Speeding ticket

robg123

Hi,

This week I got two speeding tickets in the post.
Both offences were alleged to have occurred in the first week in August in the same location - Naas Road, Dublin 22.
In each case I was doing slightly over 70 in a Special Speed Limit 60 zone.
This is my daily route to work (Naas Road out to town towards Citywest)

At the time I wasn't aware I was breaking the limit - I have examined the route since and signage seems to be very poor - but anyway I'm not disputing that so much as the fact that I received 2 tickets in one week but was not notified at the time - or in fact until more than 2 months later.

I have no problem paying the first offence and accepting the penalty points - but in my opinion, I should not have to pay the second as I was given no opportunity to alter my behaviour. I travel this route every day - how many times have I been clocked and not realised it? - I could already have lost my licence at the rate they are being processed?

No doubt many people will claim I should have read the (very poor) signage etc - which may be a valid point. I'm not really interested in that argument.

Do I have a case for not accepting the second notice (on the grounds that I wasn't informed promptly first time I got ticketed)?

Any other way to avoid these penalty points?

Cheers

mikemac

robg123 wrote: »

I have no problem paying the first offence and accepting the penalty points - but in my opinion, I should not have to pay the second as I was given no opportunity to alter my behaviour.

Sorry, ignorance is not a defence when breaking the law.
That sounds like a high-horse comment, sorry it's not meant to be.

You have zero chance of getting out of the second ticket with your argument.

Maybe think of some other avenue but don't tell that quote to a judge :eek:

chris85

robg123 wrote: »

Hi,

This week I got two speeding tickets in the post.
Both offences were alleged to have occurred in the first week in August in the same location - Naas Road, Dublin 22.
In each case I was doing slightly over 70 in a Special Speed Limit 60 zone.
This is my daily route to work (Naas Road out to town towards Citywest)

At the time I wasn't aware I was breaking the limit - I have examined the route since and signage seems to be very poor - but anyway I'm not disputing that so much as the fact that I received 2 tickets in one week but was not notified at the time - or in fact until more than 2 months later.

I have no problem paying the first offence and accepting the penalty points - but in my opinion, I should not have to pay the second as I was given no opportunity to alter my behaviour. I travel this route every day - how many times have I been clocked and not realised it? - I could already have lost my licence at the rate they are being processed?

No doubt many people will claim I should have read the (very poor) signage etc - which may be a valid point. I'm not really interested in that argument.

Do I have a case for not accepting the second notice (on the grounds that I wasn't informed promptly first time I got ticketed)?

Any other way to avoid these penalty points?

Cheers

No defence as far as i can see. You broke the speed limit twice and got two speeding tickets, take it on the chin and learn from it.

You may not want to hear the argument that you shoul have read the speed signage but its extremely relevant. You should have known the speed limit.

The thief says to the guard, "You can't do me for breaking into two houses in one night, i wasnt informed and givin the chance to alter my behaviour after the first house"

skibum

You were caught speeding last august and you only got the tickets this week? I thought you get the tickets within a month of the offence?

btkm8unsl0w5r4

I know the speed trap on the Nass road....it in itself is criminal. Wide straight road with a good surface, and a 60 KPH limit....its like shooting ducks in a barrel. Cops always there especially after McDonald's on the red cow side.

I feel your pain OP...the lag between issuing tickets and the offense is unacceptable, as you say if you speed the same way to work for 6 days you could loose your license.

If only there was some way to know that a speed trap was ahead.....hummmm;)

chris85

hold on, only seen that the speeding occurred last August, in that case you might well have a goo chance of getting off these just due to the length of time. Not sure if there is a certain time they have to send them out but 10 months is a bit stupid

Run_to_da_hills

I was told that if a summons is not issued within 6 months of the offence the whole thing is squashed.

Seth Brundle

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I was told that if a summons is not issued within 6 months of the offence the whole thing is squashed.

I recall hearing that also but I also recall hearing that there is nothing in the law regarding this. Maybe someone can comfirm.

Cionád

Serenity Miniature Attic wrote: »

I feel your pain OP...the lag between issuing tickets and the offense is unacceptable, as you say if you speed the same way to work for 6 days you could loose your license.

I agree, they should be almost instantly issued, and sent by registered post within a day or two of the offence imo.

Not exactly difficult with the technology out there.

Guy:Incognito

He says he got them 2 months later, I assume August should read April.

Serenity Miniature Attic wrote: »

I know the speed trap on the Nass road....it in itself is criminal. Wide straight road with a good surface, and a 60 KPH limit....its like shooting ducks in a barrel. Cops always there especially after )

It really isnt criminal. Both sides of the Naas Rd have pedestrian crossings on them. Over the years I have seen loads of people sailing through the red lights (and I dont use the road that often) at the pedestrian crossings either just not caring or while not seeingthe lights. Theres been a fair few acidents aswell.

