Intented prosecution - Exceed 50mph Motorway temp restriction (Roadworks) -ACD

keystone

psarinuk wrote: »

I've appealed. Watch this space for outcome..

Unless you have found some procedural or a paperwork !!!!-up leading to case dismissed I guess you would take one of two routes for this:

1. Not guilty. A fiver says you lose.

2. Guilty with mitigating circumstances. Another fiver says you lose.



Cheers

PS In support of my claim I refer you to Post # 30. Rinse and repeat.

alleycat`

MORPH3US wrote: »

I think you comment was tongue in cheek and you realise what you put is silly but just in case...

You can't compare with two variables and then attribute the differing results to one of those variables without proof that the second variable had no effect.

yes i was taking the proverbial
The point i was making is that anything taken in isolation can be shown to prove what you like.

[Deleted User]

Personally, I would have taken option 2 and got mum to cough up since she put you in this position. (Mind you I would have told her to catch the train anyway).

Cant help thinking if it goes to court the judge aint going to be particularly impressed with your excuse. Keep us posted though it'll be interesting.

alleycat`

pwllbwdr wrote: »

Not a very good devil's advocate I'm afraid. Braking distances are indeed further in the wet. So, not reducing your speed to match the driving conditions kills.

The point i was making is that taken in isolation you can, with a lot of latitude, show that anything kills.

I wasn't trying to get into an argument about speeding or not speeding.

The 30mph / 35mph argument for stopping is the sort of "sillyness" you are defending as you are putting speed purely in isolation.

As you've said driving to the conditions in a properly serviced and maintained vehicle is what counts.

I don't generally disagree with your line of thought but religiously driving to the signs and not the conditions isn't a good thing to be teaching drivers (in my opinion).

cyclonebri1

psarinuk wrote: »

This site should also auto filter on "self-obsessed and judgemental people".

I was NOT wrong and under similar circumstances, would do the SAME THING AGAIN!!

Look mate I could have said you would get such replies if I'd read this earlier, forget it, most folks here see sense.

Accepting you broke the law by making a "dynamic risk assesment" of the situation and acting accordingly is understandable. In your position I would have done the same;)

Take the popular advice re punishment, and ask yourself if exceeding the speed limit was justified considering road conditions at that time of day?

I think you will feel a £60 fine or whatever irrelevant in this case, take care. ;)

Lum

pwllbwdr wrote: »

I'm not going to comment on Lum's post because I don't think they've actually understood this, and I don't think it is appropriate to assume that the speeding driver is the more alert.

While I wont claim to have actually crunched the numbers and worked out the stopping distances. I have no issue with your claim that all other things being equal the 35mph car will still be doing 18 when the 30mph car has stopped.

My issue is simply that in reality this never happens, and that the person who sticks religiously to the limits is going to be spending more time looking at their instruments and less time looking at the road, and thus the 35mph car, being driven by a competent driver, will brake sooner, negating the effect you describe and most likely reversing it.

Of course the incompetent driver who is also speeding is going to do more damage than the equally incompetent driver who sticks religiously to the limit. My complaint is that the effort should be spent removing incompetence from the roads, not mitigating it's consequences through speed cameras, as this will result in a greater reduction in the number of KSIs

pwllbwdr

Lum wrote: »

While I wont claim to have actually crunched the numbers and worked out the stopping distances. I have no issue with your claim that all other things being equal the 35mph car will still be doing 18 when the 30mph car has stopped.

My issue is simply that in reality this never happens, and that the person who sticks religiously to the limits is going to be spending more time looking at their instruments and less time looking at the road, and thus the 35mph car, being driven by a competent driver, will brake sooner, negating the effect you describe and most likely reversing it.

Of course the incompetent driver who is also speeding is going to do more damage than the equally incompetent driver who sticks religiously to the limit. My complaint is that the effort should be spent removing incompetence from the roads, not speed, as this will result in a greater reduction in the number of KSIs

Yes that's what you said first time. I don't agree with your assumptions.

pwllbwdr

alleycat` wrote: »

The point i was making is that taken in isolation you can, with a lot of latitude, show that anything kills.

I wasn't trying to get into an argument about speeding or not speeding.

The 30mph / 35mph argument for stopping is the sort of "sillyness" you are defending as you are putting speed purely in isolation.

As you've said driving to the conditions in a properly serviced and maintained vehicle is what counts.

I don't generally disagree with your line of thought but religiously driving to the signs and not the conditions isn't a good thing to be teaching drivers (in my opinion).

Who said anything about driving to the signs not the conditions? The speed limit is the limit. When conditions are poor you should be driving more slowly if the conditions dictate that. When conditions are good you shouldn't be driving faster!

I have not been advocating any silliness about considering speed in isolation. All I did was illustrate exactly how speed and deceleration work in relation to a fixed distance. Most people have an intuitive view of this which is incorrect. The example I gave shows how a relatively modest difference in speed at the start (5mph) gives rise to a seemingly disproportionate difference in arrival speed (18mph). No more no less.

psarinuk

I spoke to the county police again (some manager) and told them of all the circumstances plus the fact that I am based in Essex who do not take referrals on SAC, even though I am willing to take course (in Essex).
Was advised to write it in a covering letter along with a tick on SAC, which is what I've done.
Underlined that my letter is not a step for court procedure, so it in effect a non-court appeal.
Worst outcome would be going to Bedford/ Luton to do SAC in my case but the guy on the phone asked me to return the form + letter and then wait till further advice is sent.

P.S. Just realised its the 100th post on this thread, thanks to all for their contribution!!

funkycoldribena

alleycat` wrote: »

stopping distance at 20mph is 40feet.

Travelling at 35mph instead of 30mph adds 21feet to stopping distance (based on a 1965 car - which is high way code values).

Think that sort of sums it up.1965! about as outdated as your views;)