Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by Cyril Haearn »

What % of speeding crimes are detected?
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Tangled Metal
Posts: 9505
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by Tangled Metal »

If you're retired I'm sure you could claim hardship on the grounds of being a grandparent and your grandchildren would suffer unfairly. I certain you'd rather follow the laws and regulations of driving first of course.
User avatar
Audax67
Posts: 6001
Joined: 25 Aug 2011, 9:02am
Location: Alsace, France
Contact:

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by Audax67 »

I'm amused at how necessary it was felt to be to showcase the name and value of the car. OK, he probably couldn't have done more than 110 mph in a bog standard family flivver but I doubt if that would have stopped the police nabbing him. It wouldn't hit the required level on the Wail's Inverted-Snobbery Gauge, though, so would probably have made it under the radar - unless, of course, his licence had been lifted, in which case he'd have been "one of our heroes" and they'd have been thumping that particular tub instead.
Have we got time for another cuppa?
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11009
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by Bonefishblues »

They got the DB9's price wrong :)
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by reohn2 »

Bonefishblues wrote:
Cunobelin wrote:The idea of revoking licences are a myth

If you look at the figures, they are mind boggling with repeat offenders getting away with it ..... repeatedly


There are more than 10,000 drivers with more than 12 points, with the record holder (Feb 2017) having 62 points on their licence, and there are half a dozen over 50, and over 100 with more than 24 points


Even if you give allowances for the 12 point margin, these people have continued to offend, and have unequivocally proved that they are totally incapable of driving legally and safely

I understand that relatively few are over 18 points (c200 last year). The absolutely ridiculous ones are true outliers which steal headlines but probably tell us little tbh.

Someone will have to enlighten me as to why anyone is driving a motorvehicle on UK roads with so many points on their driving licence or how anyone can retain their licence when a ban is automatically applied for speeding over 100mph.

These people have proved they aren't fit to drive on the roads safely,it's simple and to hell with their private circumstances,they shoud have thought of that when they were comitting the offences. :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by thirdcrank »

Bonefishblues wrote:They got the DB9's price wrong :)


I noticed that, but only because I was checking the brake horse power with the idea of using the thread title "Driving a coach and 500 brake horse power through the law" but I thought it might not fit.

I'd still be interested to know how many of these applications are rejected, because I doubt if it's many. My impression is that if you have the money to get one of the countless learned friends who present these applications, you are unlikely to lose your licence these days. Try googling "totting up" in the hope of finding the relevant legislation and you are likely to lose interest before you have ploughed through all the ads.
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11009
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by Bonefishblues »

That's why we have the legal system IMHO - to see if that statement is proven (all that's proven is they've accumulated lots of points), and to hear mitigation.

Or, as you suggest, treat it as a crime so serious that it deserves to be treated as one of strict liability without any mitigation being possible.

We pays our money and all that.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by thirdcrank »

I don't have any problem with the idea that the law has to be followed, even when dealing with people who have broken it, but this aspect is reaching absurdity in that a provision introduced to tighten up the system appears been ruthlessly exploited. I don't even think that individual cases matter all that much but together they give a pretty widespread impression that "they can't touch you for it." I could imagine some lawyers having a private wager on who could succeed with the most preposterous application. How about "My wife doesn't like getting her hair wet." :lol:

I latched onto this case as a pretty extreme example of first, somebody by who, by nature of their training eg administering quasi-judicial military discipline and their own knowledge of their future career pattern, must have known in advance the problems which would be caused by disqualification. Secondly, the extreme nature of the offence. So. I'll jump to the conclusion that this defendant assumed he had a good chance of escaping detection and more importantly in terms of totting up, getting away with it.

