I knew my luck would run out soon, well sort of...
 

On the way to work this morning, got to the main roundabout before the Motorway. Got stuck at the first set of lights. Lights change to green, I depart on the rear wheel. Got stuck at the next set of lights, I depart on the rear wheel.

On to the slip road and on to the motorway. Two miles later after some deft traffic dodging, leave the motorway. At the end of the slip road the lights are on red. I've stopped waiting for the lights to change, when I car pulls up by my side very sharply and very close to me.

I turn to see what knobber is driving said car and realise that it's Mr police man in an unmarked car. Damn.

He indicates for me to pull over, so I let him know that I am going to negotiate the roundabout and will pull over a little further down the road out of the way of the traffic. He had no problems with this and gives me the thumbs up.

I pull over, take gloves and helmet off and get off the bike. He comes over and we have a chat about my journey from the lights at the previous roundabout to the roundabout that he stopped me on.

He said that he was waiting in the traffic at the first lights and when I shot off on the rear wheel that kind of got his attention, so he decided to follow me.

He commented about my road discipline whilst travelling along the motorway. He said that although I undertook, filtered through two lanes off traffic at speed on the white line, and then went across three lanes of traffic to take the slip road, he was happy that I was paying great attention to the rest of the traffic and was fully aware that I was actually being quite sensible about when and where I decided it was safe to make these manoeuvres.

Because of this he was prepared to ignore the antics at the roundabout, ignore the filtering, ignore the small number plate, illegal can and dark visor and just gave me a ticket for doing an average of 90 mph over the two miles of the motorway.

When I got to work I actually looked at my ticket in more detail. It states that I got the ticket for excessive speed on the motorway, the only speed written down on the ticket says 70 mph. I think this is to indicate what the actual speed limit was at the time. It does not state what speed I was actually travelling at.

Does that mean that I am only looking at 3 points and the fine? Or (being hopeful here) does it mean he has made a mistake when issuing the ticket and forgot to write the speed I was travelling?

Either way, I think, putting it all in context, I got lucky again... sort of.

can you buy my lottery ticket tomorrow please? :wink: :P :lol:

I still think when you put it in that context 3 points would be a let off, especially in light of the sheer number of lucky escapes you've had to date :wink:

but if someone here cant help, pepipoo is the place to ask I believe :D

Wow I would say that was quite lucky :shock: .. dont know what the ticket means without seeing it. :? .. but I would say if it doesnt state the MPH you were going then it's just the standard points and fine..but someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

:shock: All that and he gave you a 'funny' ticket? Blimey...bet if it was me they'd have.....blah....blah....I don't know what it means but I reckon you're a lucky sod Bigape. 8)

When I got my ticket on the M5, the police officer had written down my average speed on the ticket. ( 95.8mph ) he then advised me that he was going to give me 3 points and a £60 fine, which if I wanted to I could contest in court. I said I would accept the 3 points and fine.

Bigape, what exactly did he say to you at the roadside. Did the conversation go anything like that ?

Yep he said quite clearly that he was going to ticket me for an average 90 mph over a 2 mile period. But the only speed indicated on the ticket is 70mph which I am assuming is stating the speed limit of the road at the time.

I'm getting more and more confused now.

XS71 which is the offence code on my ticket means: Excess speed (class of vehicle) LGV

The next box states Brief wording in which is written: Excess speed, 70 mph.

So this is the bit I don't understand as Excess speed, 70 mph is the words that describe the offence code XS72.

So which one am I getting prosecuted for :?


Either way, there is no indication on the ticket what so ever of the actual speed that I was doing.

Hi Mate,

I assume this was on the M4, from 13 to 12? I go the other way, but generally go along the A4 because it's more fun. Where did you pull over?

That aside....

Something relatively similar happened to me a few years ago when I was in my car on the M27. I was done for an average of 96 over 6 miles (!!), and he said I wasn't driving badly, just fast, and it was too fast to be let off.

I'm 99% sure that I got an XS71 (which confused my insurance company when i told them) on the ticket I was given, but when i got my license back it showed an SP50.

It sounds to me as if you've got away as lightly as you could really - nice one.

Rgds

Rupert

Junction 12 to 11 this morning. Stopped me (or rather caught up with me) at the lights at the end of junc 11 slip road. I'm sure we have passed each other at various times. :lol:

Yes you'll get 3 points, an SP50, and a £60 fine. All in, you're still damned jammy! :wink: (could have been an awful lot worse)



Oh and you used a spell checker didn't you? Cos (apart from God) I'm one of only three people in the UK that can genuinely spell "manoeuvre" :lol: .


.

Oh you are lucky to get off so lightly.

You're not on 9 already though are you....

And everyone knows it's 'manoover'

Of course I used the spell checker, jeez if I didn't nobody would ever be able to understand what the hell I were talking about. My spelling is atrocious

:wink:


.

