Caught speeding this morning, question.

Lord Nikon

I was pulled in for speeding this morning, Garda said I'd be issued a fine and penalty points. Garda car was stopped at a crossroads, pulling out, as soon as he came out blue lights came on, and I pulled in. No speed detection gun was used.

Question is, does it have to be proven that I was speeding, or be his word against mine?

blingrhino

He was only guessing if no detection devise was used.so yes if it went to court which is highly unlikely it would be your word against his.

Probably just a natural reaction by the guard when he saw you to pull you over if you looked like you were travelling too fast.

Isambard

here's the rub, his word carries more weight.

bmc58

Were you given the actual speed you were doing from the Garda?If not challenge his "professional opinion".

Comhrá

Can a Garda issue a fine that just says 'speeding'? Doesn't he have to state by how much the driver was over the limit before penalty points are handed out?

amcalester

Comhra wrote: »

Can a Garda issue a fine that just says 'speeding'? Doesn't he have to state by how much the driver was over the limit before penalty points are handed out?

AFAIK he can issue the FCPN and then the OP has the choice of accepting it and availing of the lower points and fine or he can take his chance and go to court.

bladespin

Comhra wrote:

Can a Garda issue a fine that just says 'speeding'?

Yes

Comhra wrote:

Doesn't he have to state by how much the driver was over the limit before penalty points are handed out?

No

shamrock55

Surely he can't prove you were speeding

rex-x

All he has to do was form the opinion you were speeding and if he has a second garda in the car to coorberate then it's case closed really. Detection equipment doesn't have to be used.

Acosta

Isambard wrote: »

here's the rub, his word carries more weight.

None of them are getting done for all the lies and corruption regarding penalty points. Doesn't seem fair does it?

A guard can not just assume you were spending. You have the right to request to see the speed you were travelling on his equipment if you are stopped and they have to show you.

If he didn't actually measure your speed and you are positive he didn't it will be thrown out of court.

wally1990

Lord Nikon wrote: »

I was pulled in for speeding this morning, Garda said I'd be issued a fine and penalty points. Garda car was stopped at a crossroads, pulling out, as soon as he came out blue lights came on, and I pulled in. No speed detection gun was used.

Question is, does it have to be proven that I was speeding, or be his word against mine?

Here ya go

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2010/act/25/section/81/enacted/en/html

The Royal Scam

OP,
Did you assume they did not have detection equipment or did you ask?
A few years ago I got stopped for speeding in Limerick and I did not see an obvious way they detected me so I asked.
They had a gsrda on a bike about 500m back the road that was well hidden. They asked if you want we could go up the road to verify but I didnt bother.
Nice part of the story is never got the ticket after.

Lord Nikon

I should have questioned how he detected me, because it wasn't apparent, or he didn't detect me at all, and merely speculated that I was speeding. I should have contested it. Saying that, he seemed to be more interested in my insurance disc(it's a temporary one), and didn't bat an eyelid about my tax being out since July(I recently bought the car, and have yet to tax it, waiting on logbook).

Stallingrad

Were you speeding OP? You probably know the answer. If so why not just pay the fine and move on.

Lord Nikon

I wasn't speeding at all, never went over the limit in my life. Points free all my life.

callaway92

Lord Nikon wrote: »

I wasn't speeding at all, never went over the limit in my life. Points free all my life.

seamus

If he was waiting at a junction and pulled you after you went through, he may be planning to do you for driving without reasonable consideration or similar because he believes you failed to approach the junction with sufficient caution.

You don't have to be breaking the limit to be driving too fast.

But you'll have to wait to receive the notice to find out what he plans on charging you with. Then you can respond appropriately.

copeyhagen

The Royal Scam wrote: »

OP,
Did you assume they did not have detection equipment or did you ask?
A few years ago I got stopped for speeding in Limerick and I did not see an obvious way they detected me so I asked.
They had a gsrda on a bike about 500m back the road that was well hidden. They asked if you want we could go up the road to verify but I didnt bother.
Nice part of the story is never got the ticket after.

cuz they were probably spoofing

Lord Nikon

seamus wrote: »

If he was waiting at a junction and pulled you after you went through, he may be planning to do you for driving without reasonable consideration or similar because he believes you failed to approach the junction with sufficient caution.

You don't have to be breaking the limit to be driving too fast.

But you'll have to wait to receive the notice to find out what he plans on charging you with. Then you can respond appropriately.

It was a crossroads, I had the right of way, I saw him pull up to it from way off. He was stopped because he had the yield sign.

seamus

Lord Nikon wrote: »

It was a crossroads, I had the right of way, I saw him pull up to it from way off. He was stopped because he had the yield sign.

Still doesn't matter. Good roadcraft would dictate that you reduce your speed as you approach any junction, right of way or not.

The rules of the road states for junctions that

It is important to understand that the right of way is not an absolute right of way. You must proceed with caution, having regard for other road users

If the Garda observed you approaching and thought that you didn't seem to exercise enough caution, i.e. went too fast through the junction, they can write you up for it.

