22 Speeding Tickets (ban) :-(

A delivery driver who was caught speeding 22 times on the same road in just 3 weeks was last week banned for 15 months…

Peter McPherson used to deliver supplies to hotels and restaurants around London, which he’s been doing for 40 years.

The so-called ‘offences’ were committed in a 30mph zone on the A40 in July last year.

Peter pled guilty to all the charges of driving between 35 to 41mph.

4 of the “offences” occurred on the same day within just 14 hours of each other…

At court last week he was given 67 points on his licence and disqualified from driving for 15 months!

The stretch of road that Peter fell foul of became a temporary 30mph limit a couple of years ago during repairs to the road.

However, it seems the Transport for London overlords liked the additional revenue to their coffers so much that they decided to keep the limit at 30mph.

Here’s a picture of the road in question where the limit drops from 40mph to 30mph:

Does this look like a 30mph stretch of road to you?

Drivers are being summoned to court most days for speeding along this very stretch of road…

Its pretty obvious when you look at the case that Peter didn’t realise the speed limit had been arbitrarily

He was hoping magistrates would choose not to ban him from driving because it was an obvious mistake and he wouldn’t be able to work.

But sadly for him, they did.

The “exceptional hardship” argument is very powerful and CAN be used successfully (I did a recent newsletter on it here) but it seems that Peter probably didn’t use a good Solicitor…

He said he was “shocked” when he received all the fines.

Before appearing before the magistrates last week he said:

“If I lose my job I don’t know what I’m going to do. I’ve never been inside a court before so I’m very nervous, but I’m going to ask to not be banned.

“I’m very worried about the whole situation. I’ve been at the firm for my whole adult life and driven without problems. Everything changed in such a short period of time”.

Last year a Transport for London committee — I bet they’re a fun bunch to be around — said they were “working towards enforcing up to a Million speeding offences by 2024/25.”

I doubt most Members will be surprised to hear I think this kind of treatment of Drivers is immoral, heavy handed and pernicious.

But what do you think?

Let me and other Members know in the comments below:

All the best,

P.S. We are seeing more and more of these “multi ticket” cases at DriveProtect. If you aren’t already a Member, you can get in touch on 01843 232 791, send a message on WhatsApp to 07403 921048, or become a Member online with the BTST Member Discount here

19 comments on “22 Speeding Tickets (ban) :-(”

  1. It’s a ridiculously slow speed limit for that road. They keep lowering it. I’ve driven over it many times. Even 50 mph, usual motorway roadworks speed, wasn’t high for that road. The only justification is that it’s on an elevated section so if there was an accident on there it would be very difficult to clear, and to get cars stuck in the tailback off.

  2. Used to be 60mph then 50mph when the lamposts were removed then 40mph and now 30mph
    It is generally pretty clear in the morning – It should revert to 40mph like the rest of the A40 it is part of

  3. 67 points and a disqualification for 15 months. Isn’t that double jeopardy ?
    Are there any signs along the stretch advising of the speed limit (sorry i don’t know the stretch of road in question)

  4. its illegal no signs reducing speed down to 30mph. A while ago on the 483 in midwales its national speed limit signs up every where, but there were road works and 30 max signs went up road works both sides took about 8 ro 10 weeks, and same thing police caught hundreds even locals doing 60 in a unoficial 30 all enforced in court because councilors needed the money the roads were kept by the farmers union because of the rural area, nothing they could do but put up there own signs saying 30. police warned the people responsible would be prosecuted if caught.

  5. Absolutely immoral. They’ve ruined this mans life. How can they be allowed to do this? Some sort of petition should be set up to help this poor man.

  6. That’s why I’ve beena drive protect member for years…. One of the most precious things in my life is my driving licence!! It can so easily happen to any of us, its truly scary.

  7. Urgent need to remove the perverse incentive for this kind of nonsense. Start a campaign for the following very simple law:

    All fines and nudging levies (eg. “congestion charges”) to go into a fund totally inaccessible to any level of government. The cost of enforcement should come from general funds (not fines). If the measure being enforced is so socially beneficial, then the general taxpayer won’t mind funding enforcement.

    The fine fund might be used for charitable purposes such as compensation for victims of uninsured and hit-and-run drivers.

