was it single or duel carriageway?thought vans could do 70 on duel and you dont see many singles with a 70 limit
Any van over 2000kg laiden weight as listed in the v5 is limited to 10mph slower then the posted speed limit ie you should be doing 60 in a 70 dual carriageway, 50 in a 60 single carriageway. This restriction does not apply on motorways. Car derived vans ie astra type are usually under the 2000kg so are not governed by the restriction. Minibus's have a different restricted weight and the above comes into force when the listed laiden is over 3500kg . I also fell victim to getting done doing 70 mph on the A64 one early morning several years ago. I've recently done a speed awareness and tbh there not a bad thing, I thought this is going to be several hrs of my life I'll never get back but tbh it was a learning curve and it allowed me to brush up on what I had forgotten.
I think it is still ridiculous that an old law still exists for when vans were dodgy and dangerous back in the 40s, compared to where now, a new van are as safe as SUV's and smaller than many, or Vans that can do 130 MPH still be caught under this law, that could be a 3 or even 4 lane duel carriage way, (Not a Motorway) even the Lorry Speed has been put up to 50 MPH on a single carriage way, now the same as a Van. Never new it was weight related, some SUV's weigh more than that
A few months before I bought the 899 I was haring down the m25 well into 3 figures. Didn’t have mirrors on the bike but I could feel something behind me. Turned round and there was an undercover plod car with the blues and twos flashing. Genuinely thought it was game over, pulled over to the next lane, they sped alongside me and just made a slow down gesture with their hands. Felt sick with relief.
exactly, it needs an overhaul! So cause I could be heavy and dangerous, for low limits I have to go 10mph less than everyone else, but at the highest limit, yey, I can do the same speed!, yeah that works. What were they thinking?
The use of 'nominate' is not accidental or sloppy. To nominate is to propose someone formally, by naming them - think of nominating someone for office. From the latin, nominare, 'to name, call by name, give a name to'. As a legal term it entails the designation of a person to fulfil a duty; a nominee is a person to whom rights or duties would pass when named, as here. When they ask for a nomination, they don't mean, give us any old name, they mean, tell us whodunnit. And has been pointed out, they go nuts - conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, and a custodial sentence - if they find out that it was the wrong name.
Ahh i was fighting the same thing just over a year ago 43 in a 40 11pm at night A14 through the road works. Its was just me driving i said me and the old man was there couldn't remember who was driving ! send me a pic please to id who was driving knowing full well u would not see me ... This went on for 6 mths letters back and forth each letter taking a little longer thou recorded delivery every time. There 1st fook up was sending me the fine out 2 weeks after it happened. All they wanted me to do was sign the letter saying i was driving and pay the money arrrr nope ! i wrote back saying i will pay the money take the points but not signing the form because its a offence as it states on the paperwork that i didn't know who was driving plus the pic does not show me driving ... Got threatened with Bailiffs Court all manner of stuff thou held ground ! They gave up after 8 mths itsl about the money they don't care who was driving .... its all about the principle and i won with the biggest middle finger to the system :
@Packman there is a difference saying you do not know who was driving, and claiming someone was driving who was clearly not, I have also used that ploy many years ago after actually being fined, and given points although not I was not in court, I only found out when I received a debt collect letter a few months later, I had it all reversed to the point I had to state who was driving, of course I could not remember after 6 months, so they took me to court, and made me wait all day, before asking me again, I still said "how would I remember after 6 months", so they said ok "you can go home now", dropped the case, removed points, and cancelled debt collector etc.
My van at the time was a Pug Expert van im tall 6.2 so i use to have my sun visor down all the time hence no pic shot not done on purpose much lol As i said its all about the principle ....
The speed awareness courses are usually cheaper than the fine, and you have no points to decalre for insurance purposes for the next 5 years. It's a no brainer. As for time away from work, I could pick any day of the week for mine, I chose a Sunday morning. 4 hours out of my life was no big deal, I just missed a lie in that day. The suprising thing is I expected to be sitting in a room full of boy racers. most peopke were 40 - 55. We got asked a question at the start of the course that you reply to with a push button handset. "Do you think marginally speeding causes accidents" or something along those lines. I twigged straight away that they would ask again at the end of the course, so I voted YES. I was in a small group of 6 in a small room as the course was oversubscribed and all 6 people voted YES. When asked again at the end of the course I voted NO, result 5 out of 6 now agreed that speeding causes accidents. The tutors face was a picture, after the course someone had changed their mind and now thought speeding was safe.
Saw something that said that insurers aren't actually allowed to penalise you for having penalty points in the last 5 years as they are officially off your license in 4 years.
Not sure what you mean by that. Surely no insurer is under any obligation to issue insurance cover to any customer. Insurers can charge any premium they like for cover. If you are suggesting an insurer can be forced to provide you with cover when they don't want to, or forced to charge you a lower premium than they want to, I would like to know upon what that supposition is based and how it would work.
I've heard of people duelling with pistols, and with swords, but I've never heard of anyone duelling with a carriageway before...
We have to do "driver awareness" training for work. It's an on-line training package that is, basically, anti-speeding propoganda. It's all rubbish and everyone has learnt the right answers, so we all get top marks, even though it doesn't actually reflect how we drive at all... The "powers that be" are intent on brainwashing everyone into believeing that speed is the root cause of all accidents so that they can carry on justifying the speed cameras that make them so much money every year...
