about to be convicted for careless driving - help

oli_ro

Back in jan, drove the car through the red light(it was just turning red, was amber when I was 5 m from the lights).

Got spotted by Garda and they pulled me over. They took my details, and they would not tell me what's going to happen.

2 days ago, I got the summon letter for an apperance in the district court for careless driving. I am denying my guilt, but I am now a bit stressed about the consequences.

Should I hire a solicitor, is this going to infuriate the judge rather than help me ? If I get 5 penalty points how much is the insurance like going to go up ?

Anyone been in a similar situation ?

JB123

Get a solicitor get dressed up and beg for mercy.Don't stress to much it's not like u killed a bus full of nuns.

Larianne

JB123 wrote:

Get a solicitor get dressed up and beg for mercy.Don't stress to much it's not like u killed a bus full of nuns.

Yeah but he could have. You'll probably get off anyway though. Garda won't show up. If ya weren't speeding you could have stopped in time.

damo605

Try and hire a cop to squash it
But if that's not possible then definitely hire a solicitor - I think a judge may think that you're not taking it seriously if you don't.
Plus a solicitor will know how to argue the toss in your favour and could have a good chance of getting you off!

Mr. Presentable

You're more likely to antagonise the judge by denying the offence. Take your medicine and drive more responsibly in future.

Stephen

According to the rules of the road though, you should not proceed through an amber light unless you're already too far gone to stop, so legally the garda does have you in the wrong.

better get that solicitor

mike65

Plead guilty, get a solicitor and take whatver comes with grace.

No point in getting too wrapped up in yourself about this.

Mike.

elexes

[edited ramblings of a fool]

30-6shooter

unlucky mate,, useless **** have nothing better to do.
Just out of interest,,, were the guards in a squad car or an unmarked yoke.
And how far were they behind you that they caught you, did they race after you, or did they just happen to be 2/3 cars behind ya?

astec123

unlucky mate,, useless **** have nothing better to do.
Just out of interest,,, were the guards in a squad car or an unmarked yoke.
And how far were they behind you that they caught you, did they race after you, or did they just happen to be 2/3 cars behind ya?

sorry but laws are put down for a reason, to make the world safer for all. I somehow get the feeling the "boy racers" are about in this thread (people that think putting 10,000 into a car when saving would of bought a real car thats faster in the same amount of time). If you ran a light its against the law, just turned red means nothing, you ran a red light, they go amber for a reason. Take the fine, points, sentence etc and live with it, its deserved if you broke the law and the mentality was as such to not notice that it is against the law and feel outraged over the fact that they caught you. The US police's motto is applicable here too "to protect and serve" the cops are here to protect everyone, that does not mean spending the day in high speed chases or catching little johnny breaking a window, it means protecting all and enforcing all laws. Learn from the situation and become a better person and driver.

Talliesin

1. Get a solicitor
2. Plead guilty. You're bang to rights so you'll just make things worse if you don't.
3. Learn how to drive before getting behind the wheel again.

oli_ro

I am not outraged that they caught me, I am outraged with my stupidity: it was one of this moments: after puttin 10 hrs of work, and I was going to pick my son from the creche, it was 2-3 mins past closing time of the creche, and I just lost it: but I did made sure entering the crossroad that there was no car coming, etc.

What's worst is that it was dark outside, and the gards were just behind me, in a marked car, so as soon as I entered the crossroad, I heard the sound, ... can you be more stupid than that ?

But I did took that as a lesson.

But it's not the points, fine that's worrying me: if it was that simple. I wanted to apply next year for irish naturalization, and I am afraid that having a conviction(even for a road offence) might work against me.

hawkmoon269

oli_ro wrote:

But it's not the points, fine that's worrying me: if it was that simple. I wanted to apply next year for irish naturalization, and I am afraid that having a conviction(even for a road offence) might work against me.

Why would you want to live in this ****ty police state of a country anyway?

