Yep, fair cop that.
If anyone is interested I've pitchforks for hire.
FuzzyWuzzy
Full Member
Is that a CCTV grab (so someone is sat there monitoring it) or a camera triggered by a sensor (when light is red)? If the latter then probably harder to use a defence of “it was amber when I crossed the line guv”, if the former then surprised they do that (I guess AI could help but would have thought it would have problems not alerting cars going across the other road)
Specific red light monitoring cameras at that junction mate.
Is that a CCTV grab (so someone is sat there monitoring it) or a camera triggered by a sensor (when light is red)?
Camera on a pole (for the avoidance of doubt, that's a big stick in the ground, not a person from Eastern Europe).
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/ @51.3786056,0.535123,3a,75y,73.72h,91.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMFRLMG5a33HYIrs8HK-Fdw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Genuinely, I don’t know why you’re even asking this question.
I value (most of,lol) the opinions/ help given on here. Just checking my own thinking really, I've a lot going on right now.
Am I right thinking 3 points won't effect her insurance much/ at all?
Bang to rights!
Lucky not be on some sort of charge for poor lane discipline too 😉
An the car do do with a clean.
Throw away the key!
If that looks like a Range Rover to you you need to give up your driving licence now! 😀
you guys know that amber means “stop”, don’t you?
Well yes, but no.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/light-signals-controlling-traffic
AMBER means ‘Stop’ at the stop line. You may go on only if the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to pull up might cause an accident
Red Amber of course has no such amberguity (sorry)
Admittedly arguing you'd cause an accident given zero other cars at that junction would probably not be that easy.
Guilty, M'lord!
[img] 
[/img]
Its not stopped, you know how photographs work, right?
👏
Shame about the timing!
Is she a friend of Matt Hancock? That would normally qualify for an exemption and a £200m PPE contract.
She might get offered a driver awareness course(I did for the same offence)
Would a Traffic Light awareness course not be more appropriate?
Who was that posh lawyer on the radio, I'm sure he'll be happy to get her off...
The last thing we need is self aware traffic lights.
But yep course might be offered when first offence.
I got a fixed penalty and 3 points ~15 years ago for doing the same, I was a named driver on someone else's insurance at the time and don't think it had any effect on that. The points came off my record while I had my own insurance and I don't recall it having much/any impact on the premium the next year.
She hasn’t got any other points so im thinking this won’t effect her insurance much/at all? Yes, she’ll declare it of course.
Depends on individual insurer's view on motoring offences, but in the grand scheme of things, if no other factors e.g. accident caused by the transgression, it's not an insurance biggie! (Caveat - I work for a provider of insurance and their underwriting view is slightly more 'uptight' about any offences)
Admit it. Likely be offered a training course along the lines of the speed awareness one. I was when in this situation about 4 years ago.
Thanks for the info on the insurance impact guys.
Do points stay on for 6 years these days?
I know I could Google that but such actions would kill of half the questions on general chat.lol
@dangeourbrain that's why the lights stay at amber long enough for the people to react before it turns red. Basically anyone using the Junction should either have stopped or be clear by the time it turns red. Hence the Amber Gambler campaigns.
But you know the reaction to amber is to push the right hand pedal yeah? 😉
On an unrelated note, why does autocorrect keep capitalising Amber like we're discussing the merits of a pole dancer not traffic lights?
(for clarity, the pole dancer may be a person from Eastern Europe but specifically relates to their use of a metal stick anchored in the ground during their dance routine)
For everyone’s information - the cameras don’t take a photo unless the light is on red when a car crosses the target line.
Even the first photo would have been enough by the mere fact that there’s a photo at all.
StuE
She might get offered a driver awareness course(I did for the same offence)
Yep, same here. I was driving into Brighton to see Underworld and excitedly chatting to my mate. I got to sit in a room with a bunch of mobile-phone-while-driving cretins, these days you just do a 4 hour zoom call… expensive mistake, but won’t effect license/insurance.
Even the first photo would have been enough by the mere fact that there’s a photo at all.
Unless a) it's a yellow box camera at which point it's triggered by a car being in the box not crossing a line.
Or b) it's not working right.
I'm all for "probably yeah, partner poop is bad" but the camera having taken a photo alone proves nothing beyond the camera works.
We’ve all been in situations when a light turns just as you’re approaching. And in many cases it’s safer to carry on than do an emergency stop.
Another one to point out that amber means stop
AMBER means ‘Stop’ at the stop line. You may go on only if the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to pull up might cause an accident
That photo doesn't say to me that it wouldn't be safe to have stopped, no other car close behind, etc. In fact, the position over the lanes looks to me like 'shit, light's have changed, can still make it on amber if I press loud, arse!'
She’s not going to contest it so 3 points and a £100 fine do we think?
In England she is likely to be offered a course (cost £90?) and take a morning of her time. Probably the main thing she'll learn on that course is that other road users are idiots and that most people who get caught with road traffic offences believe they weren't really doing anything wrong. If she doesn't fancy that then yes it will be fixed penalty £100 & 3pts.
Argue it in court and it can go up to 1k.
The fine itself will not be £1K at court unless she (a) had some horrendous history of similar offences or (b) was earning an astonishing amount. BUT in England should would be liable for prosecution costs which for a trial are somewhere in the region of £600 on top of the fine.
They wrote back and said we had to tell them who it was.
I wrote back and told them that my obligation was to tell them to the best if my knowledge, which we did.
You are lucky! Plenty of other people have then found themselves in court trying to convince the magistrates that two grown adults really can't work out who was driving at the time. Whilst sometimes that does succeed - we were moving house 1 mile and made about 20 trips back and forth that day changing driver regularly. More often than not you'll be getting 6 points and a £500+ fine; and if you really try hard both of you will get that! What you have to keep in mind is the magistrates will have seen people appear with lots of evidence what they did to try and determine the driver (the due diligence that the law requires) e.g. phone records (who was on a call), credit card / bank records (who paid for fuel, who bought what that day), work diaries, even google location tracking... so their expectation on what people will do to establish the driver is probably a higher bar than yours! Oh, and if you knew who was driving (as the OP did) and made up a story that it could have been either of you and got caught (say by posting on the internet!) then not only do you face the s172 charge for failing to ID the driver with big fine, 6pts/ban, anyone involved could get (attempting to) pervert the course of justice charge. All rather a lot of hassle rather/riks than just admitting as the OP's better half seemed to play from the start, saying "fair enough my driving wasn't as good as it should have been that day - I'll get a fine and some points".
exactly, but why you're wasting time discussing it (& why OP bothered posting it at all!) I have no idea, given the existing of the 2nd photo! 🤣but the camera having taken a photo alone proves nothing beyond the camera works.
I have no idea, given the existing of the 2nd photo! 🤣
Well if he posted that first it would be a short thread I suppose? He's just baiting us really. On the next page he'll post the one from the speed camera, then after that the one showing the armed response cars chasing them and so on. It'll all escalate until we find out poop's other half is Joseph stalin or something.
That photo doesn’t say to me that it wouldn’t be safe to have stopped
I think I said as much, the only accident stopping there was likely to cause judging from the photo is the driver might have made an embarrassing but hilarious typo on their Facebook status.
Won't be in a room or zoom with phone users now. Phone use is a 6 pointer now, courses can't be offered.