Role model to other ranks?
Barks
Posts: 310
Joined: 14 Oct 2016, 5:27pm

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by Barks »

In no way is it essential that a REME Army Officer needs to drive in the Falkland Islands - he can walk to most places around the airfield site and if he needed to go by a vehicle there would always be some one else who could drive him. Occasionally it might be inconvenient to him that he couldn’t drive himself but no way ‘operationally essential’. It is a travesty that he has avoided a ban on such a pretext, and even more that his CO undermined the system by testifying on the individuals behalf, which by the sheer fact of him committing the offence means that he cannot by definition be trusted. An Officer is required to demonstrate a level of unquestioned integrity - any breach should result in the individual resigning his Commision. He should have been hung out to dry by the Magisatre AND the Army. Shame on them all. One thing I will guarantee, this individual will drive at excessive speed again at some time in te future, it is the natural tendency of such arrogant individuals.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by reohn2 »

thirdcrank wrote:I don't have any problem with the idea that the law has to be followed, even when dealing with people who have broken it, but this aspect is reaching absurdity in that a provision introduced to tighten up the system appears been ruthlessly exploited. I don't even think that individual cases matter all that much but together they give a pretty widespread impression that "they can't touch you for it." I could imagine some lawyers having a private wager on who could succeed with the most preposterous application. How about "My wife doesn't like getting her hair wet." :lol:

I latched onto this case as a pretty extreme example of first, somebody by who, by nature of their training eg administering quasi-judicial military discipline and their own knowledge of their future career pattern, must have known in advance the problems which would be caused by disqualification. Secondly, the extreme nature of the offence. So. I'll jump to the conclusion that this defendant assumed he had a good chance of escaping detection and more importantly in terms of totting up, getting away with it.

Role model to other ranks?


Only last week it was reported on local BBC news that a very rich woman had been found guilty of drinking and driving (twice over the limit if memory serves).
Her plea for keeping her driving licence was that she couldn't very well walk the length of her 1/2 mile long driveway,and she couldn't do community service as she'd never worked.Its a hard life :? .
Thankfully she was banned for 12 months :D
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Tangled Metal
Posts: 9505
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by Tangled Metal »

Barks wrote:In no way is it essential that a REME Army Officer needs to drive in the Falkland Islands - he can walk to most places around the airfield site and if he needed to go by a vehicle there would always be some one else who could drive him. Occasionally it might be inconvenient to him that he couldn’t drive himself but no way ‘operationally essential’. It is a travesty that he has avoided a ban on such a pretext, and even more that his CO undermined the system by testifying on the individuals behalf, which by the sheer fact of him committing the offence means that he cannot by definition be trusted. An Officer is required to demonstrate a level of unquestioned integrity - any breach should result in the individual resigning his Commision. He should have been hung out to dry by the Magisatre AND the Army. Shame on them all. One thing I will guarantee, this individual will drive at excessive speed again at some time in te future, it is the natural tendency of such arrogant individuals.

I did wonder why he needed to drive. Surely any time he'd have to move by vehicle there would be others going with him to do the driving. If anything the only excessive hardship that I'd have expected that he'd experience is the boot up his behind from the CO.

But obviously in this case his CO doesn't think speed limits apply to army officers. Shame there's no higher up with integrity and the clout to sort them out. Obviously officer and a gentleman is outdated concept.
Tangled Metal
Posts: 9505
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by Tangled Metal »

A friend once told me of a rich lady approaching retirement age turned up at his kiosk in the jobcentre. His kiosk was downstairs where the most desperate would go to claim hardship. He dealt with the difficult or unusual cases = violent ones way too often.

However in this occasion the woman turned up because her husband had instructed her to pay her full pension stamp or whatever it was called. Basically never worked in her life but she wanted to make a payment to get a pension or something like that. Needless to say it was a big payment when he gave her the bill. Apparently she didn't even flinch one moment just put it on a card!

Some people eh?!
pete75
Posts: 16370
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by pete75 »

Hmmm he missed out on claiming it accelerated uncontrollably - probably would have got a not guilty verdict.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by thirdcrank »

On the subject of avoiding a totting up ban, here's Martin Porter in the interview already linked in the "Death by dangerous cycling" thread.

There’s a massive industry of lawyers out there who can almost guarantee getting a convicted motorist out of losing their license, for a price.

It’s easy for a lawyer to present the client as in hardship: “How am I going to get to work or get the kids to school?” And this is all premised on the assumption that the courts share that you can’t live a normal life without the ability to drive around. There are lots of people driving around with well over 12 points on their license.

It’s big business for these lawyers. It’s a fairly scandalous state of affairs.


http://www.cyclist.co.uk/news/3372/cycl ... -interview
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Driving an Aston Martin through the law

Post by Cyril Haearn »

What about magistrates? I thought they were decent people serving the community
Looks like the loophole lawyers can influence them, is that right?
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Post Reply