# Got a section 59 for speeding/driving without due care......



## arichmond64 (Dec 1, 2011)

.....and attention

I was driving home from my friends last night, about 3am, dual carriageway all the way, 50mph which I was doing for almost all of it. Before I get home, there is 2 sections of dual carrigeway with roundabouts in between, the first is about 1 mile long and is always dead, especially at 3am.

Any way, at the roundabout before this stretch of road, I noticed a Police car had already pulled someone, just off the roundabout, so I thought nothing of it, I put my foot down coming off the round about and hit about 90 further down the road, then slowed down and cruised the next into a 30 where I live. Out of no where I see these blue lights, can't effing believe it!!!!

I basically held my hands up, went into the back of his car for checks etc. and just had a general chat. He said he actually liked the car and was asking me about it, and my number plate. He gave me abit of a ticking off telling me he heard me accelerating away, and then issued something called an S59. If you get another in 12 months, your car gets impounded with £150 release fee, no questions, no appeals process.

I'm abit peed off withmyself, worried I might flag up on the ANPR systems and end up getting pulled for me trivial stuff.

I've read a few horror stories online, of people getting them for loud exhausts, accelerating too quick and overtaking.

Anyone else had one of these.


----------



## Pugwash69 (Jun 12, 2012)

No. I also have the dash cam in case I need to check exactly how fast I was going. I can't imagine he clocked you accurately in the dark unless they have some magic method now? Did you straight away admit to speeding?
I was pulled over years back after leaving a pub very sober (half a lager 3 hours earlier). I didn't honestly know how fast I had gone, so they breathalysed me and gave me a producer.


----------



## conlechi (May 6, 2006)

Not had one , and I'm too old to be out that time of night as well 



arichmond64 said:


> hit about 90 further down the road,


Might be an idea to edit your stated speed on a public forum :wink:


----------



## t'mill (Jul 31, 2012)

They're generally given to young backward baseball capped wearing hoodlums dicking about in supermarket carparks racing around etc. They're a lower level means of disposal for lower level traffic infringements. I think they're used as a means to educate the young hoodlums into changing their ways!


----------



## Pugwash69 (Jun 12, 2012)

conlechi said:


> Not had one , and I'm too old to be out that time of night as well
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Too late now you've quoted him.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

Let me get this straight, he issued you with this because he "heard you accelerating away". Does he have magic speed detecting ears or did he actually have proof you were speeding?


----------



## t'mill (Jul 31, 2012)

I don't think he needed proof of his speed to issue it, because if he did have proof, I'm sure the op would now be sporting 6 points on his licence and a fine.


----------



## TTSam (Dec 12, 2013)

I got one of these a few years back for "street racing" as the copper put it. Was in my mk2 focus ST and was having a bit of fun with a BMW. I wouldn't worry to much, just don't do anything blatantly stupid. They are basically the asbo of the motoring world

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Pugwash69 (Jun 12, 2012)

Reading this it sounds like the police was going out on a limb:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/section/59


----------



## arichmond64 (Dec 1, 2011)

brian1978 said:


> Let me get this straight, he issued you with this because he "heard you accelerating away". Does he have magic speed detecting ears or did he actually have proof you were speeding?


This is the problem people have with them, because the officer is effectively the judge and jury. If they don't like the way they see you driving, or what you did, they can give you one of these, and you can't do anything about it.

I've already scoured a fair few forums and there's quite alot of threads about people getting them for trivial stuff like I said. Accelerating too harshly, wheel spins, loud exhausts, congregating with other car owners (meets).

I mean, he really had no idea how fast I was going, just speculated because by the time he got in his car and after me, I was well away and I had probably slowed right down to the speed limit.

I'm just worried now that I will flash up on their ANPRs and they will be looking to pull me for anything they can now.

Can the Police give you a fine and points if they think you are driving dangerously, for example, I did take a slight racing line off the huge roundabout, and put my foot down.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

t'mill said:


> I don't think he needed proof of his speed to issue it, because if he did have proof, I'm sure the op would now be sporting 6 points on his licence and a fine.


Disregarding whether the op was speeding or not, he issued this by assumption alone. Only hearing the exhaust note no actual evidence or proof of anything.

That's ridiculous, but if the OP has stuck himself in it not much he can do now. This is why I tend not to converse with police that pull me over.


----------



## arichmond64 (Dec 1, 2011)

brian1978 said:


> t'mill said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think he needed proof of his speed to issue it, because if he did have proof, I'm sure the op would now be sporting 6 points on his licence and a fine.
> ...


There's nothing you can do to avoid these, google it and you'll find a fair few posts from forums just like this, of people being pulled for trivial stuff, speeding is actually a rare reason to be done.

He also wrote down "driving without due care and attention" which may have applied to me racing off the roundabout.

It's an ASBO like someone above said, if they don't like what they seen you doing, they basically say, don't do it again or we're taking your car.


----------



## Pugwash69 (Jun 12, 2012)

Fit a dash cam. Arm yourself with footage if you think you are driving safely and within the law. I almost got accused of overtaking on double white lines last year but he wasn't sure if he could see and gave me the benefit of the doubt. I had footage of me pulling back in before the lines, as I checked later! Useful if I needed it.

I personally don't see why he wasted his time chasing you down even if you did drive enthusiastically down an empty dual carriageway at night. Maybe it's a stretch of road used by the local yoof for racing?


----------



## t'mill (Jul 31, 2012)

You won't be triggered on ANPR. They would have put the fact you were issued a S.59 onto the PNC, so if you get pulled again for driving in an anti-social manner and the police do a vehicle check, it will ping up that you've already been issued a S.59. Don't worry about ANPR though.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

arichmond64 said:


> I'm just worried now that I will flash up on their ANPRs and they will be looking to pull me for anything they can now.
> 
> Can the Police give you a fine and points if they think you are driving dangerously, for example, I did take a slight racing line off the huge roundabout, and put my foot down.