And it's basically your word against theirs.

Stallingrad

Stallingrad wrote: »

Were you speeding OP? You probably know the answer. If so why not just pay the fine and move on.

Because why would you unless it can be proven.

If I was doing 100kmh over the limit and somehow had a way to get away with the points and fine I'd jump at the chance.

That being said as he didn't ask to see the speed reading or how he was dedected then its going to be difficult for him to know, I don't think garda fines indicate the speed you were going like a gosafe fine does but I'm not 100% sure.

seamus wrote: »

Still doesn't matter. Good roadcraft would dictate that you reduce your speed as you approach any junction, right of way or not.
.

That makes absolutely no sense, if we were to slow for every junction you would get nowhere as every side road entering another road is a junction. You are perfectly entitled to travel at the speed limit approaching and going through a junction which you have right of way. It could be considered dangerous to be needlesly slowing down approaching junctions where you have right away as people behind would be expecting it.

seamus

Michaela Rancid Amphibian wrote: »

That makes absolutely no sense, if we were to slow for every junction you would get nowhere as every side road entering another road is a junction.

I'm not talking about slowing to 10km/h and crawling past it, but easing off the throttle and being prepared for something to emerge unexpectedly from a junction is the bare minimum you should do as you pass.

And yes, for every single side road. Because why not?

You are perfectly entiotled to travel at the speed limit approaching and going throuhg a junction whcih you have right of way.

No such "entitlement" exists, you've completely made that up. In fact, legally it's the exact opposite. You are obliged to exercise caution.

Stallingrad

Michaela Rancid Amphibian wrote: »

Because why would you unless it can be proven.

If the OP knew he was speeding (being cognisant of breaking the law) then why contest it or wait for it to be proven? Take responsibility. I have no time for people who try to 'get away with it', even when they know they are in the wrong.

If he felt he was not speeding then by all mean contest it.

Stallingrad

Stallingrad wrote: »

If the OP knew he was speeding (being cognisant of breaking the law) then why contest it or wait for it to be proven? Take responsibility.

Because not everyone is a soft touch, I'd rater pay a good solicitior for example more than the equivalent of a fine if he could get me off with something than actually pay the fine and get the points.

I'm not saying I would automatically challenege any fine as most of the time it would be pointless but if I thought there was a chance of getting off I would take it.

The issue is the op does not know if there was speed detection equipment or not. My guess would be that there was, as any guard knows well that a case would be thrown out of court if trying to prosecute on a guard "guessing" that a person is speeding as it is meaningless. Why would there be a requirement for only using correctly calibrated speed dedection equipment if a guard could just decide someone is speeding.

Stallingrad

Michaela Rancid Amphibian wrote: »

I'd rater pay a good solicitior for example more than the equivalent of a fine if he could get me off with something than actually pay the fine and get the points.

You do realise the fine might be around €80? You know what the hourly rate is for a good solicitor?

Anyway, back to the OP's issue, and not our differing stance on personal responsibility.

Zubeneschamali

Michaela Rancid Amphibian wrote: »

The issue is the op does not know if there was speed detection equipment or not.

The OP has already said he was not speeding, so if there was detection equipment, it would say so. The guard is probably just being annoying, and no ticket will ever arrive.

If I got a ticket like that, I would find my suit and hire a solicitor.

OP, write down everything about the incident today and keep the notes. It could be months before a day in court and you could forget stuff.

Miike

Dont the GRPU use CLEARTONE / Puma in-car speed detection units now for the last year or so?

redcup342

seamus wrote: »

Still doesn't matter. Good roadcraft would dictate that you reduce your speed as you approach any junction, right of way or not.

You'd fail your driving test for not "Making Progress"

Slowing at every junction when you have right of way would result in gridlock all over the country.

markpb

redcup342 wrote: »

You'd fail your driving test for not "Making Progress"

Slowing at every junction when you have right of way would result in gridlock all over the country.

Failing to make progress means driving at an appropriate speed, not dawdling. It does not mean you'll instantly fail for dropping below the speed limit when needed. I was told by several driving instructors to reduce my acceleration approaching a junction for specifically the reasons mentioned earlier in this thread. It doesn't cause gridlock and, even if it did, I think you'll find that gridlock can be caused for lots of reasons. Me slowing down for 5 seconds won't suddenly make Dublin worse and, likewise, me doing max speed through every junction won't make it better.

Here's a great example of a crash which was recorded from several viewpoints: link. A police car sets off in pursuit to chase a red light runner. He crashes into another car who had a green light and proceed through the junction at normal speed. Neither drive saw the other because because their views were obstructed by other cars. Without arguing about who was right and wrong, the crash could have been averted if either driver had slowed down briefly to properly observe the junction and anticipate any problems.

The problem of constant bearing, decreasing range is also a well known phenomenon which causes crashes between road users and even warships. The simplest way to avoid it is to change speed slightly approaching a junction.

