My wife has just got another speeding penalty notice - but its from early May - I heard that they had to issue them out within a certain time period otherwise they would not be valid. Does anyone know anything about this?
She has to got to a disciplinary meeting late this afternoon as this takes he to 12 points now and she needs her licence fore work.
This thread's going to be a big 'un!
If she needs her licence for work, what's she doing speeding?
You could take the points for her 😉
Is it a lease car or is she the registered owner?
she could learn to drive at the speed limit perhaps this is the way to teachher ...sorry if that sounds harsh but she does not seem to be learning a lesson here
I'd request a speeding exemption from the magistrate, she's clearly very busy and every second when she's not doing business is a tangible loss t the company. I'm sure they'll understand. 🙂
(I have 3 points for speeding, on the way to work, past the same static speed camera I drove past twice a day for three years, a day before the council turned all the speed cameras off, because life does that sort of thing to me, oh and I'm a ****)
No time limit as far as i'm aware
The trick is to not get caught.....
Now in NZ they hide the ****ing things! I learn't the hard way 🙁 I did however do a bit of a dukes of hazard style hiding down a side road till the cop, who had turned round to chase me, had gone.
What Junkyard said.
IIRC, 5 O have to issue the paper within 14 days.....
[i]she does not seem to be learning a lesson here[/i]
Have to agree there, 9 points aint an accident.
😉
Go ask on www.pepipoo.com
There's loads of experts on the site as it's specifically for this type of query.
There i something like a 3 month window of issuing I heard, I'd look into that more
Has to be notified to the registered keeper within 2 weeks - if she's not the registered keeper (leased etc.) then they can take as long as they like to notify her after that.
As others have said, if I needed my licence for work and had 9 points I'd be crawling everywhere.
Some authorities publish that they must issue the ticket within 30 days. Go to the relevant website and have a look.
They have to issue [post]the intention to prosecute notice within 14 days of the offence to the cars registered keeper
Company car ones obviously get sent to the company or lease company etc. & can then take a while to get to the driver
If they posted it within the 14 days, she's had it - if they didn't she stands a good chance of avoiding the fine & points
I think there's a 14 day limit also but it may be that its 14 days to issue the ticket to the owner of the vehicle. If its a lease company car then the ticket will have been sent to the lease company and they may have delayed forwarding it to your wife fo some reason. Not sure where she stands in those circumstances.
so bushwacked - who is the registered owner????????
Okay, the facts are:
NIP must be sent out within 14 days. This applies to the registered cars keeper/driver.
If the car is a lease car, hire car, company car etc then they have 6 months.
How do I know this? I worked for a company and we had 3 guys who kept speeding and getting caught. Our company cars were leased and the manager would lose his rag every few weeks as another NIP would land on his desk. lol. Fortunately everything was logged so it was easy to find out who it was.
Oh, and 9 points! I don't need to comment on that one... lol
Zedsdead - MemberOh, and 9 points! [b]I don't need to get any more abuse!!!!!![/b]......
Plus a massive increase in her car insurance (if she insures the car herself) - that's assuming that she can get any, because a plenty of insurers won't touch anyone with 12 points plus.
By "speeding penalty notice" do you mean a Notice of Intention to Prosecute?
A NIP should be issued [i]to the registered keeper[/i] within 14 days of the (alleged) offence I believe, though if she was stopped by the police rather than caught on camera then this won't apply - they will have given her a verbal NIP at the scene.
Note that if it's taken a while to track down the driver, this is outside of the 14 days. Ie, if the keeper and driver are different, the RK can't sit on it for a month before passing it on to the driver who then goes "14 days, hah!"
As for the "should have known better" argument; the real problem to my mind isn't the speeding in and of itself, but speeding whilst not paying attention to what she's doing. If you're going to drive fast you need to be constantly aware of what's going on around you, not seeing four speed traps would point towards observation issues.
