Speeding - Automonous Cars

force_ten

i was sat in the drivers seat but i was asleep at the time the alleged incident occurred and the car was driving itself my lord

so it is the cars fault

enjoy your day in court

DUTR

MG_overmyheadLOL wrote: »

Hi, I have been sent an NIP from Kent police for speeding on the M25.
I have been recorded doing 68mph while the smart motorway was set to 50mph. I have reviewed the camera images and they show no reason for the reduction in speed. I know ignorance is not an excuse but I was unaware that the gantrys were not just advisory - I thought motorways barring works was always 70mph. All that said I was driving a hire car.


My question is can anyone advise on this:


I kid you not I was driving the latest Volvo estate which has driver assist which I was using, it was set to 70mph adaptive cruise control and lane control, the summons asks who was driving and not who was responsible - I'm tempted to try mitigating circumstances but deep down I know the law will not allow this to be a precedence..?


Does anyone know if the law has to be black and white with the who was driving rule>

Which section of motorway was it? For example the A38M looks like a regular motorway but the speed limit is always 50mph or less.
You are behind the steering wheel so it's you driving.

tho_2

Just as another point. Which lane were you in? Because I'd imagine if you were in lane 1, you'd have been doing 56 at most when you came up behind a lorry. I presume you were overriding the system to move back left whenever you weren't overtaking? Right?

rich13348

tho wrote: »

Just as another point. Which lane were you in? Because I'd imagine if you were in lane 1, you'd have been doing 56 at most when you came up behind a lorry. I presume you were overriding the system to move back left whenever you weren't overtaking? Right?

He was driving a Volvo he was of course in lane 2 all the way.

Car_54

MobileSaver wrote: »

Wow! Whatever else you do, do not mention this to the police or in court... telling anyone you didn't realise a red circle with a speed inside it was mandatory could (and probably should) see you getting the book thrown at you!

Should - yes. Could - no.

Stupidity is not a crime, and the police have no evidence to support any other charge. And the courts sentence within guidelines.

System

MG_overmyheadLOL wrote: »

I agree its my responsibility - however can it not be argued that the summons demands who was driving and not who was responsible - rules are rules - it was the car computer steering and controlling the gas and brakes.

Doing a speed you set it to. By all means feel free to say you'd like your day in court but expect the points to increase and the fine to not be £100 but to be a week's wage.

ElefantEd

You might just as well argue that in a car without cruise control, all you are doing is pressing the accelerator pedal a certain amount, and the electronics and physical systems then 'decide' what speed you do.

AdrianC

MG_overmyheadLOL wrote: »

Does anyone know if the law has to be black and white with the who was driving rule>

Everybody's focussed on the other points, and this seems to have gone without answer.

What are you meaning here?

The hire company have returned the identification request, and named you - as the person who hired the car. Are you asking for advice on lying when you return it, rather than admitting you were driving? That's a really, REALLY bad idea, as I'm sure you know deep inside.

It's called "perverting the course of justice", as Chris Huhne MP and his wife both found out.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21737627

TBH, though, it's probably a better plan than claiming ignorance of road signs that haven't changed for many decades, and blaming the car for trying to maintain the speed you told it to maintain.

onomatopoeia99

AdrianC wrote: »

Everybody's focussed on the other points, and this seems to have gone without answer.

What are you meaning here?

The hire company have returned the identification request, and named you - as the person who hired the car. Are you asking for advice on lying when you return it, rather than admitting you were driving? That's a really, REALLY bad idea, as I'm sure you know deep inside.

It's called "perverting the course of justice", as Chris Huhne MP and his wife both found out.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21737627

TBH, though, it's probably a better plan than claiming ignorance of road signs that haven't changed for many decades, and blaming the car for trying to maintain the speed you told it to maintain.

I think the OP is suggesting claiming the car itself was driving with "driver assist", rather than naming another person (which would indeed be PCOJ and win them a year's holiday at her majesty's pleasure). At least that's my take on the initial post.

The fundamental problem though is them not knowing that a number in a circle outlined in red is a speed limit.

Car_54

onomatopoeia99 wrote: »

The fundamental problem though is them not knowing that a number in a circle outlined in red is a speed limit.

No, I think that's just a symptom of his fundemental problem.