Speeding Fines

[Master Fox]

Does anyone know how i can get out of paying the £60 fine?

I was doing 34pmh in a 30 zone and got caught by a speed camera. Gutted

[lou]

Ive heard that if you ask for photos, wait for them to arrive, then claim they havent and ask for more they give up and drop it.

Worked for a m8 of mine but that was a couple of years back so they might have sussed that one out.

[Sir Fynwy]

If there are any mistakes (number plate printed in the wrong place or partially unreadable etc) send the notification back asking for them to be corrected, you'll probably not hear anything again. If there aren't you'd be best paying up and taking the hit (remembering that the biggest hit is 4 years increases in your insurance) or getting a decent solicitor to check for any loopholes.

[Master Fox]

Ive heard that if you ask for photos, wait for them to arrive, then claim they havent and ask for more they give up and drop it.

Worked for a m8 of mine but that was a couple of years back so they might have sussed that one out.

anything is worth a try.

I just cant bring myself to pay it

[Master Fox]

If there are any mistakes (number plate printed in the wrong place or partially unreadable etc) send the notification back asking for them to be corrected, you'll probably not hear anything again. If there aren't you'd be best paying up and taking the hit (remembering that the biggest hit is 4 years increases in your insurance) or getting a decent solicitor to check for any loopholes.

Is my insurance going to go up?

[Sir Fynwy]

Is my insurance going to go up?

Next year it will, you have to declare any points gained in the last 4 years to the insurance on renewal (probably best to declare them to your current insurer anyway), if you get points for dangerous or drunk driving I think it's 7 years, the premium will be higher and some insurance companies will not quote if you have points.

[Master Fox]

Next year it will, you have to declare any points gained in the last 4 years to the insurance on renewal (probably best to declare them to your current insurer anyway), if you get points for dangerous or drunk driving I think it's 7 years, the premium will be higher and some insurance companies will not quote if you have points.

****!!

[Sir Fynwy]

****!!

3 points shouldn't add too much to your premium, so many people have points now they aren't viewed quite so harshly as they were in the past, if you aren't at full no-claims discount the extra years NCD will still mean that you premium will come down.

[The People's Hero]

3 points often adds nothing.

Not that I write motor.

You do have to declare it though.

All advice given above is sound. Ask for some photos. Claim they haven't shown up.

Also, don't do anything till they send the second notification of the fine. Delay it all and eventually sometimes they give up.

[Guest]

Make sure that you check the paperwork when you declare points. One of the original low cost insurers 'lost' any record of my points when I came to make a claim. This meant that they could invalidate my policy, thus making me liable for the costs not just of my repairs but also the third party. It was only after hearing I wasn't the only person who had been caught out like this that we came to an 'agreement', however in retrospect, I still should have reported them for what they did.

[The People's Hero]

What Lisa said.

Write to them and ask them to confirm receipt.

Alternatively, send by special delivery so they have to sign for it.

Insurers will do anything.

[Master Fox]

I had the option of taking a speed awareness course.

I didn’t realise there was a fee of £75 involved and went away thinking I had booked it for when I got back. But because I never paid the course fee I’ve now been sent the fixed penalty. It’s all a total fcuking pain in the arse hole.

So if I take the points and the £60 fine I shouldn’t need to bother telling the insurer?

[Benji]

When i passed a couple of years ago my teacher said to me something about requesting the calibration certificate of the speed camera, they have to prove it has been checked in I think 12 months. Might be worth a try.

[The People's Hero]

I had the option of taking a speed awareness course.

I didn’t realise there was a fee of £75 involved and went away thinking I had booked it for when I got back. But because I never paid the course fee I’ve now been sent the fixed penalty. It’s all a total fcuking pain in the arse hole.

So if I take the points and the £60 fine I shouldn’t need to bother telling the insurer?

You need to tell the insurer about the points. They can find out anyway - insurers and the DVLA are well buddy-buddy.. but it's up to you to disclose it to the insurers.

Otherwise they can try to weasel out of paying claims due to non-disclosure of material fact.

When i passed a couple of years ago my teacher said to me something about requesting the calibration certificate of the speed camera, they have to prove it has been checked in I think 12 months. Might be worth a try.

It's worth a try but they calibrate the main ones (the lucrative ones) quite often now. Still, worth a try. Nothing to lose and all that.

[Guest Bilo]

This is apparently a fantastic book for situations such as this. There are loopholes galore within by all accounts, might be too late for this one but hopefully you can avoid such bull in the future.

I was also caught doing 34 in a 30 in March 2006, so the points are no longer valid but remain visible on my licence till next year, and I have to pay to get them removed then! Anyway, hope it helps!

http://www.drivershandbook.co.uk/

[Guest]

You need to tell the insurer about the points. They can find out anyway - insurers and the DVLA are well buddy-buddy.. but it's up to you to disclose it to the insurers.

