[Closed] So my bro got caught speeding

First question would be how much does he earn? It's going to be very spendy hurty no matter what!

Real men get caught doing triple digits.

Has he got any points already?

7-56 days disqualified or 6 points. Plus 150% of weekly income.

Plus 150% of weekly income.

How do they determine that, net, gross, with pension contributions etc?

We don't get pay slips any more, all online in some HR app....

I dont believe he has any points

Most likely 6 points and fine dependent on current outgoings/commitments

Most likely 6 points and fine dependent on current outgoings/commitments

Yes it will be this. It's 150% of disposable weekly income capped at £2,500. But I suppose if you earn enough to pay the maximum you can afford it more than someone on minimum wage paying £100. Just don't speed, it's not big or clever. I found that out the hard way 🙁

And good luck getting insurance if he does get disqualified.

It's 150% of [b]disposable[/b] weekly income

150% of Zero is Zero.

Awesome.

Yep. Disposable income is a pretty meaningless measure.

It's weekly income after tax and ni. I did read somewhere that if the defendant doesn't say what their income is then it's worked out on the median wage which is 440 per week apparently.

Seems like a bit of a loop hole - duno if there is any way the court can force the defendant to tell them.

So if you spank loads of money on a expensive car each month you have a smaller fine?

I don't remember reading that it had anything to do with 'disposable' income.

I think it's just a percentage of your weekly income; although not sure if that is gross/net etc.

It's not disposable income, but the court does take into account assets and liabilities.

Guidance [url= https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/explanatory-material/item/fines-and-financial-orders/approach-to-the-assessment-of-fines-2/4-assessment-of-financial-circumstances/ ]here[/url]
[url= https://formfinder.hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/mc100-eng.pdf ]
Here's the MC100[/url] form that the OP's brother will need to complete.

I was recently stopped and was 1mph inside a band B offence (4-6 points & up to 125% fine). Am content with a conditional offer of 3 points & £100 fine.

It's not disposable income, but the court does take into account assets and liabilities.

True I'd got disposable bit wrong.
Handy fine calculator here.
https://www.confused.com/on-the-road/driving-law/speeding-fine-calculator

I know a chap who got caught speeding twice in one journey. One ticket was in one county and the other was from the one he crossed into a few minutes later. He argued in court that going by the time and distance between the speed traps that he could not have dropped below the national speed limit between them. Therefore it could only be proved he had broken the limit once and so he was only liable for one of the tickets, it worked.

He argued in court that going by the time and distance between the speed traps that he could not have dropped below the national speed limit between them.

That's some curious logic at work there. Surely there's another inescapable conclusion given that argument?

EDIT: Ah, I see now. I'd have been tempted to withdraw the charge at that point and see if the CPS fancied a stab at Dangerous Driving given the admitted sustained excessive speed over a considerable distance...

Therefore it could only be proved he had broken the limit once and so he was only liable for one of the tickets, it worked.

Far from the only one, it is a common (and legitimate) argument. Usually only worthwhile deploying if you are facing a totting-up ban. For someone with a clean licence, two FPNs will probably be cheaper than a court appearance.

Handy fine calculator here.
https://www.confused.com/on-the-road/driving-law/speeding-fine-calculator

Suggests it's capped at £1k...

I got caught doing 112mph a bit further north on the A1(M) on my way back home to Glasgow a few years ago. I pleaded guilty on the paperwork but I had to go back down for court to be sentenced and before that had a chance to write up excuse/reason/mitigating circumstances etc as well as I had to provide a statement of my financial situation. Was told that a disqualification (most likely) or points and a fine would be the outcome so not to take my car as the ban would start immediately. I had a chance to speak to the magistrates and I asked outright for the points and a fine to which they agreed to no bother. I didn't make any excuses, just said that I should have known better and that was that. They took into consideration the statement from the traffic police (I never said anything to them except to confirm my details), my annual mileage (at that point about 60k pa) the fact I never made any excuses for speeding and that driving around the UK was part of my job. Cost me a fair bit in fines, victim surcharge and travel/accomodation and I got 6 points added to the 3 I already had. Insurance premium went up but not by as much as I would have expected tbh. I think your bro will be ok unless he was being a knob to anyone during the process.

I got caught doing 112mph

😯

Cost me a fair bit in fines, [i]victim surcharge[/i] and travel/accomodation

Eh? Who's the 'victim' of speeding on the motorway?

112 is fast but the context makes a big difference.

