Glasgow police: is this even legal?

[SFTPhotography]

Greedy dibble. LOL actually LOL.

Have a look at my Apco guidelines link. I think they've been over zealous in meeting the dibble targets that big dibble hand out ?

 

[Byker28i]

and that one is not there. I doubt they publicise 1 hour long stupid restrictions.

It was only there for an hour?

 

[SFTPhotography]

This is probably the most helpful post to the OPs thread other than the usual eat humble pie bile that gets touted about for minor motoring offences.

Read this: http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/uniformed/2013/201305-uoba-joining-forces-safer-roads.pdf

Speak to a motoring lawyer, see if you can appeal it. 44mph is below the guideline speed of 46mph before a ticket is issued.

 

[viv1969]

I hope you clever lot get done by a proper greedy dibble for even very minor offences. That would teach you for these replies. I bet most of you couldn't even pass a driving test if we follow recent surveys.



I have plenty of legal options.

Please do keep us entertained and list them.

 

[f1charlie]

Speak to a motoring lawyer, see if you can appeal it. 44mph is below the guideline speed of 46mph before a ticket is issued.

He doesn't even know if he's getting a ticket yet.

 

[SFTPhotography]

He doesn't even know if he's getting a ticket yet.

He will...law of pedants have taken over real police work

 

[Peter B]

This is probably the most helpful post to the OPs thread other than the usual eat humble pie bile that gets touted about for minor motoring offences.

Read this: http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/uniformed/2013/201305-uoba-joining-forces-safer-roads.pdf

Speak to a motoring lawyer, see if you can appeal it. 44mph is below the guideline speed of 46mph before a ticket is issued.

Section 9.2 is the catch-all (literally?)

9.2 Driving at any speed over the limit is an offen
ce and the police are not restricted and may
prosecute.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Section 9.2 is the catch-all (literally?)

9.2 Driving at any speed over the limit is an offen
ce and the police are not restricted and may
prosecute.

True, but the APCO guidelines indicate its often appropriate for officers NOT to pursue a charge but an educational chat. 44mph in a 40 is in that education chat zone.

 

[viv1969]

True, but the APCO guidelines indicate its often appropriate for officers NOT to pursue a charge but an educational chat. 44mph in a 40 is in that education chat zone.

Yes, but the fine has been issued. In this instance someone deemed it appropriate.

 

[neil_g]

I hope you clever lot get done by a proper greedy dibble for even very minor offences. That would teach you for these replies. I bet most of you couldn't even pass a driving test if we follow recent surveys.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Yes, but the fine has been issued. In this instance someone deemed it appropriate.

Appeal it innit, see how that goes. Write to the police, ask why. It's better to try and fight these things, and see if it is revoked.

 

[POAH]

I've never seen such nasty and cunning tactics by police to clearly extract cash. They put temporary limit of 40 instead of 70 on M8 from Edinburgh for miles on a clear empty road, and set up a trap. If you are one of them I hope you are really ashamed and burn in hell. I don't think they got me, but you never know. They have certainly made journey longer, less safe, and caused a lot of distress, and put many motorists in a very bad situation. Really, can I complain anywhere about such stupid dibble actions? Police is mean to protect residents, not setup nasty traps to innocent people.

P.S. Avoid dibble-infested M8 to Edinburgh from Glasgow as plague. Use M80 / M9 instead.

yes, a trap to catch all those drivers unable to stick to speed limits.

 

[Steep]

This is probably the most helpful post to the OPs thread other than the usual eat humble pie bile that gets touted about for minor motoring offences.

Read this: http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/uniformed/2013/201305-uoba-joining-forces-safer-roads.pdf

Speak to a motoring lawyer, see if you can appeal it. 44mph is below the guideline speed of 46mph before a ticket is issued.

These guidlines do not and cannot replace a police officer's discretion

 

[viv1969]

Appeal it innit,

I'm sorry, but...what?

 

[frank]

The truth is Glasgow has the Commonwealth Games to pay for, they need all the money they can get Come back once the games have been paid for

 

[SFTPhotography]

yes, a trap to catch all those drivers unable to stick to speed limits.

