TC1474

Which might be appropriate if caught be a camera, but there are other ways of enforcing speed. As I said, you can ask, but there is no formal obligation or requirement. Usually people know who was driving at a particular time or place, but like everything else there are always exceptions to the rule, so it woud be reasonable in these cases to ask. Some forces do send out photos with the paperwork. There is no standard parctice.

If there is photographic evidence then the Police are not obliged to disclose it until it goes to court depening on the plea, and there is not always photographic evidence. Some do it when and if requested, but it is not a requirement. People, please get it out of your heads about photographic evidence all the time. It is not a legal requirement to prove the offence, it is a recent introduction in relative terms and all the loopholes were by and large closed a long time ago which included the possibility of tagging another vehicle.

Well therein lies some of the problems. Once upon a time back in the day, if a local authority wanted a change in a speed limit or a camera to be placed, they had to consult the Police. The Police would conduct what is called an 85 percentile check over a period of several days, they would get the average speed data over that time (15% was disregarded because you would always get the blatant offenders hence the 85%) check accident records and then make recommendations. In some cases there would be a justification for a reduction in speed limits, in some case no justification and in a few it was argued that limits should actually rise. With consultation, an agreement would be reached, the regulations amended and advised in the London Gazete (still a requirement) and the new regs would come into force. If the Police said there was no case for a reduction or a camera but the council insisted, then the Police could and often did say "Fine, but we will not enforce" or "You can place your camera but as the authority responsible for operating said camera, we will not be putting any film in it!" This usually had the desired affect, and in fact in my area they learnt qite quickly to listen to what we said after they reduced the speed limit and the crash rate increased by about 70% But then it was decided that the Councils were no longer required to consult the Police and off they went and did their own thing. They decide where cameras go, they decide what speed limits apply and what other regulations are applicable which is why I mention in a previous thread that if you get a parking ticket check the traffic order at the library because invariably it is wrong and unlawful because there is no Police Traffic management epartment to check the traffic order against the signs and lines in place. So, the local authorities have (and excuse the pun) become a law onto themselves, safety is not their priority but money making, and traffic engineers having to justify their existance and big salaries. And you are right about the cotton wool society. I joined the service knowing that I would see some pretty horrible things, I am sure Firemen and Ambulance crews are the same. You accepted that there would be days when you really would wish you had not gone to work that day and you accepted it, it was part of the job. But not once ever did I or any of my colleagues ever consider going off sick with stress or PTSD. We developed black humour which to outsiders might have seemed disrespectful, but that was the way we dealt with things. This year is the 30th anniversary of the Hungerford massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungerford_massacre I was there, it was carnage. Roger Brereton (aka Gobby) was my buddy and that affected all of us traffic officers because we lost one of our own (the insurance company also tried to put the patrol car back into service ) and there were bodies everywhere but not once dd any of use consider PTSD, stress or counselling. Following year I was first on scene at the M4 crash when 25 burnt to death same again, it was one of those things. But then you look back further and in my early days, I had colleagues who had fought in the war. What must they have seen as young men? So, I totally agree with you, the generation today is a different breed in all the emergency services. and like you rightly say, some of these are supposed to be contributing to or safe keeping? NB. I would add, that I am not tarring everyone with the same brush, because there are some good people serving, but they seem to be few and far between these days.