If she needs her car for work and would be sacked if she lost her licence, you may have a case for claiming unnecessary hardship. Expect a hefty fine and perhaps a speed awareness course (which should really be coupled with a 'look where you're bloody going' course, when I'm in charge etc etc)
IdleJon, I decided to edit that as I thought he's going to get enough abuse on here lol.
But you're right. Although, I do wonder how many people are honest and do actually tell their insurance company if they have points and how many?....
Zed, sorted for you! 😉
Surely any right-thinking person will tell their insurance company how many points they have - otherwise they may find them not paying up in the event of a claim.
As for the argument of 'I need a license for work'
It will most likely go like this...
defence - my client requires a license for work blah blah hardship etc blah blah...
judge - does your husband work?
defence - yes, but...
judge - tough! Banned for a year and £400 fine. NEXT!
They're harsh!
No point having insurance if you don't tell them. It would be invalid anyway.
Speeding kills - no sympathy here.
[i]Although, I do wonder how many people are honest and do actually tell their insurance company if they have points and how many?....
[/i]
But that just makes it worse doesn't it, as fibbing to the insurance Co, just means you're not insurred 😯
mastiles, but most sensible people would only have 3 or maybe 6 if they were 'unlucky'.
If your insurance found out that you had 3 points which you didn't declare, they would mostly just charge the correct premium backdated to when you should have declared the points, as opposed to voiding the policy.
Covering up 12 points would be a little more serious though. (Not that I'm suggesting the Ops wife to be doing this.)
No sympathy, everyone has probably speeded some time in their life, but after your first 3 points people tend to learn. If it was permanent camera have 14 days to serve NIP to registered keeper, if it's a hire car or business car it can easily take months to reach the driver!!
Perhaps, but would anyone think it wise not to tell an insurance company even if it was 'just' 3 points? Write off a £20k car, insurance company looking to make savings, sees you haven't notified them about something that invalidates the policy, it just gives them a very easy out.
If all 12 points are for speeding then She's in a whole lot of trouble, & in all honsety there is a problem here, that needs to be addressed.
It took a Senior Director of a firm I knew to fly to N.Irelend to plead the case for a rep who was in a simmillar position. He kept his licence though.
Was she done by a camera or stopped by the police? If the later they have 6 months for the paper work to come through.
No sympathy. If she has so many points and needs the car for work she should take more care.
Well if she is hot/fit/busty...
And I was the judge...I'd let her get away with it as they do!
Ok bring in the Black guy who parked 1 minute longer than he should have in a 1hr zone...prision sentence 12 yrs!
Try saying it was you instead and spank her bottom in return?
😯
Does she have a dead relative she can palm the points off on like that woman did a couple of months ago?
speeding doesnt kill. bad driving kills.
Don't think you will get away with it by not telling insurers.
We just have gone through a vehicle write-off process, and the last step before they sent us the cheque was a teleconference call with the DVLA to make sure our licences were - as we had stated - clean.
guns dont kill people rappers do
alexxx - Member
speeding doesnt kill. bad driving kills.
So does denial.
Surely speeding and bad driving overlap somewhat?
ZZzZzZzzz
So does denial.
No it doesn't.
Speeding IS bad driving.
Anyone else's troll alarm ringing? For the OP, not alexxx (yawn).
So is she fit?
Post pics OP and send to the Judge-he'll get to the bottom of it...
I don't think it is a Troll - surely the Trollee posts subsequent messages, whereas the OP on this occasion has disappeared altogether after making the post.
Which is, I think, very rude of him.
😛
I had 9 points (3 speeding offences) when in my early twenties - for 3 years I just slowed down and looked out more.
Since, (Touch Wood) only had 1 speeding ticket - radar detectors and cruise control - plus never speed in built-up areas.
Not slowed me down elsewhere though.
It's not a troll
Surely speeding and bad driving overlap somewhat?
