A fair cop

[Dave *]

Err...no.
Driving without reasonable consideration under section 3 of the RTA 1988 is an offence.
Driving under the speed limit, is not.
Are you a tad hard of understanding?

The only one acting like an idiot is you, but that’s not surprising. Why try and change the subject from driving excessively slowly to driving under the speed limit? Is it because you are a little troll that just likes to provoke arguments?

I have seen said signs but they are not a common occurrence. If I remember back to my traffic law days there is a statutory minimum speed limits on the motorway. It should be mentioned in the Highway Code.

You are correct, driving excessively slowly and inconveniencing others was made a specific offence for which the police can issue a PCN, it was in 2014.

As it’s Ruth I can’t really be arsed to waste too much time on google, (she’ll simply argue the sky is pink for the hell of it) so a DM link will have to do.

End of the middle lane hogs: Police handing out thousands of £100 fines to 'anti-social' drivers who slow traffic and splash walkers

• Under new laws, around 10,000 on-the-spot fines have been handed out
• The penalties costing £100 have been given to inconsiderate drivers
• Fines issued for offences such as tailgating and middle lane hogging
• Were also given to drivers performing wheel spins and handbrake turns

The police figures also reveal a tractor driver in Norfolk was fined after failing to pull in to let the queue of motorists behind him get past.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2996009/End-middle-lane-hogs-Police-handing-thousands-100-fines-anti-social-drivers-slow-traffic-splash-walkers.html#

Sorry but you need to read @viv1969 post again, carefully.

What she has said is factually correct

No, it’s not correct in terms of what was being discussed. Driving excessively slowly and inconveniencing other drivers is now an offence, for which you can be fined or taken to court.

 

[Jim_Tod]

Its coming up to our busiest time at work, time off may be an issue so the points may just have to be taken..............along with the fine

Then remember to tell your insurer- they will be interested in this change in circumstances

 

[Byker28i]

Thought slow driving was actioned under the road traffic act 1988 section 3 careless and inconsiderate driving.
What's the new Law?

 

[Byker28i]

Ah answer my own question.its to a new law at all, still the same old1988 section3. What's new is that spot penalties can now be applied.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-penalties-for-careless-driving-come-into-force

So still careless and inconsiderate driving, just new on the spot penalties can be applied.

 

[Dave *]

Ah answer my own question.its to a new law at all, still the same old1988 section3. What's new is that spot penalties can now be applied.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-penalties-for-careless-driving-come-into-force

So still careless and inconsiderate driving, just new on the spot penalties can be applied.

Yep, same section, just a change of procedure and the addition of specific things like middle lane hogging and driving too slowly so as to cause an inconvenience were added as FPN offences.

 

[viv1969]

The only one acting like an idiot is you, but that’s not surprising. Why try and change the subject from driving excessively slowly to driving under the speed limit? Is it because you are a little troll that just likes to provoke arguments?



You are correct, driving excessively slowly and inconveniencing others was made a specific offence for which the police can issue a PCN, it was in 2014.

As it’s Ruth I can’t really be arsed to waste too much time on google, (she’ll simply argue the sky is pink for the hell of it) so a DM link will have to do.





No, it’s not correct in terms of what was being discussed. Driving excessively slowly and inconveniencing other drivers is now an offence, for which you can be fined or taken to court.

No. It isn't; not a specific offence...how dense are you?

 

[Dave *]

No. It isn't; not a specific offence...how dense are you?

Dense enough to keep feeding the little troll that you are, my little pigeon...

 

[Keebsuk]

[emoji23]

 

[viv1969]

Dense enough to keep feeding the little troll that you are, my little pigeon...

Take that as a yes, then.
Driving below the speed limit is not, in itself, an offence.

 

[Byker28i]

Dave, as mentioned, Viv is technically correct, there is no offence for driving slowly, however you can be prosecuted under the road traffic act 1988 section 3, careless and inconsiderate driving.
So yes, you can be prosecuted for driving slowly but the actual offence you are prosecuted under is inconsiderate driving.

Careless, and inconsiderate, driving.
If a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place, he is guilty of an offence

Meaning of careless, or inconsiderate, driving

(1)This section has effect for the purposes of sections 2B and 3 above and section 3A below.

(2)A person is to be regarded as driving without due care and attention if (and only if) the way he drives falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.

(3)In determining for the purposes of subsection (2) above what would be expected of a careful and competent driver in a particular case, regard shall be had not only to the circumstances of which he could be expected to be aware but also to any circumstances shown to have been within the knowledge of the accused.