Re: I knew my luck would run out soon, well sort of...
 

Yep , I would say so :wink: .

Cheers
Ben

I knew my luck would run out soon, well sort of...
 

You've done it again - you are one lucky chappie!

At least they didn't threaten you with seizing your bike. Still not totally sure what my ticket means either but I guess they can do almost what they like. Including taking photos of you going through a red light, even thought it had only been red for 1 second (and doing it at 18 MPH is just embarassing)

It is no wonder that people complain about the Police. What an inhuman, jobs worth! Talk about being unreasonable! :wink:

you sure this was a genuine policeman - for a start, why is he praising your riding, crossing three lanes to get to the slip road, undertaking whilst speeding and stunting??? The he gets the wrong code, and the form does not contain all the details? Don't get me wrong, apart from the mono this sounds like my spirited ride in this morning :P , but I doubt a copper would praise me even if I did show exquisite bike control, consideration for other road users and spacial awareness given the number of offences you totted up. Looking back on the incident and the conversation, was there any point when you thought the very generous policeman might actually fancy you? :wink:

You know you need a black rat on the back don't you (I know, urban myth etc......!)

After I got done, I also wondered about the praise.
The policeman who got me was by himself, and from his perch (motorway bridge), he watched me go through past a couple of markers (one was a tree, another a sign) and estimated I was speeding (i.e. didn't use a speed gun or anything), so he followed me. I wondered if by stoking someones ego (i.e. mine!), he thought I'd just accept the penalty so he could get back to doing other things, as opposed to having to spend ages arguing, or doing lots of paperwork if I decided to take it to court.

Re: I knew my luck would run out soon, well sort of...
 

Could it could be that the ticket has been incorrectly issued? Looks like he might have written the speed limit on the ticket instead of the speed you were travelling.

If that's the case then you've been very lucky. Actually, you've been lucky anyway :D

Jammy get :D

Saw this at the weekend - it reminded me of your riding for some reason . . . :lol:


http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i2...06/Chinook.jpg

One other thing, BA.........did he caution you verbally? You know......."You do not have to say anything, etc....."


If he didn't caution you verbally then this, together with a potentially dodgy ticket, means your done better than "got away lightly" :thumbsup:

What, you mean slow and ungainly? :lol:



.

Ah.........nothing to do with BA having a big chopper* :lol:





*I'm referring to custom bikes with long, raked-out forks :wink:

Certainly not according to Mrs Ape :lol: .


.

I thought the picture was more in reference to how BA bows to the wishes and demands of Mrs.Ape or otherwise suffer the consequences? :wink:

I'd contest it in court personnnally....

I'f hes just written you a ticket.

Did he have any video equiptment in the car? (if not, you want proof you were speeding)
Was he by himself? (can his words be varified).
Is the ticket fully written out correctly, everything spealt right on your ticket RE YOUR information? Anything wrong, its not valied in court.

Personnally, i'd go to court suited and booted and fight it if the ans no the above..... Worst that happens is you will still get 3 points.....

Best, no points and no fine at all.....

You need BA's spell-checker :wink:

The Courts will believe the word of a copper over that of BA. Might be wrong but that's the way it is.

The ticket is just a ticket.......the Court will use the copper's evidence/statement.

They might use the ticket as evidence that BA was (or wasn't) cautioned correctly. Could get off on a technicallity.

Not true - the Court can give more severe punishments. 3pts/£60 is only guaranteed if BA accepts the fine out of Court.

If BA chooses to fight the case then the copper might chose to mention BA's wheelies, illegal can, black visor, etc.


I wouldn't be surprised if BA hears no more about it :wink:

Daimo...with respect I think you need to get real. Simon has admitted he was at fault and feels he has got away lightly. Why then go to court and frankly do nothing but lie? Is that what the UK is all about these days? :?

Was just typing exactly the same thing!

I started typing something similar, as well as pointing out that Daimos advice was wrong but decided not to incase things got heated. But sounds like I'm not alone! :-)

was going to lunch, in a rush ha ha.

The Courts will believe the word of a copper over that of BA. Might be wrong but that's the way it is.[/QUOTE]

Disagree, its down the the police to prove this person was speeding with adiquate evidence...


Disagree. I had a small incident where my insurance ran out and the sods law, the day it ran out, i got pulled on random stop check....

He filled in my details wrongly when i got the letter. If the details are wrong, then the case WILL be thrown out.

This I agree on, but as with my case, i didn't even have to pay court charges. I was guilty of the offence (if only a mistake with paperwork), but the fact is, i turned up, showed them the paperwork with the mis-spealt name and that was it, went home again.

Won't have any relevence and its down to the copper to PROVE that he had these things.

I was also watching that program about that solicitor who gets everyone off.

The word of the police isn't always taken as gospel, especially if you can prove the police office may be lying (can be anything at all, if you can catch them out).