Our man in Havana

oli_ro wrote:

I am not outraged that they caught me, I am outraged with my stupidity: it was one of this moments: after puttin 10 hrs of work, and I was going to pick my son from the creche, it was 2-3 mins past closing time of the creche, and I just lost it: but I did made sure entering the crossroad that there was no car coming, etc.

What's worst is that it was dark outside, and the gards were just behind me, in a marked car, so as soon as I entered the crossroad, I heard the sound, ... can you be more stupid than that ?

But I did took that as a lesson.

But it's not the points, fine that's worrying me: if it was that simple. I wanted to apply next year for irish naturalization, and I am afraid that having a conviction(even for a road offence) might work against me.

nope shouldn't affect you. So long as you have been an upstanding member of the community there should be no problems. Its your €700 they want. Anyways it will be good practice for when you take the oath of allegiance in front of a judge.

Padraig Mor

30-6shooter wrote:

unlucky mate,, useless **** have nothing better to do.

What an ignorant comment.

OP: Nothing personal, but I hope you get screwed. Whatever about an amber light, running a red light is very dangerous and inconvenient to other motorists. I drive through Cork city every morning and spend ages stuck in traffic jams. These jams are not caused by volumes of traffic but mainly by two things: people entering junctions they cannot clear, and people running red lights. It really is one of my pet hates. If my light is green, there should not be someone still driving through the junction perpendicular to me! Incredibly, most of these idiots act like they're in the right if you blow them out of it!

preilly79

here's my two cents:

the sequence of traffic lights are timed in such a way that if you are traveling at the posted speed limit, and are watching the lights, you have absolutely no reason to break a red light. simple.

so, either you werent watching the lights or you put the foot down when you saw amber. either way that's careless driving. plead guilty to the judge, offer to make a donation to the poor box and be done with it. no need to hire a solicitor, i think the judge would be more impressed if you were to stand up in court and admit your guilt and take the punishment, and opposed to trying to defend what happenned.

Canis Lupus

Lads the man drove through a light just turning red. Now I don't know a single, SINGLE person who hasn't at one time in their life gunned it when the lights were about to change and I know plenty of people who do try to beat the lights specially if they are trying to get home quickly and I'm one of them as well and happy to say that too. Stop being so sanctimonious, no one is a perfect driver.

To the OP, get a solicitor and plead guilty. They aren't gonna deport you or anything

preilly79

i dont think anybody is claiming to be a perfect driver. you're right, i think most everybody has gunned it on an amber light. that doesnt however make it right.

it's irresponsible to think that just because one is running late they have the right to bend the rules. a conscious decision is made to break a red light, and more often than not you'll get away with it. however, we will all get pulled by the gardai at some stage.

nobody here is being sanctimonious, merely stating the fact that if a law is broken and you're caught you should accept it.

Canis Lupus

No your not being, but lines like:

"Nothing personal, but I hope you get screwed"

"Learn how to drive before getting behind the wheel again" (explain how he should do this without being behind a wheel?)

"sorry but laws are put down for a reason, to make the world safer for all"

Are just a little over dramatic for what he did imo.

Talliesin

oli_ro wrote:

But I did took that as a lesson.

A refreshing and laudable attitude.

oli_ro wrote:

But it's not the points, fine that's worrying me: if it was that simple. I wanted to apply next year for irish naturalization, and I am afraid that having a conviction(even for a road offence) might work against me.

I wouldn't worry about it, but do talk to your lawyer about this.

DonkeyStyle \o/

Canis Lupus wrote:

(explain how he should do this without being behind a wheel?)

Read the rules of the road?

Canis Lupus

DonkeyStyle \o/ wrote:

Read the rules of the road?

shsssssh I was being selective in my interpretation

astec123

"Nothing personal, but I hope you get screwed"

"Learn how to drive before getting behind the wheel again" (explain how he should do this without being behind a wheel?)

"sorry but laws are put down for a reason, to make the world safer for all"

Are just a little over dramatic for what he did imo.