You won't flash up on ANPR cameras unless you are doing something wrong, no tax etc,.....

They can't just fine you if they feel like it, they need proof. 2 independent corroborating sources of evidence or it will get chucked out of court if you challenge it. Accelerating away hard isn't an offence unless you were not in control of the car or did something dangerous.

Lesson for future, deny everything till you are sure they can prove it, you don't have to speak to the police for more than confirming your name and address. This is why they ask you to get in the back of the car, it's puts you under pressure and makes you easy to manipulate. If they ask you to get out your car politely refuse.


----------



## arichmond64 (Dec 1, 2011)

Reading some forums it appears they can't actually give you an S59 for speeding, because they can either prove it, or they can't. The reason I got it, was he believed I was "driving without due care and attention"

This thread below has some interesting posts in it.

http://londonbikers.com/forums/printtopic736500.aspx

EDIT:

This is a post from that link, since he was on his own, am I correct in thinking it would always be his word against mine?

You should ONLY be issued a s59 if there was an offence committed for which you could be prosecuted, and only if that offence falls under s3 of the RTA, which is driving without due care and attention.

ONLY if the Police Officer could have arrested you for that offence and prosecuted you for that offence can they issue a s59, bearing in mind that this does not affect their decision to prosecute.

As someone said earlier, write a letter to the commander of Kent police and ask what offence it is you committed to be issued with a s59, if it is merely the suspicion of speeding, that shouldn't be enough to lead to a prosecution for driving without due care, and therefore should not warrant a s59 notice.

You should then ask for the s59 notice to be removed as it was issued incorrectly.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

arichmond64 said:


> Reading some forums it appears they can't actually give you an S59 for speeding, because they can either prove it, or they can't. The reason I got it, was he believed I was "driving without due care and attention"
> 
> This thread below has some interesting posts in it.
> 
> ...


It was a lone policeman, should he even be pulling people, let alone issuing these "asbos" of the motoring world? 
Am I wrong is assuming you need 2 officers to issue a ticket?

Sounds to me like this s59 is open to all sorts of abuse, or is all above is true the officer is a little out of order issuing it.


----------



## arichmond64 (Dec 1, 2011)

brian1978 said:


> arichmond64 said:
> 
> 
> > Reading some forums it appears they can't actually give you an S59 for speeding, because they can either prove it, or they can't. The reason I got it, was he believed I was "driving without due care and attention"
> ...


This is exactly what people are saying on other forums.

If the officer is having a bad day, and he sees you doing something he doesn't like, he can just give you this S59, which on the face of it, isn't much, but then it can result in you having to pay £150 to get your own car back, when there's no proof you've even committed a crime.

I've read on one forum, a guy got one for overtaking the 2 cars infront of him as he came onto a dual carriageway from the slip road. The officer said he wasn't being courteous to other road users or some bollocks.


----------



## Pugwash69 (Jun 12, 2012)

brian1978 said:


> It was a lone policeman, should he even be pulling people, let alone issuing these "asbos" of the motoring world?
> Am I wrong is assuming you need 2 officers to issue a ticket?


It was a lone policeman who pulled me over in November. I would assume they also have dash cams. He was very courteous and friendly and just wished me a safe journey once he was convinced I wasn't an uninsured scumbag.


----------



## fixitagaintomoz (Apr 26, 2013)

I know a friend from a while ago who got his 2nd s59 and was charged to release his car after it was towed. Admittedly he deserved both s59s. He was warned a 3rd would lead to his car being crushed.

If the policeman heard you reach high revs in 2nd gear and then accelerate through 3rd hard on your way to 90 then he can reasonably assume you were going above the posted 90. Also if on your exit you crossed lanes with no indication then that could be frowned upon if they want to be picky.

I usually find its best to be straight with police- they aren't daft and allow a little leeway if your honest. I've been pulled a few times for speeding and got away with it because ice been honest and shown that I am considerate of the conditions, and other road users.

Sounds like your cop was a little low on his numbers for the night so issued yours to bump em up.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

fixitagaintomoz said:


> If the policeman heard you reach high revs in 2nd gear and then accelerate through 3rd hard on your way to 90 then he can reasonably assume you were going above the posted 90. Also if on your exit you crossed lanes with no indication then that could be frowned upon if they want to be picky.
> .


They can't issue fines on assumptions and other fantasy evidence.



fixitagaintomoz said:


> I usually find its best to be straight with police- they aren't daft and allow a little leeway if your honest. I've been pulled a few times for speeding and got away with it because ice been honest and shown that I am considerate of the conditions, and other road users. .


It doesn't look like being honest helped the OP at all, infact it looks like being honest is what landed him in it in the first place :wink:

(Well I'm aware what he did landed him in it, but being honest only gave the police ammunition to issue the ticket)


----------



## fixitagaintomoz (Apr 26, 2013)

They can't, but fact is 3rd gear red line is above the national speed limit- fact.

Plus he didnt- he issued it because the OP was honest. *edit didn't see you say that too lol*

Don't get me wrong I don't agree with the OP getting a s59 for this im just pointing out that the police aren't daft and can tell when people are speeding


----------



## arichmond64 (Dec 1, 2011)

I don't think it mattered that I was honest, strictly, you can't even give these for speeding, because speeding is black and white, the main reason was "driving without due care and attention" which I'm presuming is him seeing me race off the roundabout, which is obviously a matter of opinion, so needs no proof for a S59.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

fixitagaintomoz said:


> They can't, but fact is 3rd gear red line is above the national speed limit- fact.
> 
> Plus he didnt- he issued it because the OP was honest. *edit didn't see you say that too lol*
> 
> Don't get me wrong I don't agree with the OP getting a s59 for this im just pointing out that the police aren't daft and can tell when people are speeding


As a person I have no doubt they can ascertain that he could have been speeding at redline in 3rd, but that's not good enough. He could have for e.g., accelerated to redline in 2nd then slowed right back down and did it again. Unlikely but possible.

Could have been another car that did it? Many things. That's why you need proper evidence not just a bunch of assumptions.