    Remove the financial incentive and I bet 99% of the nonsense goes away. I bet the law would be very popular. Let’s start a campaign.

  8. Totally unfair.
    It’s not like he’s driven at 70 in a 30
    They should have looked at any previous history and current circumstances, which were very likely to cause confusions and therefore many “repeat offences” in short space of time

  9. I think Peter should contact his MP over what is a clear unnecessary money making scam. This does need to be highlighted on Panorama (or more appropriately Crimewatch, because it is criminal).
    I agree with the reply suggesting that any fines should be diverted away from government or Councils, to remove the incentives for these scams!

  10. I think the UK is unique in being the only country where traffic offences are taken more seriously than real crimes like theft, robbery, rape and murder.

  11. Absolutely appalling. I’ve never heard of a 3 lane 30 mph limit and from the photo it doesn’t look like it’s clearly marked. It’s stealth fining, but that isn’t the most important issue – it’s the endorsements. This poor fella does unequivocally NOT deserve to be banned for 15 months, it’s ridiculous. Stealth speed cameras should not be prioritised over the real road criminal offences i.e. what are the police doing about the high speed tailgaters, the under-takers, and the lunatics doing 100mph?…..very very very little is the answer. Getting the dangerous idiots off the road should be no.1 priority, not picking off poor guys like this. It’s a disgrace.

  12. Perhaps we should take the people responsible for introducing such a ridiculously low limit to court for improper use of power. 35 – 41 mph on a dual carriageway (and especially in this case bearing in mind the road) does not make him a danger to the public so there should be no ban. I would support his appeal, and I would want to see in court the justification for such a low limit by the jobsworth responsible and furthermore expect them to be sacked without settlement and never allowed to hold public office again

  13. My partner has just done a speed awareness course and she was told a road like that she national speed limit by the person hosting the course

  14. The following article was posted on the BBC website today. It would seem this is the same section of road. Not that I have much sympathy for Mr Gallagher at the best of times:

    Musician Noel Gallagher must pay more than £1,000 for failing to tell police who was driving his Range Rover.

    The 56-year-old former Oasis star, who cannot drive, was also handed six penalty points.

    He refused to give information relating to the identification of a driver when required by magistrates earlier this week.

    Gallagher’s Range Rover was recorded speeding at 41mph on a 30mph stretch of the A40 in west London in October.

    The guitarist and songwriter’s case was dealt with at Willesden Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday. Under the Single Justice Procedure, Gallagher was not required to be present.

    He was fined £742 and told to pay a £296 victim surcharge plus £100 costs, a court official confirmed.

    His manager declined to comment.

  15. First thing to say is that there are no visible speed limit signs IN THE PICTURE. That doesn’t mean there aren’t any, so all comments regarding that are void.
    Next, if you go over the limit that many times then surely we are looking at a new definition of stupid. OK you might feel miffed and disagree with it or whatever, but to keep on and on doing it and punishing yourself is just insane, isn’t it? what’s that definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
    As for the article itself, there is so much rubbish spouted in it that it’s difficult to know where to start, so let’s just look at the final sentence…
    “I doubt most Members will be surprised to hear I think this kind of treatment of Drivers is immoral, heavy handed and pernicious.”
    Complete rubbish. Of course we believe it, because it seems you think people should be allowed to drive aroun doing exactly what they want (good luck with that one when you’re left crippled by some out of control nutter). It’s not treatment of DRIVERS, it’s treatment of people WHO DRIVE OVER THE SPEED LIMIT BECAUSE THEY DON’T THINK IT APPLIES TO THEM.
    When are you people going to grow up and accept some responsibility for your own actions?

  16. It’s all very well to argue that ignorance of the law is no defence, but all the signs here are contrary to advice you get if you’ve ever done a speed awareness course. So why not use the law wisely and ensure the authorities put clear 30mph repeater signs in? We all know why they wont do that!

    In particular, I think Pete’s comments (3rd June) may be a little over zealous. Given the volume of evidence regarding this stretch of road, it appears far from obvious that the limit is what it is. The Gov.UK website states (Highway code) “A speed limit of 30mph applies to all single and dual carriageways with street lights, unless there are signs showing otherwise.”

    There is no street lighting visible on this stretch of road. It seems that the legal arguments put forward in defence may not have been that good.


Leave a Comment