So your basically saying that if you had been crossing that it was ok for him to run the light, it is irresponsable, dangerous and most of all against the law. Take you point a bit further murders illegal, but someone pisses you off, you kill them, your defence would be I was annoyed at them, justifying an action over the fact that no one was harmed is no way to act, if a child had been crossing what then, if everyone takes the same route I guarantee that there will be an increase in RTAs on the roads. Wake up, get some sense, and most of all act like an adult.

Canis Lupus

As stated by the OP in the original post the light was on amber/about to go red also stated in his follow on post "but I did made sure entering the crossroad that there was no car coming, etc".

Next I'm a little confused here but I'm assuming that when you say, "So your basically saying that if you had been crossing that it was ok for him to run the light" you mean if I had been crossing the road on foot or been in a car travelling perpendicular to the OPs' road. But taking the OPs' comments that would mean I would have to have been crossing the road on foot which I shouldn't have been given the light was just changing to red remember so I wouldn't have had a green man and likewise had I been in a car would have meant I jumped a long standing red light which is totally out of order.

Then you make the jump from going through an amber light turning to red into a defence argument in a murder case? I'm not even gonna comment here.

Now finally, I haven't stated anywhere that what he did was a responsible thing to do simply that people do it every single day of the week myself included (when I'm in a place with traffic lights that is) and that some peoples responses were a little OTT given the "crime" at hand.

Did you even read the posts by the OP and were you not able to interpret my intentions behind my posts?

astec123

Your asking for this now.

http://www.britain.tv/motoring_carstopdistance.shtml
Breaking distances

Next I'm a little confused here but I'm assuming that when you say, "So your basically saying that if you had been crossing that it was ok for him to run the light" you mean if I had been crossing the road on foot or been in a car travelling perpendicular to the OPs' road. But taking the OPs' comments that would mean I would have to have been crossing the road on foot which I shouldn't have been given the light was just changing to red remember so I wouldn't have had a green man and likewise had I been in a car would have meant I jumped a long standing red light which is totally out of order.

The rules of the road and all driving instructors say that you should slow down at lights to ensure you will be able to stop when the lights change. I have read this entire post and it shocks me, and also brings to light why Irish drivers are so bad, I honestly have to admit that the French and Italians are better and they are bad.

Lights go green>amber>red, therefore if they are green its safe to continue, if they go amber you should be about 25m away if you are to stop from 30mph, otherwise you continue through, the Gardai will not pull you over for going through an amber light, they will if its a red light, the OP is in the wrong. If you are caught you are caught. You need to brush up you road manners if this is how you act, if I am in the car or on the bike, I always slow up at lights to be sure I will stop safely at the lights if they change. Anyone supporting the OP should not be driving, what he did was illegal, though it was not intentional, it is still not allowed and therefore should not of been done.

The murder point is perfectly valid and moving the point that little bit further, if you support the OP in that its "ok" to do as they did then all laws in your view should be a bit more "easy". Shop trying to justify your preaching about supporting the OP, he was in the wrong, should accept the punishment, and become a better person because of it, and you should start acting like a responsable person, and not a fool thinking that bending the rules is ok in "certain circumstances". Covering over your actions with a dulcet tune does not help.

Canis Lupus

You're still not getting the point :rolleyes:

astec123

No your the one not getting it, the point is that its not permitted to run a red light.

Canis Lupus

I'm well aware of that fact but thanks for pointing it out and proving my point that "some" people were getting righteous about it.

unkel

I'm surprised (just) breaking a traffic light would lead straight to a court appearance for careless driving

oli_ro, are you giving us the full detail? Did you fail to pay a fine that was sent to you?

Our man in Havana

There is no provision to deal with red light offences by fixed penalty, its a court appearance.

Padraig Mor

Canis Lupus wrote:

Lads the man drove through a light just turning red. Now I don't know a single, SINGLE person who hasn't at one time in their life gunned it when the lights were about to change and I know plenty of people who do try to beat the lights specially if they are trying to get home quickly and I'm one of them as well and happy to say that too. Stop being so sanctimonious, no one is a perfect driver.

