[Merged] - The Road Traffic Act (inc Speeding)

Originally Posted by me283

I agree, arbitrary speed limits are neither feasible nor practical. And hoping that a magistrate will be interested enough to even listen to what one has to say is pure fantasy. Even before my own experience I had heard horror stories. Maybe the GAtsoS themselves are less of a problem than the scale of fines and the handling of cases by the courts? I would have second thoughts about going to court now, even if I had the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury as witnesses that I was 1000 miles away! I got the impression that I was just another motorist chancing his arm, in their eyes.

C'mon, you've had my sympathy for your case.... don't push it!

[ian@huth]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Thats interesting. Got any links?

I'm sure that you can find some with a little googling.

These camera studs were first trialled on the M8 in Scotland and I believe are in use in America and Australia. I think they were manufactured or designed by Astucia. Astucia also have intelligent cats eyes for use in fog where the cats eyes change colour for a time when vehicles pass over them warning you that there is a vehicle in front of you. They also have anti tailgating cats eyes.

[me283]

Ah yes, but I sadly have another case coming up which I am arguing. Wait till you hear this!

I have a bad habit when I am driving, which is to drive with my elbow on the door edge and my head on my hand. Technically driving one handed, but obviously only when I'm on an open road, not changing gear etc.

A while back I was driving along in this manner when I saw a traffic car behind flashing me to pull over. I did, although it was in a dangerous position and got out to ask what the problem was. The driver (a WPC) was extremely rude; so much so that I complained to an inspector later on and received an apology, whilst she was unoffocially told off.

ANyway, back to the incident. I was accused of using a mobile phone at the wheel (although I have a bluetooth headset), and offered the option of accepting a ticket or going to court. I am a principled person and have refused to accept guilt for something I haven't done, so I now await a court date.

Sadly, I was told by the WPC (there was also a male officer in the car), that they had video evidence. I saw this, and it shows basically a pink blob and nothing more. When I pointed this out the WPC said "Well, we'll both go to court and say that we saw you doing it". And this was after they passed me going the other way, sped up and flew around a roundabout, speeding again to catch me. There was no other traffic and I was below the speed limit (as proven by the video).

Now, firstly what purpose did their action serve? Secondly, what hope have I got in a magistrates' court against two police officers - one of whom should have been looking at the road, and the other of whom could see as much as his camera ie nothing?

Originally Posted by me283

Ah yes, but I sadly have another case coming up which I am arguing. Wait till you hear this!

I have a bad habit when I am driving, which is to drive with my elbow on the door edge and my head on my hand. Technically driving one handed, but obviously only when I'm on an open road, not changing gear etc.

A while back I was driving along in this manner when I saw a traffic car behind flashing me to pull over. I did, although it was in a dangerous position and got out to ask what the problem was. The driver (a WPC) was extremely rude; so much so that I complained to an inspector later on and received an apology, whilst she was unoffocially told off.

ANyway, back to the incident. I was accused of using a mobile phone at the wheel (although I have a bluetooth headset), and offered the option of accepting a ticket or going to court. I am a principled person and have refused to accept guilt for something I haven't done, so I now await a court date.

Sadly, I was told by the WPC (there was also a male officer in the car), that they had video evidence. I saw this, and it shows basically a pink blob and nothing more. When I pointed this out the WPC said "Well, we'll both go to court and say that we saw you doing it". And this was after they passed me going the other way, sped up and flew around a roundabout, speeding again to catch me. There was no other traffic and I was below the speed limit (as proven by the video).

Now, firstly what purpose did their action serve? Secondly, what hope have I got in a magistrates' court against two police officers - one of whom should have been looking at the road, and the other of whom could see as much as his camera ie nothing?

As I said I have every sympathy when the evidence is dubious (although as you say, bad habit!). If I was you though, I think i'd be paranoid cos if what you say is true then they are out to get you

No offence to anybody but I personally think this thread has run its course (ie I'm getting bored) so I shall bid you farewell and even a little adieu. Cheers chaps.







Unsubscribe.

[gazzae]

Originally Posted by me283

A while back I was driving along in this manner when I saw a traffic car behind flashing me to pull over.