You are bang on with your assessment I had lunch with old crewmate yesterday who after 31 years service and 12 years as a civillian has told the Police service what they can do with themselves because it is becoming equally frustrating for those serving, but not helped by the calibre of recruit, i,e poor with a capital P. He told me about a fatality he was called to where the deceased had been squashed to a pulp and what remained was hardly recognisable as human. So before anyone arrived, he got a sheet or blanket abd covered the remains so that nobody else could see. Local Plod arrived and my old mate asked the young crew to go and see if they could find any witnesses and cop a name and address and if they had the time, possibly take a statement? At no time did they see or look at the remains. They then made a complaint to their Inspector about being made to deal with an incident they were not prepared for. Pete was called in to see the local Inspector and was gobsmacked at what he heard and the nature of the complaint. As he said, if that was their attitude, what were they doing in the job in the first place? Apparently his reply was neither polite or complimentary He finished on the driving school and had people coming on advanced courses who could not cut the mustard as drivers, or, passed the course got posted to Traffic and quit after a few months becuase they did not realise that they would be required to deal with fatal crashes or see sights that were not pleasant....WTF? Anyway, I digressed, sorry for that Traffic policing is no longer considered main stream or front line despite the fact that we used to make more crime arrests than anyone else, deal with more dead bodies than anyone else on a regular basis, and the cost of a fatal crash is now exceeding £1.5million per fatality. The number of fatals has dropped but still too many are occuring. Pete told me how before he became a civillian he was dealing witha fatal where the deceased was squashed to a pulp. What remained was pretty hard to recognise as human so when he got there, he placed a blanket over it to hide it before anyone else arrived and to protect the public. Driving standards on Motorways are pretty poor, not helped by the fact that there is no longer the Police patrols we used to have, and this is unlikely to change anytime soon. Tailgaiting, poor lane discipline a lack of understanding of how to drive on Motorways is an issue, and even if after the consultation, Learners are allowed to be trained on a Motorway, it will not have any safety bearing unless the instructors themselves have the knowledge. Most don't, in fact most have no idea of how to drive on a motorway. We used to run fog convoys back in the day. In real pea soupers, we would escort groups of around 40 vehicles at a time close together at a constant speed as it kept everything bunched up and bangs were minor rather than catastrophic, but a few years ago a study was carried out on the section of the M4 I used to work on. Between the M25 and junction 8/9 crashes tend to be minor bangs because of the level of congestion and relative slow speeds. From 8/9 down to 12, the severity would increase from minor injury up to fatal because at 8/9 traffic tends to thin out and speeds increase, and then from 12 onwards, crashes are often catastrophic because speeds significantly increase. When I think back, this is a pretty accurate assessment and the presence of a marked Traffic car made a difference to drivers behaviour as we always had 3 crews on the motorway and at peak hours 5 cars covering from Heathrow down to Membury plus a fully equipped accident unit. Now you might just see a couple of traffic wombles who have no authority as such and probably little interest and can do nothing to enforce regulations or standards. In my force during my day, there were about 250 of us full time traffic cops, 42 of us were full time motorcyclists. It is now around 100 and there are about 6 part time motorcyclists covering 3 counties. Says it all really. Training is now non existent for traffic crews. I did 16 weeks driver training to get my class 1 car, and then the same again for my class 1 bike and on top of that a 12 week traffic law course, now they do an advanced course in 3 weeks, and their law course is 1 maybe 2 weeks. So, yes, I pretty much agree with everything you say, and things are unlikely to get any better in the future especially with the funding cuts being made all the time. I will get off my soap box now

My apologies. Legality is on hold at the moment. It was illegal under the 1949 Wireless & Telegraph Communications Act. However, a couple of cases are currently going throug the court of appeal, and so they are legal pending the final ruling which is likely to be sometime next year. Brexit may influence the final decision because of the illegality of possesing such devices in many european coutries. I was not intending to decieve anyone, although I do know of a couple of cases where possesion and use f such devices was deemed to be an attempt to pervert the course of justice, which is not really the issue here. However, if you do use a device, just be aware that might still be an issue. I will keep you posted as soon as I receive an update

If they are part of a sat nav, it is legal, (I have camera warning on my sat nav) If it is a lazer or radar detector it is not illegal to sell one, it is the use of which is illegal. But then it is illegal to speed, but that doesn't stop people

Who told you that? The fundemental principle of the legal sysytem in this country is that you are allowed to contest any allegation made against you, and whilst is may not seem like it, there is still the policy of innocent until proven guilty. However, the majority of speed offences are banged to rights and the whole idea of the fixed penalty system is to save time in the courts and speed the process up. Those alleged of an offence only tend to have penalties increased when they employ delaying tactics or it is so obvious that they are guilty of an offence they are clearly wasting the courts time and therefore increase the possibility of paying a heavier penalty. Contrary to popular myth, the Police service is still held in this country to be honest, and to be honest, in 40 + years of being involved in the Law, I have yet to come across anyone serving or retired who is or was prepared to lie for 1 poxy speed offence. Most if not all of the loopholes have been closed, and I am not saying or suggesting that all coppers are beyond reproach, but for the potential grief it will cause should they get caught out, I don't think there are that many that would perjur themselves. No such thing as a trap. Only people who call it a trap are those who break the speed limit and get caught? May I suggest you don't. If it just detects speed cameras or other speed detection devices, they you leave yourself open to further prosecution as speed detectors are actually illegal here. If it is part of a sat nav indicating where a camera is, then perfectly legal. As I said, you ony have to put reasonable doubt into the mind of the magistrates, and whilst a lay magistrate is unqualified in law, they are advised on procedure and points of law by the Magistrates clerk who is a qualified lawyer. So for example if you can prove using time over distance that the speed claimed could not be achieved in the distance claimed by the prosecution, or you can get an expert to ask the right questions, then you would have a chance of success. If you have legal cover on your insurance policy or through your breakdown, might be worth speaking to them as they often provide legal representation as part of the policy cover. They should at least be able to advise you. If all else fails, I can put you in touch with someone who is a lawyer specialising in these sorts of cases.

