# F#cking speeding ticket and i didn't even speed



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

I got caught speeding(50mph in 40mph) by a man in a van on a bridge.

The reason i want to contest it is because the day before the incident i had spotted them in a bright yellow and white van :roll:, funny how it was only there on the bank holiday week (so they were obvouisly out to make money). I programmed them in to the Tom Tom so i would remember.

The following day approaching the bridge i saw them whilst on my mobile to a friend and mention to them about the camera and had a little joke about the sign on the side of the van (making essex a safer place) while everyone is doing an emergency stop to avoid a possible ticket.

Arrived back of holiday to find out on the day that i was on the phone while approahing the camera i was doing 50mph which was clearly not the case.

i have contested it but they told me that the equipment that they use is 100% correct and is a laser system (points to coming traffic)

You can imagine that i am slightly pi$$ed of as i was fully aware that i was not speeding.

Anyone else encountered this ?


----------



## denTTed (Feb 21, 2007)

Got done in Farnborough a couple of weeks ago, I was speeding but I must have got confused by all the 40 signs and missed the single 30 sign, as you have already guessed I was doing 40....twats.

What really gets me is I always stick to the limit in strange towns, as I don't know where the speed traps are. I drove bak there and re-traced my route I was so adamant I was not speeding.


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

Are you going to contest it or just take the points?


----------



## denTTed (Feb 21, 2007)

I am considering contesting, wasted a whole saturday morning going back there ffs. I might as well try my hand. Thing is, and anyone who has driven down this road will confirm the road barons is on, 40 signs every 30/40 yards then 1 30 sign and a fucking mobile camera beside it. Blatant piss taking.


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

Thats how i got my first three points.. I was in a national speed limit doing 50 then went round a corner and it turned into a 30 so i broke but obviously not hard enough because as i passed the sign a PIG was hiding in someones long driveway and clocked me doing 36 in a 30..

What happened to the cameras being made to be seen ?

Did i miss something... [smiley=knife.gif]


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

JAAYDE said:


> The following day approaching the bridge i saw them whilst on my mobile to a friend


Well, if it wasn't 3 points and 60 quid for speeding it'd be 3 points and 60 quid for driving whilst using a mobile phone!! :? (unless handsfree of course).


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

handsfree smarty pants


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

I know. That's why I said it!! :wink:


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

have you any useful imput to *MY* thread ? well have you?

If not then you know the drill :-*


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

Oh, is it *yours* all *yours* then?

Is it by invite only?

Useful input ~ You were speeding so cough up and shut up. There, better for you?


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

TT2BMW said:


> Oh, is it *yours* all *yours* then?
> 
> Is it by invite only?
> 
> Useful input ~ You were speeding so cough up and shut up. There, better for you?


All mine 

A word of advice










I wasn't speeding...


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

:lol:

Concentration lapse whilst on your handsfree perhaps?

At the end of the day it's gonna be your word against theirs! :?


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

nope.. I knew what i was doing.

After a little scanning if found an article thats states that using a laser from the front to track speed is all down to distance.

The distance is recorded and then burnt onto the picture they take. Depending on what make and model the camera is this will determin what happens next.

The camera only have a certain range that they are accurate at, after that no one knows how they calculate speed.

I not taking this Pi$$ing ticket i have already had three points +60 from some prat hidden in a drive when in the picture they took i was clearly braking at 36mph and yet they sent me a patrinising letter saying that they would have let me off if it wqs 35mph.

FCUK WITS

I don't care they do that they do, its just how they do it.. This fucking county drives me up the wall with fucking rules that the PIG force don't even follow.


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

I agree mate.

It's the best example of what they call 'Stealth Tax'! :?

They'll have your nads whatever you do in this shit tip at the moment.


----------



## Sparks001 (Jun 18, 2007)

There is a phenomenon know nas "Slip" that causes these speed guns (Normally the LTI 2020) to give an inacurate reading, it happens when the operator points the gun at the side of the car, and moves it from the rear to the front, it appears to the gun that the car is moving towards it faster than it actually is.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressr ... ide.shtml#

http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/art ... ture.shtml

I saw the mentioned Inside Out episode, and the demonstrated the problem, that apparently can't happen :roll:

More info here

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=1211


----------



## fastasflip (May 13, 2003)

Some use video rather than stills

UK LTI 20-20 would give the operator an error code rather than a speed reading if any slip was detected.


----------



## Sparks001 (Jun 18, 2007)

fastasflip said:


> Some use video rather than stills
> 
> UK LTI 20-20 would give the operator an error code rather than a speed reading if any slip was detected.


