Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Original poster

Should we lie to save dh's licence?

102 replies

goodwife · 23/08/2003 13:10

Moral dilemma here - and due to the nature of the dilemma, I'm going under a pseudonym.
The facts are as follows:

Over the last year dh has had 3 lots of speeding fines. Today he has had notification in the post that he was caught going 85 in a 70mph last week. As far as I am aware, this means that he will get another 3 points, making 12, which means a ban from driving (not sure how long for - anyone got any ideas?). Now if he's banned, then obviously this will have an impact on the family as a whole - he is able to get to work by public transport, and it is possible to get the children to school without a car (he does the morning school run), so not a drastic one, but obviously there are many times when he does things involving the car which he would no longer be able to do, and would therefore be down to me - running children to classes etc, shopping, taking stuff to the tip, etc. etc. Also, once he is able to drive again, the insurance premiums (already huge) would be even huger (is that a word?)

So where's the moral dilemma? Well, we could say that it was me driving the car. This would mean that I would have the points and he would not be banned. But, selfishly, I really don't want to do this - I've got a clean licence, and always have had, and obviously this would also increase our insurance premiums, whereas if he wasn't driving at all they would be manageable. But should I put him and any future inconvenience of me always having to do the driving before my pride? Of course, this would also be illegal (maybe this should have come higher in the list of reasons against! ) and the penalty if we were found out could be a £2000 fine. But how could we be found out - can the camera "see" who's driving the car?
So, your thoughts and experiences will be gratefully received.

OP posts:
janh · 26/08/2003 11:25

Correct, zebra! Give that woman a coconut!

I don't remember ever knowing that (passed test 30 years ago) but obviously should have and do now. But when the road has always been 40, with signs on lampposts, and they take the 40 signs away, you need to know where they were and notice that they've gone if the council doesn't put warning signs up, and the CPS thinks this is wrong (I posted this previously under "not my car" thread but got no advice so I'll try again here!):

I knew it wasn't fair!

So if anybody can help...???

janh · 26/08/2003 11:33

Blimey, WSM! You could be said to have been very lucky in both cases only to have been caught speeding, not something worse - I've never gone that fast EVER!

I still feel like defending goodwife's husband a bit though - 4 tickets in one year (she hasn't given details so I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt) implies that

  1. he has probably never had a ticket before the last year

  2. he's been nobbled (like so many of us) by the sneaky new cameras they are slipping in everywhere to get lots of lovely money out of us (don't forget D Blunkett is aware enough of this huge new source of revenue to have suggested slapping a £35 "tax" on top)

and he is not a dangerous speed freak at all.

(I bet he'd never do 50+ down my road for a start.)

donnie · 26/08/2003 11:50

don't mean to sound nasty Goodwife but you have not yet mentioned on a single occasion the wellbeing of the general public which is what is at stake here; do you know how many children are killed every year by careless drivers ?do you or your husband care ? which would you prefer, the hassle of a rearranged school run or a dead child ? think about it before using terms like 'moral high ground' which you clearly do not understand.This isn't a gender game of scoring points, it's actually about taking a dangerous driver off the road before he kills someone. Do you understand????

wickedstepmother · 26/08/2003 11:50

This year my DH got his first speeding conviction and 3 point endorsement (camera on the M6, police with gun types not static camera) after 17 years of driving with not one single conviction. Recently he was caught again twice, 2 offences by the same camera, within 2 hours of each other. This would take his endorsements up to a dangerously close 9 points. We sent a letter to the issuing police authority asking if both could be treated as one offence, yes we'll pay the fine for 2 but please could they be treated as one 3 point endorsement as he is the only driver in the household. We are still waiting to hear from the authorities on this one...

This 'scare' hasd really woken DH up the very real fact that he could lose his licence. As a result he now drives with his 'speed limiter' on at all times, this means that he sets it to the local speed limit and the engine will not allow him to exceed it. It has been a godsend.

wickedstepmother · 26/08/2003 11:50

This year my DH got his first speeding conviction and 3 point endorsement (camera on the M6, police with gun types not static camera) after 17 years of driving with not one single conviction. Recently he was caught again twice, 2 offences by the same camera, within 2 hours of each other. This would take his endorsements up to a dangerously close 9 points. We sent a letter to the issuing police authority asking if both could be treated as one offence, yes we'll pay the fine for 2 but please could they be treated as one 3 point endorsement as he is the only driver in the household. We are still waiting to hear from the authorities on this one...