That is just a myth. Never has been the case. A traffic cop can even do you for speeding without any device but just by giving an opinion. It is called "Speed Reckless" I have used it twice in my career. It is very rarely used these days, but its still there to be used. You do and never have been required to be stopped at the time. It makes life easier to stop you at the time as you are given a verbal NIP rather than having to send out a written one, but you do not have to be stopped at the time in law. Usually though, a traffic Policeman will form an opinion and then have that opinion confirmed by an approved device, so it may be a radar device, Truvello, Muniquip, VASCAR or just the calibrated speedo head of the patrol car over minimum distances. That may be a local procedure thing depending on what Force they operate in. It is not a legal requirement and they do not have to stop you at the time. If you are adamant that you were not doing the speed that is alleged, then you can and you are entitled to plead not guilty and ask for a hearing and bring the copper to court. You only have to put reasonable doubt in the mind of the magistrates (3 of them if lay magistrates, 1 if a Stipend) and they must aquit you. Mistakes do sometimes get made and this may just be such a case, but it is for you to raise the reasonable doubt. The prosecution are not obliged to give you any photos but usually will do so when a not guilty plea is received. But in this case there is no photographc evidence, and a section 9 prosecution statement will be served once a plea of not guilty has been received. What makes you think there is video evidence? Video is an aid, not a reqirement and I would certainly not expect a copper at the side of the road to be video recording. If the OP pleads not guilty the reporting officer will provide a statement and details of the calibration will/should be provided within his statement. If it is a following check against a speedo, then the speedo is checked once a week against the designated measured mile at 30 and 60 and this information is also included in the evidence. If it is using something like Muniquip, the calibration is checked against a tuning fork set for 30 MPH and is used before and after use each time. Modern devices such as radar have their own in built calibration, but suffice to say that most of the early loopholes were filled in a long time ago. To all of you, please don't get sucked in by myth and guesswork as many have done here. I appreciate that there are many stories doing the rounds, but most are unfounded or have been twisted to suit the story of individuals. The bottom line is, if you feel that you have been hard done by, and you are confident that is the case, then plead not guilty and take your chances in court. That is your right and your entitlement.

I have done an in depth piece for the website which may help you https://www.hudgellsolicitors.co.uk/news/road-traffic-accidents/mobile-phones/