....Allegedly..., and only if it *detected* slip, if there was slip, but it didnâ€™t detect it, then it wouldnâ€™t error.....


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

"it's a fair cop, but society is to blame."

"Take Him down."

"NEXT."


----------



## slineTT (Feb 24, 2006)

JAAYDE read the pepipoo forum as Sparks has mentioned. Yes you can contest it all the way to the end. How much time and money have you got? You need to be dedicated though and feel that the speed culture in UK is wrong. The shut up and pay up culture is not a sign of a mature democratic society but a sign of a society made of subjects. Make your choice......


----------



## whiteshirt (Jul 19, 2007)

I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but this is a useful site.

http://www.ukspeedtraps.co.uk/


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

This was the reply to my letter..

they just disregarded what i have said.. I'm not suprised though.


----------



## BreTT (Oct 30, 2002)

So there you have it - they have video evidence to back up their case. What evidence will you present in court to refute it? I don't think "I know I wasn't speeding" will be considered good enough.


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

but the point is i wasn't... Otherwise i would bother

What did you think they would reply?

''Hi sir you are 100% correct''

put it this way if i take them my insurance will also go up so then i will have 6 points. 3 for a PIG hiding in a private drive and 3 for an error and Â£120..

Its not the money that bothers me, i would put my hands up if i was wrong but i'm not.


----------



## BreTT (Oct 30, 2002)

I'm not disputing your innocence, I am merely asking how you intend to contest the points. Video footage would appear to be reasonably conclusive, but I am no expert in the field. Good luck anyway.


----------



## Sparks001 (Jun 18, 2007)

If you haven't already, go over to www.pepipoo.com and have a good few hours read, then post a message asking for advice. 
I would want to have a copy of the video, then you can see exactly what speed you are doing, by taking a distance over time measurement of things you pass in the video.

That's what I would do anyway!

I don't know if you are entitled to see the video/have a copy, if they say you are not, then you may be able to request it under the data protection act, for a small fee (Â£10 or under) Not sure if you can do that with police footage though!


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

Thanks for the info *Sparks001*

I've been on the website for a while and i will be sending another letter based on what i now know. (very greatful face) :wink:

I have also found out that van laser is as off as the handheld which is useful to know.

Its so funny that they hide on bridges and in drives and cameras are meant to be marked yellow, never quite understood that law :roll:


----------



## fastasflip (May 13, 2003)

My bet is, you were speeding, but only the video will tell, it should show everything the operater see's through the sight including, at what distance the speed measurement was taken, your speed and the point on your car that the laser hit. A good percentage of things that people complain about on other forums that they think are "The law" are ACPO guide lines, but they are just that, Guide lines. I would imagine your next letter will read in a roundabout way something like " Here is your video as requested, see you in court"

Most if not all loop holes have been closed, the LTI is a home office approved device, providing it has been factory calibrated once a year and the operator carried out daily checks for scope alighenment and distance checks your knackered.

Good Luck...............you'll need it!


----------



## garvin (May 7, 2002)

What you don't say is whether you were exceeding the speed limit before the warning or saw them and then slowed down - from the camera van vantage point they can see a long, long way down the road and have usually 'copped' the offenders way before they notice the van and slow down. The vans are generally more accurate because the camera/laser system is mounted on a base and is less susceptible to a hand held unit of runing between different points on the appraoching vehicle and resulting in speed reading error - they can usually hold it on your front number plate quite easily and at some range as the camera optics are 'pretty good'. Having said that they can get it wrong and they probably won't bother checking any of the evidence until their intimidation is seen not to work and they know it's going to court.

But if you are so sure then 'go for it' as the evidence can't possibly stand up in court as the video will clearly show the aim point to wander if that is what happened. When you win, don't forget to apply for reimbursement of those awfully expensive costs incurred in preparing the case, travel, days off work etc., etc.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

JAAYDE said:


> but the point is i wasn't... Otherwise i would bother
> 
> What did you think they would reply?
> 
> ...


You are a persistent offender - you dont deny first offence - aqnd pig ion drive hardly mitigates.

Fight it and if they still find you guilty, which seems likely given video evidence, and the Magistrates fine will almost certainly cost more than the insurance uplift for wasting their time.

You need a pretty compelling case to win this, and it is not coming thru strongly in your posts of protestation.

Take the rap.