Yeah, so rattling along nearly 30mph above the limit takes you right up the backside of considerate drivers like me..
Thanks.
And 112mph, you deserve a 10yr ban. You should know better.

I’ve zero tolerance for speeding motorists.

Yeah, so rattling along nearly 30mph above the limit takes you right up the backside of considerate drivers like me..

So you sit in the fast lane doing 70mph? You could like, move over... 🙂

Nah, 60 in the slow lane occasionally pulling out to overtake trucks.

You think I’m joking don’t you..

Rong.

EDIT: Ah, I see now. I'd have been tempted to withdraw the charge at that point and see if the CPS fancied a stab at Dangerous Driving given the admitted sustained excessive speed over a considerable distance...

Yes I think he probably would have deserved that. I'm not condoning his wriggling out of it I just thought it was an interesting tactic.

Far from the only one, it is a common (and legitimate) argument. Usually only worthwhile deploying if you are facing a totting-up ban. For someone with a clean licence, two FPNs will probably be cheaper than a court appearance.

I'm pretty sure he was facing a ban from the two charges together.

Just did 100 mph on motorway.

It was a dumb thing to do now looking at your bro or the possible consequences or injury/death to others.

Thing is my car can do 155mph and 0-60 in 5.9 secs.

Should have bought a leaf.

Not speeding again.

Eh? Who's the 'victim' of speeding on the motorway?

112 is fast but the context makes a big difference.

Yeah, so rattling along nearly 30mph above the limit takes you right up the backside of considerate drivers like me..
Thanks.

And 112mph, you deserve a 10yr ban. You should know better.

I’ve zero tolerance for speeding motorists.

Real men get caught doing triple digits.

Nah. Real men [i]dont get caught[/i] doing triple digits.
Cars need too much space to go fast, so it happens in obvious places. Bikes don’t. So it doesn’t.

Frankenstein - Member
Just did 100 mph on motorway.

It was a dumb thing to do now looking at your bro or the possible consequences or injury/death to others.

Thing is my car can do 155mph and 0-60 in 5.9 secs.

Should have bought a leaf.

Not speeding again.

BMW? 😀

doing 112mph a bit further north on the A1(M) on my way back home ....., my annual mileage (at that point about 60k pa)

What a ****ed up legal system we have...

Judge: You're accused of breaking the speed limit and endangering life. Do you have anything to say?
Accused: Yes I do it shit loads throughout the year.
Judge: Ah ok, then we'll not give you a big sentence then.

eh..

I once was stopped for doing 83mph on a Mway (it was just before 10pm on a sunday evening). The policeman, who'd clearly had a bad day was pretty rude, and accused me of "nearly killing everyone on the motorway at the time" To which i answered. "There was one person on the Motorway, and that was me" (the police car was sat in one of those "up and over" mounds you see occasionally at the side of the mWay, but wasn't a marked car so i hadn't seen any Batternburg glint etc)

The guy eventually let me off, after i'd calmly apologized and said i was sorry. He then said " I really hope you don't normally drive at that speed" to which i quite truthfully answered "no, of course not officer". It was completely truthfull, because just prior to that i'd been doing an indicated 175.........

The guy eventually let me off, after i'd calmly apologized and said i was sorry. He then said " I really hope you don't normally drive at that speed" to which i quite truthfully answered "no, of course not officer". It was completely truthfull, because just prior to that i'd been doing an indicated 175.........

*In before the hand-wringers*

That is very funny, and fully awesome 😀

I wonder what decisions you make when you decide to speed?

Is it because you feel entitled or are you just plain selfish? Maybe because you do “colossal” mileage’s means you are a better driver than you actually are?

Maybe a clear road in front of you equates to “sod the speed limits, I’m awesome”

I’d offer the courts ought to take that sense of smug entitlement away from you and once the sentence served that you take a driving test once a year for the rest of your life..

Happy to offer my opinion, you are welcome.

I’m with bikebouy on this one. It’s no wonder people speed like they do. The consequences might as well be nonexistent.

Respect your opinions chaps, but if it's an empty road, what's the problem? No one to hurt but yourself.

'If a tree falls in the woods' etc...

The problem is that not everyone can follow the empty road logic. There are a lot of seriously daft people out there. Simple blanket rules help keep things simple. Want to go fast go to the track

I think the problem is if you do **** up and hit the barriers scattering your motor and possibly your torso across the lanes of the motorway., the next driver 2 miles behind you has to stop and sort it out.

He then said " I really hope you don't normally drive at that speed" to which i quite truthfully answered "no, of course not officer". It was completely truthfull, because just prior to that i'd been doing an indicated 175.........