By definition, yes, but that doesn't imply cause. Some speeders are bad drivers, some bad drivers are speeders.
Some of the worst drivers I've ever seen have been people scared to drive over 20mph. Conversely, Lewis Hamilton.
You might as well argue that there's an overlap between, oh I don't know, bad drivers and people who like cheese.
Well the fact remains (as mentioned many many times) that going slower reduces the chance of accident (since people have more time to react) and the consequences are worse. Which is why we have speed limits.
If you're going to drive badly, it's better to drive badly and more slowly. Since the not-concentrating camera hasn't been invented yet, we have to use speed cameras.
Surely you'd agree that whilst speeding doesn't always mean bad driving, getting caught speeding multiple times probably does?
We need a common sense camera as it is apparent how uncommon such a sense is.
The fact also remains that if you go through a 30mph area at 60mph, you'll spend half as long there exposed to children jumping in front of you.
Statistics can mean anything you want them to. Hiding behind them if foolish.
And speed doesn't kill. Andy Green drove a car at 766mph; didn't get a scratch on him.
that going slower reduces the chance of accident
{citation needed}
If you're going to drive badly, it's better to drive badly and more slowly
If you're going to drive badly, it's better to get training or take the bus. Why exactly is 'bad driving' acceptable?
Since the not-concentrating camera hasn't been invented yet, we have to use speed cameras.
It's been around for years; it's called "policemen".
Surely you'd agree that whilst speeding doesn't always mean bad driving, getting caught speeding multiple times probably does?
I would, but I think I said that earlier (or at least, that's kinda what I was getting at.)
I don't hold with the idea that's it's ok to drive really badly whilst simultaneously holding a phone conversation, smoking, chastising the kids etc so long as you do it really slowly.
and the consequences are worse.
Sorry, missed this bit. Yes, of course, high-speed accidents tend to be worse than low-speed ones.
Which is why we have speed limits.
Actually, no it isn't. Speed limits were introduced to stop Jaguar using the M1 as a test track.
The fact also remains that if you go through a 30mph area at 60mph, you'll spend half as long there exposed to children jumping in front of you.
But the ones the driver is exposed to will be less likely to be able to see and react to the vehicle's presence nor the driver able to react to any danger from said child jumping into the road.
31% of all motor accidents in the 19-25 yr old range involved alcohol
Ban sober youngsters from driving & - at a stroke - reduce accidents by 69%
And speed doesn't kill. Andy Green drove a car at 766mph; didn't get a scratch on him.
Guess it depends if your definition of driving is sitting in a jet propelled car in the middle of the desert.
For most people its something completely different, and this is where speed becomes the killer.
The assertion was speed (alone) kills. If that was true then 766mph would have killed him, his parents, his dog and the milkman.
It didn't, so there must be a little bit more to it than just 'how fast'.
I've managed way over 130 in a 30 limit on many occasions - didn't do me any harm
Does brain damage not count?
in fact, I've probably managed 150
Speed categorically is not a killer.
The inability of a driver to select an appropriate speed for their ability, conditions and environment can be.
I sometimes speed, but not in built up areas where kids can run out. That is just asking for trouble!
Not sure why people are moaning about speed on here. Isn't that what our sport is about???
Not advocating speeding, but surely it depends on by how much? If you're doing 80mph in a built up area you are a selfish c*** as you can't predict what's happening. If you're doing 65mph down a country road that allows 60mph then you are going a little quick. Not saying it's right, but it's not the same. As long as you can see and are in control. Think the same goes for flying down a trail!
I am sure if you took enough Speed it would kill you.
Not sure why people are moaning about speed on here. Isn't that what our sport is about???
Im not sure what "our" sport is. I assume yours is "driving like a bit of a bellend."
It's been around for years; it's called "policemen".
A policeman can't tell if someone looking at the road is in fact daydreaming and mentally miles away.
