speeding ticket riddle

jakdelad

a friend of mine
was done for speeding usual story
hiding in the bushes .dident see anyone
anyway he was 8 klm over the limit, forget what he said the limit was
it was on a motorway
but he said he is always mindfull of his speed
and on the day in question and the area it says on the ticket
he says he had to overtake a skip lorry which was not covered
and bits of plaster board were dropping off
he said in order to execute the move he had to slightly increase his speed
and he thinks when he was pulling back into lane ,thats when he thinks he was zapped
he says they can shove the fine up their ar5e he s going to
take it to the judge,
am sure the judge will be fair
well boys of the silks what say you...........

non cessat passio

Hootanany

I got done for overtaking in Cavan just before the points were introduced. I was told pay up as this is a grey area

jakdelad

Hootanany wrote: »

I got done for overtaking in Cavan just before the points were introduced. I was told pay up as this is a grey area

ah yes, that dreaded grey area

would it come under tort?/ i wonder

Johnny Utah

Pirelli, is that your second account?

Hootanany

Asked loads of Gards all said if you go over the speed limit your speeding . but overtaking you have to break the speed limit for H&S reasons

Hooch

Hootanany wrote: »

Asked loads of Gards all said if you go over the speed limit your speeding . but overtaking you have to break the speed limit for H&S reasons

Speeding is speeding....there is NO grey area.

If it was on a motorway there would be no reason to increase speed in lane two.....

jakdelad

Johnny Utah wrote: »

Pirelli, is that your second account?

no just a lowly dalit from the country

Johnny Utah

jakdelad wrote: »

no just a lowly dalit from the country

Sounds like Pirelli then so!

Tom Young

jakdelad wrote: »

no just a lowly dalit from the country

You might consider reading the charter before asking for legal advice again.

jakdelad

Tom Young wrote: »

You might consider reading the charter before asking for legal advice again.

i asked for nothing. i sought clarification on an issue
which has been described, by some here as a grey area.
others a health n safety issue
and described a situation which most here would describe as
unusual to say the least
please excuse my wording and grammer, perhaps i was not concise
Apologies mea si deliqui

DUB777

The current speed limit reg's Allow 10% increase or decrease of the speed limit.
IE. if your in a 120kmph zone you can do up to 132kmph and 108kmph
if your in a 60kmph zone you can do 66 & so on. It depends on what speed he was doing. If it was well over the 132 I'd say the judge will like to hear his explanation. Depends on the judge really & how well your friend represents himself or his representation represents him. If you catch the judge on an off day, he could suffer double of what has been imposed & if he catches him on a good day he might get away with it. Down to the judge, solicitor & your mate really. Let me know how it goes.

niallam

DUB777 wrote: »

The current speed limit reg's Allow 10% increase or decrease of the speed limit.
IE. if your in a 120kmph zone you can do up to 132kmph and 108kmph
if your in a 60kmph zone you can do 66 & so on.

So what your saying is the legal speed limit is actually 132kms when in a 120km??? :rolleyes:

g_moriarty

DUB777 wrote: »

The current speed limit reg's Allow 10% increase or decrease of the speed limit.
IE. if your in a 120kmph zone you can do up to 132kmph and 108kmph
if your in a 60kmph zone you can do 66 & so on. It depends on what speed he was doing. If it was well over the 132 I'd say the judge will like to hear his explanation. Depends on the judge really & how well your friend represents himself or his representation represents him. If you catch the judge on an off day, he could suffer double of what has been imposed & if he catches him on a good day he might get away with it. Down to the judge, solicitor & your mate really. Let me know how it goes.

This is complete rubbish and actually dangerous advice on a public forum.

Also to the OP - there was nothing stopping your friend from decreasing his speed slightly to avoid the falling debris.

jakdelad

DUB777 wrote: »

The current speed limit reg's Allow 10% increase or decrease of the speed limit.
IE. if your in a 120kmph zone you can do up to 132kmph and 108kmph
if your in a 60kmph zone you can do 66 & so on. It depends on what speed he was doing. If it was well over the 132 I'd say the judge will like to hear his explanation. Depends on the judge really & how well your friend represents himself or his representation represents him. If you catch the judge on an off day, he could suffer double of what has been imposed & if he catches him on a good day he might get away with it. Down to the judge, solicitor & your mate really. Let me know how it goes.

therein lies the problem
catch the judge on an off day
should be no off or on days should be fair and impartial days
but i hear what your saying

Hooch

DUB777 wrote: »

The current speed limit reg's Allow 10% increase or decrease of the speed limit.

Can you link to these "current" regulations??

(may aswell answer for you - "no a friend of a friend who knows stuff told me")

DUB777

niallam wrote: »

So what your saying is the legal speed limit is actually 132kms when in a 120km??? :rolleyes:

Yes, you have an allowance a 10% increase/decrease in whatever particular zone your driving in. Ask any good solicitor, cases have been thrown out for doing 128 in a 120 zone. However 68 in a 60 zone your guilty no matter what the circumstances are.

old_aussie

Did't "have to" overtake, could have dropped back a bit and then there would be no need to speed and break the law

MagicSean

DUB777 wrote: »

Yes, you have an allowance a 10% increase/decrease in whatever particular zone your driving in. Ask any good solicitor, cases have been thrown out for doing 128 in a 120 zone. However 68 in a 60 zone your guilty no matter what the circumstances are.