Yes please, have searched posts by you that contain the word leather, but not found it. Here you go... Head injuries, although often the most serious, are not the only injuries motorcyclists suffer. Leg and arm injuries are common, and leg injuries in particular can be serious often causing permanent disability. Under the EC personal protective equipment directive, a series of European standards were developed for motorcyclist protective clothing that was designed to. 1. Prevent or reduce laceration and abrasion injuries. 2. Prevent or reduce impact injuries such as fractures, broken bones and joint damage. These standards marked with a CE mark are essentially to help riders distinguish between clothing that offers a minimal level of protection, and garments that may look similar but offers very little if any protection at all. Unfortunately for many riders, the buying of new leathers is often no more than a fashion statement as opposed to a desire to maximise their protection, but, contrary to popular believe you can be fashionable and protected. As with helmets, there are accidents and injuries from which even the best or most expensive clothing will not protect the rider for various reasons. It is therefore important not only to try and reduce the severity of the injury as best as you can, but also ensure that the garment is comfortable, does not impede the movement of the rider and will reduce the affects of fatigue thereby aiding concentration. Leather is still regarded as the best form of protection against injury when riding a motorcycle. They are made from a natural material, which is breathable, abrasion resistant and supple. Like a crash helmet, they cannot offer total protection from injury, but they can reduce the severity and long term affects if they fit correctly. Leather garments can be made from 4 different animals, Cow, which is the most commonly used, Goatskin, Buffalo or kangaroo skin. Cowhide is the preferred choice of most manufacturers. It is heavy duty (compared with the others). It is hard wearing, and in the main the manufacturers use 1.4mm thick hides, which means that in the summer weather with the thickness and all the padding they can get hot inside. Buffalo hide is often used on cheaper garments and this can be felt in the overall quality when compared to other leather products. Buffalo is tough, will last well but it tends to be a very stiff leather and can take some time to bed in and soften up. Goatskin although worth considering as an alternative for summer use is very difficult to find in the UK. It is considerably lighter and more flexible than Cowhide, and many consider the goatskin to be stronger than cowhide due to the fibres being more closely knit together than cow skin. The downside is that goatskin stretches a lot quicker than cow so it may require specialist tailoring on an annual basis. Kangaroo is probably the least known of the hides used although they are being used more regularly in very hot climates. The hides are supple, light and quite tough, but it has been found that they can react with sweat particularly when worn by riders who perspire freely. If this were the case then you would probably be well advised to look elsewhere as you may find your suit literally coming apart at the seams. For those considering purchasing leathers for the first time, the question often asked is whether to purchase a suit/jacket combination, two piece suit or a 1 piece racing suit. The choice comes down to individual preference, but here are a few points that you may find useful to consider. 1. A jacket and trouser combination is probably the most popular choice for the majority of riders, and, they can be worn singularly or in combination. However, many jackets (not all) have a Thinsulate lining for warmth retention together with a quilted lining. Many riders complain that they overheat in warm weather which can ultimately affect concentration. However, this combination is ideal if you are an awkward size or on a limited budget. 2. A two piece zip together suit can be a good choice for a number of reasons. • They can normally only be worn as a complete garment thereby maintaining your crash protection. • They come in a number of colour choices therefore conspicuity can be enhanced. • They are normally lighter than jacket/trouser combinations which for some means they will be more comfortable for summer or warm weather use. • When stopping for a break, the jacket can be unzipped from the trousers thereby enhancing comfort when away from the bike. • They maintain their shape and size better. • They often have features such as perforated leather to allow air to pass through in warm weather, stretch fabric panels behind the knees, waist and inner thighs which again can enhance warm weather comfort. On the downside, it is worth bearing in mind that:- • They can normally only be worn as a complete suit. • They can take a while to break in and mould to your shape. • They are not particularly warm in the colder weather. • There are not as many pockets as in a jacket/trouser combination, which for some may be a good thing. • The colours tend to be more flamboyant than jacket/trouser combinations. 1 Piece suits are the other alternative often favoured by those who ride Supersports or participate in track days. Whilst offering a fair degree of protection, for road use they have often been deemed impractical as you cannot separate them when away from the motorcycle, but more importantly in serious accident situations, the emergency services have occasionally experienced difficulty in rendering an effective diagnosis or treatment simply because they cannot cut through the leather to tend to the riders injuries, or they cannot risk removing the garment without fear of causing further injury. This of course comes down to a matter of preference. Leather is abrasion resistant, and its main function is allow you to slide, thereby reducing friction. From new, leathers should fit as tightly as possible to allow for stretching and moulding to the wearer’s shape. If the leather is a poor fit then there is the possibility that as the rider slides down the road, the friction caused by the road surface will cause the leather to snag. This could cause a flailing limb to snag and whilst the torso is still travelling at speed, the flailing limb will slow down too quickly and can result in severe injury. On the plus side, a good fitting leather can slow down any potential blood loss, particularly internal blood loss, or it can at least stem the flow until medical help arrives on the scene. If you are unfortunate enough to be involved in an accident as a result of which you are injured (and we all hope that it doesn’t happen), at least you can be comforted that the severity will be less than if you were wearing non protective clothing, and the sympathy you receive from the emergency services and Hospital will be far more favourable than your compatriot wearing his jeans and trainers.

Video footage that reaffirms why I always have a balcony cabin when I am cruising. Got to be one one of the ultimate thrill rides though. I came through the Bay of Biscay on the Independence of the Seas when it was a bit choppy a few years ago, and whilst we had a bit of a sway (But nothing compared with the P & O ship following behind us) it was a flat calm compared with this trip on the Anthem which is itself a big ship. http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/were-hoping-not-to-die-cruise-ship-packed-with-thousands-of-passengers-hit-by-30ft-waves-in-terrifying-footage/ar-AAodVIV?li=AAnZ9Ug

I was waiting to see who would be first to spot the deliberate mistake

Inyour first point, as I have already mentioned, very rarely happens and a broken finger can be just as debilitating as a crushed knuckle. Don't confuse what they use in racing with what we might use n the road. Different disciplines, different surroundings. For example, racers have to use 1 piece leathers. On the road 1 piece can and has been the cause of much more serious injury and permanant dissability for the rider. Do a search and you will find the article I did a few years ago on that subject. If you can't find it, I will post it up again.