Motorway speed limits are pretty arbitrary, and the basis for their being set is long lost.

If they increased the limit to 80 would you still be outraged at the reckless endangerment bikebuoy, or is it just ‘because it’s the rules’?

How do you feel driving in Germany? Even at 60 it must be hard not to crash with all that hand wringing.

jambourgie - Member

Respect your opinions chaps, but if it's an empty road, what's the problem? No one to hurt but yourself.

'If a tree falls in the woods' etc...
Posted 20 minutes ago # Report-Post

funkmasterp - Member

The problem is that not everyone can follow the empty road logic. There are a lot of seriously daft people out there. Simple blanket rules help keep things simple. Want to go fast go to the track
Posted 16 minutes ago # Report-Post

tails - Member

I think the problem is if you do **** up and hit the barriers scattering your motor and possibly your torso across the lanes of the motorway., the next driver 2 miles behind you has to stop and sort it out.

+1 for - How do they cope in Germany?

 

thegeneralist - Member

What a **** up legal system we have...

Judge: You're accused of breaking the speed limit on a motorway [s]and endangering life.[/s] Do you have anything to say?
Accused: Yes I drive [s]do it shit[/s] loads throughout the year and this speed is not habitual as you can see from my relatively clean endorsement history.
Judge: Ah ok, then we'll not give you a big sentence then as it wasn't really that serious given you were deemed to be driving safely. Drive slower this time on your way back home.
Accused: Ok will do, cheers.

eh..

How do you feel driving in Germany? Even at 60 it must be hard not to crash with all that hand wringing.

Hope he never goes to the Isle of Man either.

Everybody speeds. Until recently I was doing a motorway commute by motorbike. I was in no rush and I’d stick to 70 (+/- 2mph) day after day after day. Prior to that I’d done a lot of car mileage at work and used to set the cruise as 65, so I know where he’s coming from. But he breaks speed limits. Everyone does. I really honestly don’t believe ANYONE who says they NEVER EVER break a speed limit. Mostly it’s fine and it’s live and let live IMO. I’d rather someone go a bit quick now and again and pay attention than some of the stupidly and inattention you see every day. 70mph is too low anyway. Most of Europe is higher than that as are some US states these days. Given my choice I’d set it at 90, maybe 100, and crucify anyone that went more than 5-10mph over it. Long bans no matter what they sobbed about.
We’ve not got long left like this anyway. Our kids will see self driving cars that don’t need to speed to get places faster than we do now because nobody will own a car, we’ll just call one up on an app when we need one, so the roads will be a lot quieter.
Anyway. Back to Earth. Dinner time soon.... 🙂

The speed limits were set when we drove these:

[img] [/img]

They set the Mway speed limit to pretty much within 10mph of the maximum speed of that typical family car.

If we did the same today the speed limit on the Mway would be 120mph.

Now, i'm not suggesting that 120mph is a sensible speed at which to set the limit, but i am showing just how arbitrary the number about which the "arbiters of the national limit" get soo frothy about......

(Take a train under, or a boat over just 20 miles of channel, and you can do 85 legally (in the dry) for example)

The only difference between 100mph and 99mm is that one has 3 figures and the other just two. And you can drive dangerously at 20mph and safely at 200mph.

Context, is everything........

OP does your brother drive you to church?

http://www.centralfifetimes.com/news/15811755.speeding-teenager-clocked-at-120mph-escapes-driving-ban/

And you can drive dangerously at 20mph and safely at 200mph.

Context, is everything........

+1

Reminds me of the time I got pulled over doing just over 90mph. The cop asked me if I knew what speed I was doing. "Oh, probably closer to 80 than 70" says I. "Try 90" he snapped back to which I replied "Well it's still closer to 80 than 70". He was not amused.

That's hilarious (-:

I really honestly don’t believe ANYONE who says they NEVER EVER break a speed limit.

Oh, I do. I encounter TCR jam cars on a regular basis. Dribbling along at 50mph in the middle lane of the motorway, or driving around town and dabbing the brakes every time they approach 20mph.

They're a minority though, in terms of speed abusers I see far more monospeeders who think 40mph is the correct speed to be driving at irrespective of whether the posted limit is 30 or 70. They're [i]great[/i] fun to be behind on motorway slip roads.

Incidentally, the UK motorway speed limit was set as a temporary measure by somebody who couldn't even drive.