(4)A person is to be regarded as driving without reasonable consideration for other persons only if those persons are inconvenienced by his driving.]
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/3

Basically a catch all law that the police use rather than have a number of specific offences.

 

[Mr Bump]

Yes but as said keeping it at 28 in a 30 or say 38 in a 40 is not inconsiderate as I drive. The would be whiners simply see safe and legal drivers as getting in the way of them having it there way.

 

[nilagin]

Yes but as said keeping it at 28 in a 30 or say 38 in a 40 is not inconsiderate as I drive. The would be whiners simply see safe and legal drivers as getting in the way of them having it there way.

So you feel safer for your family by driving at 2mph below the speed limit and by your own admission, you won't show consideration to other drivers, because they don't show you any. That just leans heavily in your corner that you are the problem, not them. I dread to think what you are like on your motorbike.

 

[Mr Bump]

So you feel safer for your family by driving at 2mph below the speed limit and by your own admission, you won't show consideration to other drivers, because they don't show you any. That just leans heavily in your corner that you are the problem, not them. I dread to think what you are like on your motorbike.

Once again you really struggle with it don't you?
Driving slightly under the maximum speed limit is not being inconsiderate.
once again the speed limit on a road is the maximum permitted speed.
If I were to do as you say and attempt to drive exactly on the speed limit as a minimum I would spend more time looking down at the speedo than looking at the road which is self defeating

 

[nilagin]

Once again you really struggle with it don't you?
Driving slightly under the maximum speed limit is not being inconsiderate.
once again the speed limit on a road is the maximum permitted speed.
If I were to do as you say and attempt to drive exactly on the speed limit as a minimum I would spend more time looking down at the speedo than looking at the road which is self defeating

I'm not struggling at all. If you can't achieve a given speed and maintain it by judgement with just the quick cursory glance, you must be a very inexperienced driver. What's more you will have been looking at your speedo just as often to maintain your 2mph below the limit as you would if you had been driving at the limit or any other speed. If you are lacking in confidence in your driving ability as much as that, perhaps it would be safer for al, especially your family,l if you just got the bus.

 

[woof woof]

Gutted, I have been caught speeding, yes my own fault for not sticking to the speed limit but in my defence, it was a road I use very regular and in all honesty I thought it was 50mph but the 50mph sign was a good 100yds further down the road and even though its an unlit section with no houses for miles, it is 40 and I thought by sticking to 45-46 past the van that was in a position you could see for a good half mile, I was caught............. ............ my first 3 points ever.
So even if you know the road, don't risk it, slow down to 10mph below what you think the limit is.

I haven't waded through this thread but...

Years ago I was one done in a very similar situation although it wasn't a road I used regularly. I pulled out of a petrol station and thought I was in a national speed limit section but when the cops showed the vid back the higher limit sign was just a 100 yards or so further down the road. IMO a talking to would have been appropriate as I was doing less than 50 in a 40 limit (as per everyone else) and less than about 100 yards from the national speed limit sign and I said so but they were set on doing me for speeding and that's what they did.

I suppose I really couldn't complain as I was speeding but I do also think that sometimes it's a money making or numbers exercise when a talking to would do the job.

What has irritated and annoyed me over the years is that driving a sports car has made me target number 1 for the cops whereas taxi drivers can speed and generally drive like total k**b heads in built up areas seemingly with impunity. If the system was about enforcing the rules the cops would fine or give a talking to as appropriate and not act like d**k heads and let one off whilst doing another. I worked with people who drove for a living or as a part of making a living who'd be stopped for speeding, given a talking to and sent on their way time after time but every time I was stopped I was done, every single time and before some smart a**e says that if I speed I deserve to be done for it I'll add that I haven't been done for decades now but back then and now drive at 50 in a 50 or 70 in a 70 limit and see how many cars pass you. Be passed by literally hundreds of cars and still be the one pulled over and it annoys. I know we need traffic cops but my experience has lead me to think that a number of them are just w*****s who can't see a sports car / expensive car without wanting to give the driver a hard time.

On the plus side no one cares about SP30's so insurance shouldn't go up.

 

[Byker28i]

I haven't waded through this thread but...

"I'm sorry is this a 5 minute argument or the full half hour..."

 

[Box Brownie]

Lane discipline is crucial and oh so often ignored by all too many drivers, that and the consideration & respect of other road users is IMO key to safer roads whatever the speed of road and drivers on it.