Have you never sped or broken the speed limit, even broke it by 1mph. If you haven't I salute you and everyone here who hasn't.

Otherwise, if you have, I'd say the OP is getting a lot of stick for sounding off for being prosecuted for a 4mph transgression of a speed limit on a quiet road by the holier than thou mentality that seems common place in this day and age.

 

[ChasG]

Please - Nowhere does the OP say he has been ticketed. In view of the time it has hardly had time to reach him yet. We are talking Scotland.

 

[Tigger.ufo]

Please - Nowhere does the OP say he has been ticketed. In view of the time it has hardly had time to reach him yet. We are talking Scotland.

Jeez, I can only imagine the paddy if he actually gets done!

 

[viv1969]

Have you never sped or broken the speed limit, even broke it by 1mph. If you haven't I salute you and everyone here who hasn't.
Otherwise, if you have, I'd say the OP is getting a lot of stick for sounding off for being prosecuted for a 4mph transgression of a speed limit on a quiet road by the holier than thou mentality that seems common place in this day and age.

No Steve, the OP is getting a lot of stick for kicking off like a 4-year-old who's had his lolly nicked. :arghh: :dummy1:

Well, not any more. I can 100% promise you that. Revenge time.

I have plenty of legal options. 1. Publicise everything wrong about police in the media. 2. Hog the traffic like aunt Dorris does in Honda Jazz. You do all hate it, don't you when you can't drive at 35 in a 30 road. That one is coming for sure. 3. Vote Tory next time in the local elections.

He needs to pick up his toys join the adults at the big table.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Please - Nowhere does the OP say he has been ticketed. In view of the time it has hardly had time to reach him yet. We are talking Scotland.

Notice of intended prosecution - it is all the same. It seems a very pedantic one this. My view, the OP should have gone faster, at least to get value of the £100 fine and 3 points. I got an FPN (NIP) for 96 for a 70. Glad I was going 96 not 77 (same % above the limit as the OP) as I got an extra 19mph for my fine/points.

 

[Byker28i]

This is probably the most helpful post to the OPs thread other than the usual eat humble pie bile that gets touted about for minor motoring offences.

Read this: http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/uniformed/2013/201305-uoba-joining-forces-safer-roads.pdf

Speak to a motoring lawyer, see if you can appeal it. 44mph is below the guideline speed of 46mph before a ticket is issued.

That's exactly what they are - guidelines.

I've been successfully prosecuted for 41.4mph in a 40mph zone. (long story - they claimed I was 54mph, I proved I was at most 41.4 using their video - thats what I was done for. 3 points , £100 fine and costs... That's when you know what Partnership means in Scamera Partnership).

 

[Bernie174]

If you were prosecuted then it was because you were doing 46, not 44.

True, but the APCO guidelines indicate its often appropriate for officers NOT to pursue a charge but an educational chat. 44mph in a 40 is in that education chat zone.

On another subject, I pointed out why senteces are the way they are, ie people whining. Thats a prime example..."yer, but yer but...It's not fair, I got done and he didn't...I'm soooooo entitled...Yer But"

Talking of whining...Why is he still on about it. Grow up sunshine!

That's exactly what they are - guidelines.

I've been successfully prosecuted for 41.4mph in a 40mph zone. (long story - they claimed I was 54mph, I proved I was at most 41.4 using their video - thats what I was done for. 3 points , £100 fine and costs... That's when you know what Partnership means in Scamera Partnership).

Complicated answer for you byker. You were summonsed for doing 54. You pleaded not guilty? But successfully proved you were driving in excess of the speed limit. The Guidelines were complied with, it was 54, way over the 'grace' level. You in effect did your own legs by proving you were driving at 41.4, and the Magistrates were therefore left with no option but to convict you, you admitted the offence.
The offence it's self is absolute, you were driving at 40 or under (if thats what the limit was) or you weren't. The ACPOoo Guideline is for issuing a summons, not for what Magistrates decide to do.