Oh, and what you'd do in Germany is this:

Drive as fast as you like without being an utter cock.
If you're an utter cock you'll get pulled over.
If it's raining don't be even a slight cock.
If you're in an accident and you're doing over 100mph then you will be assumed to be at fault.
If you're in an accident at over 100mph then 'fault' won't matter anyway.
Move the **** over when you've finished overtaking.
Your car tops out at 155mph? How cute, move over.

I drive a diesel van and know my place.

They set the Mway speed limit to pretty much within 10mph of the maximum speed of that typical family car.

And it was nothing to do with road safety, it was because Jaguar were using the M6 as a test track.

you can drive dangerously at 20mph

As I indicated via the time honored "shaking the beans" symbol yesterday when walking down a singletrack lane (public footpath, private road) as he charged towards me and my scared 7 yo daughter in his SUV.

He didn't take to kindly to my gesticulating, just as I dodn;t take too kindly to his dangerous behaviour.

Respect your opinions chaps, but if it's an empty road, what's the problem? No one to hurt but yourself.

'If a tree falls in the woods' etc...

Oh, and what you'd do in Germany is this:

Out of interest, how do autobahn accident statistics stack up to ours, anyone know? Our motorways are statistically the safest roads we have. And yes, I know there's more to accidents than speed alone; road design, driver training and ability etc. Just curious.

(Yeah, I could Google it, but it's easier to ask on STW and let someone else share their knowledge or do the legwork...)

No idea of stats, but my German info is legit, I've seen a pushy cock in a Porsche bullying cars out of his way, only to be pulled over about 5 miles ahead. The police are very strict and there is even a campaign to reduce what we might call roadhogs, boy racers or Jeremy Clarkson. There's large hoardings by the motorways showing a family in a car being harassed by said cock. I can't remember the wording but it's something like 'Drängeln' which is literally 'jostle'.

PeterPoddy - Member

We’ve not got long left like this anyway. Our kids will see self driving cars that don’t need to speed to get places faster than we do now because nobody will own a car, we’ll just call one up on an app when we need one, so the roads will be a lot quieter.
...

I keep posting this so once more won't hurt, but I think self driving cars will be tiered/taxed based on how fast you're allowed to go. If the speed limits are based on human abilities why would you stop fully autonomous cars from doing 100+ on the motorway?

I think for a time at least prestige/performance models will allow you to zoom past the plebs in their inferior marques, if you pay.

Really odd thread here I think. I don’t think that anyone could defend the OP’s brother who probably (with the way speedo’s under read) was probably showing +100mph in their car. No excuse.

Bikebouy - never do 33mph in a 30mph zone or 45 in a 40?

The M-way speed limits were introduced in the 60’s after AC cars were found to have been road testing their Le Mans Shelby Coupe on the M1 straight near Newport Pagnall. Someone getting that speed ow would make headlines so imagine the impact 50years ago.

tonyg2003 - Member

The M-way speed limits were introduced in the 60’s after AC cars were found to have been road testing their Le Mans Shelby Coupe on the M1 straight near Newport Pagnall. Someone getting that speed ow would make headlines so imagine the impact 50years ago.

[url= https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/motorsport/day-jack-sears-hit-185mph-m1-motorway ]185mph at 4:15 am.[/url]

No one to hurt but yourself.

and the firemen and paramedics that cut you out, and the road that has to be closed for hours for accident investigation and repair, and the copper that has to go to your house and tell your mum, and your mum herself, and.....

probably showing +100mph in their car. No excuse.

Agreed.

Bikebouy - never do 33mph in a 30mph zone or 45 in a 40?

Unless I'm misremembering usernames I very much doubt it going off previous discussions here. Probably best not to push this line of enquiry TBH.

The M-way speed limits were introduced in the 60’s after AC cars were found to have been road testing their Le Mans Shelby Coupe on the M1

Hah, I got both the manufacturer and the road wrong.

If the speed limits are based on human abilities why would you stop fully autonomous cars from doing 100+ on the motorway?

im sure.... the human element wont go away

for example ... will the human check the tires and spot the damage that causes the blow out when the car hits 100 ?

things still fail and like it or not the faster your going when it fails the more severe the consequences

trail_rat - Member

If the speed limits are based on human abilities why would you stop fully autonomous cars from doing 100+ on the motorway?

im sure.... the human element wont go away

for example ... will the human check the tires and spot the damage that causes the blow out when the car hits 100 ?

things still fail and like it or not the faster your going when it fails the more severe the consequences

Tyre temperature and pressure sensors are already a thing - the car could decide whether the tyre pressure, weather and road conditions are safe to go ???mph. At the minute a human can ignore info from their tyre pressure sensors or fail to check them and drive 70+mph. If the car is in control you can't do that.