The low speed limits are justified and there is/was buildign work going on.

Seth Brundle

If thats the case then both are completely valid - the OP can expect 2 * 2 points unless they are contested unsuccessfully in court. However, you could check to see that the special speed limit was legally valid at the time.

robg123

Yeah sorry August should have read April!

Looks from the replies like I'll just have to accept it - kinda annoying though as I am generally a very conscientious road user.

cyclopath2001

Serenity Miniature Attic wrote: »

If only there was some way to know that a speed trap was ahead.....hummmm;)

Speed limit signs?

eringobragh

Serenity Miniature Attic wrote: »

If only there was some way to know that a speed trap was ahead.....hummmm;)

........and perhaps opens a garage as well

btkm8unsl0w5r4

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Speed limit signs?

How would they let you know a speed trap was ahead

eringobragh

Serenity Miniature Attic wrote: »

How would they let you know a speed trap was ahead

SSSSSSSSSSH He's quite passionate about keeping under the PSL at all times :pac:

cyclopath2001

Serenity Miniature Attic wrote: »

How would they let you know a speed trap was ahead

The general idea is to catch & punish people who deliberately break the law. Just observe the speed limit and you won't need to worry about speed cameras.

Keeping people guessing is also a good tactic.

(From RTE radio) - Police in western Canada are deploying life-size cardboard replicas of traffic cops pointing a radar gun at oncoming traffic in an effort to reduce speeding and road fatalities.

The mock-ups are so realistic that while being tested on a Vancouver street this week, a tow truck driver pulled up and started talking to one, the police said.

Clare_Guy

robg123 wrote: »

Hi,

This week I got two speeding tickets in the post.
Both offences were alleged to have occurred in the first week in August in the same location - Naas Road, Dublin 22.
In each case I was doing slightly over 70 in a Special Speed Limit 60 zone.
This is my daily route to work (Naas Road out to town towards Citywest)

At the time I wasn't aware I was breaking the limit - I have examined the route since and signage seems to be very poor - but anyway I'm not disputing that so much as the fact that I received 2 tickets in one week but was not notified at the time - or in fact until more than 2 months later.

I have no problem paying the first offence and accepting the penalty points - but in my opinion, I should not have to pay the second as I was given no opportunity to alter my behaviour. I travel this route every day - how many times have I been clocked and not realised it? - I could already have lost my licence at the rate they are being processed?

No doubt many people will claim I should have read the (very poor) signage etc - which may be a valid point. I'm not really interested in that argument.

Do I have a case for not accepting the second notice (on the grounds that I wasn't informed promptly first time I got ticketed)?

Any other way to avoid these penalty points?

Cheers

Have you any relations in the uk? If so, get one of them to claim they were driving. There should be somewhere on the tickets you received in the post where you can nominate who was driving the car at the time.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

The general idea is to catch & punish people who deliberately break the law. Just observe the speed limit and you won't need to worry about speed cameras.

Of course why didn't I think of that :rolleyes:. As for the cardboard cops thats a good idea. I have no problem with correct limits on dangerous roads. And I object to some of the limits on poor country roads they are crazy high. However that particular stretch of the Naas road is perfectly safer for 80-100 kph. If pedestrians need to cross 6 lanes of traffic and a Luas line, I think the resources would be better spent on a foot bridge.

It is lazy policing....setting up camp where you are going to catch the maximum number of people in the shortest time. Dont bother to to catch undertakers on motorways or land hoggers. Dont bother policing accident blackspots on B roads. Dont bother sitting outside pub car parks catching the people who are so obviously drink driving. No instead set up on a straight bit of Dublin road where the speed limit has recently been set stupidly slow and catch people 10-20 Kph over the limit. I recently find myself watching my speedo more than the road I am so paranoid about getting points. When the private cameras come in here all hell will break loose.

Just my humble opinion.More cops on the road catching dangerous driving and the mentalers on the road & less in vans with guns generating revenue.

kmart6

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Keeping people guessing is also a good tactic.

Don't know when you took that from the radio...but the Gardai here have already done that.

Here's a link to it if you wanna pay to read about it!:p

kmart6

Clare_Guy wrote: »

Have you any relations in the uk? If so, get one of them to claim they were driving. There should be somewhere on the tickets you received in the post where you can nominate who was driving the car at the time.

They'd prob have to prove they were in the country so don't think that's work!

