Jump to content

You can now change your notification sounds by going to this link https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/index.php?/&app=soundboard&module=soundboard&controller=managesounds

 

You can find a library of free notification sounds in several places on the Internet. Here's one which has a very large selection https://notificationsounds.com/notification-sounds

 

 

BankFodder BankFodder

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi,  I'm new here, and hoping that this is the right place to post this.   I applied for pip and was awarded standard mobility (10 points).  I did an M.R. but got the same result. They acknowledge that I can't leave my house without having someone with me. They accept that I'm not completely housebound as I go out to appointments, which are not a regular occurrence, they also said that they can't award me enhanced because I'm not out most days.  Is this correct?  Surely it shouldn't matter how often I go out? 
    • The Legal Ombudsman has a wider remit than the SRA, and can always refer matters on to the SRA where they find a breach of the SRA's code.   I'd suggest writing to the solicitors, highlighting these issues, asking them to refund the money. If they don't then complain to the LO.
    • Good morning all,   I have an update for you all, shortly after my first hearing i was told i would need to have a rehearing with another company, Obviously i agreed but after the initial grievance hearing the person then asked me to enter into a private conversation, I have received the settlement offer and are disgusted as its not even half of my monthly  salary, I'm not sure what to do at this stage as i dont have the funds to finance a solicitor,so any advice would be appreciated.  
    • Sorry, but what does this mean?   Who are ARC? It would be helpful if you could be a little bit more clear about what happened. I don't understand why you are not simply proceeding against Amazon – because it is clearly their responsibility as it was their driver or courier company
    • I understand that you were involved in a contentious divorce in respect of which there was a bill for court costs – £850. You decided to challenge the costs in court and you lost and an order was made against you. We decided to appeal the order but before the appeal was heard, the solicitors made you a without prejudice offer of a 50-50 split – £425. You agree to this and you signed the document to that effect which you returned to the solicitors. Despite that the solicitors are now trying to impose the original £850 order. Is that the correct order of events? "Without prejudice" is certainly something that doesn't seem to be very well understood, including by solicitors. "Without prejudice" can protect an offer from being disclosed to the court where the offer has been refused so that it is not binding on anyone. However, without prejudice cannot be used to hide everything from the court – including wrongdoings, unethical behaviour et cetera. It seems to me that once you sign the agreement you effectively had a contract. I'd like to know a little bit more about the agreement that you signed but presumably it was intended to bring a halt to any further proceedings. I don't think there is any difficulty about disclosing a contract to the court in the circumstances. It is only the offer which was made without prejudice. Once the agreement was accepted and signed then the document acquired a wholly different character. It was no longer an offer open to be accepted or refused. It was a legally binding contract which imposed obligations upon both sides. In my view the solicitors have acted in a highly unethical way and I would begin by making a complaint to the SRA. I wonder whether the solicitors proposed the 50-50 split to you without consulting with their client and when they then contacted their client and told her what had been agreed, she refused to accept it and on that basis the solicitors recognised that they had made an error but rather than accept their responsibility and footing the £425 out of their own pockets, they preferred to get it from you. Of course this is just speculation but it seems to me to be quite a possible scenario. I'd like to see the agreement post up here please – that my sense is that you should complain to the SRA and you should tell the solicitors that this is what you're doing.
  • Our picks

    • Currys Refuse Refund F/Freezer 5day old. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422656-currys-refuse-refund-ffreezer-5day-old/
      • 5 replies
    • Hi,  
      I was in Sainsbury’s today and did scan and shop.
      I arrived in after a busy day at work and immediately got distracted by the clothes.
       
      I put a few things in my trolley and then did a shop.
      I paid and was about to get into my car when the security guard stopped me and asked me to come back in.
       
      I did and they took me upstairs.
      I was mortified and said I forgot to scan the clothes and a conditioner, 5 items.
      I know its unacceptable but I was distracted and Initially hadn’t really planned to use scan and shop.
       
      No excuse.
      I offered to pay for the goods but the manager said it was too late.
      He looked at the CCTV and because I didn’t try to scan the items he was phoning the police.
       
      The cost of the items was about £40.
      I was crying at this point and told them I was a nurse, just coming from work and I could get struck off.
       