Otherwise they can try to weasel out of paying claims due to non-disclosure of material fact.

See above.

[The People's Hero]

See above.

Indeed.

[cisono]

I love how they go after people doing 34 mph when there are clearly many people regularly doing over 50 mph on some of our major roads in Leicester (when/where pedestrians abound)....

[Guest Bilo]

I love how they go after people doing 34 mph when there are clearly many people regularly doing over 50 mph on some of our major roads in Leicester (when/where pedestrians abound)....

It's an easy cop with absolutely no work involved and makes the Treasury £60 a throw with next to no argument from the "offender." It is essentially legalised theft, but we and the police know that there is little the ordinary motorist can do about it.

[Guest]

It's an easy cop with absolutely no work involved and makes the Treasury £60 a throw with next to no argument from the "offender." It is essentially legalised theft, but we and the police know that there is little the ordinary motorist can do about it.

How is it legalised theft? If you are driving at 0.2mph over the limit, you are breaking the law. If you are stupid enough to drive over the limit and get caught, you only have yourself to blame.

[Master Fox]

This is apparently a fantastic book for situations such as this. There are loopholes galore within by all accounts, might be too late for this one but hopefully you can avoid such bull in the future.

I was also caught doing 34 in a 30 in March 2006, so the points are no longer valid but remain visible on my licence till next year, and I have to pay to get them removed then! Anyway, hope it helps!

http://www.drivershandbook.co.uk/

thanks.

I really want to try and get out of this one.

[Guest Bilo]

How is it legalised theft? If you are driving at 0.2mph over the limit, you are breaking the law. If you are stupid enough to drive over the limit and get caught, you only have yourself to blame.

The amount of resources dedicated to catching people committing this crime show us that their concern is not upholding the law but making money. Speed cameras are everywhere and are horribly flawed as a road safety device. The police know full well that the vast majority of motorists creep over the speed limit from time to time, and 4mph over the limit definitely falls into the category of 'creeping.' There is also the fact that speed cameras can detect only one type of motoring offence, they cannot detect uninsured, drunk or drugged-up drivers. Somebody who is stone cold sober driving at 34 is a damn sight safer than a uninsured drunk with no licence bumbling along at 30 yet the police would appear to be more concerned with prosecuting with the former given their obsession with Gatsos.

[General Smuts]

I got whacked for £60 the other week. Doing 42 in a 30 in front of a mobile camera van.

The photos are online nowadays.

[Daggers]

The amount of resources dedicated to catching people committing this crime show us that their concern is not upholding the law but making money. Speed cameras are everywhere and are horribly flawed as a road safety device. The police know full well that the vast majority of motorists creep over the speed limit from time to time, and 4mph over the limit definitely falls into the category of 'creeping.' There is also the fact that speed cameras can detect only one type of motoring offence, they cannot detect uninsured, drunk or drugged-up drivers. Somebody who is stone cold sober driving at 34 is a damn sight safer than a uninsured drunk with no licence bumbling along at 30 yet the police would appear to be more concerned with prosecuting with the former given their obsession with Gatsos.

So, let me get this straight - your argument basically runs to: It is unfair I get caught breaking the law when other law breakers doing worse stuff get away with it.

Correct?

[Guest]

The amount of resources dedicated to catching people committing this crime show us that their concern is not upholding the law but making money. Speed cameras are everywhere and are horribly flawed as a road safety device. The police know full well that the vast majority of motorists creep over the speed limit from time to time, and 4mph over the limit definitely falls into the category of 'creeping.' There is also the fact that speed cameras can detect only one type of motoring offence, they cannot detect uninsured, drunk or drugged-up drivers. Somebody who is stone cold sober driving at 34 is a damn sight safer than a uninsured drunk with no licence bumbling along at 30 yet the police would appear to be more concerned with prosecuting with the former given their obsession with Gatsos.

It doesn't matter. If you go over the speed limit, you break the law, and if you get caught then you pay the consequences.

They do actually give a 10% tolerance for inaccurate speedometers and "creeping", but 34mph in a 30mph zone is still above the allowance. What you are asking for is introducing subjective standards, which is ludicrous given the number of people that get caught. A simple objective standard, with strict liability means that everyone is clear about the law and what is required for each driver.

As for resources, they stick a camera in a location, then leave it to do its job. Once every so often, somebody goes and changes the film. Wow, a huge drain on resources. What would you rather they do, have policemen with speed guns on every corner watching for speeding motorists? Speed cameras allow traffic cops to be on the roads to try to catch the "bad" drivers, which contrary to popular belief they do. It's just that there are so many poor drivers, it's going to take more officers on patrol to catch them.

Speed cameras are merely a tax on idiots at the very worst.