This kinda thing really annoys me...... Freddie Flintoff

Same rule for all.
All you need us the means to hire the right lawyer.
 
Too true about getting the right lawyer, but it would be good to think magistrates had half a brain and not take, IMO, irrelevant things into account.

If you have a family and get done for speeding then you know there is a chance that it will result in a ban, especially if you have been done before, so anything to do with the impact on his family should be discounted.

Does being a good cricketer and a supporter of charities mean you should get a more lenient treatment than others?

Dave
 
Tringa said:
Too true about getting the right lawyer, but it would be good to think magistrates had half a brain and not take, IMO, irrelevant things into account.

If you have a family and get done for speeding then you know there is a chance that it will result in a ban, especially if you have been done before, so anything to do with the impact on his family should be discounted.

Does being a good cricketer and a supporter of charities mean you should get a more lenient treatment than others?

Dave
Click to expand...

No it sent out very bad signals that certain people are above the law :(
 
I don't care if you're married...single. ..got kids, no kids, disabled kids or spouse. If you've been bell.end enough to amass 12 points you should be banned. End of.
 
I can see the rationale for may be not banning someone where there'd be genuine hardship - like carer to a disabled relative , poor , lives well of the nearest bus route in the middle of no where needs the car to get too and from hospital and get essential supplies etc

but flintoff is loaded so there's no reason at all why he couldn't hire someone to drive him, or use taxi's for his 'extensive charity work'
 
Tringa said:
Too true about getting the right lawyer, but it would be good to think magistrates had half a brain and not take, IMO, irrelevant things into account.

If you have a family and get done for speeding then you know there is a chance that it will result in a ban, especially if you have been done before, so anything to do with the impact on his family should be discounted.
Click to expand...

No it shouldn't

Why should his family suffer as a result of HIS actions.

Don't get me wrong he could take a ban. He could afford to hire a driver so there would be minimal hardship.

Magistrates have to look at the big picture.

Take Steve for instance (A fictional character) Steve drives through the night for a living and covers nearly 80k miles per year. He's not had the best couple of years his father has died leaving his disabled mother alone and his wife has left him. He's paying massive amounts of child support so sometimes pushes the speed limit a little so he can get more work done to help pay for the kids.
Over the past 2 years he's been clocked for speeding 3 times, and has just been done for a 4th so ends up in court.

He is the only one available to take his Disabled elderly mother to the Dr's, Chiropodist, Supermarket or even to visit the grave of her recently past soul mate.

Do you think its fair that she should suffer because he works a bit faster than he should?

EDIT: Moose types faster than I do
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
viv1969 said:
I don't care if you're married...single. ..got kids, no kids, disabled kids or spouse. If you've been bell.end enough to amass 12 points you should be banned. End of.
Click to expand...

Do you think its ok to get caught speeding at all?
You know the way we pretty much all speed at some point
 
Those playing the "carer card" are no better than those playing the rich celeb card imo. Each chose to speed.
 
viv1969 said:
Those playing the "carer card" are no better than those playing the rich celeb card imo. Each chose to speed.
Click to expand...

So should the person being cared for suffer as a consequence?

What should happen is Freddie can ONLY drive when he is performing those duties and they need to be recorded in advance.
 
mattyg said:
You know the way we pretty much all speed at some point
Click to expand...

we all creep over the limit occasionally which is why the acpo guide line is 10% plus 1 - but 87 in a 70 when you already have 9 points is just taking the p*** ... if I had 9 points I'd be extremely careful not to go over
 
mattyg said:
So should the person being cared for suffer as a consequence?

What should happen is Freddie can ONLY drive when he is performing those duties and they need to be recorded in advance.
Click to expand...

Perhaps someone in a carer's role should take that into consideration when they drive.
 
Thats for digital equipment the police can issue summons for 2 mph over the limit up to 66mph then 3mph over that
 
The points system is a joke and just a tax collecting service. Speed limits often make no sense and cameras are mainly there to catch not save lives.

Maybe Freddie has been let off easy, but often many celebs get harsher punishments just because of status. Goes both ways.
 
Driver A does 10k miles per year gets done once per year and will not get to 12 points.
Apply the same maths to Driver B who does 80k miles per year doesn't seem fair
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
viv1969 said:
Perhaps someone in a carer's role should take that into consideration when they drive.
Click to expand...

indeed - but as said everyone speeds occasionally and it would be a bit harsh to ban someone where genuine hardship would result for doing say 65 in in a 60 - that said theres no genuine hardship in flintoffs case and 87 in a 70 is more than accidental
 
No one gets 12 points in 3 years accidentaly
 
cambsno said:
The points system is a joke and just a tax collecting service. Speed limits often make no sense and cameras are mainly there to catch not save lives.

