|
On the face of a ban is justified under "totting-up" - 1 offence of speeding and 3 of unsafe tyres. The OP needs a plea of mitigating circumstances relating to the offences, not their personal position, so best to come from a solicitor - but expect a much higher fine than normal in place of the ban.
|
|
Looks like there's a good chance of just 3 points total for the tyres with a fair wind but you definitely need a solicitor to represent you on this one, as the stakes are quite high. Your post has made me go out and check ours!
|
|
Each transgression of the law is treated as a separate offence, three bald tyres plus speeding points equals a ban. The only advice I can offer is not to waste money on solicitors but to wear a smart suit, stand up straight, articulate your case and grovel to the magistraites because if they stick to the letter of the law disqualification is inevitable. It's been my experience that they take a more sympathetic attitude to those who show contrition and are able to convince them that there were circumstances that made the offences a genuine oversight. In other words try to appeal to their better nature.
|
Each transgression of the law is treated as a separate offence, three bald tyres plus speeding points equals a ban. The only advice I can offer is not to waste money on solicitors but to wear a smart suit, stand up straight, articulate your case and grovel to the magistraites because if they stick to the letter of the law disqualification is inevitable. It's been my experience that they take a more sympathetic attitude to those who show contrition and are able to convince them that there were circumstances that made the offences a genuine oversight. In other words try to appeal to their better nature.
May equal a ban - courts have discretion in extenuating circumstances which is what the OP needs to focus on presenting.
|
May equal a ban - courts have discretion in extenuating circumstances which is what the OP needs to focus on presenting.
I am mystified, what is your point? That's exactly what I indicated in my post.
|
May equal a ban - courts have discretion in extenuating circumstances which is what the OP needs to focus on presenting.
I am mystified, what is your point? That's exactly what I indicated in my post.
The ban isn't a foregone conclusion.
|
The ban isn't a foregone conclusion.
Exactly. Perfectly illustrated by my advice to the op. Easy to understand really isn't it?
|
|
|
|
circumstances that made the offences a genuine oversight.
Not a chance!! I doubt that the OP's Mondeo wears it's front tyres as quick as my Saab which scrubs off 1mm per 2500 miles. So if the OP does average mileage (about 1000Mpcm) then he would have had 2 1/2 months MINIMUM during which they were wearing out their last legal 1mm. So clearly the OP was failing to check his tyres during this time, despite his legal responsibility in this matter. No way is that just an "oversight"
Given the state of the weather over the last few months the OP should consider himself lucky not to have gone slithering about on the road, heading toward a tree ..... or a truck ..or ...or ..
Good job he was caught in time before he had chance to do some serious damage.
The OP failed in his responsibility both as a motorist and as a parent, exposing his kids to such danger.
It is clear the OP does not understand the danger he has been creating, most ordinary motorists don't. Unfortunately, I do. It's why the law on this matter is in place. And it's why I hope they throw the book at the OP with a ban.
|
|
Time to get global agreement to increase the minimum limit up to 3mm - although some will still go bald!
|
|
I agree about 3 mm, don't even like them that low and by the time they're at 4mm i'm scouring the usual places for a good buy.
Coming home today from work sudden torrential rain flash floods drains spouting water uphill the lot, my MB's tyres still just under 8mm but even at 40 mph max where the nearside tyres hit the worse pools on the country roads you could feel the pull to the nearside strongly, wouldn't entertain running them to legal min tread.
|
|
|
|
circumstances that made the offences a genuine oversight.
Not a chance!! I doubt that the OP's Mondeo wears it's front tyres as quick as my Saab which scrubs off 1mm per 2500 miles. So if the OP does average mileage (about 1000Mpcm) then he would have had 2 1/2 months MINIMUM during which they were wearing out their last legal 1mm. So clearly the OP was failing to check his tyres during this time, despite his legal responsibility in this matter. No way is that just an "oversight"
Given the state of the weather over the last few months the OP should consider himself lucky not to have gone slithering about on the road, heading toward a tree ..... or a truck ..or ...or ..
