Speeding + Unmarked car - what will happen?

Welshdebtor

d.ross wrote: »

If they were looking through the viewfinder, then they may not have noticed the OP drinking coffee. However they may still get a fine for speeding. Although I have no personal experience of this, so I can't say for sure.

I agree the speeding will get noticed and dealt with.maybe I worded my comment wrong, but that is what I meant.

That said Andy has now posted a link to what device he thinks was used. If this was the device the coffee drinking may of been caught.

So it will be alot harder to disapprove the police evidence.

I may be wrong as I am a non driver, but I think you should find out within 14 days by post if action is to be taken.

Outpost

andyg_prs wrote: »

The OP has certainly taken on board that the behaviour reported was stupid and it most definitely won't be repeated.

If you, as the OP, are not the person who committed the alleged offence then how can you guarantee that it will 'definitely' not be repeated then?

Sirdan

Outpost wrote: »

If you, as the OP, are not the person who committed the alleged offence then how can you guarantee that it will 'definitely' not be repeated then?

Well spotted but I think we'd worked this out a while back ...:D

adamc260

Would doing 90mph and drinking coffee be safe if someone ahead slams their brakes on... or swerves to avoid something and goes into your lane? Could he react in time SAFELY? Probably not.. In all honesty, he deserves to be caught so it hits him in the pocket, maybe then he'll realise it was a daft thing to do. No sympathy here, sorry

Outpost

Sirdan wrote: »

Well spotted but I think we'd worked this out a while back ...:D

Always nice to have your instincts confirmed straight from the horse's friend's mouth.

Nilrem

Sirdan wrote: »

The OP probably needs to re visit when his friend has received the NIP or Summons...whilst speeding can be dealt with by way of a fixed penalty I'm not sure that any other offence relating to the coffee can be..

Only a legally qualified person with experience of traffic matters could give the correct advice ..is 90 on a motorway with coffee likely to be :-

Driving without due care etc
Driving whilst not in proper control
Careless driving ?
Reckless driving ?
Dangerous driving ?

I would suspect it would be Driving whilst not in proper control as a starter for ten, then depending on the circumstances it would move up...

Much the same way that using a mobile is a specific offence (but used to be not in proper control from memory*), but can rapidly go up the scale depending on what's gong on when you're caught - iirc you can still get done for dangerous driving etc with a mobile if you're in an accident, despite the option for the lower charge.


*but got it's own dedicated offence as it became more common, and an absolute offence is a lot easier to prosecute.

HO87

Nilrem wrote: »

but got it's own dedicated offence as it became more common, and an absolute offence is a lot easier to prosecute.

Not entirely correct in that since at least the early 1970's (and I suspect a lot earlier) there has been a requirement that a driver must be in a position to have proper control of his vehicle. However, this was linked only to the appropriate use of the vehicle controls (both hands on the wheel etc) and so with the advent of mobile phones, iPod's and the like it was somewhat difficult to prove. Circumstances would not often allow the use of offences such as driving without due care and attention.

In the circumstances outlined by the OP here it is akin to the older offence but perfectly capable of being scooped up by the new definition, an offence of strict liability in that there is no requirement for evidence of guilty knowledge only that the prohibited act was done.

As you rightly point out the use of a mobile phone etc or even the drinking of a mug of coffee, might form part of a more serious offence but proving such offences inevitably requires some evidence as to the state of mind of the person at the time - whether he failed to exercise the degree of care one might normally expect or knowingly took a calculated risk, although this may be inferred from his behaviour.

The offence as it stands may be dealt with by way of a fixed penalty notice. Whilst not knowing the full circumstances, that would seem to have been the most likely eventuality in this case had the OP's friend been stopped at the time and had that been the only offence disclosed. However, it is suggested that he was also speeding at ~90mph. Had this been picked up the drinking of coffee whilst doing so may well have represented a seriously aggravating factor.

Had the combination of offences been spotted at the time I am sure that the person concerned would have been stopped there and then and for that reason I remain convinced that nothing will follow. Without fuller details it is difficult to anticipate what might have happened. However, had I been the officer concerned I would have reported him for the excess speed and due care/dangerous expecting the CPS to simply go for the excess speed laying it on thick about the aggravating factor (this would have the effect of increasing the culpability for the offence).

The speeding alone - in this situation - would leave the offender open to up to 6 points or a short-term ban (7-28 days) and a fine of up to £2,500. I think that might cover it.

Given all of the foregoing it would, however, be wise for the OP's friend to be prepared for the receipt of an NIP (for speeding) but even that is an outside chance, I'd suggest.

andyg_prs

@HO87 - thanks for the info. For information, and not making excuses for the incident, which I've already posted clarification on, the drink was contained in a sealed polystyrene cup....not hot, and not a mug. I'm sure a few people will jump in to deliver some more kicks....but just to correct the image of someone sipping from a steaming hot coffee filled to the brim in a large mug... 90mph was a worst case estimate as well.

Further clarification....the person in question has learnt a lesson, luckily without hurting anybody, and has both slowed down and stopped even considering drinking / eating whilst driving.

One question - not clear on the implications of the 'state of mind' ....failing to exercise the degree of care vs taking a calculated risk? In this case (and again ready for a barrage of abuse - but I am just presenting the facts) the motorway was virtually empty, the conditions perfect; no wind, no rain, good light.

Thanks

Welshdebtor

andyg_prs wrote: »

@HO87 - thanks for the info. For information, and not making excuses for the incident, which I've already posted clarification on, the drink was contained in a sealed polystyrene cup....not hot, and not a mug. I'm sure a few people will jump in to deliver some more kicks....but just to correct the image of someone sipping from a steaming hot coffee filled to the brim in a large mug... 90mph was a worst case estimate as well.

Further clarification....the person in question has learnt a lesson, luckily without hurting anybody, and has both slowed down and stopped even considering drinking / eating whilst driving.

One question - not clear on the implications of the 'state of mind' ....failing to exercise the degree of care vs taking a calculated risk? In this case (and again ready for a barrage of abuse - but I am just presenting the facts) the motorway was virtually empty, the conditions perfect; no wind, no rain, good light.

Thanks

The temp or type of container the drink was in does not matter. My workmate was killed by a cold drink in the same sort of container.

Tyres can blow on empty roads in dry conditions. Perfect conditions sadly do not 100% wipe out accidents.

If you do get anything in the post and need advice then it might be best to start a new thread.

andyg_prs

@welshdebtor - do you mean start a new thread because this one is offending you? If so, why are you taking part? That doesn't mean that I am not sensitive to your loss - that is a terrible thing.

It has also been made clear that the lesson has been learnt...so I'm not sure I understand the point you are making?