PS the bonkers driving in poor conditions never ceases to amaze me! And that includes inappropriate use of rear fog lamps

 

[LCPete]

I'm not struggling at all. If you can't achieve a given speed and maintain it by judgement with just the quick cursory glance, you must be a very inexperienced driver. What's more you will have been looking at your speedo just as often to maintain your 2mph below the limit as you would if you had been driving at the limit or any other speed. If you are lacking in confidence in your driving ability as much as that, perhaps it would be safer for al, especially your family,l if you just got the bus.

Sorry I don't get this what's the problem with doing say 38 in a 40
It's neither here nor there what gets me annoyed is agressive idiots tailgating me when I'm in a 30 and doing 30
Think what bump was saying is that a speed limit is the maximum allowed and if the there's hazards about it's sensible to drop your speed

 

[Dangermouse]

I have now checked with my insurance and they say one SP30 will make no difference.............2 would up it considerably.

 

[J40ADF]

I was caught by a camera just over a year ago, 98 on a motorway. No speed awareness course for that bad boy, 3 points on my licence and insurance premiums have gone up on both my insurance and it was more expensive to insure me as a named driver on my son's first car than it was my mother-in-law.
Done the crime, now doing the time

 

[Dangermouse]

I was caught by a camera just over a year ago, 98 on a motorway. No speed awareness course for that bad boy, 3 points on my licence and insurance premiums have gone up on both my insurance and it was more expensive to insure me as a named driver on my son's first car than it was my mother-in-law.
Done the crime, now doing the time

Close to a ban that one though

 

[Dave *]

Dave, as mentioned, Viv is technically correct, there is no offence for driving slowly, however you can be prosecuted under the road traffic act 1988 section 3, careless and inconsiderate driving.
So yes, you can be prosecuted for driving slowly but the actual offence you are prosecuted under is inconsiderate driving.

Jesus, don’t be as obtuse as the resident village idiot. The charge is actually driving without reasonable consideration (which I posted but presumably the pigeon couldn’t be bothered to read them, and just carried on arguing. Nowhere did I say the offence is called “driving too slowly”.

Go back to post 55 and see what I actually wrote in that post and my following posts after that.

Except of course if you’re driving significantly below the speed limit you aren’t obeying the law...

Driving without reasonable consideration
The offence of driving without reasonable consideration under section 3 of the RTA 1988 is committed only when other persons are inconvenienced by the manner of the defendant's driving, see section 3ZA(4) RTA 1988.

The maximum penalty is a level 5 fine. The court must also either endorse the driver's licence with between 3 and 9 penalty points (unless there are "special reasons" not to do so), or impose disqualification for a fixed period and/or until a driving test has been passed. The penalty is the same as for driving without due care and attention.

A driving without due consideration charge is more appropriate where the inconvenience is aimed at and suffered by other road users.

The following examples are typical of actions likely to be regarded as inconsiderate driving:

• flashing of lights to force other drivers in front to give way;
• misuse of any lane (including cycling lanes) to avoid queuing or gain some other advantage over other drivers;
• unnecessarily remaining in an overtaking lane;
• unnecessarily slow driving

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/...ance_on_prosecuting_cases_of_bad_driving/#a30

The quote says it all, but as usual Ruth will stand and argue with a brick wall (it probably has something to do with it having the same density as her head).

 

[Byker28i]

Jesus, don’t be as obtuse as the resident village idiot. The charge is actually driving without reasonable consideration (which I posted but presumably the pigeon couldn’t be bothered to read them, and just carried on arguing. Nowhere did I say the offence is called “driving too slowly”.

Go back to post 55 and see what I actually wrote in that post and my following posts after that.





The quote says it all, but as usual Ruth will stand and argue with a brick wall (it probably has something to do with it having the same density as her head).

Thats funny as Ruth posted her technical point and you've argued the toss since, but you carry on insulting people, I'm out

 

[pierre]

I was caught by a camera just over a year ago, 98 on a motorway. No speed awareness course for that bad boy, 3 points on my licence

I thought that would have been 5 points. Looks like that has changed then.

 

[Dangermouse]

Jesus, don’t be as obtuse as the resident village idiot. The charge is actually driving without reasonable consideration (which I posted but presumably the pigeon couldn’t be bothered to read them, and just carried on arguing. Nowhere did I say the offence is called “driving too slowly”.

Go back to post 55 and see what I actually wrote in that post and my following posts after that.