      They rang the police anyway and they came and issued me with a community resolution notice, which goes off my record in a year.
      I feel terrible. I have to declare this to my employer and NMC.
       
      They kept me in a room on my own with 4 staff and have banned me from all stores.
      The police said if I didn’t do the community order I would go to court and they would refer me to the PPS.
       
      I’m so stressed,
      can u appeal this or should I just accept it?
       
      Thanks for reading 
      • 7 replies
    • The courier industry – some basic points for customers. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421913-the-courier-industry-%E2%80%93-some-basic-points-for-customers/
      • 1 reply
    • The controversial sub-prime lender says the City watchdog is investigating its practices.
      View the full article
      • 0 replies
mystic_bertie

GRRRR - not wearing seatbelt fine

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3977 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

today i got a fixed penalty fine or £60 for not wearing a seat belt, i usually always do wear a seat belt but i was travelling about 1m within a town and i suppose i forgot to put it on, as i turned left at a set of lights i saw a traffic police car sitting waiting to go the opposite way, next thing i know when i pull into where i was going the police pulled in behind me.

 

i got told i was wearing a seat belt, i said i was, they said they both seen me with no seatbelt on, this is a lie cause i seen the other officer looking out the other window, the officer that did see had a quick glance and could tell thru my oem tinted windows also i was up high in a 4x4.

 

so in the interest of road safety he deemed it suitable to do a 3 point turn close to a junstion in order to come after me to fine me for not having a seat blet on. I was furious i thought what the F~~~ motivates these people to go to all that bother because i was driving slowly with no seatbelt in the opposite direction. Obviously they it looks good for them the more fines they dish out.

 

im now expecting people to say pay up and shut up :lol: but has there ever been cases when these things have been dropped, only one officer seen my with no belt on and i am amazed he did thru the tinted window and the view he had.

 

on my way home i was looking to tell if people in vans etc had seat belts on and its very hard to tell so i would assume this officer being certain is questionable and obviously the other officer is backing the other up cause the other officer was looking in the opposite direction.

 

im unemployed just now and £60 is a lot of money as i have 3 kids and bills to pay :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what the F~~~ motivates these people to go to all that bother because i was driving slowly with no seatbelt in the opposite direction. Obviously they it looks good for them the more fines they dish out.

 

Sadly I know of no cases that just get dropped in the way you describe. And I'm not either aware of any get out for you.

 

What motivates them is that they have to clear-up the mess after the accident and knock on doors informing next of kin.

 

I would try and be thankful (and I know it's hard if the financial squeeze is on) that you have a fine to deal with and not catastrophic facial injuries or worse!


********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yh as said before, there rather come across a crash with the driver still in the car, then having them go through the front windows and land in the road.

 

unfortunally take it on the chin, pay it up, and learn for next time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was furious i thought what the F~~~ motivates these people to go to all that bother because i was driving slowly with no seatbelt in the opposite direction. Obviously they it looks good for them the more fines they dish out.

:eek:

 

bertie, I am 100% convinced that the police do not dish out this type of fine so that they look good. Bernie is more likely correct.

I think that the cheapest way for you is to pay the fine, as defending it would be nigh on impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
today i got a fixed penalty fine or £60 for not wearing a seat belt, i usually always do wear a seat belt but i was travelling about 1m within a town and i suppose i forgot to put it on, as i turned left at a set of lights i saw a traffic police car sitting waiting to go the opposite way, next thing i know when i pull into where i was going the police pulled in behind me.

 

i got told i was wearing a seat belt, i said i was, they said they both seen me with no seatbelt on, this is a lie cause i seen the other officer looking out the other window, the officer that did see had a quick glance and could tell thru my oem tinted windows also i was up high in a 4x4.

 

so in the interest of road safety he deemed it suitable to do a 3 point turn close to a junstion in order to come after me to fine me for not having a seat blet on. I was furious i thought what the F~~~ motivates these people to go to all that bother because i was driving slowly with no seatbelt in the opposite direction. Obviously they it looks good for them the more fines they dish out.