Clare_Guy

no, they don't have to prove they were in the country.

you put their info on the ticket and send it back to the dept. where they issue the ticket to the "correct" :rolleyes: person!

kmart6

Well that's a bit ****ed up if it's the case!

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Will they check that the person named was insured to drive....cause the penalty could be worst for letting an uninsured driver drive your car...I dont know?

Clare_Guy

well look at it from this point of view...

if you had loaned your car to a relative from across the water, and they did speed, and you did receive the notice in the post after they'd gone home...

you'd expect the system, to notify the gardai of the error, to be an efficient and simple operation...

Clare_Guy

Serenity Miniature Attic wrote: »

Will they check that the person named was insured to drive....cause the penalty could be worst for letting an uninsured driver drive your car...I dont know?

if they check (which they can't) what will they find?

an uninsured motorist? well that's the uninsured motorists problem, not your's...

peasant

Clare_Guy wrote: »

if they check (which they can't) what will they find?

an uninsured motorist? well that's the uninsured motorists problem, not your's...

rubbish ...it is most definetly your problem who you loan your car to and to make sure that they have a valid licence and insurance.

No more hints at how to cheat the system, please

Clare_Guy

what is the charge for allowing someone (uninsured) to drive your car?

therewillbe

A legal piece from an Irish company , "speed nanny". no good for random checks only the fixed cameras. pain is felt from all us drivers.nothing to do with road safety just a money making scam.

kmart6

Clare_Guy wrote: »

what is the charge for allowing someone (uninsured) to drive your car?

Can be dis-qualified I think depending on the circumstances!

Clare_Guy

kmart6 wrote: »

Can be dis-qualified I think depending on the circumstances!

Riiiight! :rolleyes:

kmart6

Clare_Guy wrote: »

Riiiight! :rolleyes:

Oh look at that trying to be a smart-ass!

Clare_Guy wrote:

if they check (which they can't) what will they find?

an uninsured motorist? well that's the uninsured motorists problem, not your's...

It might actually work, trying to be a samrt ass that is, if you weren't trying to point out what other people think compared to you thinking that it's not the owner's fault if some else is driving they're car uninsured!

I.S.T.

Stekelly wrote: »

It really isnt criminal. Both sides of the Naas Rd have pedestrian crossings on them. Over the years I have seen loads of people sailing through the red lights (and I dont use the road that often) at the pedestrian crossings either just not caring or while not seeingthe lights.

So the problem is not speeding then, it's people not driving with due care and attention and breaking red lights as a result. Speeding fines are not going to stop this from happening.

Stekelly wrote: »

Theres been a fair few acidents aswell.

What kind of accidents? Were they caused by speeding?

Guy:Incognito

IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »

So the problem is not speeding then, it's people not driving with due care and attention and breaking red lights as a result. Speeding fines are not going to stop this from happening.


What kind of accidents? Were they caused by speeding?

The kind of accidents where pedestrians get hit by cars. I'm sure if it's you that gets hit you'd be praying the guy is going as slow as possible.

Theres multiple sets of lights withing yards of each other, keeping the traffic at a sensible speed is a good thing. Either way, wit the amount of light on the road, theres no need for traffic to be moving very fast, plus , inbound it changes down to one lane at Kylemore.


Anyway, even if the speed limit is 20, I really dotn see peoples problem with getting caught.A bit of observation and you wil know the speed limit of whatever road your on. I'll hold my hands up to speeding, but I know I'm doing it.

cyclopath2001

Serenity Miniature Attic wrote: »

However that particular stretch of the Naas road is perfectly safer for 80-100 kph.

Maybe your're not aware of all the circumstances that led to the limit being set? You're risking the safety of others and your license because you think you know it all?

Serenity Miniature Attic wrote: »

If pedestrians need to cross 6 lanes of traffic and a Luas line, I think the resources would be better spent on a foot bridge.

Not everyone is able to climb a footbridge.

craichoe

OP I've gotten off a speeding ticket where the signage was in poor shape, went from 60 - 50 but the signage was covered by leaves. Got stopped by a garda hiding behind a wall, said i was doing 58 in a 50 zone, i said i didnt even know it was a 50 zone. Blah blah blah .. road traffic act, fine in the post etc.

Went back and had a look, took some pictures, went to his garda station a week later and showed them to the sergeant, he said it had already been processed so to just leave it go and it would be struck out.

The leaves were cut back on the signage the next day too !

I dont think its fair to assume everyone will know what the speed limit is, this attitude of "Oh well ingorance is no defence" then whats the point in having advertised speed limits in the first place, if you should just "know" what it is.