Good job he was caught in time before he had chance to do some serious damage.
The OP failed in his responsibility both as a motorist and as a parent, exposing his kids to such danger.
It is clear the OP does not understand the danger he has been creating, most ordinary motorists don't. Unfortunately, I do. It's why the law on this matter is in place. And it's why I hope they throw the book at the OP with a ban.
The clue is in the complete sentence.
That magistraites take a more sympathetic attitude to those who show contrition and are able to convince the them that there were circumstances that made the offences a genuine oversight.
I don't condone any type of offence, the op simply asked for some advice. In British law many convictions are dealt with by the imposition of concurrent sentences whether this is approved of or not.
|
|
He speeds in a car that carries his 3 children & has only 1 good tyre and is looking for / needs a lenient magistrate = Points and a hefty fine is the minimum.
You do not get 3 baldies overnight - you might shred a tyre in a pothole & be "unaware" but 3 worn! - that is pushing things.
His insurers will add a good few £££s on renewal making 3 new tyres look really cheap by comparison.
|
|
Anybody who drives about on bald tyres is a risk to everybody else on the road. All drivers are responsible for the condition and roadworthiness of their vehicles all the time.
No excuse - If I was sentencing it would be 3 points for each bald tyre plus the maximum fine for each defective tyre as an example to other drivers who can't be bothered to check their own tyres.
Well done to the traffic officer for being thorough and spotting it.
|
|
Whilst the OP asked for advice on how to mitigate his penalty and I agree completely with the unasked for advice which has been given.
I try to be understanding but, in this case, his lack of care maintaining his car deserves significant punishment.
On a personal level I hope he is able to get on with his life. Fortunately, there were no physical consequences from his irresponsibility.
|
|
No sympathy from me, I'm afraid.
|
|
|
"It is clear the OP does not understand the danger he has been creating, most ordinary motorists don't. Unfortunately, I do. It's why the law on this matter is in place. And it's why I hope they throw the book at the OP with a ban."
Some posters seem keen to dish out some heavy criticism, maybe based on personal experience.
Sorry, guys - I think thread has drifted inappropriately. We don't know that "... the OP does not understand the danger he has been creating..."
Just bear in mind we don't know the full facts of the case. A court may feel more lenient, or indeed less lenient, than those of you calling for dire punishment.
The OP said straight off: " Completely my fault..."
I really don't see the point in rubbing his nose in it.
|
|
Sadly far too many people don't bother to check their cars these days. It was something I was taught at a young age, every Sunday after washing it.
I remember going to look at one car where mice had eaten the engine bay soundproofing - it was all over the engine and a complete mess.
When I asked the owner, she said she never had a reason to open the bonnet.
|
Thanks for the feedback, mostly useful some really not!!
Based on what I've read and researched I will look to get a solicitor.
I appreciate the neggative views on this and trust me I felt terrible I had let the tyres get to this point, lesson definitely learnt. Any fine or possible ban will do nothing to stop this happening again, I learnt my lesson as soon as the policeman said I had three bald tyres.
What annoys me is if my car was that bad why wasn't it impounded? Why was I left to drive off with my kids and brother in the car with no demand to prove I had bought new tyres in the next day or so! I could still be driving with them now for all the police know.
Secondly not once during my life have I been taught/tested on how to check tyres correctly and identify what is and isn't illegal. If it isn't part of the driving test now then it should be considering the possible consequences.
Thirdly, I have spoken to a lot of people on this subject, hardly any check their tyres regularly, some never and many don't even know what to look for. Many people rely on their service/MOT to get them checked. Mine got through the MOT with no issues.
I think there is a huge educational/legal area that needs tightening.
Thanks,
Simon.
|
|
It's in the Highway code, as clear as day. Which you did learn when you learnt to drive. As did the rest of us.
It's also displayed in virtually every single fast-fit tyre shop in the UK.
You appear to be making excuses with that post. It's someone else's fault for not teaching you/others the law, and showing you how to do it. It's even the police's fault for not impounding your car on the spot !
