court

That's true; we thought there was only one t in Birkett.

 

Previously on ukrm, said...

Mine's spelt the proper Cumbrian/Borders way

 

In uk.rec.motorcycles, Ben said:

*Ding*

 

Having read other posts on this thread, it rather makes me wonder why are
they pressing the WDC charge? Is there anything specific which indicates
lack of due care, apart from speed (alone)?

JP's advice IIRC has been to plead guilty to WDC if the only reason was
excessive speed.

 

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:55:45 +0000, darsy wrote:

Having read other posts on this thread, it rather makes me wonder why are
they pressing the WDC charge? Is there anything specific which indicates
lack of due care, apart from speed (alone)?

JP's advice IIRC has been to plead *not* guilty to WDC if the only reason
was excessive speed. (bit of an ooooops here: I'd posted an original
response - now cancelled - without the 'not')

 

Maybe it's a rich 't' Birkett.

--

Dave

GS 850 x2 / SE 6a
SbS#6 DIAABTCOD#16 APOSTLE#6 FUB#3
FUB KotL OSOS#12? UKRMMA#19

 

In uk.rec.motorcycles, Grimly Curmudgeon said:

That's a bit hard to Digestive, haven't you got something Nice?

 

*meep*

Speeding is defined as being a criminal offence by Section 89(1) of the Road
Traffic Regulation Act 1984. So the rehabilitaion bit does apply.

HTH,

 

In triped:

But its a fine and is covered - see
http://www.lawontheweb.co.uk/rehabact.htm

I had to do a lot of digging on this when I was sorting out security
clearance paperwork a few years ago.

Cheers

 

*meep*

Speeding is defined as being a criminal offence by Section 89(1) of the Road
Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

HTH

 

Hmm.

I've read what it says but I still believe that this is valid
information for risk assessment and don't see why a small matter of the
law should get in the way of commercial practise...

 

Are you serious? I always thought it was a Civil offence. So everyone
caught speeding has a criminal record?

 

No. That's about whether it is a "recordable offence"

 

In triped:

So following your logic, someone convicted of, for example, defrauding an
insurance company who is sentenced with a fine/probation/community service
etc would not, under the Rehab act, have to declare this to an insurance co
after five years, yet the same person would have to perpetually declare all
speeding convictions and, using your logic again, potentially have their
premium weighted on ancient history. Which is more relevant to the company -
their driving record as detected by PC Gatso or their history of derauding
insurance companies?

This is precisely the reason for the Rehabilitaton Act, to ensure that an
offender's past record is not held against him/her for an unreasonable
length of time.

 

Hmm. You know, I really ought to get a solicitor ;-) It's not that I'd
have any problems saying stuff in court, but I'm really not sure what
I /can/ say except that in my opinion I was riding in a safe and
responsible manner, albeit slightly above the speed limit.

sure, now this bit I won't have a problem with.

 

err, yes, but how do I, living in London, find a decent solicitor from
Macclesfield?

 

yes, that's all it is - there's not even any real filtering - just
sort of undertaking cars in lane 3 followed by overtaking cars in lane
2 sort of thing.

 

the policement involved appear to be under the impression that
undertaking is illegal. Now, JP says it isn't, but he's not going to
be representing me...

 

Here's what I did: - I phoned *my* solicitor, and explained the
situation. He got his "Solicitors yellow pages" out, and gave me
phone numbers for 6 or so firms in the area. I rang each, saying I
needed someone local who did traffic - after 5 calls, 3 had
recommended the same firm (which wasn't on my original list from my
solicitor), so I called them.

 

ah. I don't *have* a solicitor.