Elderly driver, 76, fined £100 and given three points for ‘allowing ambulance to pass’

HAYSIE

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/elderly-driver-76-fined-100-and-given-three-points-for-allowing-ambulance-to-pass-132647493.html

Essexphil

If this man genuinely believes this, then he needs to be off the road:-

1. It is a straight 2-lane road. How is edging forward in a straight line going to make any difference?
2. Distinct lack of ambulance in picture-the only vehicle that might be is in the same lane as him
3. The reason he has to appear in Court to plead Not Guilty is so that he can be cross-examined, in order that the Mags may decide how believable he is

He has 2 choices. Pay up. Or attend Court. Where his fine plus costs are going to be much higher.

Not whine to the Press.

PS-he is not being treated like a criminal". Technically, he is a criminal...

HAYSIE

Essexphil said:

If this man genuinely believes this, then he needs to be off the road:-

1. It is a straight 2-lane road. How is edging forward in a straight line going to make any difference?
2. Distinct lack of ambulance in picture-the only vehicle that might be is in the same lane as him
3. The reason he has to appear in Court to plead Not Guilty is so that he can be cross-examined, in order that the Mags may decide how believable he is

He has 2 choices. Pay up. Or attend Court. Where his fine plus costs are going to be much higher.

Not whine to the Press.

PS-he is not being treated like a criminal". Technically, he is a criminal...

Thats a bit harsh.
Do you think that he slowed down at the lights because the two lanes merge into one, allowing the ambulance to pass him, and not realising he was a second late for the lights?


https://www.itv.com/news/central/2023-01-10/driver-fined-100-and-three-points-after-slowing-to-let-ambulance-pass

HAYSIE

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

If this man genuinely believes this, then he needs to be off the road:-

1. It is a straight 2-lane road. How is edging forward in a straight line going to make any difference?
2. Distinct lack of ambulance in picture-the only vehicle that might be is in the same lane as him
3. The reason he has to appear in Court to plead Not Guilty is so that he can be cross-examined, in order that the Mags may decide how believable he is

He has 2 choices. Pay up. Or attend Court. Where his fine plus costs are going to be much higher.

Not whine to the Press.

PS-he is not being treated like a criminal". Technically, he is a criminal...

Thats a bit harsh.
Do you think that he slowed down at the lights because the two lanes merge into one, allowing the ambulance to pass him, and not realising he was a second late for the lights?


https://www.itv.com/news/central/2023-01-10/driver-fined-100-and-three-points-after-slowing-to-let-ambulance-pass

Why did the 76-year-old slow down in front of the ambulance?
The 76-year-old slowed down to make sure the ambulance could pass, otherwise he feared he would have been stuck in front of it on single lane ahead and cause it to be delayed.

HENDRIK62

I think what has happened here is, he has slowed down to let the ambulance pass (which you can see in front of him in the pictures) and the other car behind the ambulance has passed him as well, then the lights have changed and he has thought "f**k it I am going through too"

HAYSIE

Essexphil said:

If this man genuinely believes this, then he needs to be off the road:-

1. It is a straight 2-lane road. How is edging forward in a straight line going to make any difference?
2. Distinct lack of ambulance in picture-the only vehicle that might be is in the same lane as him
3. The reason he has to appear in Court to plead Not Guilty is so that he can be cross-examined, in order that the Mags may decide how believable he is

He has 2 choices. Pay up. Or attend Court. Where his fine plus costs are going to be much higher.

Not whine to the Press.

PS-he is not being treated like a criminal". Technically, he is a criminal...

A driver could receive a hefty punishment after he slowed down to let an ambulance pass him on the A52 in Nottinghamshire. Retired Frank Wallington, 76, of Walsall, was driving home to the West Midlands after attending his cousin's funeral in Long Bennington when he saw an ambulance with flashing blue lights approaching.

