Flashed!!!!
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 65,827
Likes: 2
From: FCUK
I have just been informed that my insurance will go up from GBP1,200 to 1,550 next year due to my accident.
Not bad though, I have no no claims and it is insured any driver over 30.
This seems very strange when a friend has just insured a 6 year old Toyota "somethingorother" which he paid 300 quid for... it cost him GBP 380 third party!!!!!
The insurance system here seems pretty screwed up!
Not bad though, I have no no claims and it is insured any driver over 30.
This seems very strange when a friend has just insured a 6 year old Toyota "somethingorother" which he paid 300 quid for... it cost him GBP 380 third party!!!!!
The insurance system here seems pretty screwed up!
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 4,983
Likes: 0
From: Leyland, Lancs.
Originally posted by tokyo_james
I have just been informed that my insurance will go up from GBP1,200 to 1,550 next year due to my accident.
Not bad though, I have no no claims and it is insured any driver over 30.
This seems very strange when a friend has just insured a 6 year old Toyota "somethingorother" which he paid 300 quid for... it cost him GBP 380 third party!!!!!
The insurance system here seems pretty screwed up!
I have just been informed that my insurance will go up from GBP1,200 to 1,550 next year due to my accident.
Not bad though, I have no no claims and it is insured any driver over 30.
This seems very strange when a friend has just insured a 6 year old Toyota "somethingorother" which he paid 300 quid for... it cost him GBP 380 third party!!!!!
The insurance system here seems pretty screwed up!
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 7,653
Likes: 4
From: The Beautiful South
Morning Guys,
Many thanks for all your comments / support / suggestions!
I know that radar detectors are a sound idea, but (and a lot of you will think this silly, and beleive I deserve every ticket I get - (1and 1 potentially pending
over the last 10 years) but I hate the way they clutter up the inside of the car!
The other thing is - as I mentioned - I am so aware of the camera which got me - would something beeping at me have made the difference (well, yes, maybe!) - it was a spur of the moment 'there's a gap and I'm going through it' thing!
Given some of the horrendous sums of money being paid in insurance (Brian - that really is grim
) I should not feel too sorry for myself -
Many thanks for all your comments / support / suggestions!
I know that radar detectors are a sound idea, but (and a lot of you will think this silly, and beleive I deserve every ticket I get - (1and 1 potentially pending
over the last 10 years) but I hate the way they clutter up the inside of the car!The other thing is - as I mentioned - I am so aware of the camera which got me - would something beeping at me have made the difference (well, yes, maybe!) - it was a spur of the moment 'there's a gap and I'm going through it' thing!
Given some of the horrendous sums of money being paid in insurance (Brian - that really is grim
) I should not feel too sorry for myself -
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 680
Likes: 0
From: Camberley
Hi Ian,
I have lots of cameras near me and a friend of mine is a cop. All the cameras can be set up to flash regardless of film, he said the only way to tell is whether the holes were open or closed.
When I asked him what he means, apparently there are two holes at the rear of the unit (the part you see as you aproach the camera) if they are the same colour as the unit no film, but if they are black or smoked glass in appearance the film is in and loaded.
Have a look next time you drive past, hope this will help put you at ease.
The other option of course is if the ticket comes through say that you were not driving and you do not recall who was. Innocent until proven guilty, this puts the emphasis on the police to 'prove' you were driving. Impossible as the cameras only take pictures of the rear of the car - hence why the new style ones take pictures from the front. Your case will never make it to court and you avoid 3/6 points.
Anthony
I have lots of cameras near me and a friend of mine is a cop. All the cameras can be set up to flash regardless of film, he said the only way to tell is whether the holes were open or closed.
When I asked him what he means, apparently there are two holes at the rear of the unit (the part you see as you aproach the camera) if they are the same colour as the unit no film, but if they are black or smoked glass in appearance the film is in and loaded.
Have a look next time you drive past, hope this will help put you at ease.
The other option of course is if the ticket comes through say that you were not driving and you do not recall who was. Innocent until proven guilty, this puts the emphasis on the police to 'prove' you were driving. Impossible as the cameras only take pictures of the rear of the car - hence why the new style ones take pictures from the front. Your case will never make it to court and you avoid 3/6 points.
Anthony
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 65,827
Likes: 2
From: FCUK
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Anthony
[B]Hi Ian,
The other option of course is if the ticket comes through say that you were not driving and you do not recall who was. Innocent until proven guilty, this puts the emphasis on the police to 'prove' you were driving. Impossible as the cameras only take pictures of the rear of the car - hence why the new style ones take pictures from the front. Your case will never make it to court and you avoid 3/6 points.
