Court summons for been 6" over in a 6ft 6" width restriction HELP

photome

wealdroam wrote: »

OP, I cannot understand why have you decided to go to court?

Surely if your vehicle is over 6' 6" wide you would be better off paying the £30.

Or am I missing something?

I am with you, I dont understand why the OP elected to go to court. If the vehicle was over 6' 6", which it seems it was, why not just pay £30

paddedjohn

daveyjp wrote: »

If the officer measured the van you need to argue he didn't do it right - this is how 'loophole' lawyers work, but you need to pay them!

He has already stated in his post #5 that his vehicle is 7 ft wide.

BRADFORDTIGERS

photome wrote: »

I am with you, I dont understand why the OP elected to go to court. If the vehicle was over 6' 6", which it seems it was, why not just pay £30

Thanks for the post i elected to go down that route thinking that once it was presented to them they would see that it was a oversight on my behalf and for the sake of 6" the matter would be thrown out but now it seems they want to go to court with it and as ive stated my options are limited, guilty more costs, not guilty costs of getting there ,day off work,yes i am guilty and yes should of just paid the fine but as a poster said a subway sandwich is 6" that was the difference if it was a couple of feet then yes i would of known and wouldnt have been in that lane, genuine error, this officer as 20 years experience and as lost the abilty to give a ticking off

Mankysteve

BRADFORDTIGERS wrote: »

this officer as 20 years experience and as lost the abilty to give a ticking off

Lots of people don't listen to there advice and carry on the same so they go down the ticketing route.

thelawnet

BRADFORDTIGERS wrote: »

Thanks for the post i elected to go down that route thinking that once it was presented to them they would see that it was a oversight on my behalf and for the sake of 6" the matter would be thrown out but now it seems they want to go to court with it and as ive stated my options are limited, guilty more costs, not guilty costs of getting there ,day off work,yes i am guilty and yes should of just paid the fine but as a poster said a subway sandwich is 6" that was the difference if it was a couple of feet then yes i would of known and wouldnt have been in that lane, genuine error, this officer as 20 years experience and as lost the abilty to give a ticking off

Why should he? The restriction is 6'6", which means that only relatively narrow vehicles are allowed down there - Range Rovers are too big, and so is your van. It doesn't seem hard to understand to me. The limit is 6'6", you exceeded that, and you should have known what the width of your vehicle was when you went through there.

forgotmyname

Seen it many times when they had the roadworks on the M6, They would lookout for transit sized vans and
bigger using the width restricted lane. As soon as the roadworks ended they pulled them over.

For the sake of £30 it really would have been best to payup. I wouldnt have wasted more time & money going
to court unless you had proof he got the figures wrong.

smjxm09

Go to court and you will be found guilty. Forget the £30 fine as it will be a 3 figure sum.

In our local newspaper there is a list of people who have gone through the courts. Fines for minor motoring offences which could have been dealt with by fixed penalties can run into hundreds of pounds.

CHR15

So you're actually going to court to convince the judge you didnt have a clue what vehicle you were driving?

What happens to all the lorry and bus drivers who skim the top half of their wagon off going under a low bridge?

Imo you have no defence other than ignorance. Factually the fine and offence are perfectly accurate.
Just pay up and move on (preferably on wider roads lol).

C_Mababejive

Was it one of these little oinks who drives around in the Battenberg highway patrol 4x4s thinking they are patrolling the Pacific Coast highway or something? AKA failed coppers.

Anyway..it is my view that although technically you may have broken the law/regs...it might be a fair argument that the width restriction could be viewed in more general terms. That is to say,unless your vehicle has a plate or sign in the cab indicating its height/width/length then you can only make a general assessment as to whether your vehicle is too wide/high/long at the time when you approach the restriction. Are we all to stop at such signs and measure to ensure we can pass? No we are not. The driver of a car or motorcycle would make an instant judgement that they are clear to pass whereas it would be reasonable for the driver of the rig below to know that he would be over the width restriction and therefore could not pass.

You on the other hand are in a middle ground as your medium sized vehicle is somewhere between a big panel van and a small truck and further,the front of the truck is compliant whereas the rear is marginally over. Does the law say all the vehicle has to be under the width and does it require you to measure it/make an on the spot assessment?

Sounds like a little man jobsworth to me..

Hintza

OP has tried a spot of brinkmanship and lost. The danger of playing this game is if you lose it costs you a lot more.