[...]

And this was after they passed me going the other way, sped up and flew around a roundabout, speeding again to catch me. There was no other traffic and I was below the speed limit (as proven by the video).

Why didn't you put both hands on the wheel when you first saw the police car on the other side of the road?

[me283]

Originally Posted by gazzae

Why didn't you put both hands on the wheel when you first saw the police car on the other side of the road?

Because I was pootling along at 35mph in a 50 limit, and they were haring the other way. It didn't really occur to me that resting one's head on one's hand was an offence. It certainly didn't occur to me that it looked like anything else. Besides, I was concentrating on what was ahead, and behind me, rather than what I looked like to a car which was flying in the opposite direction!

[gazzae]

Originally Posted by me283

Because I was pootling along at 35mph in a 50 limit, and they were haring the other way. It didn't really occur to me that resting one's head on one's hand was an offence. It certainly didn't occur to me that it looked like anything else. Besides, I was concentrating on what was ahead, and behind me, rather than what I looked like to a car which was flying in the opposite direction!

35 in a 50?? I take it the road conditions were pretty bad? If they were good and the copper was as grumpy as you say I'm surprised they didn't do you for that.

[me283]

Originally Posted by gazzae

35 in a 50?? I take it the road conditions were pretty bad? If they were good and the copper was as grumpy as you say I'm surprised they didn't do you for that.

Gazzae, I was 15mph BELOW the speed limit! There was no other traffic around. It was a clear day, dull but not wet. Why would they do me for NOT speeding?!

[gazzae]

Originally Posted by me283

Gazzae, I was 15mph BELOW the speed limit! There was no other traffic around. It was a clear day, dull but not wet. Why would they do me for NOT speeding?!

You can be done for driving too slow. Imagine a twisty road where the limit is 50, someone pottering along at 20mph. Would you like to come round a bend at a safe speed and have to brake suddenly cause someone is driving slower than required?

I'm not saying this is the case with you all I was saying it was surprising that if she was as rude and grumpy as you say that she didn't try to charge you with something else

Try taking your driving test again and driving at 15mph below each limit, I guarantee you wouldn't pass.

[Russ]

The offence is of Dangerous Driving actually, if you go too slow.

[etccarmageddon]

you were causing an obstruction! a passing police car was having trouble reaching 70mph 'cos of you!

[me283]

Originally Posted by gazzae

You can be done for driving too slow. Imagine a twisty road where the limit is 50, someone pottering along at 20mph. Would you like to come round a bend at a safe speed and have to brake suddenly cause someone is driving slower than required?

I'm not saying this is the case with you all I was saying it was surprising that if she was as rude and grumpy as you say that she didn't try to charge you with something else

Try taking your driving test again and driving at 15mph below each limit, I guarantee you wouldn't pass.

No I wouldn't. But then I wasn't on my driving test. I agree that if I was holding up a huge queue of traffic then that would be a nuisance at least... but driving at a reasonable speed on an empty road, with adequate overtaking possibilities... doesn't seem too bad to me!

I just wonder what the WPC was hoping to gain.

[Russ]

A conviction.

[me283]

Originally Posted by Russ D

A conviction.

At any cost, it would appear. And with little justification.

I have to say, the inspector was extremely helpful and very courteous. He also went to great lengths to resolve the complaint. But the case was never withdrawn, and that still hangs over my head. Any bets as to what my chances are of winning? Only if I could avoid low-flying pigs methinks.

[gazzae]

Originally Posted by me283

At any cost, it would appear. And with little justification.

I have to say, the inspector was extremely helpful and very courteous. He also went to great lengths to resolve the complaint. But the case was never withdrawn, and that still hangs over my head. Any bets as to what my chances are of winning? Only if I could avoid low-flying pigs methinks.

Maybe they genuinely thought you were using a mobile phone. I don't know anyone who drives with their head resting in their hand so I assume it would be easy to think you were using a phone.

I imagine with phones being small these days they would be difficult to see in police video.

Of course that doesn't excuse them for being rude.

If you go to court and explain that you have a handsfree kit and weren't using your phone then you may get off with that, but you may well be fined for driving without due care or something for having your head in your hand.