Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Reported for 72 in a 40 on a motorbike.
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
Bidgez

It went like this. Im riding my motorbike on a dual carriageway 'A' road and a marked X5 police car pulls me over. He's on his own but shows me a speed gun which just shows a load of numbers that mean nothing to me, I also notice a video camera in his windscreen and a monitor in the dashboard, but he doesn't make any reference to using it. He says I was doing 72 just as the national speed limit reduced to 40. I give him my details and let him know that I'm unfamiliar with the road as I'm not local, I didnt see a speed limit sign and dont know what speed i was doing. I'm then on my way after he confims that i am being reported for the offence and will be written to within 28 days. 

 Now i'm just joe public who doesn't know the score and would rather not just admit the offence as a matter of course unless I was actually speeding, which I don't know as I only have his word for it.
I don't have a letter confirming how they want to proceed as yet, but any info would be a great help as I don't know what supporting evidence they require or if the hand held lazer is sufficient against a motorcycle?
southpaw82
An approved device and the testimony of the operator is sufficient, yes. Have you looked for the speed limit signs, in person or via Streetview?
BaggieBoy
QUOTE (Bidgez @ Sun, 1 Sep 2013 - 20:53) *
I don't know what supporting evidence they require or if the hand held lazer is sufficient against a motorcycle?

Totally sufficient. The officers opinion that you were speeding coupled with the reading from the laser device is all they need. Since you don't know what speed you were doing or what the limit was makes a defence unlikely.
Jlc
That speed will go straight to summons.

The sentence, if convicted can be checked here:



A guilty plea attracts a 33% discount on the fine, costs around £85 and a surcharge of 10% of the fine.

If this is England/Wales then pleading not guilty could also attract costs around £600 if subsequently found guilty.
sgtdixie
If you don't know what speed you were actually doing then getting pulled shouldn't come as a surprise.

A stop such as this will be very difficult to defend against especially as you appear not to have seen any signs and don't know wat speed you were doing. This will end up as a summons so come back when you get the statements.
Bidgez
Thanks guys. Fair enough, i wasnt sure if sweeping was an issue with bikes, but I'll check for signs on street view.

Do i just plead guilty if they write to me then, or should i follow up on here?
Jlc
QUOTE (Bidgez @ Sun, 1 Sep 2013 - 21:07) *
Do i just plead guilty if they write to me then, or should i follow up on here?

If you know you were speeding then pleading guilty will at least reduce the fine slightly. As they will be considering banning you then you will have to attend court (or send legal representation) - any ban is immediate so don't drive/ride to court.

Wait for the statement but as already noted a road-side stop is generally the hardest to defend.
Kieran_e1
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sun, 1 Sep 2013 - 20:57) *
An approved device and the testimony of the operator is sufficient, yes. Have you looked for the speed limit signs, in person or via Streetview?

unless you are in scotland as you still need corroboration do you not?? Thats assuming the device has no recording function
Bidgez
I should elaborate about what speed i thought i was doing. I don't know exactly, so i'd rather not guess, but the crucial thing for me is that I didn't think that I was speeding at the time. Having said that, I didn't see a change in speed limit and therefore was not expecting blue lights from out of no where.

I'll let you know when the letter arrives, in the mean time it looks like I may have to just assume that I am guilty and reply to that effect.
Jlc
As you'll know, not thinking you were speeding is not a defence. If you are going to defend then you'll need to check the road signage but trouble is 72 is faster than any possible limit.
Logician
You may hear nothing for up to 6 months or a few weeks more.
Bidgez
QUOTE (Logician @ Sun, 1 Sep 2013 - 23:17) *
You may hear nothing for up to 6 months or a few weeks more.


Yes he mentioned something about 6 months, maybe if it goes to court?
My guess is, a letter in a few week means points, a few months means court.
mrh3369
This will be a court visit not a fixed penalty as the speed is too high to be offered a fixed penalty. Next you hear will probably be a summons.
The Rookie
QUOTE (Bidgez @ Sun, 1 Sep 2013 - 21:27) *
I didn't think that I was speeding at the time. Having said that, I didn't see a change in speed limit

There is your issue really isn't it, in reality you know you were speeding as you know you didn't slow to 40 at the start of the limit, 60 or 72 only affects the level of punishment.
Bidgez
UPDATE....
5 months later and as suspected I receive a summons for March.

What should I be checking with you guys or posting on here?

Also, the "Postal Requisition" (summons) contains a section where I can plead guilty by post, but there is a separate sheet enclosed that says "For high speed offences" (above 66 in a 40) that you must attend court. So which is it?
Jlc
You can plead guilty by post but you will have to attend as they will be considering a ban.
Bidgez
QUOTE (Jlc @ Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 17:09) *
You can plead guilty by post but you will have to attend as they will be considering a ban.


So I have to find a way to get there just so they can tell me if they're going to ban me???
peterguk
QUOTE (Bidgez @ Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 17:05) *
there is a separate sheet enclosed that says "For high speed offences" (above 66 in a 40) that you must attend court. So which is it?


QUOTE (Bidgez @ Sun, 1 Sep 2013 - 19:53) *
I was doing 72 just as the national speed limit reduced to 40.


There's a clue there somehwere, just can't quite lay my hands on it...
sgtdixie
QUOTE (Bidgez @ Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 17:56) *
QUOTE (Jlc @ Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 17:09) *
You can plead guilty by post but you will have to attend as they will be considering a ban.


