Totting up ban with Court date impending.

Aylesbury_Duck

monkeybrains wrote: »

Yep I 100% understand and fully agree with what you're saying and again, I'm not disputing I'm in the wrong in a legal sense but my habits have changed since I got 9 points and this last offence was 35 in 30 when I was going the same speed as everyone else.

...It was a stupid mistake seeing as I've been very careful and this was 1 single slip-up.

There's also no 30 limit signs on that road but I know I should have paid attention to the street lights as an indicator.

Please see below. The policeman with a radar gun was on pavement at the bend and to clarify that is 2 lanes going in the same direction.

https://goo.gl/maps/Jc3pQeUUb7P2

Everyone else's speed isn't a defence. Perhaps they all got caught. When I first clicked on the streetview link, I'll admit that my quick reaction was that it doesn't look like a typical 30mph road. However, a few seconds of looking and you spot the regularly spaced lampposts, the sign warning of a school and just spinning the camera around, it's clearly a road running through a congested residential area which you drove through. I really don't think you have any defence I'm afraid.
With respect, your previous penalties haven't done enough to deter your bad habits and this "single mistake" isn't single - it's the latest in a succession of them. As others have pointed out, the time to be extra vigilant was after the first and second transgressions, not when you're on your last life and your licence is at risk. You're fortunate that you have other transport options if as seems likely, you have a ban. I'd politely suggest that when you do return to driving, you undertake some refresher lessons with an instructor to help you form better habits and to protect your licence. It would be money well spent because this must have cost you a lot already and will go on costing you in insurance premiums for years.

AdrianC

monkeybrains wrote: »

I'm not disputing I'm in the wrong in a legal sense

What other sense matters?

but my habits have changed since I got 9 points

Not quite enough, perhaps...?

and this last offence was 35 in 30 when I was going the same speed as everyone else.

Mmm. I distinctly recall "But all the others were doing it" wasn't accepted when I was in primary school - and I'm damn sure it's not changed since...

...It was a stupid mistake seeing as I've been very careful and this was 1 single slip-up.

Fourth (or fifth? Have you done an SAC?) in three years...

There's also no 30 limit signs on that road

But there's definitely no 40 repeaters, is there? So it definitely isn't a 40.

but I know I should have paid attention to the street lights as an indicator.

Please see below. The policeman with a radar gun was on pavement at the bend and to clarify that is 2 lanes going in the same direction.

https://goo.gl/maps/Jc3pQeUUb7P2

Repeaters? No.
Streetlights? Yes.
That tells you EVERYTHING you need to know to be 100% sure it's a 30.

If you'd not noticed the streetlights, then it'd be a 70 without repeaters, since it's a dual carriageway. The number of lanes on each carriageway is irrelevant.

monkeybrains

Like I said, I'm fully happy to accept I'm at fault - hence why I didn't dispute the prosecution.

Obviously I would like to reduce any penalty as much as possible.

Thank you Aylesbury for the constructive advice - greatly appreciated

Warwick_Hunt

monkeybrains wrote: »

The only other case for hardships I can think of is:

I did suffer from Anxiety and Panic attacks and whenever I'm out and no I have a place of refuge, that does help me.

My doctor is also aware of this issue and has prescribed medication which I've been able to stay off for well over a year.

I've also full stopped drinking and smoking over the last 14 months due to a liver condition/slight drinking problem and not having a car may trigger thoughts of starting those up again.

I guess the above are not rules for hardship but no car would definitley be an issue in these senses.

But it’s tuff if the punishment effects you and as for your parents, like you said they can drive.

monkeybrains

Warwick_Hunt wrote: »

But it’s tuff if the punishment effects you and as for your parents, like you said they can drive.

Yes, I understand it's 'tuff'.

unholyangel

monkeybrains wrote: »

Yep I 100% understand and fully agree with what you're saying and again, I'm not disputing I'm in the wrong in a legal sense but my habits have changed since I got 9 points and this last offence was 35 in 30 when I was going the same speed as everyone else.

...It was a stupid mistake seeing as I've been very careful and this was 1 single slip-up.

There's also no 30 limit signs on that road but I know I should have paid attention to the street lights as an indicator.

Please see below. The policeman with a radar gun was on pavement at the bend and to clarify that is 2 lanes going in the same direction.

https://goo.gl/maps/Jc3pQeUUb7P2

Sorry but no. You expect them to believe your driving changed so drastically in 8 months when the previous period of 2.5 years it hadn't changed and when at the end of that 8 months, you have another speeding offence?

The sentencing guidelines (with regards to the ban) also instruct them not to give any consideration to hardship that is not exceptional or circumstances alleging to make the offence not serious.

As for the no signs.....iirc repeater signs are prohibited on a restricted road (aka a 30mph road with street lighting). Therefore the absence of speed limit signs should have clued you in to the fact it was a 30mph road and is in no way a mitigating factor. A 40 mph road would have had repeater signs.

monkeybrains

unholyangel wrote: »

Sorry but no. You expect them to believe your driving changed so drastically in 8 months when the previous period of 2.5 years it hadn't changed and when at the end of that 8 months, you have another speeding offence?

The sentencing guidelines (with regards to the ban) also instruct them not to give any consideration to hardship that is not exceptional or circumstances alleging to make the offence not serious.

As for the no signs.....iirc repeater signs are prohibited on a restricted road (aka a 30mph road with street lighting). Therefore the absence of speed limit signs should have clued you in to the fact it was a 30mph road and is in no way a mitigating factor. A 40 mph road would have had repeater signs.

I actually got a 3 month ban instead of 6 due to my solicitor informing the judge of little known legislation with regards to the most recent offence being so near to the time the first points were to come off, along with defenses we gave including the Community Support officer who came to court and defended hadn't brought proof he'd measured between the lampposts.

AndyMc.....

monkeybrains wrote: »

I actually got a 3 month ban instead of 6 due to my solicitor informing the judge of little known legislation with regards to the most recent offence being so near to the time the first points were to come off, along with defenses we gave including the Community Support officer who came to court and defended hadn't brought proof he'd measured between the lampposts.

So you got a sentence against guidelines for an offence that wasn't proved in court. Under what legislation did this happen?

monkeybrains

I've no idea - I'm not a Solicitor and I was just relieved to have got a lower ban. The above was explained during my debriefing straight after.

monkeybrains

The below case closed letter from my Solicitor outlines why I got 3 months.

"The 3 penalty points imposed for this offence meant you had accumulated a total of 12 points for offences committed within a 3 year period and therefore you were at serious risk of a minimum 6 month Totting Up disqualification.

However, after considering the mitigation that I advanced on your behalf and looking very closely at the wording of section 35 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, the Judge VERY unusually agreed to not impose the minimum 6 month Totting Up disqualification despite you not having exceptional hardship grounds. The Judge agreed to impose a 3 month totting up disqualification on the basis you had only been caught by the totting up provisions by 6 days."