Notice of Intended Prosecution

Rodney_Trotter

AdrianC wrote: »

A lousy excuse, and you're rapidly talking yourself up from exceeding the speed limit, through careless driving, to dangerous driving, imho. With that serious a distraction in the car, you should be stopping at the first opportunity to sort it out. You're freely admitting that it was serious enough for you to be unaware of your driving and your surroundings.

A few years ago, somebody fed me that self same excuse, reckoning it wasn't their fault that they'd reversed out of my neighbour's drive straight into the side of my parked car, which they "hadn't seen was there". They hit it hard enough to move it sideways, stopped only by the kerb.

They soon backed down when I pointed out that if the car hadn't been there, they'd have gone straight through the front wall, and gawd help anybody who happened to be walking down the pavement at the time.

Send the NIP back, accept either the FPN or course if they offer it to you - entirely their choice, and you can do nothing to influence it - and be thankful that it wasn't a police car behind you with the lights on, because you probably wouldn't have seen that either. If you "just" get the points, then accept that you deserved them and more, fair and square.

IYO how would he do that if he left it 14 days?

Careless and dangerous also required a nip.

kingstreet

MikeR71 wrote: »

It was one of these yellow average speed cameras that must have caught me.

I just don't want the points and will own up. I just wondered whether I should include a letter asking for a course when I send them the NIP back.

Two cameras. It is the time taken for you to pass between two SPECS cameras which are a set distance apart, which is used to calculate your speed, hence the average.

If eligible, you will be offered a course when you return your completed S172 form. Ensure you keep a copy and obtain proof of postage. As the course has to be attended within a short timescale, ensure you follow-up your S172 nomination with a query, if you do not get a response within a month, or so.

Henzo

It's not hard or difficult for these speed check cameras to catch drivers . I go through these speed check sections on the M1 every-day. And , I do see some drivers who genuinely seem to have a great deal of a problem and issue with this 50mph speed check thing . And that's Sticking to it, Amazing and ridiculous .....

AdrianC

Rodney_Trotter wrote: »

IYO how would he do that if he left it 14 days?

Careless and dangerous also required a nip.

Unfortunately, you're right.

But since the only evidence against him is a couple of notes of registration number/location/time, there's no way of enforcing any other road law - drink driving, stolen car, unroadworthy... Might as well go for a full set, eh?

I'm merely trying to make the OP wake up to exactly how well-deserved these "unfair" points actually are.

Rodney_Trotter

AdrianC wrote: »

Unfortunately, you're right.

But since the only evidence against him is a couple of notes of registration number/location/time, there's no way of enforcing any other road law - drink driving, stolen car, unroadworthy... Might as well go for a full set, eh?

I'm merely trying to make the OP wake up to exactly how well-deserved these "unfair" points actually are.

The stolen car is a bad example.

I'm sure the OP came here for advice and not to be patronised.

AdrianC

Rodney_Trotter wrote: »

The stolen car is a bad example.

Only in that even a speeding ticket wouldn't get delivered.

I'm sure the OP came here for advice and not to be patronised.

"Patronised"? No, not at all. But perhaps he might realise that the "innocent victim" act is absolutely counter-productive, and merely shows him as actually realising how badly he was driving. Personally, I'd rather not share the roads with people whose minds are everywhere but on what's around them.

jase1

Rodney_Trotter wrote: »

No it's not.

Yes it is.

The driver who fails to take note of, and act upon, a legal speed limit is not driving with due care and attention.

I suppose, for you that continuing through rural villages at 40mph in 30 limits is also not careless, and that "not noticing" is a reasonable excuse? There is no difference in principle.

Rodney_Trotter

jase1 wrote: »

Yes it is.

The driver who fails to take note of, and act upon, a legal speed limit is not driving with due care and attention.

I suppose, for you that continuing through rural villages at 40mph in 30 limits is also not careless, and that "not noticing" is a reasonable excuse? There is no difference in principle.

So why do we bother with an offence of exceeding the speed limit?


By your reasoning should anyone who exceeds the limit be prosecuted for careless driving? And who exceeds it by a lot be done for dangerous?


If so our emergency services who have to adhere to the speed limits at all times as the have no exemptions for careless and dangerous driving.


I'd like to see your reaction if you were stopped doing 31 in a 30 and given 8 points for careless driving.

AdrianC

Rodney_Trotter wrote: »

So why do we bother with an offence of exceeding the speed limit?

Because it's really, really easy to prosecute. But - if other offences were used properly - it would purely be an administrative offence.

By your reasoning should anyone who exceeds the limit be prosecuted for careless driving? And who exceeds it by a lot be done for dangerous?

Depending, of course, on the circumstances. Just as it's possible to be driving far too quickly for the conditions - carelessly or dangerously - yet within the speed limit.

A few years ago, the Dept of Transport released police figures on the causes of injury and fatal collisions. More were ascribed to excess speed for the conditions (but within the limit) than were ascribed to speed above the limit. The most common cause was inattention and distraction. It didn't take very long before the stats were pulled from the web.

I'd like to see your reaction if you were stopped doing 31 in a 30 and given 8 points for careless driving.

I can think of plenty of situations where 29mph in a 30 would be careless, even dangerous. Equally, I can think of many stretches of road where 69mph in a 30 would not only be safe, but would have been perfectly legal the previous day.

The road past the end of my drive is a 60mph limit. Anything much above 10-15mph would be dangerous in places, with visibility restricted in some points to barely past the end of the bonnet.

Rodney_Trotter

AdrianC wrote: »

Because it's really, really easy to prosecute. But - if other offences were used properly - it would purely be an administrative offence.



Depending, of course, on the circumstances. Just as it's possible to be driving far too quickly for the conditions - carelessly or dangerously - yet within the speed limit.

A few years ago, the Dept of Transport released police figures on the causes of injury and fatal collisions. More were ascribed to excess speed for the conditions (but within the limit) than were ascribed to speed above the limit. The most common cause was inattention and distraction. It didn't take very long before the stats were pulled from the web.



I can think of plenty of situations where 29mph in a 30 would be careless, even dangerous. Equally, I can think of many stretches of road where 69mph in a 30 would not only be safe, but would have been perfectly legal the previous day.

The road past the end of my drive is a 60mph limit. Anything much above 10-15mph would be dangerous in places, with visibility restricted in some points to barely past the end of the bonnet.

What's your point?

We aren't taking about inappropriate speed. Jase1 said speed in excess of the limit is careless.