Anyway the main reason I think this will be a thing is for taxation. If EVs are tax exempt for co2 reasons governments will have to reconsider their taxation models - performance, speed and going faster than others seems like a perfect reason.

so who got harmed? Any victims of these crimes who suffered harm or loss?

[img] [/img]

theotherjonv - Member
No one to hurt but yourself.

and the firemen and paramedics that cut you out, and the road that has to be closed for hours for accident investigation and repair, and the copper that has to go to your house and tell your mum, and your mum herself, and.....

By the same logic, we should say it's morally wrong to participate in anything that could result in a call-out for the emergency services. Cycling for example.

*Wonders if jambourgie will explain what the fast lane is*

*Wonders if bikebouy will explain what the slow lane is*

A few years ago I attended a speed awareness course. Very insightful and gave me plenty of food for thought. I would say I drive progressively but hypeaware in any built-up areas. Dual carriageways/motorways etc and I will consistently speed but if I top 100 it’s seconds only, not worth the risk, too much traffic.

Some comedy gold. Fast lane, slow lane bollocks. Unfortunately there’s always been a speed limit on the Autobahn due to traffic when I’ve been on one.
Those that advocate zero speeding tolerance on the motorway, how do you feel when you cross the channel to an 80mph limit. Is it somehow safe because the sign says so?

Had the parents over during the Christmas break and was informed that my brother was having to go to court as he got caught doing 120mph on the m6 toll road. He doesn’t need to drive for work as he works from home and has enough money to pay the taxi fares to the airports. If he doesn’t get banned then there is something very wrong with our legal system and I have everything crossed that he does get a ban.

For a little bit of context I was informed a good few years ago on a single lane bypass with my mum in the car he was doing 100mph and he frequently and actually always drives at those sorts of speeds with his wife and kids in the car..... utter pr!ck!!!

@golfchick, he’s clearly a Selfish swine of the highest order.

On said course, was also told that traffic accidents with a fatality cost £1m a go on average. Seemed a touch exaggerated but I’m sure all the services attending, investigations, forensics etc., it soon mounts up.

By the same logic, we should say it's morally wrong to participate in anything that could result in a call-out for the emergency services. Cycling for example.

I don't think the same sort of psychological trauma is likely to be involved in treating the average cycling wrist or collarbone as picking someone's body parts out of a crushed car that's hit a tree. And when my mum got the call to come and pick me up because i was in a wrist cast..... i think she was more annoyed at me messing up her timing of the sunday roast than devastated at the loss of her eldest child in an entirely avoidable 'accident'.

But you carry on, it's only yourself you're harming.

[quote=rene59 ][s]this speed is not habitual[/s] I've been lucky not to get caught before as you can see from my relatively clean endorsement history.

refixed

A sobering fact I was told at a speed awareness course on Saturday (caught doing 36 in a 30 which is embarrassing compared to some of the above)...

If two identical cars doing 70mph and 90mph slam on at the same point, at the point where the car doing 70mph stops (potentially avoiding collision), the car doing 90mph is still doing 70mph. Hitting a fixed object at 70mph is going to hurt.

Basically when braking hard a vehicle sheds a huge amount of its initial speed at the end of the braking phase. Speeding kills kids!

Those that advocate zero speeding tolerance on the motorway, how do you feel when you cross the channel to an 80mph limit. Is it somehow safe because the sign says so?

The fact is the French don't really appreciate speed limits.

And 112mph, you deserve a 10yr ban. You should know better

Daft doing that speed, but a ten year ban. Get a grip. It's far more dangerous driving at 30 past a school than it is 120 on a deserted 3 lane motorway (in a high performance car).

Context is everything...

If two identical cars doing 70mph and 90mph slam on at the same point, at the point where the car doing 70mph stops (potentially avoiding collision), the car doing 90mph is still doing 70mph.

That's got to be wrong. So if it takes 5 seconds to stop from 70 then it's gonna be 10 secs from 90? **** I'll have to start braking before I even reach 120!

refixed

If two identical cars doing 70mph and 90mph slam on at the same point, at the point where the car doing 70mph stops (potentially avoiding collision), the car doing 90mph is still doing 70mph. Hitting a fixed object at 70mph is going to hurt.

I'm interested what identical cars they base that on. A performance car brakes from 60-0 in about a third the distance of what it states in the highway code.

 

Where are all these deserted roads we keep hearing about?