----------



## fixitagaintomoz (Apr 26, 2013)

arichmond64 said:


> I don't think it mattered that I was honest, strictly, you can't even give these for speeding, because speeding is black and white, the main reason was "driving without due care and attention" which I'm presuming is him seeing me race off the roundabout, which is obviously a matter of opinion, so needs no proof for a S59.


Well if it was based on that then his opinion is really quite daft. 3 am with no other road users and going at I assume not much more than 50 off the roundabout, when the limits 50 shouldn't be an issue. If anything you're saving the planet by not slowing down to speed up :wink:

If he'd seen you drifting around it then fair enough but I'm guessing you didn't do that!


----------



## arichmond64 (Dec 1, 2011)

fixitagaintomoz said:


> If he'd seen you drifting around it then fair enough but I'm guessing you didn't do that!


I actually wasn't going quick into the roundabout, because I seen him. Putting my foot down out of the roundabout might have been a slight error, but like you say, it was 3am, a dead dual carriageway, and even when I was in his sight, I wasn't doing more than 50mph.

An S59 is basically a way to say, I don't like what you did, I can't prove you did anything wrong, so I'm giving you this "warning"


----------



## L33JSA (Jun 30, 2010)

Yeh I got one about a year or so ago for dicking around in the BM, my mate was behind me in his Clio 172. Not doing anything particularly naughty or speeding just generally being a bit loud.

I hadn't realised that the car in front of me was a new unmarked BMW 530d [smiley=bigcry.gif] [smiley=bigcry.gif]

Anyway we pulled into a restaurant car park and the car turned round up the road and came back into the car park and gave us both a telling off & a Section 59 each!! 

Apparently he had been waiting with his camera switched on the front of his car for me & my mate to overtake him but fortunately for us and unfortunately for him that never happened. :lol:


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

Don't worry about it.


----------



## Ian_W (Oct 19, 2008)

Unless they could of provided something to prove you where speeding you shouldn't of admitted anything!

I got a caught in a similar way in December, empty dual carriageway with a 40 limit and I was doing a little under £60.

Had me on the speed gun so not much in the way of an argument :lol: £100 fine around these parts though (along with the 3 points!)


----------



## firediamonduk (Dec 24, 2013)

I think the coppers on night shift must get bored and just look for people to pull. I have only ever been pulled over once and it was driving my dads clapped out old J reg BMW 525i at midnight. I saw him sitting in a junction and as i drove past he pulled out behind me and pulled me as i had a tail light out (The warning had come on that journey) Luckily i was insured to drive it and he eventually let me on my way after going round the car trying to find something to do me on and finding everything was in order ... Possibly the most nervous 5 mins of my driving career though as i had no idea if the car was legal to drive or not, it was a bit of a heap tbh but they found nada and let me on my way with a "make sure you get that sidelight fixed..."


----------



## ryanm8655 (Oct 28, 2013)

I got one of these when I was 18 for having some fun with another car. By the time they caught up we had slowed down as there was more traffic and they issued us both with one of these.

I saw it as a good alternative to points and didn't drive like a dick in future. Never got pulled over again, so I wouldn't worry.


----------



## V6RUL (May 28, 2009)

If you wanna use the roads as a playground, expect the bullies to turn up every now and then..
Steve


----------



## slingy (May 11, 2012)

Im a 100% sure every single one of us puts their foot down every now and again, when there nobody about. Otherwise, whats the point of having these cars.....yes some people might 'say' they only put their foot down on private road or a track but it their not being honest.... disappointed to read this story everyone might aswell have smart cars ....


----------



## chigmuss (Jan 14, 2005)

On the flip side you exceeded the limit by 40mph and didn't go to court, get fined/banned and your insurance didn't go throughout the roof.


----------



## ryanm8655 (Oct 28, 2013)

^exactly.

Sure everyone might boot it now and again but it doesn't make it legal...


----------



## drjam (Apr 7, 2006)

chigmuss said:


> On the flip side you exceeded the limit by 40mph and didn't go to court, get fined/banned and your insurance didn't go throughout the roof.


+1, sounds like you've had a great result. 
Just give a relieved shrug and move on (albeit maybe with a bit more caution next time, especially given that you did actually see the police car before offending!).


----------



## jamman (May 6, 2002)

Glad there some common sense entering this thread instead of the usual anti Police plebs that seem to turn up on every Police related post.


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

The usual bloody ridiculous responses as we've come to expect here.

The OP has admitted ragging his car down a 50mph stretch of road at 90mph. He has been seen doing it by a police officer (whom he knew was there as he'd just seen him!) and when pulled over he admitted his offence, presumably under caution, and very well could have been issued with a ticket as a result. He has been dealt with *very leniently*. He has _not_ been prosecuted for anything, he has _not_ been given any kind of fine _nor_ any points on his licence. Instead he has been issued a notice that basically says if he is caught committing any other traffic offence in the future (within a specified and limited period of time), or if his car is involved in any such offence in the future, then in addition to being prosecuted for that offence his car _may_ be siezed.

So, given the offence the OP admits he committed he _could_ have lost his licence. Let's just forget for the moment what the police might have been able to prove - let's look at what the OP _actually_ did. Over 30mph over the limit means he _deserves_ to have got an automatic ban. But he hasn't got that - he's essentially been given a warning with a requirement to do nothing more than drive within the law for the forseeable future. _Very_ lucky boy.

And do we see the OP condemned for his foolishness? Is the police officer congratulated for taking sensible action that could in future save someone's life, including that of the OP? No, _we get the cop slagged off_. How bloody typical! So presumably what the police are supposed to do is allow idiots to go racing down roads at nearly twice the speed limit and just ignore it?

Seriously, what is wrong with you people?

Now cue all the expected responses that conveniently ignore the fact that the OP actually _did_ break the law, admitted to breaking the law but still bang on with dodgy opinions on rules of evidence in an effort to somehow blame the police for the OPs offending behaviour.