The only person at fault here is you.
|
|
Having seen the multiplicity of adverts, specifically educating drivers on tyre tread depth - and the presence for decades of the 1.6mm high wear indicators in all the main grooves of the tyre - I find it difficult to believe that any driver doesn't know.
Isn't bothered enough to look I understand as my own son is like that - but his excuse would be "dad always checks"!
|
|
really, so you think something that was looked at over 20 years ago and many more for some reason is still fresh in peoples memory or people take in displays in garages!?
No excuse i said 100% my fault but the fact of the matter is right or wrongly people get complacent/lazy, if you are not "a car" person you may not pay as much detail as you should to such things like this and I am guilty of this and theres a lot of people out there like it.
|
really, so you think something that was looked at over 20 years ago and many more for some reason is still fresh in peoples memory or people take in displays in garages!?
No excuse i said 100% my fault but the fact of the matter is right or wrongly people get complacent/lazy, if you are not "a car" person you may not pay as much detail as you should to such things like this and I am guilty of this and theres a lot of people out there like it.
I learnt to drive many decades longer ago than you - I take it as my responsibility to keep up-to-date with modern technology, changes in legislation and changes in road signs.
I'm no longer fit enough to fix safety issues with my car - but the day I stop being able to check all the safety issues, and get someone else to fix them, is the day I send my licence back to DVLA and quit driving.
|
|
|
With a solicitor, I'd expect you will avoid a ban. The 'three points for each tyre' is a poor police application (and very American) of applying the fixed penalty system.
If you drive an in unroadworthy vehicle, this is a motoring offence you can choose to face in court or accept a fixed penalty for. Bald tyres are obviously dangerous, but so are, for example inadequate brakes, or excessive rust. If your car had bad chassis rust in three places, it would only be unroadworthy once, so the same would apply to tyres.
If the same principle was applied to speeding tickets, they could ban you for one minor offence by measuring the speed four times each a few seconds apart. However that one is very obvious (but I wouldn't be surprised if American cops do that from time to time!)
In court, with a solicitor, I'd expect a largish fine (£500) and six points as a car with three bald tyres would be in the 'very unroadworthy' rather than 'slightly unroadworthy' with a blown headlight bulb or similar.
|
|
If (for example) you had severe rust, it would be the CAR that was severely rusted. As you're only driving one car, then it would obviously be one offence.
For tyre offences, the law does allow flexibility. The courts MUST impose 3 penalty points. However, they CAN choose to 'roll' multiple offences into one set of 3 points. So in this case, they could impose 3, 6, or 9 points.
How, or whether, they do that will be up to you and your solicitor. I'd suggest that the last post made (where blaming everyone else for not teaching you how to check your tyres, that lots of other people don't check their tyres, etc) would not be the best way to go about it.
Standing up in court, deeply apologetic for your lack of care, the tyres were immediately replaced, did not realise the seriousness of the matter, have now learnt how to look after your car properly and will continue to do so, etc. will be your best chance of avoiding a ban.
On the other hand, blaming others for not teaching you how to do it, blaming the police for not impounding your car, stating that 'nobody else checks their tyres' ... well, which way would you think the magistrate is going to jump ?
|
|
I pointed out to someone at work that one of front tyres was bald-not just down to the markers but BALD-his answer was"It's going in for a service in two week's time-they'll do it then".
|
|
I'd say a discreet call to the police would be in order. Ensure you get an incident report number.
(That way if they do nothing and he has an accident and kills someone, the police have lots of awkward questions asked, as you can point out that it was reported and they did nothing). Nothing gets police moving faster than knowing they are going to be partially 'on the hook' if something goes wrong.
|
I pointed out to someone at work that one of front tyres was bald-not just down to the markers but BALD-his answer was"It's going in for a service in two week's time-they'll do it then".