And no-one thinks sheer speed alone kills - so there's no point constructing an argument to disprove that. We're not that bloody stupid.
I maintain that going slower reduces the chance of an accident, because everyone has more time to react. If I glance that the stereo for a second, I've travelled less distance; if I fade to the other side of the road, an oncoming driver has more time to avoid me and more time to stop - etc etc etc.
You really think that if we all zipped aroudn town at 50mph we'd be just as safe?
I reckon I definitely hit 150 around [url= http://www.multimap.com/maps/?qs=coleraine&countryCode=GB#map=55.14199,-6.6814|14|4&bd=useful_information&loc=GB:55.14935:-6.68115:14|coleraine| ]here[/url] but I'm not sure now if it was a 30 limit - I can't remember what the sign said, it was a few years ago
Im not sure what "our" sport is. I assume yours is "driving like a bit of a bellend."
Have you ever seen my driving? So that means anyone who has driven over the speed limit anywhere is a bell end? So you can put your hand on your heart as say you've never speeded? Not even by accident? Bull!
I have a big fat zero on my driving licence and never have so I must be a pretty skilful bell end! Though I prefer to think of myself as a bell wizard 🙂
pk-ripper - Member
Speed categorically is not a killer.The inability of a driver to select an appropriate speed for their ability, conditions and environment can be.
To make that decision requires you to have more information than is usually available to us. Hence the idea behind a speed limit, it's also there to help keep egos under control.
You also forget that other people will be expecting you to be driving at the speed limit and if you're driving along faster than the speed limit then they may be acting in a different way.
From a theoretical perspective, if we did all zip around at 50mph we would probably be safer as the speed differential wouldn't be there.
To make that decision requires you to have more [s]information[/s] responsibility than is usually available to us
Fixed it.
Good point about others anticipating though. As you pull out of work here, it's a 40 limit. So you see a gap and think 'oh I've got time' so you think you can go. Except that most people think that 40 is an infringement of their personal liberties so are doing a good 55mph. So you have far less space than you think.
I reckon I definitely hit 150 around here but I'm not sure now if it was a 30 limit - I can't remember what the sign said, it was a few years ago
I would give up if I were you, no-one is rising to your bait.
Where is her driving awareness? That worries me. I'm not the slowest or the fastest driver but I have awareness of warning signs, changes in speed limits etc etc.
I'm not sitting on a high-horse it just amazes me that someone can get to 9points and NOT worry like crazy/slow down and be more aware. Shes probably better without a car IMO especially if she drives near where I commute.
A policeman can't tell if someone looking at the road is in fact daydreaming and mentally miles away.
No, but they can (and are in fact specifically trained to) tell whether you're Driving Without Due Care.
And no-one thinks sheer speed alone kills
Good to clear that up.
I maintain that going slower reduces the chance of an accident
I disagee. Slow drivers driving slowly are often not the most competent, not the most aware and / or not the most experienced. Fast drivers driving slowly are bored rigid and their attention wanders. Both of these situations are more hazardous.
The safest way is to find an appropriate middle ground. Statistics bear this out.
You really think that if we all zipped aroudn town at 50mph we'd be just as safe?
I'm not arguing for inappropriate speed (which is what that usually is), I'm arguing against the brainwashed "speed kills, end of" argument.
Good point about others anticipating though. As you pull out of work here, it's a 40 limit. So you see a gap and think 'oh I've got time' so you think you can go. Except that most people think that 40 is an infringement of their personal liberties so are doing a good 55mph. So you have far less space than you think.
That's the one area where the whole motorbike SMIDSY thing breaks down. Quite a few junctions near me where the visible distance is fine if the traffic is at the speed limit - but bikes at a significant margin above the limit are potentially on you quicker than the pull out maneuver
you have far less space than you think.
So the problem there isn't solely the speeding drivers, it's also an inability to judge speed on the part of the driver pulling out (assuming they can actually see them in time, eg not on a blind bend).