Contesting a speeding ticket

mart

Has nobody ever managed to contest a speeding ticket where the signage was bad, eg covered by overgrown trees or the like?

Clarky

WezV said:

I don't understand those of you who seem upset to be caught just after the speed limit has changed, but it does reflect the behaviour I see on the road everyday. You are supposed to be doing 30 by the time you reach the 30 sign, not brake once you pass it.

it does help if you can actually see the sign..

Gassage

If there's a mobile van randomly doing trapping they need to prove they've abided by signage regs. Fact.

Not that it helps the OP.

oaf

@mart said:

Has nobody ever managed to contest a speeding ticket where the signage was bad, eg covered by overgrown trees or the like?

A mate's dad did over 20 years ago. He was on the outskirts of Birmingham I think. Took photos of very overgrown signs and submitted them and they accepted it wasn't sufficiently clear. If I remember correctly I got the impression that he knew the road well enough to know the speed limit anyway (not sure he told them this!) but it didn't stop him getting off it.

lloyd

My mate got off with speeding when he was moving house and basically his whole family had been using it all day so none of them knew who was driving.

stickyfiddle

I recall seeing the odd headline where someone has won where signage wasn't clear, or was too far apart. 

My Dad escaped one a few years ago where we were both in the car and didn't know who was driving at 2am. Thankfully the photo evidence was all black apart from a shiny numberplate. Not sure if you can still make that defence though.

sev112

I'm quite surprised they offered the course for 9mph (or nearly 50%) over the limit. If she's been given fine and course, grab it. Do not co test it in court - that margin is often taken very seriously.
and you don't get any credit for not seeing and making a mistake because that is an immediate admission of driving without due care etc.

take it, do the course - it is very good

sev112

Many years ago I got a letter saying I'd driven off after a collision with vehicle damage!   Really shocked, couldn't understand it.  Turned out it was my wife, she'd clipped someone's wing mirror and carried on.  Of course it doesn't tell you in the letter asking who the driver is so that they can prosecute 
I took her down to the police station,told her to grovel, say it was her first ever accident and that she was rally really sorry.
got a stern lecture and said don't do it again

always helps when you are not up against a computer

chrispy108

WezV said:

I don't understand those of you who seem upset to be caught just after the speed limit has changed, but it does reflect the behaviour I see on the road everyday. You are supposed to be doing 30 by the time you reach the 30 sign, not brake once you pass it.

I don't normally do this, and I agree with your general point, but it annoys me how so many speed limit reductions are at the bottom of hills with no warnings. If they'd signed it 1/4 of a mile back I could have coasted up the hill, instead of accelerating up it to then stamp on the brakes. 

ICBM

stickyfiddle said:

My Dad escaped one a few years ago where we were both in the car and didn't know who was driving at 2am. Thankfully the photo evidence was all black apart from a shiny numberplate. Not sure if you can still make that defence though.

No. That's the 'Chris Huhne' defence. If they can't identify the driver they will charge the registered keeper unless you can bully someone else into taking the rap provide evidence otherwise.

cacophony

got 'caught' by a camera on the M62 a couple of years ago. when they were doing those horrendous never-ending road works(the ones that involved the big purple pipes for those that know this motorway). they said i was doing 60 something in a 30 zone where one of the lanes was closed. absolutely no way! there's just no way on earth i'd have been glibly bombing down two lanes of near stationary traffic doing that sort of speed even if i'd wanted to. but they just sent me a photo of my car and that's it, no discussion, no reasoning. i'm just not that stupid, but you can't argue.

chrispy108

ICBM said:

stickyfiddle said:

My Dad escaped one a few years ago where we were both in the car and didn't know who was driving at 2am. Thankfully the photo evidence was all black apart from a shiny numberplate. Not sure if you can still make that defence though.

No. That's the 'Chris Huhne' defence. If they can't identify the driver they will charge the registered keeper unless you can bully someone else into taking the rap provide evidence otherwise.

Failure to identify the driver can land the registered keeper up to 6 points and £1000.