When 80 is 60

Del2005

GM228 wrote: »

It is worth noting that speed limits are not set by signs, rather they are set by law. This thread is worth reading.

Does the link I posted from the 2010 Statute not contradict this?

GM228

Del2005 wrote: »

Does the link I posted from the 2010 Statute not contradict this?

No, re-read your link, it's an evidential presumption which can be rebutted by the accused that the speed limit sign is evidence of the speed limit applied by law.

sidcon

GM228 wrote: »

We should start a dear GM228 thread....

Perhaps some day I'll bet around to an information thread about these sorts of things.





If you receive a FCPN for such you can request that it be cancelled for such, there is no guarantee it will be though, and a new corrected one could be issued. When it comes to the summons stage it's not so simple, a charge can still proceed with "defects" in a summons despite what others often claim.





That unfortunately is a myth, a DC judge can amend any summons and proceed to trial as long as the accused is not prejudiced by the amendment. Only fundamental defects which remove jurisdiction from a court to hear a trial can lead to a case of no jurisdiction to hear the charge, technical defects are capable of being remedied and do not invalidate any charge, in many cases simply showing up in court remedies the defects.





It's not really that simple and comparisons to say manslaughter/murder to speeding (i.e indictable vs summary) are not a valid comparison, the charge is simple exceeding the speed limit - in such a case the charge is not being changed - just a technical defect in the summons, also worth noting that once you attend court a summons actually ceases to be of any significance. There is an entire body of case law in this area.





There is none.





This is not true, judges have great powers to amend the details of a summons. And again comparing an indictable charge to a summary charge is wrong - in most cases simply attending court cures any defects in a summons.





When a case is struck out double jeopardy does not apply.



It is worth noting that speed limits are not set by signs, rather they are set by law. This thread is worth reading.

Thanks GM228, where would one find put what the speed limit is for a particular road, it's my father who has the speeding fine but his dash cam shows where he was pulled in a sign saying 80(the Garda was standing at this point on the road with his hairdryer no chase given he was waved in by the garda)

exaisle

grogi wrote: »

What about double jeopardy?!

Double jeopardy is effectively not being charged with the same offence twice....if the Gardai issued a correct summons, it would be a different offence (ie of murdering John Smith rather than Joan Smith)

ambro25

sidcon wrote: »

Thanks GM228, where would one find put what the speed limit is for a particular road, it's my father who has the speeding fine but his dash cam shows where he was pulled in a sign saying 80(the Garda was standing at this point on the road with his hairdryer no chase given he was waved in by the garda)

Could your father have been travelling at 85 in a 60 zone that was immediately preceding the beginning of the 80 zone at which the Garda was standing...

...per chance?

Because I can perfectly well see the sense in the Garda speed-checking drivers arriving into the 80 zone from a 60 zone, and accelerating to the new speed limit before it actually begins (not meant as a contentious/biased opinion).

knucklehead6

I was sent a ticket in the post a while back for doing 63 in a 50 zone, which they called Confey Road. I rang the local Garda Station and asked exactly where they meant as Confey Road is a 60 zone. When I mentioned the ticket I was told to send a letter into the local station, querying the ticket as the summons was incorrect. I asked would the 3 week window still apply and was told that it goes on hold when there is a query.

A week and a half later I received a letter telling me the matter was dropped. No points, no fine, no court, all for the cost of a stamp, an envelope, a piece of paper and a phone call.

Danbo!

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Isn't the margin of error 10% + 4km/h?

Got done for 110 in a 100 on the N11. The court was full of people caught in same place for similar speeds, one was as low as 103.

EDIT, don't mind me, I just read the rest of the thread about tolerances

GM228

sidcon wrote: »

Thanks GM228, where would one find put what the speed limit is for a particular road, it's my father who has the speeding fine but his dash cam shows where he was pulled in a sign saying 80(the Garda was standing at this point on the road with his hairdryer no chase given he was waved in by the garda)

Where did it happen? Relevant bye-laws should be looked at.

Also note a sign behind the Garda saying 80 k/mh makes no odds, all that proves is the limit is 80 ahead of you/behind them, what is more important is the limit behind you/ahead of the Garda/where you were clocked.

twin_beacon

CiniO wrote: »

But the problem is that it wouldn't.
According to Irish law there's no difference between speeding by 25km/h vs 5km/h so it's exactly same offence.

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

In this situation, it doesn't matter if he was going 5km/h or 50km/h over the limit, if there is a clerical error, or wrong information on your court summons, or the guards don't follow exact procedure during an arrest, (if you are arrested) you walk.