----------



## J55TTC (Apr 25, 2005)

Here's what I think happened:

When you drove by the first time and marked the position on your tomtom or whatever it is enough time had passed to mark the position further down the road than where it actually was.
Then when driving past the following day slightly distracted while on the phone the police "clocked" you doing 50MPH before your tomtom notified you of the "hotspot".

As others have said, fighting the case will put you more out of pocket than paying up now. If money isn't an issue why are you concerned about your insurance premium going up?

Now with 6 points on your licence and the new legislation you are going to have to drive rather carefully.


----------



## slineTT (Feb 24, 2006)

So what Gary, if the police sends you a video of your car killing someone would you put your hand up and say that you have done it even if you dont know who was driving your car at that point?

Wake up people, this is a NOTICE OF INTENDED PROCECUTION. The police will send you the same paper if they think you have commited a murder and in order to convict you they need UNCONTESTED EVIDENCE. In order to be convicted the judge or jury will need to see serious evidence. Unfortunately in case of a speeding ticket judges and police take justice under a less serious light. So Jay you make them take it under the seriousness of the situation you really would hope they should take it.


----------



## J55TTC (Apr 25, 2005)

slineTT said:


> So what Gary, if the police sends you a video of your car killing someone would you put your hand up and say that you have done it even if you dont know who was driving your car at that point?


 :?


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

slineTT said:


> So what Gary, if the police sends you a video of your car killing someone would you put your hand up and say that you have done it even if you dont know who was driving your car at that point?
> 
> Wake up people, this is a NOTICE OF INTENDED PROCECUTION. The police will send you the same paper if they think you have commited a murder and in order to convict you they need UNCONTESTED EVIDENCE. In order to be convicted the judge or jury will need to see serious evidence. Unfortunately in case of a speeding ticket judges and police take justice under a less serious light. So Jay you make them take it under the seriousness of the situation you really would hope they should take it.


What a stupid example. Killing someone would be Crown Court matter for starters and the CPS would be involved in building the case and examining all evidential weight. Oh, and NIPs not used, police powers of arrest would instead be used. :roll:

Go ahead fight it. We'll all have a laugh at the seemingly inevitable outcome. It looks like a very weak case for defence from an aleady convicted speeder, who acknowledged that he knew there were vans out at the location of the second alleged (and refuted) offence. By his own admission he was not paying full attention at that time, yet paradoxically he's adamant he was not speeding.

Best of luck.


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

Makes me laugh because the people who go out of their way to look out for speed cameras, and especially mark their location on a Tomtom, are without doubt those that fear being caught for speeding.

If you don't speed then you wouldn't fear being caught! :?

I'm not preaching because I had a TT. I had a Tomtom with camera points marked. I also had a laser detector. I also _used_ to speed. I had 3 points from when I had a 1973 Mini and was 'racing' some twats in a Fiesta and 3 points when doing 60 in a 50 on a dual carriageway in the TT.

Now I have no points. I have an old 2.0 Golf GTi. I have no Tomtom. I have no laser detector. And last night I drove home, 20 miles down the M3 which was quiet, and didn't go over 70. And do you know what? It was a fucking relaxing and enjoyable drive.

I drive to work in the morning, up the M3, and poodle along at between 65 and 70. I get passed by cnuts cutting in and out of lanes, doing 90+ and then when the traffic slows I'm just 1 or 2 cars behind them. And I sit there and wonder what the fucking point was of driving like a cnut to make up 1 cars length! :?

As Gary said, I don't think there's any doubt that you were speeding. You were yapping away to your mate on the phone, Tomtom beeped too late and you got zapped probably a lot further away than you thought, (and long before you saw him).

Would it have made any difference if he was in a luminous pink van and standing there dressed in an elephant costume? So what if you didn't see him. You were speeding and you got caught. Just take the points and fine and slow down or run the risk. Your choice fella.


----------



## fastasflip (May 13, 2003)

Last speeder I had dealings with orginally was offered a fixed penalty of Â£60 and 3 points, went to court and was found guilty 4 points and Â£550 lighter he appealed at crown court who upheld Mags findings, I don't know how much he had to pay for the appeal or his breifs fees


----------



## slineTT (Feb 24, 2006)

A video of your car killing someone, is hardly conclusive evidence that the owner of the car has done it. (unless it shows your face and the rest of you doing it). The police would obviously examine the owner and obviously he will be treated as a suspect but threatening the owner with arrest or INTENDED PROSECUTION in order to confess, is against the law and against any bill of human rights in this part of the world. Of course if they have the obvious evidence they will prosecute him but I dont think the CPS will do that unless they know they have serious chances of winning the case.