The quote says it all, but as usual Ruth will stand and argue with a brick wall (it probably has something to do with it having the same density as her head).

Please lets leave the thread lighthearted and not resort to name calling, thanks.

 

[nilagin]

Sorry I don't get this what's the problem with doing say 38 in a 40
It's neither here nor there what gets me annoyed is agressive idiots tailgating me when I'm in a 30 and doing 30
Think what bump was saying is that a speed limit is the maximum allowed and if the there's hazards about it's sensible to drop your speed

At 40mph a car can be in 6th gear instead of 5th that means it is more economical and producing lower emissions. At 38mph some car engines will be labouring increasing fuel consumption and emissions and certainly not doing the engine any favours either. Bump is always harping on about dirty diesel and hates them with a passion but refuses to believe or admit that his driving below the 30mph and 40mph speed limits is not only increasing his own emissions but those of everyone stuck behind him. It has nothing to do with having to drive slower because of hazards, if it's that much of a hazard you will be travelling at a lot slower than 2mph below the limit as you may just as well be driving at the speed limit.

 

[Mr Bump]

At 40mph a car can be in 6th gear instead of 5th that means it is more economical and producing lower emissions. At 38mph some car engines will be labouring increasing fuel consumption and emissions and certainly not doing the engine any favours either. Bump is always harping on about dirty diesel and hates them with a passion but refuses to believe or admit that his driving below the 30mph and 40mph speed limits is not only increasing his own emissions but those of everyone stuck behind him. It has nothing to do with having to drive slower because of hazards, if it's that much of a hazard you will be travelling at a lot slower than 2mph below the limit as you may just as well be driving at the speed limit.

Its because you don't want the issue if speeding to be an issue you want to make it another issue and tht is the bit you just cannot grasp is some people like me have a social responsibility.

 

[Steve Smith]

Who has six gears? Not many. Not in a car anyway.


Steve.

 

[Craigus]

Who has six gears? Not many. Not in a car anyway.


Steve.

Loads of modern Diesels do. And not so modern.

 

[nilagin]

Its because you don't want the issue if speeding to be an issue you want to make it another issue and tht is the bit you just cannot grasp is some people like me have a social responsibility.

Since when has driving at the speed limit, speeding? How is using more fuel and creating more pollution and causing those stuck behind you to do the same, socially responsible.?
Much like your driving and usual rants, you are clueless.

 

[PaulF]

Who has six gears? Not many. Not in a car anyway.


Steve.

I've had at least six gears (manual) in my, mainly diesel, cars since around 2007, my current one has eight gears but that's an automatic with the option of doing manual selection.
My wife had a 2005 Smart Roadster for years, that was petrol and had six gears with an automatic clutch system.

 

[welshwizard645]

Had 6 speeds in my 2003 Saab 9-3 Aero, trouble is the GM ecotec engine is so refined that the car is so quiet doing 80 in 4th you sometimes forget to change up...

Going back to the bickering about doing 38 in a 40 zone. This does not bother me in the slightest if I am travelling behind someone doing 38 or even slightly less. Cars might be doing the same speed but it will register differently on speedometers, our Golf 4 could be doing 35 mph in a 40mph even though the needle will be at 40. It does bother me then if having left the 40 zone the same driver continues to dawdle at 40 mph and prevents me from making a safe overtaking manoeuvre.

nilagin - your attitude does concern me. Speed limits are limits, there for a reason. As the authorities say they are not a target although I do confess to exceeding them far too often, I do have a car that does beg to be driven quickly. To paint someone doing 38 in a 40 as inconsiderate strikes me as selfish. Consider this, a 2mph difference would only result in an insignificant delay in time of arrival at your destination.

 

[nilagin]

To paint someone doing 38 in a 40 as inconsiderate strikes me as selfish. Consider this, a 2mph difference would only result in an insignificant delay in time of arrival at your destination.

You are missing the point. Bump is always harping on about vehicle emissions and how he looks forward to the day we all have electric cars. If cars are producing higher emissions and wasting fuel as a result of not being able to drive at the 30 mph and 40mph speed limits, he is being inconsiderate and selfish as a result because of everyone having to breath in the unnecessarily high emissions as a result. It has nothing to do with how long it takes to reach your destination.

 

[Keith W]

For fecks sake! Give it a rest will you!

 

[joxby]

For fecks sake! Give it a rest will you!

wasting your time, obsessive tunnel vision Keith

I can't find the post that rationalizes the idea that taking 3 points and a fine is the best option, in all this BS

 

[nilagin]

For fecks sake! Give it a rest will you!