Remember the guy that didn't get the print off from his breath test in Irish, and had the charges dropped? He was way over the limit, but guards didn't follow the exact procedure.

Its common in the country where people are pulled over for speeding, and the wrong town land is entered for the location, so many people have gotten off without fines and points because of this.

Carpentry

Hudson Ugly Tournament wrote: »

I know a few people who were done on the Ballymun road for 54kph (it's a 50 zone)

I was done in Finglas, famous "under the bridge" spot. 53km/h in 50 63km/h in 60 zone. Fined on the spot, not a chance for argument.

GM228

twin_beacon wrote: »

In this situation, it doesn't matter if he was going 5km/h or 50km/h over the limit, if there is a clerical error, or wrong information on your court summons, or the guards don't follow exact procedure during an arrest, (if you are arrested) you walk.

Completely wrong. There is a large body of case law on the matter, arrest is slightly different as you can venture into the territory of lawful vs unlawful arrest.

twin_beacon

GM228 wrote: »

Completely wrong. There is a large body of case law on the matter, arrest is slightly different as you can venture into the territory of lawful vs unlawful arrest.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnists/michael-clifford/comment-penalty-points-report-highlights-need-for-reform-309263.html

"In May 2013, a fixed charge notice was issued in relation to a motorist speeding at 73km/h in a 50km/h location. The notice was cancelled by the District Officer responsible for where the offence occurred. The reason given on Pulse for the cancellation was “Data Entry/IT/Garda Errors. This referred to an opinion that the wrong name was given for the townland where the detection occurred. "

Gumbo

Carpentry wrote: »

I was done in Finglas, famous "under the bridge" spot. 53km/h in 50 zone. Fined on the spot, not a chance for argument.

That’s strange. That’s a 60 zone and always has been. Still is.

GM228

twin_beacon wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnists/michael-clifford/comment-penalty-points-report-highlights-need-for-reform-309263.html

"In May 2013, a fixed charge notice was issued in relation to a motorist speeding at 73km/h in a 50km/h location. The notice was cancelled by the District Officer responsible for where the offence occurred. The reason given on Pulse for the cancellation was “Data Entry/IT/Garda Errors. This referred to an opinion that the wrong name was given for the townland where the detection occurred. "

I'll remind you of your post and the point I replied to:-

twin_beacon wrote: »

In this situation, it doesn't matter if he was going 5km/h or 50km/h over the limit, if there is a clerical error, or wrong information on your court summons, or the guards don't follow exact procedure during an arrest, (if you are arrested) you walk.

Cancellation of a fixed charge notice is a different matter and is an option the Gardaí can exercise, cancellation is not guaranteed.

Del2005

twin_beacon wrote: »

In this situation, it doesn't matter if he was going 5km/h or 50km/h over the limit, if there is a clerical error, or wrong information on your court summons, or the guards don't follow exact procedure during an arrest, (if you are arrested) you walk.

Remember the guy that didn't get the print off from his breath test in Irish, and had the charges dropped? He was way over the limit, but guards didn't follow the exact procedure.

Its common in the country where people are pulled over for speeding, and the wrong town land is entered for the location, so many people have gotten off without fines and points because of this.

And all these people had paid solicitors to argue the case. A Joe soap walking in and saying that I wasn't speeding in a 60 zone I was speeding in an 80 zone your honour will not get off.

So the question for the OP is whether the cost of 3 penalty points and the fine will be less than the solicitor to maybe get them off.

twin_beacon

https://www.independent.ie/regionals/argus/news/town-on-summons-wrong-26932813.html

"A NORTH Louth woman who was arrested on suspicion of drink driving had the charge dropped after the garda admitted the wrong townland was on the summons."

The summons can be update before it goes to court, however, if there is incorrect information in the summons when it goes to court, and it can be proven, the case falls apart.

Load of cases are dropped because of small errors like this.

Del2005 wrote: »

And all these people had paid solicitors to argue the case. A Joe soap walking in and saying that I wasn't speeding in a 60 zone I was speeding in an 80 zone your honour will not get off.

So the question for the OP is whether the cost of 3 penalty points and the fine will be less than the solicitor to maybe get them off.

Whats to stop any joe soap from hiring a solicitor?

Rubberchikken

I don't see where there's a 9 k allowance.
I've seen a notice for someone doing 109 in a 100k and the fine and points were applied.

Del2005

twin_beacon wrote: »

Whats to stop any joe soap from hiring a solicitor?

Money, a solicitor doesn't work for free. So unless you have a load of points already it's cheaper to pay the fine and accept the points.