To the OP, get a solicitor and plead guilty. They aren't gonna deport you or anything

It's not being sanctimonius, it's being sensible. I have no problem with people going through lights if they change to amber just as they near them - it's the safest thing to do, and we all do it. However, the OP went through a *red* light, meaning the light had been amber for a good while on their approach - plenty of time to stop safely, as mentioned above. By going through a red light, the OP, by definition, saw the light change to amber in plenty of time to stop. Instead they said 'sod it, I'll race through'. Either that or they didn't see the light! Also, re 'I saw the junction was clear' etc: They were bombing towards the lights concentrating on getting through, yet they had time to carefully examine all approaches? Don't think so.

edit: and they did all this with a *marked Garda car* directly behind them??!! Would be *very* surprised if they saw anything outside of their 'beat the lights' tunnel vision...

unkel

Bond-007 wrote:

There is no provision to deal with red light offences by fixed penalty, its a court appearance.

Ah, thanks for the clarification, 007

Still leaves me a bit confused though. What about those cameras (N4 and N11) that flash for red light offences - do they trigger a court appearance as well instead of a fine?

causal

oli_ro wrote:

Back in jan, drove the car through the red light(it was just turning red, was amber when I was 5 m from the lights).

Got spotted by Garda and they pulled me over. They took my details, and they would not tell me what's going to happen.

2 days ago, I got the summon letter for an apperance in the district court for careless driving. I am denying my guilt, but I am now a bit stressed about the consequences.

Should I hire a solicitor, is this going to infuriate the judge rather than help me ? If I get 5 penalty points how much is the insurance like going to go up ?

Anyone been in a similar situation ?

To answer your questions:

Should I hire a solicitor? - YES, YES, YES. If there's a technicality - they should know it, they know what to say, and what NOT** to say!
What's the effect on insurance? - Hibernian say no discount (or loading) for 3-5 points

0 points 17.5% discount
1-2 points 10% discount
3-5 points No discount
6 points 10% charge
7 points 15% charge
* for every additional penalty point incurred a further 5% charge is applied

Now my tuppence (I know you acknowledged your fault already):
Marked Garda car behind - breaking the lights. Hello!
Consider yourself lucky it's Careless Driving (not Reckless or Dangerous)

**Your solicitor will punch you in the face mid-sentence, if you repeat what you said here when you "drove the car through the red light(it was just turning red, was amber when I was 5 m from the lights" What you're really saying is - the light was red when I was 4.99 m from the lights - but I went through anyway. You're also saying it was amber for the previous 55 meters (roughly 5 seconds at 40kmh) - but you kept going anyway.

Your solicitor will then kick you in the throat mid-sentence, if you repeat what you said here "after puttin 10 hrs of work, and I was going to pick my son from the creche, it was 2-3 mins past closing time of the creche, and I just lost it:". What you're really saying here is - I was tired and late so I just went for it. What you're also saying is - while being tired, and exercising poor judgement I then put my kid in the car and drove home.

Your solicitor will then attempt to behead you mid-sentence, if you repeat what you said here "but I did made sure entering the crossroad that there was no car coming, etc. ... What's worst is that it was dark outside," What you're really saying here is - ah it was ok to break the red light coz I knew there was nothing coming. What you're also saying is thta it was dark - and therefore you couldn't see properly - you couldn't see hazzards as well as in daylight, and even if you had seen them, given the poor lighting conditions, your judgement of both distance and speed is going to be crappy. Of course you say that you "made sure". Not a hope. The judge will see that you have no clue what danger you were in - nor the danger you put innocent road users in.