----------



## slingy (May 11, 2012)

everyone on here rags it, or has ragged it....


----------



## firediamonduk (Dec 24, 2013)

To be fair speeding down an empty dual carrage way at 3am isnt doing anyone any harm... Worst case is he lost it and killed himself but no harm to anyone else... The way i see it is the speed limits are there for a reason, that is to proctect other road users. If there are no other road users then there is no reason for a speed limit and therefore i dont see a reason not to do 90mph down an empty dual carrageway should the urge take you...

Admittedly i think i might have been a little more cautious having seen a police car on the roundabout and would not have given it the beans off the roundabout but either way... there is a big difference in doing 90mph down an emtpy road at 3am and doing it during the day when there might be other cars/ bikes/ pedestrians etc... on the road


----------



## David C (Apr 15, 2013)

firediamonduk said:


> Admittedly I think I might have been a little more cautious having seen a police car on the roundabout and would not have given it the beans off the roundabout...


Exactly...!!


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

Ian_W said:


> Unless they could of provided something to prove you where speeding you shouldn't of admitted anything!
> 
> :


59 is not speed relevant

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## L33JSA (Jun 30, 2010)

jamman said:


> Glad there some common sense entering this thread....


Shame there wasn't any common sense at the time of the offence...



arichmond64 said:


> I noticed a Police car had already pulled someone





arichmond64 said:


> I put my foot down coming off the round about and hit about 90 further down the road


Guaranteed the OP won't be making that epic fail of a mistake again in a hurry [smiley=bigcry.gif] [smiley=bigcry.gif]


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

firediamonduk said:


> I think the coppers on night shift must get bored and just look for people to pull./quote]
> 
> You couldn't more wrong.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## L33JSA (Jun 30, 2010)

firediamonduk said:


> If there are no other road users then there is no reason for a speed limit and therefore i dont see a reason not to do 90mph down an empty dual carrageway should the urge take you...


Apart from the obvious costs to the local police, fire & ambulance services when you stack it, the road needs to be closed thus causing annoyance to other road users and you need cutting out of your car and then taking to hospital where medical costs are then involved...etc etc...

Don't get me wrong I'm guilty of speeding on empty roads as much as the next person but there are other reasons for speed limits that don't just surround the safety aspects of things.


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

firediamonduk said:


> To be fair speeding down an empty dual carrage way at 3am isnt doing anyone any harm... Worst case is he lost it and killed himself but no harm to anyone else...


What about the officer to first respond who has to count how many suppurate body parts he has left? No harm to him/her?

Wrong, wrong again.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## arichmond64 (Dec 1, 2011)

V6RUL said:


> If you wanna use the roads as a playground, expect the bullies to turn up every now and then..
> Steve


Oh very wise words, you must be some old Tibet monk, riding that high horse, atop of a mountain. I hope you never exceed the speed limit.

I actually hold nothing against the copper, and in a situation like this, I just feel like the best thing to do is not act like a prick, and see what happens. I never really admitted to speeding, he just presumed I was going 80+, and I never denied it.

I've already said though, speeding can't be the reason to get an S59, it's for "dangerous driving" effectively. I think you can be done for this if there is two coppers, but he couldn't have given me a worse punishment because he was alone.

I got the worst possible outcome, which isn't really that bad so it ended OK.


----------



## L33JSA (Jun 30, 2010)

arichmond64 said:


> V6RUL said:
> 
> 
> > If you wanna use the roads as a playground, expect the bullies to turn up every now and then..
> ...


I don't think Steve was actually having a dig at you there.....but what he says does make sense. Pretty much as the saying goes 'if you can't do the time don't do the crime' type thing.



arichmond64 said:


> I think you can be done for this if there is two coppers, but he couldn't have given me a worse punishment because he was alone.


Not true.....don't forget they all have cameras mounted in their cars now and that's all the evidence they need. That's provided the cameras actually capture you doing something



arichmond64 said:


> I got the worst possible outcome, which isn't really that bad so it ended OK.


I wouldn't say you got the worse outcome.......a. you and your car are still alive b. you've still got your licence c. you didn't get any points - I think you did quite well.


----------



## arichmond64 (Dec 1, 2011)

Mark Davies said:


> The usual bloody ridiculous responses as we've come to expect here.
> 
> *The OP has admitted ragging his car down a 50mph stretch of road at 90mph. He has been seen doing it by a police officer (whom he knew was there as he'd just seen him!) and when pulled over he admitted his offence, presumably under caution, and very well could have been issued with a ticket as a result.* He has been dealt with *very leniently*. He has _not_ been prosecuted for anything, he has _not_ been given any kind of fine _nor_ any points on his licence. Instead he has been issued a notice that basically says if he is caught committing any other traffic offence in the future (within a specified and limited period of time), or if his car is involved in any such offence in the future, then in addition to being prosecuted for that offence his car _may_ be siezed.
> 
> ...


He didn't see my going 90, he couldn't even confirm I was speeding because he had just set off after me when I hit that speed and slowed straight after, so he couldn't possible ticket me for speeding, he then caught up with me about 2 miles from where he had actually seen my driving away. Speed is also not what an S59 is issued for.

I don't think the reaction to the copper has been so bad haha. If he had the option to do more if he wanted to, I'm very happy with the result, and hold nothing against him.


----------



## arichmond64 (Dec 1, 2011)

L33JSA said:


> Not true.....don't forget they all have cameras mounted in their cars now and that's all the evidence they need. That's provided the cameras actually capture you doing something
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He didn't capture me committing any offence on camera, he was out of his car for the roundabout, and by the time he got to me, I wasn't speeding. He just didn't like my exit from the roundabout, and knew I was speeding. So I'm saying there is probably no other legit punishment he could have given me.

Yeh true, there are worse outcomes.