There is no statutory allowance. Most speed gun operators will allow for a 10% margin of error but this is by know means a policy or a necessity. It is at their discretion. I take it you dont remember the zero tolerance policy brought in about 8 years ago for a few months.

As to the ops question. There is no need to speed on a motorway to overtake. Thats what the second lane is for. Of course the other option to avoid the debris would be to slow down and increase your distance from the truck in front of you. Most people don't see this as an option though. Also most speed guns would find it difficult to get a car at an angle as it moves lane so it is unlikely you were done as you pulled back in.

jakdelad

old_aussie wrote: »

Did't "have to" overtake, could have dropped back a bit and then there would be no need to speed and break the law

he could have done all them things.
ever occur to you he might also want to get ahead of him to warn him further up??
and suppose he dident overtake and worse a huge chunk of debris fell off
causing a major pile up.
all because he dident want to break the law
how noble
sorry missus your son and baby were crushed by falling debris off a lorry
only i couldent speed up or chance breaking the law.....
why does everythiing have to be so rigid????????

MagicSean

jakdelad wrote: »

he could have done all them things.
ever occur to you he might also want to get ahead of him to warn him further up??
and suppose he dident overtake and worse a huge chunk of debris fell off
causing a major pile up.
all because he dident want to break the law
how noble
sorry missus your son and baby were crushed by falling debris off a lorry
only i couldent speed up or chance breaking the law.....
why does everythiing have to be so rigid????????

Yes he could have wanted to warn the driver. But did he? If so, he could write to the Superintendent and inform him of this and may get off the ticket.

jakdelad

k_mac wrote: »

Yes he could have wanted to warn the driver. But did he? If so, he could write to the Superintendent and inform him of this and may get off the ticket.

and then the super lies back in his chair yawns stretches his arms
and says heard em all son
only the judge needs proof and so do i.....
you have to understand court is adversariel
you need tangible proof......
i was told once to pay the fine take the points and move on with your life
it was going to cost me a fortune to redeem my fine and points
your screwed
its rigged against you all the time.unless you have money

Officer Giggles

jakdelad wrote: »

he could have done all them things.
ever occur to you he might also want to get ahead of him to warn him further up??
and suppose he dident overtake and worse a huge chunk of debris fell off
causing a major pile up.
all because he dident want to break the law
how noble
sorry missus your son and baby were crushed by falling debris off a lorry
only i couldent speed up or chance breaking the law.....
why does everythiing have to be so rigid????????

after your friend got in front of the truck why didnt he slow it down and warn the driver, if he was speeding he should just take the punishment

jakdelad

Officer Giggles wrote: »

after your friend got in front of the truck why didnt he slow it down and warn the driver, if he was speeding he should just take the punishment

jasus giggles no matter what happens the punishment must be meted out..
why bother who cares
he s still going to get fines and points
avert a major accident,thanks heres a fine and a few points for ya
from the s..ke hiding in the ditch

Officer Giggles

you said he got in front of the truck, why didnt he warn the driver then, if he had done then he wouldnt of been done for speeding because the garda would have seen what he was doing

jakdelad

Officer Giggles wrote: »

you said he got in front of the truck, why didnt he warn the driver then, if he had done then he wouldnt of been done for speeding because the garda would have seen what he was doing

maybe thats what he will say in court

Officer Giggles

jakdelad wrote: »

maybe thats what he will say in court

surely the garda would have seen this truck

There can't be this many intelligent people who don't realise jakdelad is just trolling surely?

jakdelad

Officer Giggles wrote: »

surely the garda would have seen this truck

doubt it
he was too interested in his radar gun

jakdelad

test

Tom Young

I plan on infracting the troll here. I also plan on locking this thread and following up the infraction with a ban very shortly thereafter. Please quit the messing.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

DUB777 wrote: »

Yes, you have an allowance a 10% increase/decrease in whatever particular zone your driving in. Ask any good solicitor, cases have been thrown out for doing 128 in a 120 zone. However 68 in a 60 zone your guilty no matter what the circumstances are.

Absolute nonsense. Some Gardaí may give a tolerance but there is no legal or official allowance. I've checked into this and your comments are dangerous and misleading on a public forum. You might want to quote your sources on this. :rolleyes:

3DataModem

The tolerance is often quoted as an "allowance".

Basically the guns can be out by plus or minus 10pc at a roughly normal distribution curve. So say you are driving 100kph you can be clocked at between 90 and 110, more likely to be 98 to 102.

So people think "great I can drive at 110 and be clocked at 100".

Wrong.

If you drive at 110 you will be clocked at between 99 and 121... so if you are clocked at 111 or more ( which happens about half the time for drivers at 110 exactly) the Garda knows - with certainty - you were driving over the speed limit of 100.

Busted.

The 10pc myth is always misapplied in this manor.

Hooch

3DataModem wrote: »

The tolerance is often quoted as an "allowance".

Basically the guns can be out by plus or minus 10pc at a roughly normal distribution curve. So say you are driving 100kph you can be clocked at between 90 and 110, more likely to be 98 to 102.

So people think "great I can drive at 110 and be clocked at 100".

Wrong.

If you drive at 110 you will be clocked at between 99 and 121... so if you are clocked at 111 or more ( which happens about half the time for drivers at 110 exactly) the Garda knows - with certainty - you were driving over the speed limit of 100.

Busted.

The 10pc myth is always misapplied in this manor.

While some of the above is slightly correct, just to note due to angles etc the gun always shows less than what your doing....never more.

The speed limit is the speed limit....you can just as easily get detected and ticketed for 5pm over as you can for 20km over