Speeding ticket

Paradigm

Flyboy152 wrote: »

As I tell my children, I am not here to do your homework for you.

Probably a wise move. I'm sure your children will be grateful in later life

Category B - cars and vans


The car or van you use for your test must be:

• a four-wheeled vehicle of no more than 3,500 kilograms (kg) maximum authorised mass (MAM)
• capable of a speed of at least 62.5 miles per hour (mph) or 100 kilometres per hour (km/h)
• fitted with a speedometer that measures speed in mph
• displaying L-plates ('L' or 'D' plates in Wales) on the front and rear, but not interfering with the driver's or examiner's view
• a smoke-free environment

The vehicle must also be fitted with:

• a seatbelt for the examiner
• a passenger head restraint – it doesn’t need to be adjustable, but must be an integral part of the seat - 'slip on' types aren't allowed
• an interior mirror for the examiner's use

The vehicle must be legal and roadworthy and have no warning lights showing - for example, the airbag warning light.

Now I'll take a wild stab in the dark & say that if the requirement for "a" speedometer (notice the singular) is good enough for a DSA examiner & good enough for driving test purposes, then it's good enough for an instructors car... agreed?

The reference to a Yaris in your post #89 has already been dealt with by an email in post #99

The fact that the speedometer is digital and/or not clearly visible from the passenger seat will not prevent the test from going ahead.

The fact that the speedo is digital &/or can't be seen by the examiner isn't relevent & does not require any additional speedometer.

From this I'll say that your statement

Actually, it's a part an instructor has to buy, if they want to use that particular car as a driving school car....I'll let you have a guess as to why it would be required.

is actually plain wrong, misleading & utter bullsh!te!

The words "talking out of your a5se" spring to mind & you do it very well!

m1974m

Trebor16 wrote: »

Instead of making insulting comments about other forum users why not just answer the question that has been put to you (by a number of different posters) and be done with it.

Post 116 + post 121 = answer.

Interestingly, when I first read Flyboy152's "has to" sentence, I interpreted it the way Trebor16 had. It then took me about 5 seconds to work out what Flyboy152 had really meant and I presented my findings in post 116. It is a simple misunderstanding in relation to the use of the words. It is these misunderstandings which people misunderstand that leads to problems in the world.

Trebor16

m1974m wrote: »

Post 116 + post 121 = answer.

Interestingly, when I first read Flyboy152's "has to" sentence, I interpreted it the way Trebor16 had. It then took me about 5 seconds to work out what Flyboy152 had really meant and I presented my findings in post 116. It is a simple misunderstanding in relation to the use of the words. It is these misunderstandings which people misunderstand that leads to problems in the world.

All it would have taken is for Flyboy to post that his "has to have a second speedo fitted" was a misunderstanding by him and he got it wrong. Instead he choses to make insulting comments about other forum members and in doing so he gives a further insight into his true character.

But it looks like the vast majority have made up their own minds on his post and don't see any misunderstanding there at all.

Flyboy152

Trebor16 wrote: »

All it would have taken is for Flyboy to post that his "has to have a second speedo fitted" was a misunderstanding by him and he got it wrong. Instead he choses to make insulting comments about other forum members and in doing so he gives a further insight into his true character.

But it looks like the vast majority have made up their own minds on his post and don't see any misunderstanding there at all.

You clearly have a very selective view of your "friends." Although a great deal of their posts are gone, some still remain, in which they have been quite sinister in their approach towards me and I believe, as result, one or two are no longer posting. So me responding with the odd caustic remark, is nothing compared to what they have done on these boards.

Explanations have been given, incorrect inferences have been taken (many of which were not inferences at all, but an attempt to cause an awful lot of trouble, I believe that is called "trolling") and your dogged insistance that, because of your failure to understand the English langauge and that some unknown law was cited, is nothing but your own fault.

Trebor16

Flyboy152 wrote: »

You clearly have a very selective view of your "friends." Although a great deal of their posts are gone, some still remain, in which they have been quite sinister in their approach towards me and I believe, as result, one or two are no longer posting. So me responding with the odd caustic remark, is nothing compared to what they have done on these boards.

So that excuses your own "caustic" and insulting posts? I don't think so. Now I wonder why people would have adopted a particular approach towards you?

Flyboy152 wrote:

Explanations have been given, incorrect inferences have been taken (many of which were not inferences at all, but an attempt to cause an awful lot of trouble, I believe that is called "trolling") and your dogged insistance that, because of your failure to understand the English langauge and that some unknown law was cited, is nothing but your own fault.

No explanation has been forthcoming from you at any time. Just the so called reference to posts 116 and 121. The only people here who think the matter has been clarified are you and m1974m.

Let's face facts, you made a statement that was nonsense and ever since you were called on it you have been backpeddling like mad and doing anything except accept that you got it wrong. Instead you blame people for taking something that was written in plain English and was crystal clear for getting the wrong end of the stick, when it was clear what you had said.

As for trolling, if I have managed to get a number of emotional and immature responses from you, instead of a simple clarification of what you said, then I guess that makes me a troll:D But that is more a reflection on your pysche than anything else.

This thread has rumbled on and on because of your abject failure to substantiate what you wrote. You have managed to pull the wool over m1974m's eyes, but the rest of us have got your number.

cyclonebri1

Greetings chaps,
Your fued is irrelevant to this topic,

Call a truce, or butt out, and let it die.

geordieracer

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Greetings chaps,
Your fued is irrelevant to this topic,

Call a truce, or butt out, and let it die.

Actually it is relevant to the topic as the OP has a speeding ticket to deal with. Information has been mentioned that the instructor 'has to have a second speedo in the car' which is false information and hopefully the OP would not use this false information if the case went to court because it would be laughed out.

m1974m

geordieracer wrote: »

Actually it is relevant to the topic as the OP has a speeding ticket to deal with. Information has been mentioned that the instructor 'has to have a second speedo in the car' which is false information and hopefully the OP would not use this false information if the case went to court because it would be laughed out.

BTW what has happened to the OP - must have given up on us!

Trebor16

m1974m wrote: »

BTW what has happened to the OP - must have given up on us!

Probably dealing with the instructor and demanding to know why he/she didn't have the second speedo fitted.:D

moredeadthanalive

Wow, what a lot of replies to my original post. Thanks everyone.

I phoned the driving school and they were totally surprised that this had happened and would discipline the instructor. They even suggested that we sue him to claim on his public liability insurance.

The instructor called to offer to pay the fine.

My daughter has changed instructor.

So if she gets a driving awareness course instead of points, it will be paid for. If she get points and a fine we shall sue. Win win all round I think.

:T :T :T