I was done for speeding recently, and to add to that, in the officers opinion He thought my brakes were "metal to metal" which i have been summons for.

My question is, if he thought they where that bad would he have let me drive home in it. Surlely if the car was unsafe to drive he would not have allowed me to continue AT ALL..!!!

Just for the record they where not metal to metal and when i changed them the next day there was plenty of wear left on the pads

How you can diagnose foofed brakes by just looking and not removing wheels is beyond me.



Helpfull opinions only please, if you wish to have a dig or moan at me then PM's only as i want to keep this thread usefull


Cheers

Cookie

 

Not sure how he can make that judgement call.........A bit like saying your exhaust sounds too loud. Surely he would have had to have issued you with one of those 'get it changed and stamped by an MOT station' forms if he thought you were ilegal?

Gary

 

What does the summons exactly say?

 

hopefully you would have kept the brake pads which you could produce as evidence in court as well as service hisory, mots etc. get intouch with a solicitor that specialise in traffic matters the cop will be laughed out of court. agree with comment about letting you drive home. if the car is not roadworthy then the cop will be NEGLECTING HIS DUTY to let you drive away.

 

metal to metal would be easy to diagnose- you would have scars on you discs, as you haven't (and presumably you still have the replaced pads - if not get some used ones from your local subaru garage as evidence) they haven't got a leg to stand on (for the brakes)

speeding is a different matter- probably have to take the points

 

I wouldnt worry if you havent kept the pads, take the new ones out of the car the day you go to court and say ''thats the ones that were in it'' how is he going to prove they aren't?

Gary

 

yes, but that would be dishonest, ( but makes total sense) just make sure your handbrake works or you could find yourself parked ontop of the magistrates car

 

And perjury is imprisonable so I am sure he won't be taking your advice

 

send the dibble down then

 

What, exactly, does the summons say? Were you done for speeding in the sense that you got an NIP and you paid the fine? Did you admit that the brakes might have been dodgy at the scene?

 

Yes, let's have the actual wording of the summons. By the fact that you say you've been done for speeding, presumably you've already owned up and taken the points?

IMHO there is absolutely no way that you can be summonsed for this 'metal to metal' nonsense as the officer shouldn't have let you drive any further in an unroadworthy car. On top of which he is totally unqualified to offer any opinion on the state of your brake pads. And even if they wear down to the metal, there's no way he could prove it anyway!

Without knowing the details of the summons, I'd say write back informing the police that you intend to plead not guilty and will expect to be served copies of all evidence that the prosecution intend to rely on in court, in good time so that your solicitor can prepare your defence.

You are being stitched up, so fight them all the way. Worth starting up an official complaint against the officer as well, just to really stick it to them. Something like this shouldn't even have been summonsed and the CPS are way out of line with it. Unless, that is, at the time you actually admitted that your brakes were defective, in which case you're in the **** and there's nothing you can do about it!

 

At the time i said i was unaware that the pads were worn as i had a five year old child in the car and pointed this out.

Yes i was speeding and am not disputing this fact, the speed "guestimated" was stupid though 90 in a 50, if this had been the case i would have been more worried about the wrath of kiddies mum more than police, i reckon realisticly i was doing about 70-75. Which i will hold my hands up to but not 90.

How much evidence do the police need for prooving speed as there was no speed gun etc, only a "police pilot speedometer" but i believe this was the speed recorded while catching me up..!

I quote for the brakes from the summons "On 14.07.2005 at 19.27 hrs the defendant used a subaru impreza EN02 *** on a12 Colchester Road. The vehicle was fitted with a braking system which was not maintained in good and efficient working order in that the brake pads were worn beyond servicable life (metal to metal), the nearside front pad was worn to greater excess than the offside front.

When they were changed both sides were worn evenly as well, FFS

This just seems like on big pi$$ take


Cookie

 

agree with comment about letting you drive home. if the car is not roadworthy then the cop will be NEGLECTING HIS DUTY to let you drive away.
So do the police have power to seize your car if its defective? Or can they stop you from driving it in those circumstances?

 

They can force to to get in recovered to your home or a garage, but all 4 wheels must be lifted from the ground, i.e expensive

will be speaking to solicitor tomorrow, but just wondered if anyone had had similar expirience.?

Cookie

 

Doh... Just realised tomorrow is Saturday, will be speaking to one Monday morning

 

I thought the police had to have evidence of you speeding. Do they not get printouts? How can they say you had been speeding if they don't have you on film from incar cameras?

