Posted on 07/15/2003 11:22:14 AM PDT by mvpel
The best advice is simply not to speed, at least not brazenly. But if you get nailed, fight it -- because a $50 ticket can cost you thousands once your insurer gets wind of it.
By Chris Solomon
Now is a very bad time to have a lead foot.
States facing yawning budget gaps are finding new money by pinching speeders more frequently -- and pinching them harder, too. Texas lawmakers recently added $30 to fines for speeding tickets. California has added a surcharge of between $7 and $20, depending on the severity of the violation. And the Illinois Legislature is set to tag an additional $4 to the cost of a minor speeding ticket.
True, four more bucks wont change your life, but the fine is usually the least of your worries. Even one speeding ticket can begin to turn your name to mud in your insurers eyes. More than one can cost you thousands of dollars in higher premiums.
Insurance companies say punishing speeders is well warranted: In one study, California drivers with one speeding citation in a three-year period had a crash rate 50% higher, on average, than those with no infractions -- and the crash rate more than doubled for those who had two or more tickets, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and the Highway Loss Data Institute, industry-sponsored research groups.
A ticket from Johnny Law does seem to slow people down, at least for a bit. A study of Ontario traffic statistics, published in the British medical journal the Lancet, found that a conviction for a moving violation cut the risk of a fatal crash in the following month by 35%. The benefit evaporated by four months after the conviction. Assigning penalty points to a drivers license -- especially for speeding tickets -- reduced the risk of fatal crashes more than convictions without penalty points.
Get Online Insurance Quotes
Auto Health
Home Life
MSN Money Insurance
Keeping your nose clean
Still, as long as running late is an American pastime, people will speed. And there are ways to protect yourself and your premiums. First, reduce your likelihood of getting snagged by the speed gun in these ways:
The traffic stop and its aftermath
You get pulled over anyway. Now what do you do?
Get a second minor conviction and your premium would rise an additional 40%, and youd also lose your good-driver discount, says Warner. Suddenly, a premium that was $574 has ballooned to $1,071. After the third conviction, expect to pay roughly 63% more than you originally did, or $1,247. Over three years you would end up paying $2,020 more than if youd kept your nose clean, or much more than the fines themselves. Clearly, getting pinched leaves a painful scar.
The pain can be even worse if youre a teenager or young adult. Getting even one speeding ticket, much less two, can cause a dramatic spike in your insurance rates -- sometimes doubling and even tripling those rates -- and jeopardize your ability to get preferred insurance rates, says Karl Newman, president of the Washington Insurance Council, a consumer education group funded by member insurance companies in Washington State. That could require you to purchase high-risk insurance.
Luckily, youve got several initial options once busted:
Should you go to court?
If the above options arent available, go to court. Court doesnt have to be a Perry Mason experience. Simply asking for your day in traffic court can save you money. Count the ways:
The above, soft approach often works, but some people prefer to aggressively contest the ticket, which they usually do with at least some success. When [Freeper] Michael Pelletier, a 32-year-old computer systems engineer in the Bay Area, got a ticket a few years ago, he rented the nine-pound (!) legal defense kit from the National Motorists Association. (The rental cost of the packet, which is tailored to the requesters state, is $50 per month, with a discount for NMA members.)
The only thing I did was crank the legal crank, says Pelletier. That meant asking for continuances and requesting records -- proof of when the officers radar gun was last calibrated and when the officer was trained in its use -- in hopes of finding a flaw in the authorities case, or simply wearing them down until they offered a deal.
A pre-emptive strike
Battling in court can be time-consuming and complicated. Pelletier estimates he invested nearly 50 hours in the year 2000 to fight his ticket, which he received driving his motorcycle 47 miles an hour in a 25 mph zone. He got it dismissed seven months later based on an esoteric legal definition of a local street or road.
In Pelletiers eyes, the struggles are worthwhile despite the time commitment. He has also helped his wife and brother keep three citations from their records, and his insurance company recently upgraded him to a superior driver, which means he will pay $70 less in the next six months than he had been paying. And by keeping his driving record clean hes ensured that his next ticket -- if it sticks -- wont hurt him so much as it might have.
If you dont have the time to do all of this research, consider hiring an attorney who frequently deals with speeding tickets. Such an attorney will know how to get the best deal for you and can often appear in court for you, so you dont have to take a day off to do so. Fees can vary from $75 to $750, in part depending on whether theyre already frequently in the courthouse dealing with such matters.
The free piece of advice they give, however, is the same: Confront your speeding ticket, even if its your first, and do your darnedest to make it disappear. After all, they add, you never know when youll get your next one, with higher premiums close behind.
I resisted my urge to thank the officer for his kindness. But most people in OKC know that you don't speed or run yellow lights in Edmond or you are toast.
...and good looking women getting of with a warning...well, again, I just know plenty of nice looking ladies who can tell tons of "got a warning instead of a ticket" stories.