So why does the Police need to threaten you to prosecute you in order to get your confession? If then they think that you are on the wrong they should take you to court straight away. Of course if they did that with 2 million NIPs per year there would not be any other courts in the land besides traffic courts or the whole system would just colapse.

Gary there can only be ONE Judicial system and ONE Justice equal to every crime and every citizen, and in the speeding offences this is not the case.

To prove that you have only to see exactly the opposite side of the whole situation, the cases that were managed by Mr Freeman the loophole lawyer. Celebrities such as Becham, Clarckson and others got away with murder (speeding) cause they can afford a good lawyer who can play the system. I hope Jay can afford him but if not justice will not be on his side but on what the Laser Gun says. It's just a gadget that can go wrong, it s not God re-encarnated.


----------



## J55TTC (Apr 25, 2005)

I dont see what you are going on about, its as simple as this:

Jay admitted openly on a public forum that he was caught speeding.
He has no evidence to say that he wasnt, other than his word.
This is not the first time he has been caught.
The police have video evidence!


----------



## slineTT (Feb 24, 2006)

In this case J55TTC we should all be thankfull that Jay didnt do anything more serious and he will only get a few points and a fine. God forbid what would happen to him if he was accused of murder and couldnt prove that the police is wrong.

JUSTICE DOESNT WORK LIKE THAT.

The police has to prove beyond any doubt that he has done it, he is not guilty if he just cant prove that he hasnt done it.


----------



## fastasflip (May 13, 2003)

> The police has to prove beyond any doubt that he has done it, he is not guilty if he just cant prove that he hasnt done it.


 I think your missing a REASONABLE somewhere


----------



## slineTT (Feb 24, 2006)

I may miss a reasonable as S172 states that Jay has to exercise reasonable dilligence in naming the driver of the offended vehicle, part of the S172 which is in essense abolished by the recent law where the car owner has to say who was driving the car otherwise he is immediately penalised with 6 points.

Jay you have no reasonable hope what so ever mate.... :lol: :lol:


----------



## J55TTC (Apr 25, 2005)

He admitted to be driving the car at the time of the offese for heavens sake.

He also didnt suggest to us on the forum that he was trying to get away with it by saying someone else was driving his car at the time.

Whats your facination with murder / killing people?

The police have proven without doubt that Jays TT was caught speeding on video. He is guilty.

I know what point you are trying to make but it just doesnt compare in the slightest to the details we have heard from Jay.


----------



## slineTT (Feb 24, 2006)

J55TTC my comparison between murder and speeding is to show that justice should not distinguish between the two. Both offences should have the same judicial procedures in order to convict someone.

We believe that Jay was speeding cause the Laser Gun and the police said so. Do you believe everything the police say? Do you always believe what a gadget says? Even if both have all the right intentions -to protect the public and so on- that does not mean that they dont get it wrong. I am sure you have read many articles about Laser gun aimed at a wall and showing 30mph. Therefore Jay has every right to challenge them and thererfore they have to prove that they are right. If in every dispute we assume that the police is always right then we deserve to live in a state such as North Korea.


----------



## J55TTC (Apr 25, 2005)

slineTT said:


> J55TTC my comparison between murder and speeding is to show that justice should not distinguish between the two. Both offences should have the same judicial procedures in order to convict someone.
> 
> We believe that Jay was speeding cause the Laser Gun and the police said so. Do you believe everything the police say? Do you always believe what a gadget says? Even if both have all the right intentions -to protect the public and so on- that does not mean that they dont get it wrong. I am sure you have read many articles about Laser gun aimed at a wall and showing 30mph. Therefore Jay has every right to challenge them and thererfore they have to prove that they are right. If in every dispute we assume that the police is always right then we deserve to live in a state such as North Korea.


I agree with you on this.

However, can we all just agree that it is very probable that Jay was speeding at the time?


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

Lol if i used the forum for advice i would be doomed

It's funny i don't really speed even if i know where i'm going if i do its not in my golf.

TT2BM you are one funny guy and I actually feel sorry for you, where can i send a donation ? 

We can all judge but i just hope it happens those of you who have been negative and can't see the point i'm making.

If i wasn't 110% this tread wouldn't have been started so don't assume.

This tread is a prime example of why the uk is where it is today going DH.


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

J55TTC

Are you sure mate? How do you know that.

Like me calling you a prat and asking some to agree with my opinion.

PMSL

You guys should listen to yourselves.

I will also like to say again thanks to the guys offering me useful info much appreciated.