----------



## timmeh2k (Nov 9, 2013)

Mark Davies said:


> So, given the offence the OP admits he committed he _could_ have lost his licence. Let's just forget for the moment what the police might have been able to prove - let's look at what the OP _actually_ did. Over 30mph over the limit means he *deserves* to have got an automatic ban. But he hasn't got that - he's essentially been given a warning with a requirement to do nothing more than drive within the law for the forseeable future. _Very_ lucky boy.


I think saying that the OP deserves to lose his licence is a bit steep if not down right ridiculous. Doing 90 at 3am on a deserted and presumably straight dual carriageway isn't particularly dangerous if you are paying attention, people exceed these speeds daily on the german autobahns without causing horrendous death and destruction. I think you're slightly over the top comment is worse than anything said against the police in the thread. It is interesting that he can give an S59 for, in essence, having a slightly loud exhaust and not following the markings on an empty roundabout. I will make sure I drive like an OAP the next time I exit a roundabout with a policeman within a mile of me


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

Mark Davies said:


> The usual bloody ridiculous responses as we've come to expect here.
> 
> The OP has admitted ragging his car down a 50mph stretch of road at 90mph. He has been seen doing it by a police officer (whom he knew was there as he'd just seen him!) and when pulled over he admitted his offence, presumably under caution, and very well could have been issued with a ticket as a result. He has been dealt with *very leniently*. He has _not_ been prosecuted for anything, he has _not_ been given any kind of fine _nor_ any points on his licence. Instead he has been issued a notice that basically says if he is caught committing any other traffic offence in the future (within a specified and limited period of time), or if his car is involved in any such offence in the future, then in addition to being prosecuted for that offence his car _may_ be siezed.
> 
> ...


James I cant see any "anti police plebs" on this thread, just people giving opinions.

And Mark nobody is slagging off this officer. Unless i missed something, you just made that up.
He also didn't SEE him do anything. He assumed he was speeding by listening to the noise of the car, which I think is a bit presumptuous. Whether he was right or wrong is neither here nor there. Next time he makes an "assumption" based on very little evidence indeed he might not be so accurate.

What I don't agree with is a law that allows police officers to issue tickets or reprimand people on blind assumptions or personal opinions alone, what happened to actually catching people in the act? 
It just feel it leaves it open to mistakes and in exceptional cases, abuse.

Nobody should be judge jury and executioner. And in my opinion, laws like this are getting close to that.

Lets be clear on one thing, i'm not disputing what the OP did was wrong. It was silly, especially after seeing the officer at the road side. But as I have said nobody actually seen him do anything, how is it right to be able to accuse with no real evidence?


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

The argument that it is safer at night whilst it holds some merit it is not absolute. I remember driving home from a club (approx 1982) it was 3 am and turning into our lane, I held 3rd gear rather than slowing down into second, nearly running over a white terrier walking 50 yards in front of it's owner, the local copper who had just come off shift.   

Being brought up in a village where the local copper knew everyone, he didn't have to say anything.


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

For those that are insinuating it's fine to drive at speeds after dark... You could be the Stig for all I care. If you drive to excessive speeds then you should accept the risks that are taken and not dismiss them.

You haven't a clue what might appear a few yards ahead, over that brow, around that bend etc etc. It could be a 7 year old on a bike.. It could be YOUR 7 year old on a bike.

Non of us are perfect, I exceed speed limits on a daily basis. I have valid reason. And I justify every action.

To sit behind a keyboard and say "it's fine because it's past 1pm" is pathetic. Accept your decisions. Don't excuse them.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## slingy (May 11, 2012)

simno44 said:


> For those that are insinuating it's fine to drive at speeds after dark... You could be the Stig for all I care. If you drive to excessive speeds then you should accept the risks that are taken and not dismiss them.
> 
> You haven't a clue what might appear a few yards ahead, over that brow, around that bend etc etc. It could be a 7 year old on a bike.. It could be YOUR 7 year old on a bike.
> 
> ...


I wonder whether you will answer this honestly .....Have you ever put your foot down in your TT and exceeded the speed limit on a quiet road?


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

slingy said:


> simno44 said:
> 
> 
> > For those that are insinuating it's fine to drive at speeds after dark... You could be the Stig for all I care. If you drive to excessive speeds then you should accept the risks that are taken and not dismiss them.
> ...


Silly question really mate. Of course I have put my foot down. But then I'm not attempting to excuse my actions am I?

The point Im making is, for those that choose to.. To do what they want. But don't try make out that it's fine because it's just not. Doesn't matter what time of day if is, what you ate for breakfast or what socks your wearing. The same consequence's apply. And they are not to be dismissed through ignorance.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## slingy (May 11, 2012)

simno44 said:


> slingy said:
> 
> 
> > simno44 said:
> ...


If its not 'fine' as you say, why are you doing it? and whats your justification for doing so?


----------



## Jay89 (Aug 21, 2013)

Are people really making this much fuss over the OP doing 90mph on an empty dual carriageway in the early hours of the morning? IMO an able driver is more than safe to drive like this at that time of day, what the law says is a different matter but rules are there to be bent. If this is such a bad thing why do the over reacting people drive a TT? Wouldn't you be better off with something nice and steady like a micra? At least once. Week I'd say I drive at 90mph on quite roads and I haven't had one accident yet


----------



## firediamonduk (Dec 24, 2013)

simno44 said:


> slingy said:
> 
> 
> > simno44 said:
> ...


I am not dismissing the risking, i am just saying they are significantly reduced. I still slow down round corners, keep to my side of the road and keep a very keen eye out when i am driving at the speed limit, let alone when i am exceeding the limit. I think it comes down to judging the situation... In the case of the OP he judged badly as he saw the PC and still did it. Driving is all about weighing up risks and making decisions. The point i was making is that there is significantly less risk driving round at 3am than 3pm... and if something does go wrong, yes there are still consiquences but they are much reduced than they would during the day...


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

slingy said:


> simno44 said:
> 
> 
> > slingy said:
> ...


If you are referring to my post where I said I exceed daily and that I justify my every action. My answer to that is that is my job and I'm trained to do so.