 

[SFTPhotography]

All my offences, to be fair, warranted a ticket not a chat. 96 in a 70, 138 in a 70. There is no arguing they are proper breaches. However, doing someone for 41.4 and 44 in a 40...

Officers should be charged for wasting police time, doing someone for 44 in a 40. IMHO.

 

[Tigger.ufo]

Notice of intended prosecution - it is all the same. It seems a very pedantic one this. My view, the OP should have gone faster, at least to get value of the £100 fine and 3 points. I got an FPN (NIP) for 96 for a 70. Glad I was going 96 not 77 (same % above the limit as the OP) as I got an extra 19mph for my fine/points.

Where the hell does it say he has a NIP?

Post 1

I don't think they got me, but you never know.

Post 5

And this is not to say that I got done (I was being overtaken by a few cars at a time as well).

 

[neil_g]

Have you never sped or broken the speed limit, even broke it by 1mph. If you haven't I salute you and everyone here who hasn't.

Otherwise, if you have, I'd say the OP is getting a lot of stick for sounding off for being prosecuted for a 4mph transgression of a speed limit on a quiet road by the holier than thou mentality that seems common place in this day and age.

i dont believe anyone is suggesting they are "holier than thou". i think everyone is just slightly amused by the dummy spit and the OP should man up and take it on the chin for driving above the prescribed limit, if indeed he gets a ticket at all.

 

[viv1969]

Nurse!!! Steve's out of bed again!!

 

[seriousrikk]

Have you never sped or broken the speed limit, even broke it by 1mph. If you haven't I salute you and everyone here who hasn't.

Otherwise, if you have, I'd say the OP is getting a lot of stick for sounding off for being prosecuted for a 4mph transgression of a speed limit on a quiet road by the holier than thou mentality that seems common place in this day and age.

Nope

He's getting a lot of stick for acting like a d*ck about it, which is an entirely different reason.

Had he not acted like a d*ck then it is quite possible he would have got the good advise of 'Wait until you get a notice' or 'Consult a motoring lawyer' which would be correct.

If I got caught driving over the speed limit then I would gladly hold my hands up and say ooops. If I believed there was an injustice - for example the change in speed limit was unclear - then I would appeal with the help of a motoring lawyer.

 

[Steve Smith]

yes, a trap to catch all those drivers unable to stick to speed limits.

It's outrageous... It's almost as if they were breaking some sort of law!!!


Steve.

 

[MFlip]

Not red. Yellow LED things

Sounds more like an advisory limit as opposed to a mandatory limit so the theory it was there so they could give you a speeding ticket seems a little flawed.

Page 89
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/222621/dg_191955.pdf

Obviously not recommended you exceed the advisory and won't look good if you have an accident but can they give you a speeding ticket? To be honest I don't know for sure but I suspect not.

 

[seriousrikk]

How do you know it was a speed trap?

 

[Bernie174]

Sounds more like an advisory limit as opposed to a mandatory limit so the theory it was there so they could give you a speeding ticket seems a little flawed.

Page 89
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/222621/dg_191955.pdf

Obviously not recommended you exceed the advisory and won't look good if you have an accident but can they give you a speeding ticket? To be honest I don't know for sure but I suspect not.

Quite possibly, except that it is good evidence for reckless driving.

And secondly, as he wasn't pulled over, he's just got a guilty conciseness after seeing what he thinks was a Police car and made some assumptions. Hence the whine.

 

[Tigger.ufo]

How do you know it was a speed trap?

Because obviously, all police cars on the hard shoulder with their flashing lights on are out to persecute the poor motorist, who is incapable of driving at (or below) the speed limit?

 

[SFTPhotography]

Nurse!!! Steve's out of bed again!!

Dr Steve has been the most helpful poster on this thread. As a member of the public and a resident near Glasgow I find it galling there are good police tied up to catch transgressions like this while drug crazed yobs mug, attack etc. I can't even go into the city at night such is the crime problem to take photos but there are police out dealing with this, not the yobs in streets etc.