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

TBH, with an attitude like that, I hope that shaft you good and proper up the shitter!

Go on fight it. Dare ya. Then come back and tell us how big your fine was and how many points they gave you.

Now....where's that gif for W A N K E R?


----------



## Sparks001 (Jun 18, 2007)

TT2BMW - Calm down dear!

Jaayde asks if anyone has had a similar experience to his version of the events, and without any evidence whatsoever, you are accusing him of being a liar.

Please dismount your high horse!

Although he says he is 110% sure he wasn't, he may have been speeding when the Talivan clocked him, big deal, once he has the full evidence, this can be verified quite easily, there is no need for you to post comments like this.



TT2BMW said:


> TBH, with an attitude like that, I hope that shaft you good and proper up the shitter!
> 
> Go on fight it. Dare ya. Then come back and tell us how big your fine was and how many points they gave you.
> 
> Now....where's that gif for W A N K E R?


If you met Jaayde in person, would you talk to him like this, or are you just hiding behind an alias on here?
(If you would, then I suggest you see a physiatrist before you really offend someone, and they retaliate)

Unless Jaayde is extremely stupid (Which he doesnâ€™t seem to be in my opinion!), do you really think he would bother contesting this, seen as they have video evidence?

On my way to work on Tuesday (I think) I was flashed by a fixed speed camera I go past every day, this is the first time I have been flashed by it, although I have seen it go off before.

Now I know I was not speeding, I know the camera very well, my speed camera detector was quietly beeping to remind me it was there (If I were speeding it goes mental) and the car behind me, who was going even slower, was also flashed â€" If I get a NIP, shall I just pay it, as I am obviously guilty if they tell me I am, itâ€™s not as if the speed camera partnership gets any money out of the fines is it.....


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

If he talked like he writes then I'd tell him he was a wanker to his face. Yes!

If he posts, before me, as follows:

"It's funny i don't really speed even if i know where i'm going if i do its not in my golf.

TT2BM you are one funny guy and I actually feel sorry for you, where can i send a donation ?"

...then I'll assume he's taking the piss and retaliate accordingly.

FWIW I just think he's probably a wide boy, in a TT, yapping on his mobile with all the gadgets beeping and detecting around his ears and he's pissed cos he got nicked! :?


----------



## Sparks001 (Jun 18, 2007)

Than that's your opinion, and you are perfectly entitled to it.

...but that's all it is, your opinion, it doesn't make it true.

There is a line between friendly joking banter, like the smarty-pants part, obviously a play on your avatar, and verbal abuse. Your previous post was well past that line.

Reading the thread, IMHO his responses were only in reaction to you indirectly calling him a liar and then wittering on about what a good boy you are now, after your 6 points (what that has to do with anything is past me)

So there really isn't any need for the abuse you dished out is there, was there (Be honest!!)

Time will tell if he get's points or not, can we just wait an see what happens, speculating isnâ€™t going to help (as you can hopefully see by this pointless argument!)


----------



## Jac-in-a-Box (Nov 9, 2002)

You're in a similar situation to a guy who claimed he wasn't speeding after being nailed by one of these lazer guns on Piston Heads.

Seemed to be a decent guy who'd have taken it on the chin had he genuinely believed he had been speeding.

He challenged it through the courts, employed expert witness's to demonstrate slip errors, asked the Scamera Partner ship for video etc.

Long protracted affair and I'm still not sure it's resolved - this was ongoing around this time last year.

Get onto PH and look for username "Peter Ward" and see his saga in "Speed, Plod and the Law" section.
You'll have to be a registered user to see that section.

Just in xase you can't find it....

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topi ... er+%2BWard Vol 1 !!

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topi ... er+%2BWard Vol 2 !!

You'll need a day to read to read it all though - does give some food for thought if you do decide to challenge it....1800+ posts!

Dave


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

Sparks001 said:


> Than that's your opinion, and you are perfectly entitled to it.
> 
> ...but that's all it is, your opinion, it doesn't make it true.
> 
> ...


Sorry. Have I missed the announcement that you're the new Forum Moderator?

And you are correct. It is my 'opinion' to which I am entitled on a Public Forum. And it is just that ...an opinion. Didn't say it was true did I?

Smarty Pants wasn't a play on my avatar, it was in response to his previous comment. So, wrong again!

Anyway, can't say I give a shit anymore. It's not like I'm the one nicked for speeding! :?


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

TT2BM - your not for real are you?

Read your previous posts again, do you have a mind off your own or are you just a follower?