Now you know why you need a solicitor. Then general rule is - Shut up and let him the solicitor do the talking

For your shock-infotainment check out these videos of people who "made sure" the way was clear before entering a junction.
N.B. - not for the squemish/faint hearted - but real accidents captured on video-
Not just the car smash - check out the pedestrian on the left
Red car "made sure" there was nothing coming, almost


hth,
causal

oli_ro

really helpful info:
Good point you made: I am going to get a solicitor indeed. Spoke with a local garda, and I got the name of a solicitor who is dealing with road offences.

And to answer the question about the court appearance: No, I didn't get any fine, straight court appearance. And in the letter I got from the court, I am being accused of "driving without reasonable consideration for other road user", not careless driving. I don't know if its the same category of offences or not, but I saw in some irish law website, that it's the pretty much the same thing.

I've learned my lesson, that's for sure.

the jew

Some of you guys have to relax a bit. There's meant to be something like a 5 or 6 second gap from one light going red and another going green, so he was hardly gonna run over someone or into another car, it's not like he was doing about 110 down a built up area or something. By the way i did 35 in a 30 zone the other day, i know i should be locked up and the key thrown away. But seriously it's good to see the gardai fining people for this, I can't think of anything more worthy of their time than stopping people for breaking a red light that just turned red 2 seconds ago, except of course fining someone for doing 35 in a 30 zone.

Our man in Havana

unkel wrote:

Ah, thanks for the clarification, 007

Still leaves me a bit confused though. What about those cameras (N4 and N11) that flash for red light offences - do they trigger a court appearance as well instead of a fine?

What happens is a letter is sent to the registered owner asking for the identity of the driver. The named person will then get a summons.

Turner

Bond-007 wrote:

There is no provision to deal with red light offences by fixed penalty, its a court appearance.

Absolute rubbish.

The Fine On The Spot system does cover red/amber light offences. Its a E60 fine. The Garda has the option not to issue a fine and proceed by summons.

oli_ro

I know it's hard to predict: but do you have an idea at what am I looking at ? the whole 5 points + ban ?

If convincted in court, can the judge go bellow 5 points ?(I did see on oasis.gov.ie that convinction results in mandatory 5 points)

anyone have been throught this experience ?

Just to add some more data: when they stopped me, I asked the garda(a she), what is she going to do about it ? I was quite scared, my voice was trembling, etc... And she was smiling, and she said: "we'll see, I'll think about it."

So I just assumed that I got away; 5 months latter a letter arrived ...

Turner

Judge has no control over the points..

You said you are being prosecuted for driving without due care and attention..

If you are found guilty you will get a fine and no points. Probably E50 - E150 fine.

You can only get points (5) for being convicted of careless driving.

Check out www.penaltypoints.ie for the list of offences.

oli_ro

the letter says: "driving witout reasonable consideration for other road users".

Thanks everyone for their replies.

The court date is mid June, I'll post back the details ;-)

causal

The summons should say what Act, section etc. that you are being charged under.
Anyway - I'd be sure it's careless driving alright.

From the ROAD TRAFFIC ACT, 1961 SECTION 52:

Careless driving.

52.—(1) A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the place.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence.

So you can expect this penalty point & fine :

If convicted a driver will typically receive a fine, for repeat offenders there is a max fine of €1,500 and or a six months jail term.

From June 04 those convicted in the courts of careless driving will receive 5 penalty points on their license record in addition to a fine that may be imposed by the courts.

I bet now you're seeing red (Sorry but I couldn't resist)


causal

oli_ro

"driving without reasonable consideration,...., contrary to section 51(A) of the road traffic act..."

where did you looked up the section 52 ?

causal

Did the summons not say which Road Traffic Act i.e. what year?

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie
- there are several Road Traffic Acts and Amenments etc. so the numbers and definitions sometimes change. If they got it wrong you can move to have the charge dismissed.

A couple of examples:
ROAD TRAFFIC ACT, 1968 SECTION 50

50.—The Principal Act is hereby amended by the substitution of the following section for section 52:

"Careless driving 52.

52 (1) A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place without due care and attention.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for any term not exceeding three months or to both such fine and such imprisonment."