We get the policing we deserve. IMHO.

Seeing the posts, I doubt he'd hear about it but why have police out on the quiet roads when there are bigger crims to catch. This is Glasgow.

 

[ghoti]

Dr Steve has been the most helpful poster on this thread. As a member of the public and a resident near Glasgow I find it galling there are good police tied up to catch transgressions like this while drug crazed yobs mug, attack etc. I can't even go into the city at night such is the crime problem to take photos but there are police out dealing with this, not the yobs in streets etc.

As we've been over already in another thread, if you can't go out in Glasgow city at night to take photos, it's not because of any real threat of crime, it's because you must be a very nervous and sheltered individual. I've been out in Glasgow at night hundreds of times and never felt under any sort of threat.

If I still lived in Glasgow I'd be more worried about coming to harm due sad tw@ts who boast about vastly exceeding the speed limit than I would be about coming to harm from "yobs".

 

[seriousrikk]

Dr Steve has been the most helpful poster on this thread. As a member of the public and a resident near Glasgow I find it galling there are good police tied up to catch transgressions like this while drug crazed yobs mug, attack etc. I can't even go into the city at night such is the crime problem to take photos but there are police out dealing with this, not the yobs in streets etc.

We get the policing we deserve. IMHO.

Seeing the posts, I doubt he'd hear about it but why have police out on the quiet roads when there are bigger crims to catch. This is Glasgow.

How do we know that is what the police officer was there for?

 

[SFTPhotography]

As we've been over already in another thread, if you can't go out in Glasgow city at night to take photos, it's not because of any real threat of crime, it's because you must be a very nervous and sheltered individual. I've been out in Glasgow at night hundreds of times and never felt under any sort of threat.

If I still lived in Glasgow I'd be more worried about coming to harm due sad tw@ts who boast about vastly exceeding the speed limit than I would be about coming to harm from "yobs".

If you call trying to fend off two yobs in Partick station after your gear as sheltered/nervous I am.

I see what I see, I know what I know. Someone going a bit quick down a motorway is small beer compared to the syringe yielding vermin that try take people's possessions that they work hard for.

Glasgows a toilet, actually that's too kind to toilets. Accept it.

 

[Bernie174]

Dr Steve has been the most helpful poster on this thread. As a member of the public and a resident near Glasgow I find it galling there are good police tied up to catch transgressions like this while drug crazed yobs mug, attack etc. I can't even go into the city at night such is the crime problem to take photos but there are police out dealing with this, not the yobs in streets etc.

We get the policing we deserve. IMHO.

If you didn't drive at silly speeds, then they would be able to not bother patrolling roads and deal with city center disorder. Then again, if the great British public were able to take their drink, the same would also apply.
The public can't do either, so Police have to deal with both. Yes, you get the Police you deserve, trying not breaking the law, on either and you'd have officers to deal with the things that are serious at the time, rather than things that are potentially.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Perhaps the priorities are wrong. Violent crime, drugs etc should be dealt with, and only after that should road policing occur. I agree re drink. Drunks should be a higher priority target than motorists yet the hooliganism you see in this sess pit of a city it's clear they roam free but the motorist is relentlessly persecuted for minor offences.

All IMHO.

 

[viv1969]

Perhaps the priorities are wrong. Violent crime, drugs etc should be dealt with, and only after that should road policing occur. I agree re drink. Drunks should be a higher priority target than motorists yet the hooliganism you see in this sess pit of a city it's clear they roam free but the motorist is relentlessly persecuted for minor offences.

All IMHO.

Yet if the motorist would just stop offending at all....whatever might happen then?

 

[boliston]

Perhaps the priorities are wrong. Violent crime, drugs etc should be dealt with, and only after that should road policing occur. I agree re drink. Drunks should be a higher priority target than motorists yet the hooliganism you see in this sess pit of a city it's clear they roam free but the motorist is relentlessly persecuted for minor offences.

All IMHO.

being hit by a speeding motorist is still a "violent" way to die