Frank pulled over to allow the ambulance to pass when he was on the A52 Grantham Road approaching the traffic light junction at Cropwell Road in Radcliffe on Trent, which merges the two lanes. Not wanting to get in the way of the ambulances, he slowed down to make sure the ambulance could pass otherwise he feared he would have been stuck in front of it on single lane ahead and cause it to be delayed.

However, the 76 year old was not aware a white car was driving closely behind the ambulance, and due to having to let the white car ahead as well, Frank passed through the traffic lights at the junction 1.2 seconds after the light turned red. He was contacted a month later by Nottinghamshire Police who informed him of his traffic offence and punishment of £100 and given three points, but Frank deemed the punishment as unfair and wants the mitigating circumstances to be considered.

https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/driver-fined-100-given-three-8008663

HAYSIE

HENDRIK62 said:

I think what has happened here is, he has slowed down to let the ambulance pass (which you can see in front of him in the pictures) and the other car behind the ambulance has passed him as well, then the lights have changed and he has thought "f**k it I am going through too"

You could well be right.
Although that is not a story that is likely to get him off.

Essexphil

HENDRIK62 said:

I think what has happened here is, he has slowed down to let the ambulance pass (which you can see in front of him in the pictures) and the other car behind the ambulance has passed him as well, then the lights have changed and he has thought "f**k it I am going through too"

Exactly this. He was slowing down, the ambulance has already overtaken and subsequently changed lanes, and yet he still goes through the red light.

That's why he gets the 3 points.

We all make mistakes. Most of us admit them, and move on.

HAYSIE

Essexphil said:

HENDRIK62 said:

I think what has happened here is, he has slowed down to let the ambulance pass (which you can see in front of him in the pictures) and the other car behind the ambulance has passed him as well, then the lights have changed and he has thought "f**k it I am going through too"

Exactly this. He was slowing down, the ambulance has already overtaken and subsequently changed lanes, and yet he still goes through the red light.

That's why he gets the 3 points.

We all make mistakes. Most of us admit them, and move on.

I suppose that a Solicitor that was defending him may take a different view?

tai-gar

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

HENDRIK62 said:

I think what has happened here is, he has slowed down to let the ambulance pass (which you can see in front of him in the pictures) and the other car behind the ambulance has passed him as well, then the lights have changed and he has thought "f**k it I am going through too"

Exactly this. He was slowing down, the ambulance has already overtaken and subsequently changed lanes, and yet he still goes through the red light.

That's why he gets the 3 points.

We all make mistakes. Most of us admit them, and move on.

I suppose that a Solicitor that was defending him may take a different view?

As soon as the guy says "yes but it's a matter of principle" the solicitor will order his new Rolls Royce.

HAYSIE

tai-gar said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

HENDRIK62 said:

I think what has happened here is, he has slowed down to let the ambulance pass (which you can see in front of him in the pictures) and the other car behind the ambulance has passed him as well, then the lights have changed and he has thought "f**k it I am going through too"

Exactly this. He was slowing down, the ambulance has already overtaken and subsequently changed lanes, and yet he still goes through the red light.

That's why he gets the 3 points.

We all make mistakes. Most of us admit them, and move on.

I suppose that a Solicitor that was defending him may take a different view?

As soon as the guy says "yes but it's a matter of principle" the solicitor will order his new Rolls Royce.

Might give a boost to @Tikay10s shares.

Tikay10

HAYSIE said:

tai-gar said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

HENDRIK62 said:

I think what has happened here is, he has slowed down to let the ambulance pass (which you can see in front of him in the pictures) and the other car behind the ambulance has passed him as well, then the lights have changed and he has thought "f**k it I am going through too"

Exactly this. He was slowing down, the ambulance has already overtaken and subsequently changed lanes, and yet he still goes through the red light.

That's why he gets the 3 points.

We all make mistakes. Most of us admit them, and move on.

I suppose that a Solicitor that was defending him may take a different view?

As soon as the guy says "yes but it's a matter of principle" the solicitor will order his new Rolls Royce.

Might give a boost to @Tikay10s shares.