As Spark001 has said it's bold to call people names down a keyboard and there is no need for personal attack. I think the next time we have a meet you can call me a wanker to my face but i'm sure this won't be the case. AdamTTR will brief you on the kind of person i am before hand before you dig any holes.

On topic - now please.


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

Why, is Adam your bitch?

A 22yr old from Essex who's accumilated 6 points in the space of a year. And your point is what exactly?

I'm not a 'follower'. I speak as I see and that's how I see it.

On topic - carry on.


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

Not really he is just in more of a position to comment than you 

Lol making assumptions again.

You wish i was 22 and small enough for you to bully.

Look forward to meeting you.


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

JAAYDE said:


> Not really he is just in more of a position to comment than you
> 
> Lol i wish i was 22 again. There we go again making assumption again the first three point were about 3 years ago.
> 
> ...


Didn't you like your last post?

You'd probably re-read my posts and seen that I didn't back down eh?

OK. So you're 23 then. Doesn't matter how old you are really because a). We're never likely to meet anyway and b). Whether 22 or 23 might give an indication, with the other facts provided, or peoples opinion on whether you may have been speeding or not.


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

How did i know you would do that, bored on reception are we?

Well thats good news for you then .

Just remember bullies end up nowhere.


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

[smiley=sleeping.gif]

Yeah. It's dead on here today. Nothing to do but paint my nails!

Still, let's hope you stick with your current interests:

"Live fast die very young" ...but I wasn't speeding Officer. :wink:


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

I don't blame you for the way you are, if i where a companies bitch/dogs body at your age i would be miserable too 

That reminds me i need so letters posting and some PO better make that call to reception because why would i do it as it doesn't require brains.

Don't think i've ever spoken with a receptionist so long.

All the best.


----------



## phodge (Sep 1, 2002)

Handags at dawn, anybody..??

:wink:


----------



## NaughTTy (Jul 9, 2003)

phodge said:


> Handags at dawn, anybody..??
> 
> :wink:


----------



## KevtoTTy (Aug 24, 2004)

:lol: :lol:









:?:


----------



## NaughTTy (Jul 9, 2003)

KevtoTTy said:


> :lol: :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hey Kev - long time no see/hear

Pop corn - to eat while you sit back and watch the show :wink:


----------



## J55TTC (Apr 25, 2005)

JAAYDE said:


> J55TTC
> 
> Are you sure mate? How do you know that.
> 
> ...


What on earth are you on about? Sure about what?

If you read my posts on this thread they are all based on the information you provided us with. Furthermore there was no personal attack on you from me, all I was doing was giving you my opinion of a possible scenario :?


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Jaayde, when will you learn? :roll:


----------



## denTTed (Feb 21, 2007)

Did I miss a bit where somebody said they were a receptionist? Not sure where that came from.

So what happened?

Also can we expect a fight at the next annual meet? At school I always used to save mine and other peoples butties for fights, and at opportune moments run in and rub them in the fighters faces, cheese and salad cream was my favorite. So if there is going to be a fight can I get some notice to prepare please, I'm thinking dairylea and heinz sandwich spread topped off with ham and coleslaw, ooh tuna mayo didn't have them in those days.


----------



## J55TTC (Apr 25, 2005)

jonson said:


> So what happened?


Who gives a shit?


----------



## denTTed (Feb 21, 2007)

J55TTC said:


> jonson said:
> 
> 
> > So what happened?
> ...


7 pages says somebody, I'll take it was 3 points and Â£60.


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

jonson said:


> So what happened?


Still on going, the fine and penalty is currently on hold as they investigate the footage they claim to have that they cannot find..

Tbh i'm not into the british way of life just take whats throw at you, in my culture we stand our ground if we are right .


----------



## Hilly10 (Feb 4, 2004)

If they do not find the evidence no case to answer RESULT :wink: . The copper as more then likely taped over it :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## M T Pickering (Aug 11, 2004)

Probably recorded an episode of "The Bill" over it! :lol:


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

JAAYDE said:


> This was the reply to my letter..
> 
> they just disregarded what i have said.. I'm not suprised though.


Blimey this is close to my house :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Sparks001 (Jun 18, 2007)

Hilly10 said:


> If they do not find the evidence no case to answer RESULT :wink: . The copper as more then likely taped over it :lol: :lol: :lol:


Or more likely, they check the footage and see he blatantly isn't speeding, THEN "lose" the tape, so not to then have evidence of the LTI 20/20 being unreliable, and obviousy falling foul of "slip" but not detecting the slip.

That's where my money would be anyway...


----------