When I'm not at work .. Ask your self the same question and you have your answer. But again. I'm not sat here trying to convince myself that it's valid at certain times over others am I?

Nor am I saying not to do it... Each to their own. But don't claim it's "safe". Get me?

I'm not going to argue with you mate.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

firediamonduk said:


> simno44 said:
> 
> 
> > slingy said:
> ...


Sorry fella. I wasn't targeting anyone specific.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

firediamonduk said:


> simno44 said:
> 
> 
> > slingy said:
> ...


Sorry fella. I wasn't targeting anyone specific.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## NoMark (Jul 6, 2011)

timmeh2k said:


> Mark Davies said:
> 
> 
> > So, given the offence the OP admits he committed he _could_ have lost his licence. Let's just forget for the moment what the police might have been able to prove - let's look at what the OP _actually_ did. Over 30mph over the limit means he *deserves* to have got an automatic ban. But he hasn't got that - he's essentially been given a warning with a requirement to do nothing more than drive within the law for the forseeable future. _Very_ lucky boy.
> ...


Well if you look at it from the perspective of the law, 30mph over the limit 'can' lead to an automatic ban. so in the 'eyes of the law' he deserves it. I think that is the point Mark was trying to make.


----------



## NoMark (Jul 6, 2011)

Double post


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

firediamonduk said:


> simno44 said:
> 
> 
> > slingy said:
> ...


Sorry fella. I wasn't targeting anyone specific.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

It would appear my phone is playing up. Sorry for any multiple posts.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

NoMark said:


> timmeh2k said:
> 
> 
> > Mark Davies said:
> ...


"In the eyes of the law" he doesn't deserve it, many different factors must be taken into consideration and it would be up to a judge to determine the level of punishment he "deserves". In the eyes of Mark Davis however he clearly did deserve it. 
But thats Mark's opinion nothing more.


----------



## slingy (May 11, 2012)

If its not 'fine' as you say, why are you doing it? and whats your justification for doing so?[/quote]

If you are referring to my post where I said I exceed daily and that I justify my every action. My answer to that is that is my job and I'm trained to do so.

When I'm not at work .. Ask your self the same question and you have your answer. But again. I'm not sat here trying to convince myself that it's valid at certain times over others am I?

Nor am I saying not to do it... Each to their own. But don't claim it's "safe". Get me?

I'm not going to argue with you mate.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.[/quote]

It cool mate im not arguing with you either....I actually think this is a interesting discussion.

Probably not the best idea to boot it after seeing the police around, but this could have happened to any one of us imo. Its bugging me all the all the people with a hollier than thou attitude to speeding when I can almost guarantee we all speed from time to time. Speeding is not big or clever and can be dangerous. Im a careful driver and economy wise id guess 95% of the time I just poodle along to save fill ups, but I do put my foot down otherwise I might aswell get a smart car as I said


----------



## arichmond64 (Dec 1, 2011)

I've just gone past where it happened, can't actually believe how silly I was to do it, his car was about 15 yards from the lane I was in on the roundabout, and about 35 from the exit.

I don't actually boot it everywhere either, like the post above, most of the time I am just cruising, like I was that night, but this specific part of road is always clear, straight and open, so it's normally the place where I do open up if I fancy it.

To who ever said I "Deserve" to lose my licence blah blah, please, just stop. Does it mean every time you go over the speed limit you "deserve" a £60 fine and 3 points


----------



## firediamonduk (Dec 24, 2013)

simno44 said:


> Sorry fella. I wasn't targeting anyone specific.


NP my first post was not quite worded how i thought it in my head 

I think it is all just about weighing up the risks and making a judgement call... That, at the end of the day, determins how good a driver you are as everything we do on the roads is as a result of the decisions we make... If you make a bad decisions sometimes you have a near miss but get away with it, sometimes you arent so lucky, either way you should learn from it and wont do it again... For example i doubt the OP will boot it off a roundabout when he sees a copper sat on the side of the road but i garuntee he will still boot it off that very same roundabout when there isnt a PC there... He will have learnt his lesson from his mistake this time.

I agree the police have a job to do and, at 3am, probably havent got many other pressing matters to deal with so chased after him. I am not sure about the issuing of the reckless driving thing but that was presumably what he thought was just at the time... They try their best to keep rubbish drivers off the road and normally give honest genuine people a bit of slack. At least you know they give these tickets out to spotty teans who drive their clapped out old Saxos racing through the city centre and kill a group of people. These are the people who need to be educated and taken off the road as these are the people who do the real damage...

Life is just a series of decisions and it is the choices you make that defines you... 8)


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

firediamonduk said:


> simno44 said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry fella. I wasn't targeting anyone specific.
> ...


Again I don't mean to come across argumentative but that comment is not accurate by any stretch of the imagination.

3am is when most forces lose NPT officers, specials and PCSO. Their shift ends at that time. So unless they are strung up on an incident or on scene guard awaiting hand over the effective "on hand" numbers drop drastically. Meaning everything runs through the limited task force that is at hand until 7 in the morning when NPT, special and PCSO comes back on grid. 
So you find traffic, dogs and specialised dealing with a lot more situations like domestics etc etc.

I can assure you that the radio is rarely quiet. You will be asking how many donuts they eat per shift next  lol

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## Pugwash69 (Jun 12, 2012)

So how many doughnuts is it? I need to know!


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

At least 4 mate.










Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## Pugwash69 (Jun 12, 2012)

Wasn't that a box of 12?


----------



## jamman (May 6, 2002)

Pugwash69 said:


> Wasn't that a box of 12?


Think that was a night they pulled me over, I scoffed eight before they tazzzzzzzered me


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

Pugwash69 said:


> Wasn't that a box of 12?


Does Someone need a maths lesson? 

Box of twelve. 
Divided equally between two officers (on lunch) 
There are 4 left in the picture.

How many does each officer scoff?

Yep... 4

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

The other 4 go the the custody Sgt in return for his mercy.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## arichmond64 (Dec 1, 2011)

I always thought the doughnut crack was just American.