@HAYSIE


Sadly not, Rolls Royce who make the Aero engines (& much else besides) & are the company in question, are northing to do with Rolls Royce Cars who are in fact owned by BMW these days.

Even worse, I sold my RR shares. At the bottom of the market. Marv.

HAYSIE

Tikay10 said:

HAYSIE said:

tai-gar said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

HENDRIK62 said:

I think what has happened here is, he has slowed down to let the ambulance pass (which you can see in front of him in the pictures) and the other car behind the ambulance has passed him as well, then the lights have changed and he has thought "f**k it I am going through too"

Exactly this. He was slowing down, the ambulance has already overtaken and subsequently changed lanes, and yet he still goes through the red light.

That's why he gets the 3 points.

We all make mistakes. Most of us admit them, and move on.

I suppose that a Solicitor that was defending him may take a different view?

As soon as the guy says "yes but it's a matter of principle" the solicitor will order his new Rolls Royce.

Might give a boost to @Tikay10s shares.

@HAYSIE


Sadly not, Rolls Royce who make the Aero engines (& much else besides) & are the company in question, are northing to do with Rolls Royce Cars who are in fact owned by BMW these days.

Even worse, I sold my RR shares. At the bottom of the market. Marv.

I wont mention them again.

Essexphil

tai-gar said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

HENDRIK62 said:

I think what has happened here is, he has slowed down to let the ambulance pass (which you can see in front of him in the pictures) and the other car behind the ambulance has passed him as well, then the lights have changed and he has thought "f**k it I am going through too"

Exactly this. He was slowing down, the ambulance has already overtaken and subsequently changed lanes, and yet he still goes through the red light.

That's why he gets the 3 points.

We all make mistakes. Most of us admit them, and move on.

I suppose that a Solicitor that was defending him may take a different view?

As soon as the guy says "yes but it's a matter of principle" the solicitor will order his new Rolls Royce.

Not if they are sensible, no.

This man is a whiner. Who wants to blame everyone else, and/or the system, for his error.

I have been in this exact position hundreds of times. Any sensible Solicitor will both realise the hopelessness of this case and that, when he ends up with 3 points, a £100 fine, £700 costs, and a £700 legal bill, he will then blame his Solicitor.

When he refers to wanting to put his "mitigation" it is important to point out that to do so is going to cost him a lot more than £100. Because he has to turn up to do so, and in a Court that (like all other UK Courts) is supposed to run at a "profit".

Do I agree with that from a personal view? No. But my role was always to do what was best for the Client, and his pocket. Not cost him money by what he thinks the Law should be.

tai-gar

Essexphil said:

tai-gar said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

HENDRIK62 said:

I think what has happened here is, he has slowed down to let the ambulance pass (which you can see in front of him in the pictures) and the other car behind the ambulance has passed him as well, then the lights have changed and he has thought "f**k it I am going through too"

Exactly this. He was slowing down, the ambulance has already overtaken and subsequently changed lanes, and yet he still goes through the red light.

That's why he gets the 3 points.

We all make mistakes. Most of us admit them, and move on.

I suppose that a Solicitor that was defending him may take a different view?

As soon as the guy says "yes but it's a matter of principle" the solicitor will order his new Rolls Royce.

Not if they are sensible, no.

This man is a whiner. Who wants to blame everyone else, and/or the system, for his error.

I have been in this exact position hundreds of times. Any sensible Solicitor will both realise the hopelessness of this case and that, when he ends up with 3 points, a £100 fine, £700 costs, and a £700 legal bill, he will then blame his Solicitor.

When he refers to wanting to put his "mitigation" it is important to point out that to do so is going to cost him a lot more than £100. Because he has to turn up to do so, and in a Court that (like all other UK Courts) is supposed to run at a "profit".

Do I agree with that from a personal view? No. But my role was always to do what was best for the Client, and his pocket. Not cost him money by what he thinks the Law should be.

You were obviously one of the good guys then Phil. I have known a few who definitely were not.