[B]Hi Ian,
The other option of course is if the ticket comes through say that you were not driving and you do not recall who was. Innocent until proven guilty, this puts the emphasis on the police to 'prove' you were driving. Impossible as the cameras only take pictures of the rear of the car - hence why the new style ones take pictures from the front. Your case will never make it to court and you avoid 3/6 points.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 7,446
Likes: 1
From: West Mids.
Not so. Not for offences of speeding anyway, where you would after all have no control over the person's behaviour who was driving. Assuming of course you're not in the car with him in which case you would be done for aiding and abetting.
If on the other hand, you allow someone to drive your car without a licence, L plates or bald tyres say, you would get done for permitting each of the offences. The driver would get done for each of them of course.
In the case of a firms vehicle, repmobiles, lorries, etc. it is the dubious honour of the Company Secretary to get done for permitting the offences.
If on the other hand, you allow someone to drive your car without a licence, L plates or bald tyres say, you would get done for permitting each of the offences. The driver would get done for each of them of course.
In the case of a firms vehicle, repmobiles, lorries, etc. it is the dubious honour of the Company Secretary to get done for permitting the offences.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,723
Likes: 0
From: Watford
Originally posted by Cedric Tomkinson
Not so. Not for offences of speeding anyway, where you would after all have no control over the person's behaviour who was driving. Assuming of course you're not in the car with him in which case you would be done for aiding and abetting.
If on the other hand, you allow someone to drive your car without a licence, L plates or bald tyres say, you would get done for permitting each of the offences. The driver would get done for each of them of course.
In the case of a firms vehicle, repmobiles, lorries, etc. it is the dubious honour of the Company Secretary to get done for permitting the offences.
Not so. Not for offences of speeding anyway, where you would after all have no control over the person's behaviour who was driving. Assuming of course you're not in the car with him in which case you would be done for aiding and abetting.
If on the other hand, you allow someone to drive your car without a licence, L plates or bald tyres say, you would get done for permitting each of the offences. The driver would get done for each of them of course.
In the case of a firms vehicle, repmobiles, lorries, etc. it is the dubious honour of the Company Secretary to get done for permitting the offences.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 65,827
Likes: 2
From: FCUK
Originally posted by Cedric Tomkinson
Not so. Not for offences of speeding anyway, where you would after all have no control over the person's behaviour who was driving. Assuming of course you're not in the car with him in which case you would be done for aiding and abetting.
If on the other hand, you allow someone to drive your car without a licence, L plates or bald tyres say, you would get done for permitting each of the offences. The driver would get done for each of them of course.
In the case of a firms vehicle, repmobiles, lorries, etc. it is the dubious honour of the Company Secretary to get done for permitting the offences.
Not so. Not for offences of speeding anyway, where you would after all have no control over the person's behaviour who was driving. Assuming of course you're not in the car with him in which case you would be done for aiding and abetting.
If on the other hand, you allow someone to drive your car without a licence, L plates or bald tyres say, you would get done for permitting each of the offences. The driver would get done for each of them of course.
In the case of a firms vehicle, repmobiles, lorries, etc. it is the dubious honour of the Company Secretary to get done for permitting the offences.
Is there a different offence for failing to provide the information of who was driving?
I thought that there was a case recently that went to the Court of Appeal where a woman refused to give the information of who was driving and claimed that it was a breach of her civil rights to force her to give information that could incriminate herself. She won the case originally, but the Court of Appeal overturned the decision.
still
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 7,446
Likes: 1
From: West Mids.
LOL Yes I'm sure. Yes of course you can be done for failing to provide details of the driver.
Most people of course just put their hands up as we should, but what I'm sure lies behind the advice someone was given earlier in the thread is that the final decision as to prosecution rests with The Crown Prosecution Service (Drum Roll Please) who are not noted for wanting to have go in too many contested matters.
Just anticipating the next question, I'm not sure if the offence of failing to provide driver details is endorsable!
Most people of course just put their hands up as we should, but what I'm sure lies behind the advice someone was given earlier in the thread is that the final decision as to prosecution rests with The Crown Prosecution Service (Drum Roll Please) who are not noted for wanting to have go in too many contested matters.
Just anticipating the next question, I'm not sure if the offence of failing to provide driver details is endorsable!
