Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Speeding!

Got a letter through the post on Friday, saying I'd been caught doing 27mph in a 20 zone. Said they had photographic evidence but didn't include that with the letter, you'd think they would, to save arguments and time?

I know there's leeway when traveling over the limit, not sure what percentage it is but 7mph over,seems a bit fascist in their approach?

From experience, I know they prosecute, as had a similal episode, about a year ago,where I appealed and instead of 3 points as had been the original penalty, they upped it to 4. Presumably they don't like being challenged?

I know technically I was breaking the law but the penalties appear a bit harsh. I could potentially end up with 8pts on my licence. Reluctant to appeal in case they punish me further?

How many point does it take before an automatic ban and has anyone had any experience of challenging these penalties successfully?

Thanks for any advise in advance.
«13456789

Comments

  • 7 over 20 is a lot, 7 over 70 not so much, it's just in respect to the limit. I'd be shocked if they didn't punish for that.
  • 12 points trigger a ban
  • edited July 9
    Were there speed bumps, chicanes or other speed reducing items? There is a widely held view that 20 mph limits aren't enforcable.
  • I think by law that you are allowed to do 10% above the speed limit for an inaccurate speedo.
  • Were there speed bumps, chicanes or other speed reducing items? There is a widely held view that 20 mph limits aren't enforcable.

    Did my test nearly 10 years ago but remember the instructor telling me that any road with traffic calming measures was 20 and you are speeding if you go above that

  • Daddy_Pig said:

    Were there speed bumps, chicanes or other speed reducing items? There is a widely held view that 20 mph limits aren't enforcable.

    Did my test nearly 10 years ago but remember the instructor telling me that any road with traffic calming measures was 20 and you are speeding if you go above that

    Not true though, there are some 30 roads with humps.
  • Always thought leeway was 10% of whatever the limit, although I could be way off the mark.
  • Were there speed bumps, chicanes or other speed reducing items? There is a widely held view that 20 mph limits aren't enforcable.

    No there weren't.

    That's interesting about, aren't enforceable, has anyone else heard of this?
  • 7 over 20 is a lot, 7 over 70 not so much, it's just in respect to the limit. I'd be shocked if they didn't punish for that.

    I take your point.

    I'm sure they will.
  • Sponsored links:


  • 12 points trigger a ban

    Better start walking from now on.
  • Always thought leeway was 10% of whatever the limit, although I could be way off the mark.

    I think it's 10% +2mph so 20mph zone is 24mph, 30mph zone is 35mph etc
  • smiffyboy said:

    I think by law that you are allowed to do 10% above the speed limit for an inaccurate speedo.

    I presume if one claimed that, they'd 'ave ya for it being faulty and test it?
  • edited July 9
    addix said:

    Always thought leeway was 10% of whatever the limit, although I could be way off the mark.

    I think it's 10% +2mph so 20mph zone is 24mph, 30mph zone is 35mph etc
    Thanks for that.
  • Always thought leeway was 10% of whatever the limit, although I could be way off the mark.

    On my speed awareness course a few years ago, I am sure that we were told that the 10% is a myth. However, when pressed, the instructor told us that you can be done if you are 1 mph over but in many cases they will only prosecute for larger infringements. When someone said "so, it is 10%?", he replied "we've got a lot to cover and I've already answered the question".
  • As Theresa May might say 20 is 20.
    I think speeding in urban areas at relatively low speeds is much worse than speeding on a motorway or dual carriage way. Effectively you're saying f*** off to anyone crossing the road. There's no excuse.
  • Always thought leeway was 10% of whatever the limit, although I could be way off the mark.

    On my speed awareness course a few years ago, I am sure that we were told that the 10% is a myth. However, when pressed, the instructor told us that you can be done if you are 1 mph over but in many cases they will only prosecute for larger infringements. When someone said "so, it is 10%?", he replied "we've got a lot to cover and I've already answered the question".
    My missus has done a speed awareness course and was told the same.
  • seth plum said:

    Since they brought in 20 in Lewisham I am forever having frustrated drivers tailgating and hooting.
    Why don't they get up earlier?

    Said this before on a different thread but it's ridiculous to have a blanket limit like Lewisham does. Many of the roads do not warrant 20 and it's inevitable that you'll end up with people tailgating and looking to overtake (not saying that's right, just inevitable).
  • Talal said:

    seth plum said:

    Since they brought in 20 in Lewisham I am forever having frustrated drivers tailgating and hooting.
    Why don't they get up earlier?

    Said this before on a different thread but it's ridiculous to have a blanket limit like Lewisham does. Many of the roads do not warrant 20 and it's inevitable that you'll end up with people tailgating and looking to overtake (not saying that's right, just inevitable).
    If they want me to move over there is no room. They want me to drive faster but I would rather come to a complete halt and they can figure a way past. What do the tailgaters want?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Talal said:

    seth plum said:

    Since they brought in 20 in Lewisham I am forever having frustrated drivers tailgating and hooting.
    Why don't they get up earlier?

    Said this before on a different thread but it's ridiculous to have a blanket limit like Lewisham does. Many of the roads do not warrant 20 and it's inevitable that you'll end up with people tailgating and looking to overtake (not saying that's right, just inevitable).
    They warrant it if they are in biilt up areas. If you're hit by a car going at 20 you'll probably survive. If by a car going at 30 you probably won't. In this instance cars are less important.
  • seth plum said:

    Talal said:

    seth plum said:

    Since they brought in 20 in Lewisham I am forever having frustrated drivers tailgating and hooting.
    Why don't they get up earlier?