HAYSIE

Essexphil said:

tai-gar said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

HENDRIK62 said:

I think what has happened here is, he has slowed down to let the ambulance pass (which you can see in front of him in the pictures) and the other car behind the ambulance has passed him as well, then the lights have changed and he has thought "f**k it I am going through too"

Exactly this. He was slowing down, the ambulance has already overtaken and subsequently changed lanes, and yet he still goes through the red light.

That's why he gets the 3 points.

We all make mistakes. Most of us admit them, and move on.

I suppose that a Solicitor that was defending him may take a different view?

As soon as the guy says "yes but it's a matter of principle" the solicitor will order his new Rolls Royce.

Not if they are sensible, no.

This man is a whiner. Who wants to blame everyone else, and/or the system, for his error.

I have been in this exact position hundreds of times. Any sensible Solicitor will both realise the hopelessness of this case and that, when he ends up with 3 points, a £100 fine, £700 costs, and a £700 legal bill, he will then blame his Solicitor.

When he refers to wanting to put his "mitigation" it is important to point out that to do so is going to cost him a lot more than £100. Because he has to turn up to do so, and in a Court that (like all other UK Courts) is supposed to run at a "profit".

Do I agree with that from a personal view? No. But my role was always to do what was best for the Client, and his pocket. Not cost him money by what he thinks the Law should be.

Best to swallow it then.

Essexphil

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

tai-gar said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

HENDRIK62 said:

I think what has happened here is, he has slowed down to let the ambulance pass (which you can see in front of him in the pictures) and the other car behind the ambulance has passed him as well, then the lights have changed and he has thought "f**k it I am going through too"

Exactly this. He was slowing down, the ambulance has already overtaken and subsequently changed lanes, and yet he still goes through the red light.

That's why he gets the 3 points.

We all make mistakes. Most of us admit them, and move on.

I suppose that a Solicitor that was defending him may take a different view?

As soon as the guy says "yes but it's a matter of principle" the solicitor will order his new Rolls Royce.

Not if they are sensible, no.

This man is a whiner. Who wants to blame everyone else, and/or the system, for his error.

I have been in this exact position hundreds of times. Any sensible Solicitor will both realise the hopelessness of this case and that, when he ends up with 3 points, a £100 fine, £700 costs, and a £700 legal bill, he will then blame his Solicitor.

When he refers to wanting to put his "mitigation" it is important to point out that to do so is going to cost him a lot more than £100. Because he has to turn up to do so, and in a Court that (like all other UK Courts) is supposed to run at a "profit".

Do I agree with that from a personal view? No. But my role was always to do what was best for the Client, and his pocket. Not cost him money by what he thinks the Law should be.

Best to swallow it then.

Most people accepted my advice.

The ones that didn't? Once I had pointed out that they could take my advice for free, or I would confirm it in writing, and ask for an up-front retainer of £750.

Most then saw where I was coming from. Still had a few that carried on arguing.

You read in the Press from time to time some Solicitor who gets the rich and famous off all sorts of motoring prosecutions. With some guy shamelessly promoting himself.

I've known of 2 of those sorts of people. They have 1 thing in common. Both Struck Off

On a lighter note, I spent some years working for a Legal Helpline. With, amongst other people, the late Leslie Lawrenson (the very capable Solicitor who, regrettably, will only be remembered for dying of Covid while doing a blog about how Covid was irrelevant).

A Client once told us (in a very Laaaahndon accent):-

"I've tried all that British Justice. And now I want Europeeeeann Jusssstice".

A phrase which would brighten up anyone's day. And did

goldon

He should ditch the Idea of " The Law " and plump for go fund me Sympathy ....Hic!

Essexphil

goldon said:

He should ditch the Idea of " The Law " and plump for go fund me Sympathy ....Hic!

I've nothing against GoFundMe pages for people in genuine need.

But the amount of people who manage to con people to put their money where someone else's mouth is amazes me.