If you are asking if I have done a scientific study, I haven't. Maybe the government will commission one.
How's the new job going?
Yes but...you can still be speeding and NOT guilty. Example..
Speed limit = 25
Your speed = 30
Cop's ticket = 35
Assuming you take the stand, prosecutor asks you (or your witness)what speed you were going. You say 30 and explain that you've been charged with going 35 of which you are not guilty. The judge, if he/she believes you...should find you not guilty as you were charged for going 35!
I guess you can thank the same older cops that taught me about not ticketing other cops' families. Its a summons after all, not an arrest situation.
Its dangerous to say the least. I don't know how to say "stay in your car" or "turn off your engine" in 20 languages.
Best thing to do is just take it slow. Speeding is only going to get you somewhere a little faster anyway. My first bad traffic accident is something I wish everyone could have seen. This woman was hit crossing the street by an aggressive driver and I can still hear the way she was screaming. Its just not worth the chance.
The vast majority of cops here vote straight GOP even though we're in a union of sorts. So right wing bumper stickers and the like are usually a good thing.
Stay safe..
My friend was nailed for speeding in Korea. He tried the "hands up in wonderment - know no Korean" act. The policeman proudly proclaimed in well rehearsed english "Please follow me to the station". Probably the only english he knew. My friend had to backtrack about 20 miles to the station. Now he wishes he had played the "I am sorry" act and just signed the ticket and worried about how to deal with it later.
Never flown BA so don't know if that is sarcasm or not. But I am sure that BA cannot compare to some of the Asian lines for service.
When I finally got my date in court, there were about five people ahead of me - all of whose cases consisted of their word against the (same) officer's. An assistant DA was there to prosecute the tickets and in every case established the officer's experience, familiarity with the area, notetaking, etc. All lost.
On my turn, I proceded to establish his location, which was on a cross street just south of the clearly-marked beginning of the SZ. I was travelling north-bound in a 35 mph zone when he clocked me. He actually pulled out from the cross street, travelled across the southbound lanes, and stopped his motorcycle in front of me. We were both at a complete stop and the beginning of the SZ was still ahead of us. Therefore, it was impossible for him to have recorded my speed inside the zone. I also presented photographs showing the relative loactions of the cross streets, school zone, and traffic signs. I felt good.
Then the assistant DA got up and tried to get me to concede that my recollection could be faulty, that the officer may be more familiar with the area in question, and that it was possible that he could have been on a different cross street inside the school zone. I politely held firm and maintained my version of events.
Then he put the officer on the stand. After establishing his bona fides, he asked for the officer's version of events. Sure enough, the officer stated under oath that he was on a different cross street that was well inside the SZ. And that, of course, he clocked me inside the SZ. My heart sank into my stomach. If he had shut up then it would have been solely my word against his. and I had already witnessed whom the court believes in those situations.
But he didn't shut up. He went on to embellish, "I could not have been on the street that the defendant alleges, because there is a solid median there. I would have had to jump the median with my motorcycle to get to the northbound lane." Or words to that effect. Suddenly, I felt like Perry Mason.
When I got to cross-examine the officer, I reminded him of the pictures I had submitted to the court. I actually walked up to him and asked him to identify which intersection had a solid median and which did not. He had to concede that his recollection was not correct and that perhaps he was mistaken about his initial location. I promptly sat down and shut up.
The judge then made a statement about how I probably did commit the infraction, but there was enough doubt in the officer's testimony that he had to dismiss the ticket. I was a little irked that the judge still thought I did it, but had enough sense to keep that to myself. The officer actually had a mini-outburst (he said Damn! or Man! or something like that loud enough for me to hear across the courtroom - and also pounded the table once with his fist). Needless to say, he was not pleased. That was delicious.
All in all, the end result was extremely satisfying - even though it was only a lousy 8 MPH over ticket. It was also a little scary, seeing that I would have easily lost if the officer had just kept his lies straight.
She entered an intersection - still in the neighborhood - where she had the right of way. A lady ran a stop sign and did $1500.00 worth of damage to our vehicle. My daughter was cited for driving without an operators license.
We are using the experience to learn about the law. Last week she plead "not guilty" before a judge. On Tuesday, 7/22 she goes to an omnibus hearing. We studied the state code under which she was cited, and it does not govern the road upon which she was driving. Furthermore, the individual at fault for the accident was not cited precisely for this reason.
Nevertheless, I was fit to be tied when I heard about the wreck and how she was allowed to drive with neither license nor permit. The spouse and I had a talk about that one.
Well, we'll see what happens.
However, 15 years ago when I fought my traffic ticket in court, the testifying officer either was mistaken or was perjuring himself when described the reading showing on the radar gun which I had demanded to see. It so flummoxed me that he would lie that I botched my case and lost.
Now I realize that cops are human too and during court trials on TV or in the newspappers, I take what they say under oath with a grain of salt.
How so...no complaining witness...no case. What am I missing?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.