 

im now expecting people to say pay up and shut up :lol: but has there ever been cases when these things have been dropped, only one officer seen my with no belt on and i am amazed he did thru the tinted window and the view he had.

 

on my way home i was looking to tell if people in vans etc had seat belts on and its very hard to tell so i would assume this officer being certain is questionable and obviously the other officer is backing the other up cause the other officer was looking in the opposite direction.

 

im unemployed just now and £60 is a lot of money as i have 3 kids and bills to pay :eek:

 

 

Bertie, and tell me if I've got this wrong, but essentially you call the officers integrity into question (ie, 'i told them i was') by lying because you don't like the fact you've been caught.

 

How long do you think it takes for an officer to notice you not wearing a seatbelt? half a second? Less?

 

If you don't think its fair, take itto court and let them decide, but don't winge if you lose and the penalty goes up.

 

Of course, I take it you wouldn't be lying under oath would you? That would be perjury, and the stakes really go up then!

 

As for motivation, as Bernie and Sara have said its all about seeing people dead and / or seriously injured that would have had a bit of bruising around the chest and not telling a loved one that their nearest and dearest are dead. Stop and imagine an officer knocking on your door and breaking the news to your family. Its not pleasant for anyone.

 

Take it on the chin, and put the belt on as you normally do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,

 

A similar thing happened to me last month....I was eating some nuts as I was driving thorugh the town with my baby in the car. Iwas going around 10 miles ph.......I unclipped my belt as I dropped a nut beside handbrake....

 

Dont know why but I did unclip the belt and low an behold the police were behind me and followed me for a few seconds ....before I noticed them I had put my belt back on and then 10 seconds later the flashing light stopped me in my tracks...unmarked police cars and not very apologetic...

 

I was in the wrong and have paid the price...I havent had a chance to pay the ticket and is has now increased from the 60 to 90 pounds. What a time to have an unexpected bill.

 

But I agree with all that has been said I normally where my belt at all times I had hoped officers discretion would maybe count for something....but.....only me to blame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No excuse for not wearing a belt in this day and age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ah! tinted windows.

damn i paid lots for these and they can still see i'm not wearing a seatbelt thru them.

useful for the other one 4x4 drivers do - mobile phones.

 

dx


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No excuse for not wearing a belt in this day and age.

 

There are actually - they are called statutory exemptions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No excuse for not wearing a belt in this day and age.
"I was reversing" seems like a pretty good excuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

esp having just come out the pub after confirming with other regulars that the spot is a cash cow and should have a yellow line 'cause i always ignore dropped kurbs anyhow.;)


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"I was reversing" seems like a pretty good excuse.

 

Since when? That is not an excuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since when? That is not an excuse.

 

Quite right, it's an exemption. They are as follows under the Motor Vehicles (Wearing of Seatbelts) Regulations 1993:

 

•a person holding a medical certificate;

•the driver of or a passenger in a motor vehicle constructed or adapted for carrying goods, while on a journey which does not exceed 50 metres and which is undertaken for the purpose of delivering or collecting any thing;

•a person driving a vehicle while performing a manoeuvre which includes reversing; a qualified driver (within the meaning given by regulation 17 of the. Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999) who is supervising the holder of a provisional licence (within the meaning of Part 111 of the Act) while that holder is performing a manoeuvre which includes reversing;

•a person by whom, as provided in the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999, a test of competence to drive is being conducted and his wearing a seat belt would endanger himself or any other person;

•a person driving or riding in a vehicle while it is being used for fire brigade or, in England, fire and rescue authority or police purposes or for carrying a person in lawful custody (a person who is being so carried being included in this exemption);

•the driver of—

(i) a licensed taxi while it is being used for seeking hire, or answering a call for hire, or carrying a passenger for hire, or . .

(ii) a private hire vehicle while it is being used to carry a passenger for Hire;

 

•a person riding in a vehicle, being used under a trade licence, for the purpose of investigating or remedying a mechanical fault in the vehicle;

•a disabled person who is wearing a disabled-person's belt; or

•a person riding in a vehicle while it is taking part in a procession organised by or on behalf of the Crown.


********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hold my hands up! That'll teach me for being a smart alec.

 

Quite why you'd need to take off your belt to reverse in an ordinary car is beyond me though.