Anything that helps reduce friction is going to help, The priciple is the same as tight fitting leather as it allows you to slide and will hold broken bones together like a splint in the event of a bone being broken, and can also act as a tourniquet in cases where theree is potential for serious blood loss such as a severed femeral artery. Like I said, you can't legislate for every crash. Every type of kit has its plusses and minuses, some of it is practical, some of it is safety related. You have to go with what you feel is right for you, or what you can afford and then hope you don't learn the lessons the hard way. Just don't fall into the trap that the BBC have of believing that you have to buy expensive brand names to be protected, there ate a lot of brand names I would not give house space to and a lot of cheap stuff which is very good, bearing in mind that the majority comes out of a place called Sialkot in Pakistan. I still have gloves that are a famous brand that retailed for over £70 a pair 10 years ago and I pad under a fiver for them direct from the factory, they just don't have the brand badges on them.

In my last 3 cycle crashes it's the shoulder or hip as I try to keep my hands and arms away from hitting the ground first. Did an amazing forward shoulder roll and landed on my feet last time. Hope I never have to re-test that again I rest my case After the head, the lower body usually sustains the most damage, so feet and legs take the brunt of any impact. In some cases, the shoulder and collar bone take a bashing, and as far as the hands are concerned, it is usually the palms that take the brunt of any abrasion damage as it is natural to put your hands out to protect or cushion your fall. Just be aware that if you have a short cuff which goes under your cuff, you are presenting the tarmac with a raw edge to rip the sleeve of your leather open even though it should be double or triple stitched. But you can't legislate for every time of impact injury.

Just ask yourself the question, "In a crash, what part of your hands usually makes contact with the ground first?" I have yet to see a crash where the back of the hands have hit the deck or where the back of the hands have been injured other than in crush injuries. The fingers on the other hand......... Hard knuckle protection is a gimmick in 99% of cases. But it comes down to personal preference at the end of the day.

Just heard it on the news that the great man has died earlier today at the age of 83. I had the good fortune to meet him a couple of times, what a gent he was. He should have been knighted years ago. May he rest in peace and thank you for the wonderful legacy and memories of my youth. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/formula-1/2017/03/10/john-surtees-british-motorsport-legend-dies-aged-83/

Thanks for the update, and I will look forward to seeing you there

Just a reminder that this event is taking place a week on Sunday, so I thought a subtle bump up to the top of the page may be appropriate as a reminder in case you are still thinking about what to do or where to go I will be there with handouts, give aways and trinkets

It aint going to happen. The idea of a retest was looked at a few years ago, I was one of a number of advanced examiners who was approched and asked if I would examine re-tests and then it got dropped quickly and quietly for political reasons. I sit on a number of road safety committees and so I have asked the question at parliamentary level whether the idea of retesting will be considered in the future and I have been overwhelmed by the deafening silence and then a curt "No"! It will not happen.......

How, what, why?............. Obviously wrong to make judgement as we are not privvy to the evidence and it is still early days, but these are the sorts of crashes I used to hate dealing with, just on the basis that it probably could have and should have been avoided. http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/two-women-killed-after-car-ploughs-into-pedestrians-outside-hospital-in-manchester/ar-AAnZh4p?li=BBoPWjQ

If this scammer is disqualified (as well as a custodial sentance) what deterent is there in making her do a retest? Formaility for her I would suspect.. On a more serious note, I would be interested to know how many others are out there who have not actually taken a test but paid someone to take it for them. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/02/woman-wore-wigs-take-driving-tests-five-learners-money-making/

I agree with you regarding Brands, Donnington is a pile of poo and I love riding the GP circuit at Silverstone. I love riding Brands as well Close Donnington down please.......

Other than the point I made, I have no interest and cannot give a stuff if it gets built or not. I simply highlighted the article that I saw this morning so I have no interest in looking into it. Apart from that, I don't really have any desire to go over that dammed bridge to get to the circuit for the GP if it were to be held there Personally, I would rather see a few million quid ploughed into Brands Hatch to get it back up to GP standards so we have an option in respect of where the GP or any other international event can be held (so long as its not at Donnington )

Welsh MP wants the new proposed circuit of Wales circuit scrapped. I would have thought that once built and up and running it would be a good source of bringing money and investment into the area. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-39141355