Simno, any advice on how to get let off easier if this happens again haha?


----------



## Pugwash69 (Jun 12, 2012)

Keep a box of Krispy Kreme in the boot as a bribe?


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

Pugwash knows the score. Lol

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

L33JSA said:


> firediamonduk said:
> 
> 
> > If there are no other road users then there is no reason for a speed limit and therefore i dont see a reason not to do 90mph down an empty dual carrageway should the urge take you...
> ...


sensationalisim apart,, why would you suggest that he is going to stack it, are you privy to some inside information here about road worthiness of his car or his inability to drive properly or what ? ,, I don t get this type of reaction :roll:


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## L33JSA (Jun 30, 2010)

roddy said:


> I don t get this type of reaction :roll:


....and what type of reaction is that exactly?? :roll:


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

to me it seems very strange indeed,,, Audi spend millions of euros ( deutchmark whatever ), endless man hours designing, developing , testing and producing a vehicle which is proven to be safe at speeds of up to ( and some times more than) 140 mph, yet you are saying he is lucky not to have crashed it doing just a little more than half that speed, in what must be about the safest possible environment ( with the exception of a diss used airfield ) ,, why ?? as i say, unless you are privy to some other information


----------



## L33JSA (Jun 30, 2010)

roddy said:


> yet you are saying he is lucky not to have crashed it doing just a little more than half that speed


Tell me......where exactly do I say that he is lucky not to have crashed it....


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

*WHEN* you stack it.

As opposed to...

* IF * you stack it.

Think that's what roddy is getting at.


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

roddy said:


> to me it seems very strange indeed,,, Audi spend millions of euros ( deutchmark whatever ), endless man hours designing, developing , testing and producing a vehicle which is proven to be safe at speeds of up to ( and some times more than) 140 mph, yet you are saying he is lucky not to have crashed it doing just a little more than half that speed, in what must be about the safest possible environment ( with the exception of a diss used airfield ) ,, why ?? as i say, unless you are privy to some other information


Audi spent millions of euros developing the car, but the driver probably spent a few hundred quid learning to drive, then spent the next 10 years forgetting all the stuff they were taught.

Even the best drivers regularly makes mistakes. Driving fast increases the chances of a mistake resulting in a crash, and increases the severity of a crash if it happens. I think it's good for drivers to acknowledge that, even if they then choose to boot it occasionally.


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

I'm sure we all take liberties with speed from time to time and I'm sure we all do it sensibly and responsibly, but accelerating to 30 mph in excess of the prevailing limit when you've just seen a parked police car is cavalier in the extreme.

We all know the rules - if you break 'em don't winge when you get a red card. :wink:


----------



## L33JSA (Jun 30, 2010)

brian1978 said:


> *WHEN* you stack it.
> 
> As opposed to...
> 
> ...


Yeh it was more in context of the royal 'you'. I was pointing out that there were more reasons behind a speed limit than just 'if it appears it's safe to do so'.



roddy said:


> Audi spend millions of euros ( deutchmark whatever ), endless man hours designing, developing , testing and producing a vehicle which is proven to be safe at speeds of up to ( and some times more than) 140 mph,


No where do I mention anything to do with the capabilities of the car. I'm sure even you are aware there are a million and one other factors that can cause an accident - who's to say when you are driving in excess of the speedlimit that a fox won't decide to run across the road and you take the last minute decision to try and avoid it....lose control and crash. Or if a lorry has just dumped a load of diesel all over the road ahead of you. All things that you can never ever predict on a public road no matter how late or how deserted it appears to be.

Oh and don't forget that despite Audi spending a fortune on the TT's development....they still managed to release a car that was seemingly easy to loose control of at high speed - hence the recall on wishbones & spoilers!

Racing teams also spend millions on developing cars that can do 200+ mph as safely as possible.....yet they still manage to crash - this is usually down to driver error or some external factor that they couldnt have predicted.

No object travelling at any speed is invincible - there's always a chance that something could happen - this applies to any speed except the risk obviously increases as the speed does.


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

Just to stick my nose in, Audi did indeed spend a fortune on the TT.. They issued it for sale and distribution only to discover that it needed a piece of plastic on the boot to prevent people ... Ahem ... Stacking it. Following numerous incidents at speed.

It's a TT... Not a veyron.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

this is the realms of fantasy,, not reality !!! I suppose you walk around all day with a hard hat safety glasses and a yellow vest on and a fire retardant suit just in case something dreadful happenes,,, do you know that at almost anytime a meteorite could come crashing down upon you.


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

Spandex said:


> roddy said:
> 
> 
> > to me it seems very strange indeed,,, Audi spend millions of euros ( deutchmark whatever ), endless man hours designing, developing , testing and producing a vehicle which is proven to be safe at speeds of up to ( and some times more than) 140 mph, yet you are saying he is lucky not to have crashed it doing just a little more than half that speed, in what must be about the safest possible environment ( with the exception of a diss used airfield ) ,, why ?? as i say, unless you are privy to some other information
> ...


ok,so you are suggesting that the guy is not capable of driving at that speed.. ok fair does, if you know something which has not been stated by the OP


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

simno44 said:


> Just to stick my nose in, Audi did indeed spend a fortune on the TT.. They issued it for sale and distribution only to discover that it needed a piece of plastic on the boot to prevent people ... Ahem ... Stacking it. Following numerous incidents at speed.
> 
> It's a TT... Not a veyrot from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


I wonder what Audi technical dept or customer services would have to say about a claim that their car is not safe or fit for the normal driver to drive at just a little over half of its max potential,, ?? :roll: :roll:


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

roddy said:


> do you know that at almost anytime a meteorite could come crashing down.


