelling case across.

I got caught going rather fast on a dual carriageway (with a fixed limit of 40), and I think I got off lightly (6 points, and 250+fees).

Someone I know also had a court appearance, and they got less than if the had a fixed penalty.

However, I have no legal background, and it will all depend on which Court you go to!

(I accept no responsibility for any lousy advice I give!)(I have no legal training)

:-)

[supermono]

14-7 said:

The limits 70mph but I should be able to do at least 100mph because that's what I think is OK.

Yes indeed. My point as you well know is that IF they are so interested in saving lives they should be setting up somewhere where people are being killed rather than collecting easy money from what is probably the best engineered road and therefore (probably) the safest road for miles around.

Like most people around these parts I'm genuinely interested in having fewer people killed on the roads and it simply makes me seethe with anger to see a)my local "saftyists" pursuing money from easy targets and b)hapless individuals like the OP getting shafted doing something pretty much everybody does all the time without costing anybody anywhere anything.

Damn, if they're so interested in saving lives they could give up measuring vehicle speed altogether and get out to clean the hospitals. I would guarantee that if they did fewer people would accidentally die every year.

But it depends on what we as a society want -- more safety or more speeding tickets. I'm guessing you prefer the more speeding tickets approach. How very odd.

SM

[alphadog]

14-7 said:

The limits 70mph but I should be able to do at least 100mph because that's what I think is OK.

You can't do that or you'll burn all those carbons and kill the planet

One of the excuses the government reeled out in response to a petition to increase the motorway speed limit to a far more sensible 85mph

[supermono]

alphadog said:

One of the excuses the government reeled out in response to a petition to increase the motorway speed limit to a far more sensible 85mph

rofl. Is that really whay they said? It's no wonder that with this white hot sense of logic, politicians can make such a comprehensive frick up of complicated stuff like education and the economy...

SM

[alphadog]

supermono said:

alphadog said:

One of the excuses the government reeled out in response to a petition to increase the motorway speed limit to a far more sensible 85mph

rofl. Is that really whay they said? It's no wonder that with this white hot sense of logic, politicians can make such a comprehensive frick up of complicated stuff like education and the economy...

SM

Here's the link
http://www.number10.gov.uk/output/Page11927.asp

The other main excuse was increased speed differential between cars and trucks - I see more problems caused by the close formations of traffic caused by too little speed differential. Or put it another way I find myself having to anticipate and accomodate for other drivers' errors such as poorly judged lane changes far more since slowing down for fuel economy reasons.

Edited by alphadog on Sunday 20th July 09:50

[14-7]

supermono said:

My point as you well know is that IF they are so interested in saving lives they should be setting up somewhere where people are being killed rather than collecting easy money from what is probably the best engineered road and therefore (probably) the safest road for miles around.

They do in my area (well the traffic police do, the camera vans just have the approved sites) but people still bh and moan about them.

supermono said:

Like most people around these parts I'm genuinely interested in having fewer people killed on the roads and it simply makes me seethe with anger to see a)my local "saftyists" pursuing money from easy targets and b)hapless individuals like the OP getting shafted doing something pretty much everybody does all the time without costing anybody anywhere anything.

I don't really think anyone would disagree with less people being killed or seriously injured on our roads is a good thing. I'll also agree that the camera partnerships probably aren't about reducing road casulaties (after all if they do it means less people in the departments getting paid £30000 a year and they won't want that will they). Unfortunately I don't agree that the OP is getting shafted. He knew the 70mph limit but decided to go well above it. We all know the consequences. After all you only get done for what you get caught for. You take your chances as they say.

supermono said:

Damn, if they're so interested in saving lives they could give up measuring vehicle speed altogether and get out to clean the hospitals. I would guarantee that if they did fewer people would accidentally die every year.

Spokesperson for the police says "We are now moving officers in to local hospitals for cleaning patrols as this will reduce deaths". Public "WTF? Catch proper criminals not the poor little germs!" (tongue in cheek but you get my drift)

supermono said:

But it depends on what we as a society want -- more safety or more speeding tickets. I'm guessing you prefer the more speeding tickets approach. How very odd.

I would prefer to see less tickets and less people being killed or seriously injured. Unfortunately with the attitudes of most being, "I should be able to do what I like" neither is going to happen. More tickets will be issued because the public always want people like the police to justify what they are doing unless they themselves get stopped then it's back to "what's it got to do with you, I can do what I like".

I've seen too many cases in court whereby the offending driver has said "but I didn't mean to". So what? Your actions have still resulted in the death or injury of someone else. At the time you thought you were the bees knees doing 80 in a 40 zone until it went pear shaped. Now you want sympathy?

One of my BiB mates (or should that be WiB because it is a she?) worked in a branch called the public protection unit virtually dealing with rapists, child molesteres etc and she said that the time she was in there (about 4 years) she accused people of being peadophiles, took peoples children off them and all sorts and never once got a complaint from anyone. She is now in traffic and states she gets complaints virtually weekly because as soon as you call someone a bad driver or give them a ticket they get all defensive and aggressive and think they should be allowed to break the law.

The attitude of "I should be able to do what I want" needs changing.

Sorry from the slight distraction from the OP there!

[supermono]

14-7 said:

Spokesperson for the police says "We are now moving officers in to local hospitals for cleaning patrols as this will reduce deaths". Public "WTF? Catch proper criminals not the poor little germs!" (tongue in cheek but you get my drift)

Some good stuff in there, but please don't get me wrong on this point. We're not talking about police officers here -- god forbid -- we're talking about the parasitic drones running speed camera ticketing businesses. These people are unskilled ticketers of a lower calibre than traffic wardens and would be ideally suited to cleaning hospitals where they would without a shadow of a doubt save the lives of more people than they do currently.

SM

[supermono]

14-7 said:

The attitude of "I should be able to do what I want" needs changing.

The problem with this logic is that when you have almost total disobedience with no bad consequences (DFT figures) you don't get all heavy on the perps, you review the law you don't try and change attitudes because you won't. They did this with cannibis and there's far more evidence that cannibis use is dangerous than "speeding".

But getting all heavy on the perps in a place where speeding is least likely to cause trouble is simply despicable especially when you consider those ticketing have made a livelihood out of it. It does *hugely* disproportionate economic harm to people guilty of a minor transgression (100 in a 70? pah) and erodes respect for the police. All this with no benefit to society.

SM