Edited by Al27

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've never been pregnant then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does that mean fat people are exempt too? :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi there,

 

A similar thing happened to me last month....I was eating some nuts as I was driving thorugh the town with my baby in the car. Iwas going around 10 miles ph.......I unclipped my belt as I dropped a nut beside handbrake....

 

Dont know why but I did unclip the belt and low an behold the police were behind me and followed me for a few seconds ....before I noticed them I had put my belt back on and then 10 seconds later the flashing light stopped me in my tracks...unmarked police cars and not very apologetic...

 

I was in the wrong and have paid the price...I havent had a chance to pay the ticket and is has now increased from the 60 to 90 pounds. What a time to have an unexpected bill.

 

But I agree with all that has been said I normally where my belt at all times I had hoped officers discretion would maybe count for something....but.....only me to blame.

 

You were driving. With a baby in the car. Eating nuts, one of which dropped, and you thought it was a good idea to unclip your belt and go searching for that nut whilst in motion? And it took you a while to notice them following you?

 

Thank goodness you got stopped before your total stupidity killed somebody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You've never been pregnant then.

 

 

Pregnancy alone is not a valid medical exemption - unless you can convince your GP.

 

The reason being that the belt is supposed to go across the hips, not the stomach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pregnancy alone is not a valid medical exemption - unless you can convince your GP.

 

The reason being that the belt is supposed to go across the hips, not the stomach.

 

The diagonal part of the belt on the drivers side of a RHD car will go across the stomach. The hip belt will not, nor should it go across the uterus or womb which is what I think you meant in the context of pregnancy.

 

:p:D:p


********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fester Tester = Plonker

 

 

"You were driving. With a baby in the car. Eating nuts, one of which dropped, and you thought it was a good idea to unclip your belt and go searching for that nut whilst in motion? And it took you a while to notice them following you?

 

Thank goodness you got stopped before your total stupidity killed somebody."

 

Do you have a problem with driving with a baby in a car- eating whilst driving a 10mph- or not wearing a seatbelt for around 45 seconds...........Yes an old fester tester may be liable to be stupidly killed if they walked out in front of me even at 10mph....get real

 

Such negative vibes do not do anyone any good.

 

Judemental people eh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fester Tester = Plonker

 

 

"You were driving. With a baby in the car. Eating nuts, one of which dropped, and you thought it was a good idea to unclip your belt and go searching for that nut whilst in motion? And it took you a while to notice them following you?

 

Thank goodness you got stopped before your total stupidity killed somebody."

 

Do you have a problem with driving with a baby in a car- eating whilst driving a 10mph- or not wearing a seatbelt for around 45 seconds...........Yes an old fester tester may be liable to be stupidly killed if they walked out in front of me even at 10mph....get real

 

Such negative vibes do not do anyone any good.

 

Judemental people eh!

 

if we weren't around, fools would drive even more dangerously.

 

if you think what you did was acceptable then the plonker label belongs to you.

 

 

can't believe you don't realise the dangers............

 

dx


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fester Tester = Plonker

 

 

eating whilst driving a 10mph- or not wearing a seatbelt for around 45 seconds...........

 

 

There have been high profile cases of people being fined while eating or drinking when STOPPED at traffic lights.

 

It is against the law to drive forward at any speed without wearing a seatbelt,whether it is 45 seconds or 45 minutes.There are a few exceptions to this law, your circumstances are not one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bertie, hate to say it but I think you have answered your own question really! You wondered how the police officer could have seen you without a seatbelt, behind tinted windows and sitting high up, but by your own admission you weren't wearing the seat belt so obviously the police officer saw correctly. I know it seems unfair when we see constantly people on their mobile phones while driving and nothing gets done while they just get off with it - but sometimes you just have to hold your hands up and say 'yes, I got it wrong'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yea totally agree

Edited by dandy1764

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was in the wrong I broke the law.....It is hard to think you would get any slack from most of the Police Officers that WE employ nowdays. So many of them have had difficult child hoods in particular shool days that make them the people they are today....grrr.

 

To come up with a statement like that tends to make me think its you that has 'issues'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3977 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...