CalamariFritti

Cork Truck Driver wrote:

Isn't the margin of error 10% + 4km/h?

colm_mcm wrote: »

No.

There has to be some margin. I would agree with colm 'cos I have never heard of one and that probably means there isn't. But there has to be a margin simply because neither your speedometer nor their measuring equipment will be 100% accurate.

ohnonotgmail

CalamariFritti wrote: »

There has to be some margin. I would agree with colm 'cos I have never heard of one and that probably means there isn't. But there has to be a margin simply because neither your speedometer nor their measuring equipment will be 100% accurate.

the speed cameras and speed guns are calibrated and assumed to be accurate. you're right that your speedometer is not 100% accurate but they usually show a higher speed than your actual speed.

GM228

twin_beacon wrote: »

The summons can be update before it goes to court, however, if there is incorrect information in the summons when it goes to court, and it can be proven, the case falls apart.

Again incorrect, the summons can be corrected when it goes to trial, it does not have to be before the trial - you just don't leave it until the end of the trial to ask for the correction, and even if you do you just re-issue the summons, you don't just "walk" away with it like you claim.

There is an entire body of case law on the issue.

Del2005

CalamariFritti wrote: »

There has to be some margin. I would agree with colm 'cos I have never heard of one and that probably means there isn't. But there has to be a margin simply because neither your speedometer nor their measuring equipment will be 100% accurate.

Your speedo by law has to under state the speed you are travelling at. The amount it's off is set by the manufacturer, on some brands you can enter diagnostic mode and it'll show the correct speed. So you're car will always show a faster speed than you are doing. The only issue is if you have modified the car and then it's your responsibility to ensure that the speedo is accurate.

Seth Brundle

Del2005 wrote: »

Your speedo by law has to under state the speed you are travelling at.

Which law would this be?

CalamariFritti

I think he meant over state. All the same I never heard of such law which is not saying there isn't one.

I suppose when I learnt driving they didn't have digital laser measuring so maybe these are deemed accurate now. But still I never saw proof of anyone being fined for 51 km/h in a 50 zone.

bucketybuck

Del2005 wrote: »

Your speedo by law has to under state the speed you are travelling at.

I'd love to see a cite for that?

CeilingFly

Rubberchikken wrote: »

I don't see where there's a 9 k allowance.
I've seen a notice for someone doing 109 in a 100k and the fine and points were applied.

I'll see you and raise you to 105km in 100zone by camera van at Kill on N7

Happened to a colleague and I had to see the ticket to believe it.

Feckers

grogi

bucketybuck wrote: »

I'd love to see a cite for that?

ECE Regulation 39, point 5.3.

CiniO

Del2005 wrote: »

Your speedo by law has to under state the speed you are travelling at. The amount it's off is set by the manufacturer, on some brands you can enter diagnostic mode and it'll show the correct speed. So you're car will always show a faster speed than you are doing. The only issue is if you have modified the car and then it's your responsibility to ensure that the speedo is accurate.

In that case I think you meant that speedo by law has to overstate the speed.
Otherwise your statements don't make sense.

But still even if you meant that speedo has to overstate the speed, it's still not true.

bucketybuck wrote: »

I'd love to see a cite for that?

grogi wrote: »

ECE Regulation 39, point 5.3.

According to those regulations, speedometer can overstate the speed by 10% + 4km/h.
That means, that when vehicle's real speed is 100km/h, then speedometer can show anything between 100km/h and 114km/h.

But stating that speedometer has to overstate the speed by law is not true, as in vehicle travelling at 100km/h speedo can show exactly 100km/h and that will be 100% legal.

bucketybuck

grogi wrote: »

ECE Regulation 39, point 5.3.

Anybody want to put this in English for me?

5.3. The speed indicated shall not be less than the true speed of the vehicle. At the test
speeds specified in paragraph 5.2.5. above, there shall be the following relationship
between the speed displayed (V1 ) and the true speed (V2).
0 ≤ (V1 - V2) ≤ 0.1 V2 + 4 km/h

If the true speed is 60, then it would be 0 ≤ (V1 - 60) ≤ 10?

So the displayed speed must be more than 60 but less than 70, but the difference between true and displayed also cannot be zero? So a displayed speed of 1 above the true speed would satisfy the law?

Just curious, I have already answered my original thought which was about tachos.

Skatedude

CeilingFly wrote: »

I'll see you and raise you to 105km in 100zone by camera van at Kill on N7

Happened to a colleague and I had to see the ticket to believe it.

Feckers

I had points years ago for doing 54km in a 50 zone on Dublin quays,