Maybe Freddie has been let off easy, but often many celebs get harsher punishments just because of status. Goes both ways.
Click to expand...

You know that's rubbish most celebs or people in power,do not face the same punishment as rest of us (n)
 
no put they could get 9 points driving like a bell end in year 1 , become the principal carer of their elderly mother in year 2 and reform their boy racer ways, but accidentally creep over the limit , or get caught out by a change of limit in year 3 - which is why courts have discretion.

it would be interesting to see if you were still so unbending on this if you were the person requiring daily care
 
viv1969 said:
No one gets 12 points in 3 years accidentaly
Click to expand...

Whilst not by accident he was speeding so it was his fault. but one of my drivers has had 4 NIP's drop through his door in the last 2 weeks for speeding through avg speed cameras on the M6. All at 4 am on different nights when NO-ONE was working in the road works. All just over ACPO guidlines
 
they really ought to turn the SPECS off when the roadworks aren't in use - I hope he's asked to see the calibration certificates for them , because there's a good chance they've not been done and that would be an automatic walk if he's only just outside the guidelines
 
viv1969 said:
Actually more than most.
Click to expand...

although mostly in a car that's so knackered it would blow up if you tried to speed ... although it must be an arse to keep your boss's sports car under the limit
 
big soft moose said:
although mostly in a car that's so knackered it would blow up if you tried to speed ... although it must be an arse to keep your boss's sports car under the limit
Click to expand...

I'm assuming you're going to have a pertinent point shortly Petra?
 
big soft moose said:
they really ought to turn the SPECS off when the roadworks aren't in use - I hope he's asked to see the calibration certificates for them , because there's a good chance they've not been done and that would be an automatic walk if he's only just outside the guidelines
Click to expand...

He'd only bought the car a few weeks before he has since had its speedo checked and it's a fair bit out. Looks like a previous owner tried to clock it the old fashioned way with a drill.
He has now had the speedo replaced. I've advised he pleads his case in court, for ALL the points. Rather than the last 3 which will be an automatic summons for totting up.
 
the speedos in all our work vehicles read about 5mph more than you are actually doing - we decided to leave them like that to give a safety margin , though it is a recipe for annoying the hell out of the car behind when you're in a 30 limit
 
big soft moose said:
the speedos in all our work vehicles read about 5mph more than you are actually doing - we decided to leave them like that to give a safety margin , though it is a recipe for annoying the hell out of the car behind when you're in a 30 limit
Click to expand...

He's come from a sprinter to a Peugeot 206 so it seemed faster but then it would.
Most of my drivers use their sat nav as a speedo as its +/-1% which is naff all.

He does 400+ miles per day and no speeding tickets in 6 years then 4 in 2 weeks. I wouldn't say he's a habitual speeder but may be in trouble now.
 
with that record he'd be a good candidate for not losing his licence ... though he may have to suffer the 2 days of b******t otherwise known as a speed awareness course
 
big soft moose said:
with that record he'd be a good candidate for not losing his licence ... though he may have to suffer the 2 days of b******t otherwise known as a speed awareness course
Click to expand...

They are much shorter now. All done in a morning or afternoon. I've been on a few...
 
mattyg said:
Driver A does 10k miles per year gets done once per year and will not get to 12 points.
Apply the same maths to Driver B who does 80k miles per year doesn't seem fair
Click to expand...

Great point. Used to do 60k pa, now down to 35k or so but know that I am more at risk than most of my friends. There are far more dangerous drivers out there who don't speed.
 
I agree with Ruth on this one, he's got away with it because he's a celeb
it's not that hard to stick to the speed limits and if you get caught a couple of times the common sense thing to do is to slow down a bit
 
Last edited:
mattyg said:
So should the person being cared for suffer as a consequence?
Click to expand...

No. A different kind of punishment should be found which will only affect the criminal involved. Such as a hefty fine or community service.


Steve.
 
I have little sympathy with anyone who needs their car because there is someone dependent on them, but risks getting a ban by speeding, especially if they have been caught before. The points system is a good warning.

Yes, all drivers exceed the limit sometimes. I know the penalty, and if I get caught I'd not complain.

Dave
 
cambsno said:
The points system is a joke and just a tax collecting service. Speed limits often make no sense.
Click to expand...

Where I live it was 60 now dropped to 40, the bikes still think it's 60 which means 90, never a camera van despite there being a footpath right next to the road

Further down the road it's always been 30 but there's nothing either side of the road apart from hedges, no footpath, houses or pedestrians, it really shouldn't be 30 when the rest is 40

Guess where the cop car set the speed camera up , not where they'd catch a couple of bikers touching 90 and ban them generating £500, where they'll catch 100s doing 34-35 for the speed awareness course at £80-90 a go
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top