I've been to court over 3 things now (im not actually bad, lets just say unlucky, (Speeding, no insurance, no train ticket :lol: ) and out of all that the worst i got was

6 points and £400 fine... (116mph)..... Out of a possible £10,000+ of fines, possible imprisioment....

Eh? Sorry Mr Honesty????

If he can get out of a speeding fine and possible points, what harm is there me mentioning my own experiences????

If he's happy, then fine, but whats wrong with giving him other options, especially as were all here to help each other?????????

Don't try to make this into something bigger than it is than bascially branding Brits as Liers!!!!!!!

Daimo's not the Massiah,he's a very naughty boy. :lol:
FWIW I agree with you ---contest it if it comes to it.The law is just a game to those who run it so why not play to win.They do.

You can disagree all you like, you're wrong. If you can prove your innocence then thats another matter, but if all things are equal, all a police officer has to do to get you convicted of such a traffic offence is to say so.

Things like 'evidence' and 'due process' are expensive, so everyone is just assumed guilty in such matters.

My train ticket incident, well, i used to live int he middle of no-where, no ticket machine..... No inspector on the train. I walked straight up to the station ticket inspectors and told them i didn't have one. All cool... Then a plained clothed "transport" police came over, arrested me (i was just paying for the ticket), threatend me, took my previous days tickets from me etc..

I went to court, defended myself, gave the "officer" a complete grilling with questions, made him look stupid. Court went in my favour.

British Rail 0 - Damien 1

The the speeding incident. Just the speeding, 6 points, £400 fine. Didn't loose my license and thats all I cared about...

Insurance thing (didn't have it for 1 bloody day!! GRRRRR), walked out scott free, even though i was guilty....

Nope, doesn't pay to go to court and defend yourself at all does it....... I'd be in debt, probably in prison, and would have lost my license as well if i didn't go myself....

Funny thing was, at the time of the train incident, i asked a partner in a law firm i was working at for his advice as if i was guilty i'd get a criminal record and wouldn't be able to work for law firms again.. He told me to plead guilty....

Yeah, shows how much HE knew. Never go to Teacher Stern and Selby!!!.......

If the details are wrong on the ticket/letter, the case WILL be thrown out. (i've also confirmed this with my old next door neighbour who was an officer herself (Traffic as well!!!!!).

His name is Nick Freeman.

He lives in a mansion adjoining a golf course and drives a Bentley. Unsurprisingly, he's very expensive to hire :lol:

He told the story where, in Court, he was losing a traffic case very badly and his client was about to be sent to prision. He then noticed that the copper was chewing gum.

He said to the copper "Are you chewing gum?" The copper instinctively said "No" for rear of being held in contempt of Court even though it was plainly obvious to everyone that he was chewing gum.

The jury decided that the copper was not a reliable witness.

I call it genius.............

Exactly.... Not for WHAT he was doing, but the fact he LIED about it...... (wasn't he a cheif constable as well?). The point being, if he lies about chewing gum, how can you hold his word about Mr X's offence???

Have you guys commenting actually been to court for yourselfs to comment? (or as Peter says, are us Brits liers?)

Im not sure why theres this big thing about being scared of going to court. Actually going to court yeah (i was scared poopless!!!), but once your in, you see al the chavs in trackies etc f-ing and b-ding in the rooms, when your dressed in a suit and speak properly, it goes a LONG way....

Yes - frequently.

But not as a defendant :wink:

Because I cant be ar*ed. If I wasnt speeding then I wouldnt have got pulled. Therefore I wouldnt have got a ticket. Therefore I wouldnt have got points and a fine.

Going to court IMHO is expensive and means taking time off work and other sorts of hassle that I simply cant be bothered with. Its just less time consuming and easier for me

1. Not to speed. ( I can't its boring )
2. To take £60 and 3 points like a man instead of trying to worm my way out of it like a big girls blouse. ( not saying you are daimo )

Fizz ( grumpy and hot because the air conditioning in our office is rubbish and not working properly )

Sigh.

You made the point that the copper has to prove you were speeding, in your example. THEY DONT. That doesnt mean to say you can't discredit them, but that's why I specificaly said if all things are equal, all that's needed is their word.

If you go to court knowing they have no verifiable proof, but thinking all you have to do is say 'prove it' to avoid a conviction, then you're sorely mistaken.

Daimo...Mr. Honesty? Not a tag I am too embarassed to wear actually. You have your own reasoning for presenting your argument as you do. But basically you are wrong and your opinion not too reliable.

Driving without insurance be it one day or 1 minute is illegal. And I simply refer you back to Simon's original post which indicated a certain degree of relief and a hint of "it's a fair cop" to use all manner of technicalities to avoid a conviction does nothing but lower the value of the law in my mind.

*My comments are to be taken in the context of this thread only and not as a personal assault on Daimo nor taking that all cases dismissed on technicalities are ludicrous.*