Clare_Guy

kmart6 wrote: »

Can be dis-qualified I think depending on the circumstances!

you don't know what you're talking about.

kmart6 wrote: »

Oh look at that trying to be a smart-ass!!

trying to show you don't know what you're talking about.

kmart6 wrote: »

It might actually work, trying to be a samrt ass that is, if you weren't trying to point out what other people think compared to you thinking that it's not the owner's fault if some else is driving they're car uninsured!

em... hello!... we're not actually talking about a real person... it's a hypothetical person for purposes of avoiding points! read the OP and my replies... :rolleyes:

peasant

Clare_Guy wrote: »

em... hello!... we're not actually talking about a real person... it's a hypothetical person for purposes of avoiding points! read the OP and my replies... :rolleyes:

and you read mine

peasant wrote: »

No more hints at how to cheat the system, please

craichoe

peasant wrote: »

No more hints at how to cheat the system, please

Yes, if you want to cheat the system get a solicitor, their the best at it

btkm8unsl0w5r4

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Maybe you're not aware of all the circumstances that led to the limit being set? You're risking the safety of others and your license because you think you know it all?

Not everyone is able to climb a footbridge.

Of course your a correct i give up, you win, well done. I think I will go out now and campaign for escalators to be installed at all foot bridges.

...Dear Noel Dempsey............

Clare_Guy

peasant wrote: »

and you read mine

what are you on about?

have i giving any more "hints" since you posted? No.

Try moderating fairly and not taking sides... :mad:

peasant

Clare_Guy wrote: »

what are you on about?

have i giving any more "hints" since you posted? No.

Try moderating fairly and not taking sides... :mad:

You're perfectly right of course, you added nothing new ...instead you just repeated your "advice" to lie to the authorities and to make up a ficticious (or real) foreign driver to take the blame and wriggle out of a speeding ticket.

That's illegal and not good advice at all, I could have banned you for that straight away.

Now, just get the message, if you will.

cyclopath2001

Serenity Miniature Attic wrote: »

I think I will go out now and campaign for escalators to be installed at all foot bridges.

Good man, but it would be cheaper to have lower speed limits and better enforcement. Can't have footbridges (with or without escalators) everywhere, you know.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Good man, but it would be cheaper to have lower speed limits and better enforcement. Can't have footbridges (with or without escalators) everywhere, you know.

No more comments from me...I am off for a drive instead:D

kmart6

Clare_Guy wrote:

you don't know what you're talking about.

Oh yeah that's rich considering you think it's not the owner of a car's fault if they let someone drive it un-insured!

Clare_Guy wrote:

em... hello!... we're not actually talking about a real person... it's a hypothetical person for purposes of avoiding points! read the OP and my replies... :rolleyes:

Where did I say we're talking about a real person?!...point it out to me please! You telling me to read your replies and just confirm what a stupid point you were tryin to make was pointless!

Clare_Guy

kmart6 wrote: »

Oh yeah that's rich considering you think it's not the owner of a car's fault if they let someone drive it un-insured!

Dude seriously! when/where did i say i thought it wasn't the owners fault? Read my posts and look-up "hypothetical"!

kmart6 wrote: »

Where did I say we're talking about a real person?!...point it out to me please! You telling me to read your replies and just confirm what a stupid point you were tryin to make was pointless!

The only point i made was, someone could nominate someone else to accept responsibility for the offence! Some other "genius" brought up insurance and i pointed out that there is NO law against allowing someone else to drive your car! Insurance is the drivers responsibility NOT the car owners. That's why if YOU rent or borrow a car, it's up to YOU to organise insurance!

Now as to knowingly allowing an uninsured or unqualified person to drive your car (and this is the first time in this thread i've given my opinion on this) i think it's stupid and irresponsible.

You really need to read posts and not jump into the middle of a thread and THINK you know what you're talking about!

kmart6

Clare_Guy wrote: »

Dude seriously! when/where did i say i thought it wasn't the owners fault?

Ehh here.....

Clare_Guy wrote: »

an uninsured motorist? well that's the uninsured motorists problem, not your's...

Clare_Guy wrote: »

Now as to knowingly allowing an uninsured or unqualified person to drive your car (and this is the first time in this thread i've given my opinion on this) i think it's stupid and irresponsible.

Is it.....?!

Clare_Guy wrote: »

an uninsured motorist? well that's the uninsured motorists problem, not your's...

Think that show's you've talked bout it before!

Clare_Guy wrote: »

You really need to read posts and not jump into the middle of a thread and THINK you know what you're talking about!

Oh would you ever shut it,I posted 51 minutes after your first post in this thread, so how is that jumping into the middle of it?! Maybe you should be the one reading over posts before you make a show of yourself!

peasant

Where is my handbags picture when I need it?:D

closed ...take it to the thunderdome you two