45mph in 50mph roadworks

[steveb]

Originally Posted by Nigel Conniford

Hehe, my limiter is set at 91 kms, bye bye

Mines 100 kms

[bart simpson]

Originally Posted by dandan

whats the deal with people driving at 45mph or even 40mph in them roadworks with average speed cameras. any lorry drivers on here you'll know what im talking about, theres always some sponge driving slow when theres width restrictions on the other lanes.... sorry just had to rant, just followed someone for the best part of 3 mile doing this very thing.

i agree mate as a hgv driver and i am refering to the 15 miles of/ roadworks on the m1 up and down and you have to use the second lane which is tight. i could write a book on what i see in a day/ a week.!! also i am in the wrong job ever seen any one working when you go bye? bart.

[dandan]

mines 56mph but can squeeze 60mph if empty. i say fully laden knock it in neutral down hill....... weeeeeee......whats that, y does it read 80mph on my tacho. i honestly dont know boss.

[Booty]

Originally Posted by dandan

mines 56mph but can squeeze 60mph if empty. i say fully laden knock it in neutral down hill....... weeeeeee......whats that, y does it read 80mph on my tacho. i honestly dont know boss.

I assume then Dan Dan that you are still on an anologue tacho, as if not, and you worked for me you'd be in to have 'an audience' with me for constant overspeed, as shown on your digi card. Have to say that ' knocking her out of peg' is not the best thing to do either in a manual box truck. Sorry mate but working as a Transport manager as I do for Wincanton, legislation and safe working practices are force fed into you.

[quattrokid]

Tachos are a F'ing P.I.T.A I dispise them.

I'LL DECIDE WHEN I NEED A BREAK....NOT a bloody box under the dash.
F'ing European EU no good polititians who have never parked their lazy fat arsed bodies in a truck.


Gabriel the police has up to 6 months to issue a NIP, as said your guily as charged then you "fight" your case.
iF YOU SENT IT BACK UNSIGNED it will come back again and again until a big hairy arsed paracite arrives at your door asking are you Gabriel ... yes good come with me..... clink clink.

Would love to ask a magistrate under oath..... so have you broken the speed limit lately and what where you doing?
Its a money spinner to the treasury and F*** you you little peasant motorist.

3 points, 60 quid fine... CHEERS EASY

as for 45 in a 50 zone, sit at 48 if you want and if you have a grill as a view out of your rear view mirror.... IGNORE it the specs camera will see your plate, not his.
YOU sit tight, if he wants to pass then let him take the risk.

is your licence and livelyhood REALLY worth a few miles per hour over the limit, get caught and proseccuted becuase a trucker is perched a few inches from your bootlid?

[Baldy]

i think main reason for ppl slowing down so much in roadworks is innacurate speedos from some of the things i've driven when u compare the speed to a gps had a mitsubishi pick up that was out by 8mph at 60 .whereas all you yorkie munching crew probably have accurate speedos

[pimpdriver]

Originally Posted by quattrokid

T
Gabriel the police has up to 6 months to issue a NIP, as said your guily as charged then you "fight" your case.

14 days. The bit about 6 months is explained further down below........

Read it on www.pepipoo.com as Ejay has suggested, and I was going to suggest too.

Shamlessly cut and pasted from Pepipoo:


The Notice of Intended Prosecution (or NIP)
If you receive one of these it means that they're going to prosecute you for the offence. The NIP can take one of two forms:

* A written NIP (e.g. if you get a ticket from a speed camera)
* Verbal NIP

Most Constabularies send them out within 14 days of the alleged offence - even if you were spoken to at the time by a police officer (see verbal NIP). The law was amended in 1994 to allow the police to serve the NIP via ordinary post.

So, if it's more than 14 days since you were flashed, then they're too late to prosecute you - unless you were driving a company car, hire car or someone else's car. In those circumstances they're allowed more time to track you down and this letter from Staffordshire Constabulary may help you to understand this point.

If the police failed to meet the 14 day deadline for serving the initial NIP to the Registered Keeper, the following link, which includes advice provided by the RAC's legal team, may help you.

This link explains the legal position regarding inaccurate NIPs.