We can only hope.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

igotone said:


> I'm sure we all take liberties with speed from time to time and I'm sure we all do it sensibly and responsibly, but accelerating to 30 mph in excess of the prevailing limit when you've just seen a parked police car is cavalier in the extreme.
> 
> We all know the rules - if you break 'em don't winge when you get a red card. :wink:


I would agree with you on that


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

roddy said:


> simno44 said:
> 
> 
> > Just to stick my nose in, Audi did indeed spend a fortune on the TT.. They issued it for sale and distribution only to discover that it needed a piece of plastic on the boot to prevent people ... Ahem ... Stacking it. Following numerous incidents at speed.
> ...


Well they addressed the issue. So why don't you ask them.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/we- ... ive-review

Did Someone take his grumpy pills this morning? What's up with you? Very argumentative over something extremely trivial roddy.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

well you can have your own attitude :roll: ,, personally I would rather discuss the issue than argue about it...


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

and I think you might find that the chap is in fact driving one of the later post recall models,, :roll:


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

roddy said:


> well you can have your own attitude :roll: ,, personally I would rather discuss the issue than argue about it...


May I suggest you do that then? Rather than picking up on comments others make and twisting them?

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

roddy said:


> and I think you might find that the chap is in fact driving one of the later post recall models,, :roll:


No... Really???????

Obviously.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

simno44 said:


> roddy said:
> 
> 
> > well you can have your own attitude :roll: ,, personally I would rather discuss the issue than argue about it...
> ...


and what did I "twist " ?


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

igotone said:


> We all know the rules - if you break 'em don't winge when you get a red card. :wink:


Sums it up nicely mate.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

simno44 said:


> roddy said:
> 
> 
> > and I think you might find that the chap is in fact driving one of the later post recall models,, :roll:
> ...


I would have thot so my self, but perhaps not to you or maybe you would not have posted the link to the pre recall model,,,mmmm :roll:


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

roddy said:


> simno44 said:
> 
> 
> > roddy said:
> ...


Thought *

Roddy... Read the thread properly and pipe down.

Your making yourself look like an idiot. And I'm sure your not.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

well apart from you own " observations " you still have not indicated why the vehicle is unsafe at that speed,, but perhaps your argument favours personnel insults..,, actually I think that whatever argument you wish to put into the discussion the fact that these cars are regularly driven at that speed, and very often more, would really invalidate it,,,," proof of the pudding is in the eating " I believe is how the saying goes.


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

Again. I haven't suggested it is. Incidentally, Nor have I used the word "observations" at any point.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

simno44 said:


> roddy said:
> 
> 
> > simno44 said:
> ...


* you're

If you are going to be a grammar Nazi. Don't make silly grammatical errors when pointing out other people's errors.

Just sayin' :wink:


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

There is nothing to invalidate. The cars where very quickly redesigned having been released to the market, that is a fact. Not opinion or "argument" as you put it.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

brian1978 said:


> simno44 said:
> 
> 
> > roddy said:
> ...


Tosser. Lol.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

so why post links and make comments about its safety history ( we all know what that was ) if you are not implying that it is unsafe ??
( I do hope that my grammerr is correct ! )


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

roddy said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure we all take liberties with speed from time to time and I'm sure we all do it sensibly and responsibly, but accelerating to 30 mph in excess of the prevailing limit when you've just seen a parked police car is cavalier in the extreme.
> ...


Bloody Hell - we agreed on something!!! Does this mean we're engaged? [smiley=sweetheart.gif]


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

roddy said:


> so why post links and make comments about its safety history ( we all know what that was ) if you are not implying that it is unsafe ??
> ( I do hope that my grammerr is correct ! )


Roddy you said it your self. "Safety history" 
As apposed to safety present. Stop looking to find fault.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## jamman (May 6, 2002)

simno44 said:


> Stop looking to find fault.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


Unfortunately that's all some people can do :wink:


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

well, i am not looking to find fault,, personally i don't see any fault at all in any of this,, other than " if your gonna break the law then don't moan if you get caught ".. i cannot see any safety issue here at all, either with the car or the circumstances nor as there is nothing to suggest in the OP, that the driver does not have even basic skills.. some may wish to delve into the fantasy world but not i,,,, ok so i for one am happy to agree that we should / can disagree.. ( and resist personnel insult or wishing ill on others ) )


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

jamman said:


> simno44 said:
> 
> 
> > Stop looking to find fault.
> ...


quite a few it would seem ,, there has been quite a few on here picking fault with the guy on this..


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

simno44 said:


> brian1978 said:
> 
> 
> > * you're
> ...


So it's ok for you to point out roddys mistake. But when I do the same, in a light hearted manner the personal insults start and I'm a tosser?

And you said roddy was making a fool out of himself :?


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

deleted


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

brian1978 said:


> simno44 said:
> 
> 
> > brian1978 said:
> ...


Brian my response was light hearted. Hence me laughing at it. 
Don't read to much into it. Sorry if it came across otherwise.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## simno44 (Aug 25, 2012)

brian1978 said:


> simno44 said:
> 
> 
> > brian1978 said:
> ...


And no. I said he was making himself look like an idiot. Much firmer than fool. Haha.

Sent from my iPhone using Hand/Eye coordination and two fat thumbs.


----------



## jamman (May 6, 2002)

roddy said:


> jamman said:
> 
> 
> > simno44 said:
> ...


Not directed just at you Rodders


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

if picking fault at people who are picking fault is indeed a fault then I am at fault and you may pick fault , if you so wish, without fault.. :wink:


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

brian1978 said:


> simno44 said:
> 
> 
> > brian1978 said:
> ...


No problems.

Can we all hug now


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

brian1978 said:


> No problems.
> 
> Can we all hug now


AS long as I'm not picking up the soap!


----------



## Brad12 (Mar 12, 2014)

Agree with a number of commenters on your thread - how can he call you up if he "heard you accelerating away"? That seems totally dumb-ass! Yup, I can understand ticking kids off for messing around in a car park or something, but in your case, it's entirely different. The law in the UK often totally astounds me...


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> brian1978 said:
> 
> 
> > No problems.
> ...




__
Sensitive content, not recommended for those under 18
Show Content


----------

