The Motorist and the Threat of legal Action
 

Having been hit with a Court bill for £750, fines and cost's aswell as 6 points on a previously clean license, for daring to stand up for what I believe is wrong. I recieved a NIP back in March, ignored it, as it had an electronic signature. However I'm told that if I fail to comply I will be taken to Court, threat. If I was to go shopliffting and was caught I would not be fined no extra for not nameing my partner in crime, discrimination, I'd actually get a small fine or even a police caution. To threaten someone in law is a crime, to discriminate against a person or a group of people is also a crime, so how then are the police able to get away with it, and isn't it time someone stood up and did something about it. BTW I was doing 43 in a 30 with obstucted road signs.

Andy.

Bl**dy h*ll, Andy! Is this the place that you took the photo's of?

Yes if were on the same track.

Andy.

Then surely, with those photo's, you have your proof?

Only if you can afford a clever (and therefore expensive) solicitor and barrister.

I contested a case without professional representation and was told 'the court accepts your evidence, but finds against you' . . .

I had got the road gradients from the County Council and provided calculations (I'm an engineer, remember) of the power available and the weight of the vehicle (which was pulling a trailer) and showed that the speed suggested by the police (who had shot out from a side road and hadn't 'followed' me - way before radar or vascar) was impossible.

Copper lied in court (!) then followed me when I left the court . . .

I cant afford to contest it either, I wish I could, however I will not let it lie either, Dick Turpin died years ago; but his legacy lives on in the Judicial system. Motorists are easy targets, imagine fining someone for their right to silence in a police interview.

Andy.

I sympathise with you Andy, we drivers have not got a leg to stand on in situations like this, has you say we can not afford to contest it.

You'd think motoring organisations like the AA or RAC would take it up, or possibly Top Gear, the European Court of Human Rights let us down, in saying it did not breach our right to silence, so why not extend it to all other cases then, in this country to discriminate and threaten anyone or group is Illegal, yet the police can and are allowed to do both.

Andy.

Sorry to differ Andy
 

Pay up and slow down.

It is a sad fact that, people's approach to speeding is only usually realistic, when one of their own family are the victims of speeding drivers.

Whilst I too did it in my youth I had to learn from seeing too many accidents on the road and reading of too many families, experiencing a living hell because one of their children or other family members had been killed or injured on the road.

No I am not a copper, they are the worst for driving at criminally high speeds, just because they can usually get away with it.

43 in a 30 is almost 50% over the limit. If that was in a built up area, especially if lamp post criteria etc. applied and there were no speed signs to the contrary, the sensible thing to do is assume it is thirty.

No invective from any quarter thank you. This is my belief, which I live by and by which I hope my Children and Grandchildren may be allowed to stay alive.

26 years ago, I was fined for doing 42 in a 30, I was passing a car which had been doing 20 for a mile and a half, with nothing on the road. So I am not pure as the driven snow, not as young as I was, but a site wiser, and more responsible.

The road in general had actually been down graded from 40, however I'd have no argument if road signs, were clearly visable and not obstructed by trees and undergrowth. Why did the camera operator bring this to the attention of the relevant authorities? Entrapment comes to mind, and the quest by the police to make money out of the motorist. Oh btw, I'm 43 and do not make a habit of speeding in built up areas.