I pointed out in a thread this week that I had told a friend with an XF with tyres down to the markers that they needed to be changed, Result? tyres will wait but bought 4 bottles of bollinger. = none of my business!
|
|
Thanks for the feedback, mostly useful some really not!! Based on what I've read and researched I will look to get a solicitor. I appreciate the neggative views on this and trust me I felt terrible I had let the tyres get to this point, lesson definitely learnt. Any fine or possible ban will do nothing to stop this happening again, I learnt my lesson as soon as the policeman said I had three bald tyres. What annoys me is if my car was that bad why wasn't it impounded? Why was I left to drive off with my kids and brother in the car with no demand to prove I had bought new tyres in the next day or so! I could still be driving with them now for all the police know. Secondly not once during my life have I been taught/tested on how to check tyres correctly and identify what is and isn't illegal. If it isn't part of the driving test now then it should be considering the possible consequences. Thirdly, I have spoken to a lot of people on this subject, hardly any check their tyres regularly, some never and many don't even know what to look for. Many people rely on their service/MOT to get them checked. Mine got through the MOT with no issues. I think there is a huge educational/legal area that needs tightening. Thanks, Simon.
One more point which I don't suppose anyone has told you is that tyre pressures which are above or below the correct level can be highly dangerous so need to be checked regularly (ideally weekly, at least monthly) as well as checking sidewalls for cracks, cuts or bulges.
|
|
A "wile" lot of Drivers arnt drivers nor should be driving, from rueful observation over some 38 years, though this based on an small farm agricultural background where one mostly "larned" on clapped out machinery, therefore HAD to learn what made it tick.
Despite in my earlier years paying sometimes scant regard to such nicities as Car tax & MOT , and indeed some speed limits, and bytimes towing restrictions/limits(but ABSOLUTLY always fully insured), and always driving a relatively sensible boring car.
I always kept my tyres checked, anyway how could one not notice a defective tyre?, and always purchased reputable brand tyres, which, since I looked after my tyres, was a good investment.
I cannot imagine how anyone can claim to be a driver, or drive, without such a simply commonsense approach.
Nor have I ever attempted to shift blame or responsibility onto others for my mistakes.
and erm! 3 bald tyres AND speeding, though perhaps only in a very wide clear dry quiet 30 zone.
regards
m
Edited by DirtyDieselDogg on 19/05/2016 at 17:10
|
I think you would be very surprised the amount of people on the roads who don't check tyres or would even know what to check for!
No blame has been shifted but there is obviously a missing piece of education somewhere along the line that could easily be rectified.
|
|
I have found that continental tyres TWI seem to be set at 3mm, maybe they came from german stock.
OP has not told us how bald these tyres were. Visible plies or slicks are obviously much worse than 1.5mm tread. However measurement of a tyres tread is actually subject to a lot of subjective interpretation. A decent calibrated micrometer is needed and several measurements need to be made. I doubt the police made precise measurements that couldnt be shot down in court.
|
I have found that continental tyres TWI seem to be set at 3mm, maybe they came from german stock.
OP has not told us how bald these tyres were. Visible plies or slicks are obviously much worse than 1.5mm tread. However measurement of a tyres tread is actually subject to a lot of subjective interpretation. A decent calibrated micrometer is needed and several measurements need to be made. I doubt the police made precise measurements that couldnt be shot down in court.
If the TWI is flush with the tread, that's all the evidence necessary.
|
|
A micrometer is not needed - it is possible to buy a very accurate mechanical dial tyre depth gauge for £12.50.
www.tyre-equipment.co.uk/acatalog/Tyre_Tread_Gauge...l
I've had one for years, I used to teach my driving school pupils how to use it-and warned them about the consequences of driving on tyres with reduced tread depth and the penalties.
|
|
Scrumbles,
I failed to communicate, my mistake, I was trying to say; unless one understands the simple basic mechanics of car maintenance, i.e. why tyres need tread, and the correct inflation, never mind oil in the engine, coolant, why one should not force power steering etc etc, the hazards presented by differing weather and road conditions, the vital importance of always wearing a seatbelt, and ensuring ones own and others children do too(thissun based on personal observation) etc etc, one is simply a danger on the roads.
It is really that simple.