Or you could continue to barrel through junctions hoping for the best and worrying more about causing gridlock than making it home.

redcup342

markpb wrote: »

Failing to make progress means driving at an appropriate speed, not dawdling. It does not mean you'll instantly fail for dropping below the speed limit when needed. I was told by several driving instructors to reduce my acceleration approaching a junction for specifically the reasons mentioned earlier in this thread. It doesn't cause gridlock and, even if it did, I think you'll find that gridlock can be caused for lots of reasons. Me slowing down for 5 seconds won't suddenly make Dublin worse and, likewise, me doing max speed through every junction won't make it better.

It does though, from a traffic management perspective a green wave with all cars travelling at the same speed is easier to optimise than all cars travelling at different speeds, also the car behind you is slowing down because you slowed down and that car behind that and so on.

On the motorway it causes a phantom traffic jams during rubbernecking exercises.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_wave

seamus

redcup342 wrote: »

You'd fail your driving test for not "Making Progress"

Slowing at every junction when you have right of way would result in gridlock all over the country.

Yeah, taking your foot off and slowing down by 10km/h through a junction will neither fail you your test nor cause "gridlock" all over the country.

By all means keep blasting through those junctions to save yourself 30 seconds on a one hour journey though.

Nevertheless, if a Garda says that they you didn't exercise enough caution through a junction, he can do you for it.

SteelyDanJalapeno

Was he wearing a uniform? was he even a guard?

redcup342

seamus wrote: »

Yeah, taking your foot off and slowing down by 10km/h through a junction will neither fail you your test nor cause "gridlock" all over the country.

By all means keep blasting through those junctions to save yourself 30 seconds on a one hour journey though.

Nevertheless, if a Garda says that they you didn't exercise enough caution through a junction, he can do you for it.

Driving at the speed limit through a junction is hardly "blasting through it"

Every single person slowing down by 10km/h at every single junction to check if its safe to go would however causes some major issues.

On the continent they actually have signs encouraging you to drive at a certain speed to improve the traffic flow, works well as you get "Green Wave" of traffic lights.

Better for the environment and reduces driver frustration also (which in turns reduces peoples likelihood to take risks:

ironclaw

Michaela Rancid Amphibian wrote: »

A guard can not just assume you were spending. You have the right to request to see the speed you were travelling on his equipment if you are stopped and they have to show you.

If he didn't actually measure your speed and you are positive he didn't it will be thrown out of court.

This is completely incorrect. Irish Statue makes it very clear that equipment does not have to be in use and that equipment, if in use, does not have to be calibrated or even proven to be functional. The Garda merely has to form the opinion you were speeding, how they formed that opinion is irrelevant.

Miike wrote: »

Dont the GRPU use CLEARTONE / Puma in-car speed detection units now for the last year or so?

They do but its front facing only. I'm not sure of the junction the OP passed and their position relative to the Garda car, but its quite possible the OP was nabbed this way if they had any relative position to the front of the car that wasn't a hard right angle.

The alternative and this is where I would tread carefully, if the Garda car was recording video and the OP passed in front of them, it doesn't take very much to work out the speed of a car relative to the frames of video if someone really wanted to.

Basically, unless the OP is damn sure they were not speeding and is happy to pay a solicitor, I'd probably say fight it.

Miike

ironclaw wrote: »

This is completely incorrect. Irish Statue makes it very clear that equipment does not have to be in use and that equipment, if in use, does not have to be calibrated or even proven to be functional. The Garda merely has to form the opinion you were speeding, how they formed that opinion is irrelevant.



They do but its front facing only. I'm not sure of the junction the OP passed and their position relative to the Garda car, but its quite possible the OP was nabbed this way if they had any relative position to the front of the car that wasn't a hard right angle.

The alternative and this is where I would tread carefully, if the Garda car was recording video and the OP passed in front of them, it doesn't take very much to work out the speed of a car relative to the frames of video if someone really wanted to.

Basically, unless the OP is damn sure they were not speeding and is happy to pay a solicitor, I'd probably say fight it.

I know it's not relevant to this situation but are you sure its front facing only? I was at an event recently where they did a road safety demo and there was GRPU demo car that had front and rear facing viewable from the dash?

They also specifically mentioned ANPR from front and rear facing too!

ironclaw

Miike wrote: »

I know it's not relevant to this situation but are you sure its front facing only? I was at an event recently where they did a road safety demo and there was GRPU demo car that had front and rear facing viewable from the dash?

They also specifically mentioned ANPR from front and rear facing too!

ANPR is different. That's simply a video system that captures video in real time and processes license plate data.

The speed measuring part is radar-based and to my knowledge, is forward facing only.

josip

Stallingrad wrote: »

You do realise the fine might be around €80? You know what the hourly rate is for a good solicitor?

Anyway, back to the OP's issue, and not our differing stance on personal responsibility.

The fine might be only €80, but my insurance has a €75 loading on it for each of 3 years due to the 3 points. So in my case it's just over €300 .

seamus wrote: »

...

By all means keep blasting through those junctions to save yourself 30 seconds on a one hour journey though.

...

Wasn't that poster advocating slowing down where every side road meets the (major) road?
Not 'blasting through junctions'