Why? Someone else addresses me and what I was saying, I have a right to answer it.

wasting your time, obsessive tunnel vision Keith

I can't find the post that rationalizes the idea that taking 3 points and a fine is the best option, in all this BS

Not obsessive tunnel vision at all, not my fault if people can't understand logical fact and then make ridiculous claims to back up their reasoning.
To back up my claims, I ran a test in my car as far as fuel consumption is concerned, at 28mph in 4th and 30mph in 5th my car was able to achieve around 5mpg more at the latter speed/gear and at 38mph in 5th gear against 40mph in 6th gear I can get around 7mpg more at the latter speed/gear. No idea what the emissions would be, I don't think they will let me borrow one of the real world emissions measurement devices from work, but at those differences in fuel consumption, it's not really hard to realise that the emissions could be significantly higher for just one car let alone all the cars being forced to do the same.

As far as rationalising taking 3 points over a speed awareness course, there is no benefit really. Ok the OP's insurer has stated they won't be increasing his insurance as a result, that isn't to say they won't during the next 5yrs, so he could still end up paying higher premiums in the future as a result. Plus if he should have another misjudgement of speed or any other driving offence, he could incur further points on his licence and increase his future insurance premium still further. Much better to do the course, you still have to advise your insurance company of having done the course, but as far as I am aware you don't have to keep advising insurance companies after that.

 

[tarric]

Not obsessive tunnel vision at all, not my fault if people can't understand logical fact and then make ridiculous claims to back up their reasoning.
To back up my claims, I ran a test in my car as far as fuel consumption is concerned, at 28mph in 4th and 30mph in 5th my car was able to achieve around 5mpg more at the latter speed/gear and at 38mph in 5th gear against 40mph in 6th gear I can get around 7mpg more at the latter speed/gear. No idea what the emissions would be, I don't think they will let me borrow one of the real world emissions measurement devices from work, but at those differences in fuel consumption, it's not really hard to realise that the emissions could be significantly higher for just one car let alone all the cars being forced to do the same.

As far as rationalising taking 3 points over a speed awareness course, there is no benefit really. Ok the OP's insurer has stated they won't be increasing his insurance as a result, that isn't to say they won't during the next 5yrs, so he could still end up paying higher premiums in the future as a result. Plus if he should have another misjudgement of speed or any other driving offence, he could incur further points on his licence and increase his future insurance premium still further. Much better to do the course, you still have to advise your insurance company of having done the course, but as far as I am aware you don't have to keep advising insurance companies after that.

So if I've got this right you compered apples with oranges, why not 28mph and 30mph in both fourth and fifth and similarly for 38mph and 40mph in both fifth and sixth to see what the respective mpg is, also did you conduct these tests in town or on the open roads out with built up areas, as I would be interested in knowing where. If in town can you tell me which one because I have yet to find any town that I could drive round at a constant speed in order to conduct an accurate test as described. If on the open road then surely driving at these sort of speeds you would have been driving in a way as to inconvenience other road users. If however these tests were conducted on a test track then they would have been as useful as manufacturers advertised mpg in real world driving situations.

 

[Cobra]

Who has six gears? Not many. Not in a car anyway.

My car only has 2 one for forward and the other for backwards I feel cheated

 

[Keebsuk]

My car only has 2 one for forward and the other for backwards I feel cheated

It’s sounds like you are driving a DAF Variomatic! The only car I know that can go as fast in reverse as forwards![emoji23]

 

[Steeps]

The issue with emissions isn't about how much MPG your car can get but how clean the fuel burn is. If I drove around town doing 38 in 6th (petrol) my on board MPG reader will probably tell me I'm doing awesome in the intervals it reads but in reality the ECU will be struggling with the fuel mix, the cat will be dropping in temp and what comes out the back will be more harmful than if I was doing it in 5th. It's another reason why Diesel is bad for city driving because their filters clog up if they don't do enough warm mileage driving and they have to do a regen cycle (throw extra fuel through the system) to burn it out.

I don't mind if someone is doing 2-3mph slower than the limit, afterall it is a limit not a target. But if you're doing 42 in a 60 which seems to be very common (especially when the HGV speed limit is now 50 so really there's no excuse) then that is something that needs to be looked into.

Once got pulled for doing 60 in a 60, apparently just because my car is capable of it doesn't mean I should do it (nice twisty roads!)