JimUK

I post a while ago (last year) about a speeding fine that i contested due to one of the 30mph signs (left hand one) being obstructed by foilage as i entered the 30mph zone from a 50mph. I was clocked at 41mph as i had seen the sign as i passed it and started slowing down (not an emergency stop) but he got me just 57 metres into the 30mph zone. Anyway, i took plenty of pics of the offending sign a few weeks after and then again when they came and cut the branch back after receiving my letter and pics.

To cut a long story short, the offence was back in April 09 and was in court today. Magistrate didnt go in my favour despite me putting together a good case backed up by the Coombes V DPP case with the revelant law regarding sufficient time to reduce your speed if a sign is obscured.

Ended up with a £400 fine plus costs and 4 points for an offence that was £60 and 3 points..

I have done 10 years of driving everyday for my job (approx 15-20k every year) without incident and then i get ####ed for exercising my right to appeal.. no wonder the justice system in this country gets so much grief, its a joke..

barefoot

Thats a joke you don't need me to tell you you been had over....

tomkbucks

£400 plus costs ? crikey whats that going to be ! seems the law is just out to make money - no harm done - by you either ! you see people on those police camera action programs getting less for nicking a flipping car ! this makes me so angry..

JimUK

The costs were £150.. So yes, ive been shafted bigtime! And I know exxactly what you mean, scrots who nick cars etc and they end with £100 fines etc. Seems you are a target if you have a proper job and dont claim any benefits

RUSS H

Smash the lens, you will feel better. I would.

Russ.

tomkbucks

go set fire to the camera

Nick Graves

Indeed.

The ABD has highlighted other changes on the way, which mean that basically if you go to trial to appeal a motoring offence, you will be practically bankrupted WHEN you lose.

If you roll over and bite the pillow, you'll be fine.

It's totally sick. There IS no justice system any more.

cheshire_carper

Jim,
I am *really* impressed you took the effort to find a precedent (assuming you didn't just get the heads up from a www site that 'told you to use this').

I have just quickly skim read Coombes v DPP and you will notice that on issue of fact, 'The court below had made no explicit finding as to the precise location where C had been recorded as travelling over the speed limit' which immediately differs your case from Coombes', 'nor was there a finding that it had been any substantial distance from the start of the 30mph stretch'. On fact, you were up against it there.

What you have found out though and what you are competing with is the lay magistrate that decided your fate. Probably case hardened and unwilling to budge. The clerk will directed him/her but you are up against a 55 something (more than likely) that hd your fate set before you separated your lips. In Coombes you have a judge that can differentiate the law and the facts. It is second nature to them. They understand the hurdles that must be crossed. The way the decisions are taken is different.

I am impressed you pushed it but for a 60 quid fine, I would have told you not to bother. Pragmatically, you are not going to set any precedents with your decision, should it have gone your way and the risk/gain was far too high when 60 quid is all that is at stake.

I do applaud you for having a go though, futile as it was

tomkbucks

how did they sum it up ?

cheshire_carper

Coombes? Let me log back in....