ROAD TRAFFIC ACT, 1933 SECTION 50

Prohibition of careless driving.

50.—Every person who drives a vehicle in a public place without exercising reasonable consideration for persons, vehicles, and other traffic using such place shall be guilty of an offence under this section and shall be liable on summary conviction thereof to a fine not exceeding ten pounds.

causal

Turner

Check out the amendments in the Road Traffic Act of 2004.

No points just fine for Section 51(a)

causal

Do you have a link to RTA 2004?
www.irishstatutebook.ie only goes to 2003

causal

oli_ro

but it looks like they got it wrong:

I am acussed of "driving without reasonable considerration for other persons, contrary to Section 51(A) of the Road Traffic Act, 1961, (as inserted by section 49, Road Traffic Act, 1968), and section 102 of the road traffic act, 1961, ...", and there is more acts, ammendmentes.

However section 51, of the road traffic act, 1961 is about "driving under the influence".

... Don't know, like you said its not very straightforward, but I'll be definetely discuss it with the solicitor.

causal

tbh I think you are that lucky.
RTA 1961 Section 51 is about driving an animal drawn vehicle or a bicycle under the influence.
The DPP will have a hard time proving you guilty on that charge

ROAD TRAFFIC ACT, 1961 SECTION 51

Driving animal-drawn vehicle or pedal cycle while under influence of intoxicating liquor or drug.

51.—(1) A person shall not, in a public place—

( a ) drive or attempt to drive, or be in charge of, animal-drawn vehicle, or

( b ) drive or attempt to drive a pedal cycle,

while he is under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a drug to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the vehicle or cycle.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction, in the case of a first offence, to a fine not exceeding twenty pounds or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for any term not exceeding one month or to both such fine and such imprisonment and, in the case of a second or any subsequent offence, to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for any term not exceeding three months or to both such fine and such imprisonment.

(3) A person liable to be charged with an offence under this section shall not, by reference to the same occurrence, be liable to be charged under section 12 of the Licensing Act, 1872, with the offence of being drunk while in charge, on a highway or other public place, of a carriage.

(4) Where a member of the Garda Síochána is of opinion that a person is committing or has committed an offence under this section, he may arrest the person without warrant.

causal

causal

oli_ro wrote:

in the letter it is mentioned that it will be based on:
- section 102 - RTA 1961 (set to 20 Pounds)ammended by
- section 2 - RTA 1984(increased to max 350Pounds) and
- section 23 RTA 2002( this is mainly about fines)

The ofence is based on section 51A of the RTA 1961
as inserted by section 49 of the RTA 1968(which makes clear difference between this offence and careless driving)

the only thing that puzzles me is why the accusation is based on 51/RTA 1961 which is driving under the influence.

I'd say the Garda/DPP/Clerk made an error and meant to put RTA 1961 Section 52 which is careless driving (see my earlier post for the text).

causal

oli_ro

my interpretation is that: you can drive without reasonable consideration and not fall under Section 52(which is driving without reasonable consideration, but also carelessly), if you know what I mean....

I based this on section 49 of RTA 1968: which makes difference between "careless driving" and "drive without reasonable consideration", but I might be wrong ....

Anyway I am going to get a good solicitor, and try to pull on OJ Simpson on the Garda.

causal

oli_ro wrote:

my interpretation is that: you can drive without reasonable consideration and not fall under Section 52(which is driving without reasonable consideration, but also carelessly), if you know what I mean....

Sure, but this is court - and you are either guilty or not of the charge brought before the court; nothing else matters.

If that charge is being in charge of an animal drawn vehicle or a pedal cycle under the influence of alcohol/drugs - then there is no evidence of that - so quite simply you are innocent of that charge.

It doesn't matter if you broke the red light, or for that matter whether you were travelling 200mph with no licence, no seatbelt, in a stolen car - because you are not charged with any of those offences.

causal

Turner

oil_ro look at your summons. I presume its section 51(a).