Anyway, the brakes thing. Did he inspect them? Like others have said, if there was reasonable doubt they were metal on metal he should have had the car impounded and taken for inspection. Make sure your solicitor knows this and i'm pretty sure it will be thrown out of court for lack of evidence, if it goes that far.

 

try this m8.
All speed pacing police cars have to have their Speedo's measured and certified.
Typically, ONLY traffic police cars are calibrated, and the Speedo will have
increments of 1 mph. If you are stopped by a NON-traffic officer, and told that
he/she followed you, and you were speeding, simply ask as a matter of course when
his Speedo was last calibrated. *It is likely he will let you go* when you ask
this question since normal police (Beat) cars do not have certified Speedo's;
theirs is the same as yours and mine!

 

Bloody hell, have I been lucky! My SAAB has sintered iron pads! And the boys in blue don't know!

 

Did you keep the old pads when they where replaced and was there more than 1.5mm left on them. That is all that is required for an MOT test.

 

cant see how the policeman could tell they were metal to metal and where is his proof of it?

 

Ran my pads down to around 2mm on my scoob, dont know about your car, but my pads were fitted with audable warning luggs on pads, which warn you well before pads get down as far as metal to metal. ( a really annoying janggling sound ) if these are fitted on your car, you would have known your pads were on the way out way before they got to the mega low stage.

 

as explained earlier, the pads where not metal to metal. it was his "opinion"

It was traffic police BTW

 

"the speed "guestimated" was stupid though 90 in a 50"

Cookie, if the summons reads 90 in a 50 I would be much more worried about that. As I know from recent experience 30+ over the speed limit is almost certainly a ban. i was prosecuted for 83 in a 50 (motorway reduced limit), and without the input of a very good solicitor and a barrister I would have been banned. £600 fine + 6 points, to add to the 3 I all ready had!

Talk to a good solicitor asap, lots of people on here offer they opinions with the best of intentions, but what you need is solid legal advice.

 

Strange this? Did you give the coppa a lot of lip when he 'pulled' you?

And I agree that 90 in a 50 is far more worrying a crime than low pads!

You will be looking at a ban.

Pete

 

I was caught doing 68 in a 30. I know it sounds irresponsible but it was 5 in the morning on my way to work. I got a very good barrister and come away with 6 points and a £225 fine.

 

I have to agree with this, good representation may appear expensive but when you consider the potentail cost of conviction then over a few years it might all even itself out.

Don't just get any solicitor, get someone who specialises in road traffic law and I'd say you have a pretty good chance under these circumstances. The fact that the police officer set himself up as an engineer is going to allow any good solicitor/barrister to pull him apart and his attempt to add credibility by detailing that one set were more worn than the other is just a gift unless he actually took them off and inspected them.

It is interesting just how many similar stories there are on SN at the minute whereby the driver says they were travelling much more slowly than the police claim but the police officer is clearly being most economical with the truth and is detailing the speed he needed to travel at to catch up. In these cases it is almost always a single police officer who supports his "opinion" with his speedo reading. Without doubt a pattern is developing. If you care to visit Pepipoo you can see in great detail a very similar story where Mike was followed by a police officer who claimed some mad speed, the video evidence clearly shows otherwise though the police car my have achieved that speed in order to catch up.

I know it feels somewhat odd to be getting a solicitor when you know you've done nothing, or very little, wrong. However justice just doesn't happen like in the movies, either you fight for it or some copper tells bare faced lies to stitch you up. Us motorists are the new criminals in society and those who say that if you've done nothing wrong then you have nothing to fear are still living in fairy land, and are in for a very big shock some day soon.

 

To be totally honest .............. if the Police now have a zero tolerance to those speeding around our roads - then I, for one, applaud the Police actions.

Something needs to be done to stop idiots screaming around our streets at ludicrous speeds.

Pete

 

Whats the point in buying a subaru with that sort of attitude. Theres a tim and place to go fast. You wouldn't drive through a high street during the day at 100mph but whats the harm in going 20mph over the limit now and again. Say like on a dual carriage way ay 3 in the morning. As long as your not being stupid.

 

So, its ok for the local CHAVS to race around the streets of my town at 2am on a Saturday morning , is it? Just because the roads are empty??

How about the people trying to sleep??

Nah, a speed limit is a speed limit ............ it is NOT a target!

Pete

 

Pete, i didnt give lip at all when "pulled" as this is th equickest way to make things a lot worse.

ANother point I was not screaming around, yes i was speeding but not to the extreme claimed!

As requested in the first post, if you wish to start slagging me or other people off for being "chavs" etc then do it on another thread or PM me


Will be speaking to solicitor Monday morning.


Cookie