    Said this before on a different thread but it's ridiculous to have a blanket limit like Lewisham does. Many of the roads do not warrant 20 and it's inevitable that you'll end up with people tailgating and looking to overtake (not saying that's right, just inevitable).
    If they want me to move over there is no room. They want me to drive faster but I would rather come to a complete halt and they can figure a way past. What do the tailgaters want?
    Be careful you haven't got Vettel behind you
  • seth plum said:

    Talal said:

    seth plum said:

    Since they brought in 20 in Lewisham I am forever having frustrated drivers tailgating and hooting.
    Why don't they get up earlier?

    Said this before on a different thread but it's ridiculous to have a blanket limit like Lewisham does. Many of the roads do not warrant 20 and it's inevitable that you'll end up with people tailgating and looking to overtake (not saying that's right, just inevitable).
    If they want me to move over there is no room. They want me to drive faster but I would rather come to a complete halt and they can figure a way past. What do the tailgaters want?
    You've said it yourself they want you to drive faster. There will always be idiotic tailgaters regardless of the speed limit but implementing a blanket rule when some roads simply do not warrant it (eg Baring rd, Burnt ash) was always going to lead to this. The amount of drivers I've seen being overtaken (often learners) isn't reducing the risk of accidents in my eyes, it's increasing it.
  • iainment said:

    Talal said:

    seth plum said:

    Since they brought in 20 in Lewisham I am forever having frustrated drivers tailgating and hooting.
    Why don't they get up earlier?

    Said this before on a different thread but it's ridiculous to have a blanket limit like Lewisham does. Many of the roads do not warrant 20 and it's inevitable that you'll end up with people tailgating and looking to overtake (not saying that's right, just inevitable).
    They warrant it if they are in biilt up areas. If you're hit by a car going at 20 you'll probably survive. If by a car going at 30 you probably won't. In this instance cars are less important.
    Yes I do realise that being hit at a lower speed increases your chance of survival... I'm saying not every road in a borough warrants a 20 limit.
  • edited July 9
    iainment said:

    As Theresa May might say 20 is 20.
    I think speeding in urban areas at relatively low speeds is much worse than speeding on a motorway or dual carriage way. Effectively you're saying f*** off to anyone crossing the road. There's no excuse.

    Totally agree - I'll speed on motorways assuming the conditions are good, but never in a built up area. If it's 20 it's 20, if it's 30 it's 30 and so on. Also remember the speed limit is the maximum speed which is not necessarily the appropriate speed. In a built up area with a limit at 30, narrow streets with car's parked and pavements with people on them, 20 might be the appropriate speed, maybe less than that.

    It is also most definitely a fallacy that it's 10% plus 2 - and that's from a copper.
  • 12 points = a ban. The 10% is a guide only due to (I believe) calibration & that no cameras and/or car speedo's are 100% accurate.

    However, if you've challenged one before & it was not accepted & your points were increased (frivolous appeal if your playing Arsenal) then I think that you should just take it in the chin & as other have said, take a driving awareness course. I should know, I've been there, done that & even have the t-shirt !!
  • edited July 9
    A long time since I last got done, but I was caught doing 38 in a 30 on one day, and 36 at the same spot the very next day. In Slough, a place you want to get out of as fast as you can.
    I got three points for the first one, and option of a course and no points for the second, which of course I took. This seems to support the 2 mph +10% idea, but on my awareness course there were two women who'd been done for doing 32 in a 30 in London. Even the instructors were amazed at that.
  • seth plum said:

    Talal said:

    seth plum said:

    Talal said:

    seth plum said:

    Since they brought in 20 in Lewisham I am forever having frustrated drivers tailgating and hooting.
    Why don't they get up earlier?

    Said this before on a different thread but it's ridiculous to have a blanket limit like Lewisham does. Many of the roads do not warrant 20 and it's inevitable that you'll end up with people tailgating and looking to overtake (not saying that's right, just inevitable).
    If they want me to move over there is no room. They want me to drive faster but I would rather come to a complete halt and they can figure a way past. What do the tailgaters want?
    You've said it yourself they want you to drive faster. There will always be idiotic tailgaters regardless of the speed limit but implementing a blanket rule when some roads simply do not warrant it (eg Baring rd, Burnt ash) was always going to lead to this. The amount of drivers I've seen being overtaken (often learners) isn't reducing the risk of accidents in my eyes, it's increasing it.
    I use Baring and Burnt Ash a lot and pootling along is a bit dreary. However I say to my self what actual difference does it make? We all get corralled the same at the next lights or junction and time difference is miniscule.
    Maybe you say bad driving is inevitable but to me it is the fault of the drivers not the 20mph limit.
    I'm not arguing it's the fault of the driver. In an ideal world everyone would stick to the speed limits and there would be very few accidents. But that's simply not realistic, there will ALWAYS be drivers wanting to go faster. And reducing a perfectly reasonable 30 speed limit on these roads was only ever going to lead to more frustrated drivers, thus more tailgating/overtaking.
  • Isn't the speed limit reasonable because otherwise a lot of differences leads to uncertainty in the area?
Sign In or Register to comment.