Why should I pay insurance premimums based on accident statistics caused by such a needless lack of knowledge.
regards
marcus
|
|
I think it is very naive to think all road users have this knowledge, its a nice thought but im afraid wrong.
|
|
In a court of law, I think any measuring device would need a valid certificate of calibration traceable to national standards, be it a breathalyser, speed camera, gauge, whatever if challenged. I doubt your cheap internet device has a traceable certificate. Photographic evidence and a documented procedure could also be requested.
The letter of the law does not reference a TWI, it demands a physical measurement.
|
|
|
|
|
thanks, a lot of people seem to miss the point or understand my argument here.
Seems there are a lot of people with to much time on their hands on here who think they know all wthout knowing allthe facts.
|
|
I believe "all of the facts" are that you were caught speeding, with 3 bald tyres, and with your own (I assume) important to you children on board.
As I said, I've attended a 4 person fatality, with one orphaned girl, that was caused by a driver on 3 bald tyres.
There was also, a number of years ago, a collision in North Wales (where I live), where a group of cyclists were hit by a car that had 3 (or 4) bald tyres, which had just gone out of control on a wet, slightly icy morning. 4 cyclists dead. One of the survivors (who I know) came to, to the sight of another member of the group crawling across the road to try to get to his son, who was 14, and was killed in the collision.
So please, tell us "all of the facts" that we don't know as yet. Which sounds to me like "I've got a bunch more excuses why I'm not responsible for my own gross negligence".
|
|
|
thanks, a lot of people seem to miss the point or understand my argument here.
Seems there are a lot of people with to much time on their hands on here who think they know all wthout knowing allthe facts.
And if we don;t like your argument?
You want sympathy or a means of getting off?
You asked our thoughts, and
I would generally not say this, but you have risked your kids (and other lives) because you appear not to care!
1. i hope Avant locks this thread.
2. I hope you get sufficient punishment that it will hurt financially and keep you off the roads for a bit.
Maybe that will cause you to reflect!
|
|
I second ORB's wish to see this thread locked.
It appears to me that the majority of forum users are conscientious in car maintenance and obeying the law.
Someone posts asking for advice on how to avoid the consequences of carelessness - and I really don't know how he couldn't notice three illegal tyres. I think the responses have been appropriate. He was naive to expect anything else.
I think this has become one of those unfortunate threads which drag on with hostile and unpleasant posts which are of no value.
|
|
I agree and dont want it to become that.
I do not believe you understand my point, yes Im looking to understand how to handle the court situation like anyone would and I have done this today with some help from this site.
I am 100% guilty and hold my hands up , I have been an idiot and it wont happen again and will ensure my Children grow up knowing what to check.
My point is on a wider scale, there are many people out there like me and worst and to think everyone takes as much attention to there cars as people on this forum is naive.
I was aware of a bald tyre and was going to get it changed and the others checked that week however many people only dotn check their tyres and only have them checked when they get an MOT for eample.
I know the basics of checking tyres and can tell roughly when they need changing however with so much at stake (death worst case) knowledge on how to check tyres and what to look for generally just passed on and people are educated that way, there is no real control over the information passed on. Yes there are manuals, information in garages, websites etc... but again to think a lot of people read/pay attention to these in the long term is also naive.
|
|
Scrumbles you have my very best wishes and, as I said, fortunately there was no resulting tragedy. We are all human and have all made mistakes.
I have spent my life promoting education and there is a much wider scale as you say. On this forum I have often posted we do not take driving seriously enough in this country. There should be ongoing education and training of a positive nature.
I hope all goes well and, to the best of my knowledge, contributors have the best of intentions. From his personal experience I certainly understand the strength of feeling Rob has.
|
|
I agree - this thread has gone on for too long so I'll close it. As usual, Scot22 has summed it up very fairly and courteously.
The advice of the majority to Srumbles was that on balance it's worth employing a solicitor - so the thread actually served its purpose in the first few replies.
Srumbles admitted that the offences were serious, so kicking someone when they're down doesn't serve any useful purpose. We might all learn that for the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