If you were stopped and spoken to by a police officer, they have 6 months to prosecute you because the officer will have issued you with a verbal NIP at the time.

There are two separate offences under the law:

* Not providing the name of the driver (this is covered under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act);
* Speeding.

If you receive a written NIP through the post and you were not spoken to at the time of the alleged offence, you can only be prosecuted for not informing the authorities who was driving your vehicle and, doing so, exonerates you from any prosecution - assuming that it wasn't you who was driving, of course!

You can not be prosecuted for speeding if you weren't driving the vehicle, but some Constabularies try to bully the registered keeper into accepting liability for the offence. However, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, so, if you weren't driving or honestly can't remember who the driver was, you should "stick to your guns".

If the vehicle was flashed by a Gatso camera then they'll have two photographs of the rear of the vehicle - so how can they prove who was driving, if the driver doesn't incriminate them self? However, you will be in much more trouble than for a speeding offence if you say that you weren't the driver and they can prove that you were! Take a look at the photographic evidence in our Case File 7, and if they treat you any differently to the citizen involved in this case reported on the BBC News site politely remind them that everyone must be treated equally under the provisions of the Human Rights Act introduced to implement the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Inaccurate NIPs - The "Slip Rule"

There is a "slip rule" that allows the court to modify small errors (such as name/address of the keeper) due to typographical mistakes. Serious errors cannot be modified, and will invalidate the NIP.

* If the registration number is incorrect then the Defendant need only complete the Section 172 Notice attached to the NIP, stating that they are not in fact the registered keeper of the vehicle whose registration number is shown on the Notice.

If you think that the speed quoted on the NIP is wrong then you should follow this link.
Naming The Driver

Under the provisions of Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, the person who is registered as the keeper of the vehicle has a legal obligation to provide the police with the name of the person who was driving their vehicle at the time of the alleged motoring offence.

If the registered keeper fails to name the driver, then they may be guilty of an offence and could be liable to prosecution. This link has an example of such a case.

[quattrokid]

this is UTTER bollocks

so... can YOU REMEMBER who was driving say on a long motorway drive 6 MONTHS ago IF more than 1 driver was taking it turns to drive?

The Hamilton's ( so called polititians) got out of this by claiming that they couldnt say or remember which one of them was driving so case dismissed.
I assume that the law now says that if the registered owner cannot stitch SOMEONE up, then THEY will get stitched up instead and being faced with this forcefull under hand tactics of our law then the registered keeper WILL think of a name pretty sharpish.

god this country really gets on my tits sometimes, pity they cant put as much effort into PROPER policing this countries lawless citizens rather than pick off people a few mph over the limit... SO F'ING WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am sure there are more pressing issues these boys/ girls hiding behind a radar gun could do with their time than waste it sat on a bridge over a weekend on an empty motorway.
PATHETIC

better go and cool off with a beer I recon.
speed limits been out of date since some fat Yank raced a Le Mans car up the M1.... OH prior to speed limits.

Cheers you Yank TATW

its about time the Highway Code was updated to modern day standards,

VOTE THE GERMAN GREEN PARTY IN.... 155 MPH " is a gentlemans agreement as a " safe cruising speed" gets my vote then

oh no I havent been tagged in case your wondering. Just the attitude of the law in this country.

[Emjay]

here's a "legal" view of the Hamilton case, giving some detail about what the magistrates may consider when such a defence is made including the liklyhood of more than one person having access to the car. The magistrates clearly felt this was a reasonable defence and thus aquitted. Not being a huge fan of politicians in general it should be noted that Christine Hamilton actually represented herself and I personally say good on you gal for taking it on and winning.

http://www.roadsidelawyer.co.uk/ques...efence-9171701

The real issue about the justice system in these cases is the cost is typically prohibitive to take on the system. I was forced to as I was in serious pooh due to totting up. This despite 19 previous years of a clean license, no insurance claims, no fines, no nothing. Never in an accident of any kind so you can judge the impact the proliferation of speed cameras and there impact.

[quattrokid]

pm me if you like but how did you end up with a 600 quid fine and 1500 legal fees!