So I have to find a way to get there just so they can tell me if they're going to ban me???

Yep
peterguk
QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 18:00) *
QUOTE (Bidgez @ Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 17:56) *
QUOTE (Jlc @ Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 17:09) *
You can plead guilty by post but you will have to attend as they will be considering a ban.


So I have to find a way to get there just so they can tell me if they're going to ban me???

Yep


You are given the ban in person to guarantee you do not drive/ride and claim you were unaware you had been banned.
Bidgez
Thanks guys. It just seems stupid how they would say in the summons that I can plead guilty and have the case heard in my absence and then contradict that by slipping in a sheet that says I must attend.
And to add the to confusion they are now expecting me to make a 60 mile journey (each way) when I may have no means of returning home. To say that this is unreasonable would be an understatement.
sgtdixie
QUOTE (Bidgez @ Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 18:17) *
Thanks guys. It just seems stupid how they would say in the summons that I can plead guilty and have the case heard in my absence and then contradict that by slipping in a sheet that says I must attend.
And to add the to confusion they are now expecting me to make a 60 mile journey (each way) when I may have no means of returning home. To say that this is unreasonable would be an understatement.

Perhaps if you had known this you may not have ridden so fast?
peterguk
QUOTE (Bidgez @ Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 18:17) *
Thanks guys. It just seems stupid how they would say in the summons that I can plead guilty and have the case heard in my absence and then contradict that by slipping in a sheet that says I must attend.


They have sent you a standard summons, with a special enclosure which overrides the standard text as it appies to your circumstances.

I see no confusion.
Bidgez
QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 18:20) *
Perhaps if you had known this you may not have ridden so fast?


More than likely, although who (outside of the profession) does?
My personal view however, is that it doesn't justify forcing someone to make a journey that is unreasonable to return from if banned. The case is at 10am and I can't drive my kids to school and be in Wakefield 1 hour later, let alone find someone to drive my car home. Can I not have it dealt with locally?



QUOTE (peterguk @ Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 18:22) *
They have sent you a standard summons, with a special enclosure which overrides the standard text as it appies to your circumstances.

I see no confusion.


Seems simple to me that they make 2 statements contradict each other, with no mention that the slip of paper is to override the legal document. Unless you think they couldn't have made it simpler?
southpaw82
The sour grapes are strong here. No, you can't have it deal with locally (to you). As said, the summons is in a standard format. If you don't attend they'll simply adjourn and require you to attend, which can be enforced via arrest. Or you can send a solicitor on your behalf. The court is not there for the benefit of the defendant.
peterguk
QUOTE (Bidgez @ Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 18:43) *
Unless you think they couldn't have made it simpler?



there is a separate sheet enclosed that says "For high speed offences" (above 66 in a 40) that you must attend court.

Sorry, but i fail to understand how that could be written in simpler terms. wacko.gif
Bidgez
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 18:47) *
The sour grapes are strong here. No, you can't have it deal with locally (to you). As said, the summons is in a standard format. If you don't attend they'll simply adjourn and require you to attend, which can be enforced via arrest. Or you can send a solicitor on your behalf. The court is not there for the benefit of the defendant.


Yes it's a bit like the reopening of an earlier flesh wound at the moment.
Makes you realise how many people try it on with driving home afterwards. I'll just have to find someone to hold my hand.



QUOTE (peterguk @ Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 18:48) *
there is a separate sheet enclosed that says "For high speed offences" (above 66 in a 40) that you must attend court.

Sorry, but i fail to understand how that could be written in simpler terms. wacko.gif


Because it contradicts the summons as if it were an after thought.
If it were that important then it shouldn't say in the summons that it can be dealt with in my absence.
Anyway, this is one of those debating 'til the cows come home things. I think it's contradictory, but you don't, yet it changes nothing, you've confirmed what I wanted to know.


Is there anything else I should be aware of, or is it just a case of filling the forms in and heading over for my moment?
Kickaha
As an aside, it is interesting to note that the police regularly lurk around the courts to catch people who have just been banned but decide to drive home.

gilan02
This guy tried it
Bidgez
Hence the comment of bringing someone to hold my hand.
Realistically I've a few options. Take someone with me, phone for someone to drive me home if banned, suss out the public transport network, or ride there on the motorbike and get someone to collect my bike trailer to get me & the bike home. As a last resort I could disable the car when I arrive and get the AA to tow me home.
Either way, I'm sure one of those will suffice. Or, I may just get points and a big fine?
Jlc
QUOTE (Bidgez @ Thu, 6 Feb 2014 - 09:46) *
Or, I may just get points and a big fine?

Yes but you have to assume a short ban. They might consider 'exceptional hardship' type arguments if the ban was to inconvenience others - it's supposed to inconvenience you.
Stevepk73
60 mile run to court, walk in the park. Try 1000 miles.Doubt you will get banned.
Bidgez
QUOTE (Stevepk73 @ Fri, 7 Feb 2014 - 01:31) *
60 mile run to court, walk in the park. Try 1000 miles.Doubt you will get banned.


For running to court or in general?
Stevepk73
Had to go from Suffolk to Fort William for my court date, all for the judge to say, I was thinking of banning you, but will not.
The Rookie
No, but maybe he considered the journey as part of your punishement!
Stevepk73
3 days in Scotland as punishment, even told judge I was on short break.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.