This 'scare' hasd really woken DH up the very real fact that he could lose his licence. As a result he now drives with his 'speed limiter' on at all times, this means that he sets it to the local speed limit and the engine will not allow him to exceed it. It has been a godsend.

donnie · 26/08/2003 11:50

don't mean to sound nasty Goodwife but you have not yet mentioned on a single occasion the wellbeing of the general public which is what is at stake here; do you know how many children are killed every year by careless drivers ?do you or your husband care ? which would you prefer, the hassle of a rearranged school run or a dead child ? think about it before using terms like 'moral high ground' which you clearly do not understand.This isn't a gender game of scoring points, it's actually about taking a dangerous driver off the road before he kills someone. Do you understand????

donnie · 26/08/2003 11:55

and why would you lie for your husband ? what kind of wxample are you setting your own children in doing this ? the law does not exist for you to pick and choose from when it suits - you should tell your children this. Respect for the law is paramount and to believe that lying for your spouse so he can escape what punishment is due is somehow a worthy or morally upright gesture is ludicrous.

Slinky · 26/08/2003 13:04

Goodwife, you definately have done the right thing - you have nothing to feel bad about.

The fact that he has been done for speeding so many times in a year is bad enough - but then to have 3 accidents in 3 years due to his carelessness is downright stupid!

Quite frankly, you've done the British public a HUGE favour and got him off the road! They should make him resit his test again before allowing his license back.

Original poster
goodwife · 26/08/2003 13:20

donnie, when I said "moral high ground", I didn't mean that I would be morally in the right. I know it is wrong to lie and break the law, and as you can tell from my postings, I really don't want to do it. BUT this will have a huge impact on my and my children's life and I wanted to consider all the options (legal and illegal) before deciding what to do. Of course I would prefer a rearranged school run to a dead child, but the fact is that 3 out of the 4 times he has been caught in a 30mph zone doing less than 40, usually on his way home from work late at night with no other traffic around - so not much danger to anyone. However, I do feel that he is not a very good driver, and certainly I am fed up with him speeding on the motorway with us in the car and that's why I'm mainly glad that this has happened, so that he will get a wake-up call.
Thanks to everyone else for the support - you've helped me sort out my dilemma without jumping down my throat, and that's why I love mumsnet!

OP posts:
mollymay · 26/08/2003 14:22

goodwife - I am actually in exactly the same predicament as you were. My dh has 9 points and we have just received another intended prosecution for speeding which will take him to 12. I was furious and upset that he could be so stupid. He jokingly suggested that I take the rap and I must admit I had already thought about it. They sent photographic evidence and I can clearly see it is dh driving and considering I am only 5ft 2" anyone would be able to tell on further examination that I was not driving. If dh loses his licence it will be the end of his business and he does 90% of the driving in our house so I am gutted at the effect it will have on our family. Still a small part of me does feel its about time he took responsibility for his actions.. its just a shame me and dd have got to suffer as well. The form is still sitting on the table why we decide what to do....but I'm like you, I don't want to take the rap for him..why should I?

Original poster
goodwife · 26/08/2003 14:55

mollymay, don't despair - if your dh job depends on him being able to drive, then the magistrate (is that who deals with this?) may be lenient (happened to a relative of mine who is a lorry driver). For us that is no good, as his job is not affected by not having access to a car, but for you, it may be your saving grace.

OP posts:
SamboM · 26/08/2003 14:57

I think I must be morally bankrupt! I really wouldn't think twice about it if I didn't think I would get caught. Asked dh yesterday and he said he would do it for me.

spikeycat · 26/08/2003 16:39

Another point, my sil (blond, longlegged and v pretty) has been caught speeding on the motorway 3 times in the last 3 months, and been let off with warnings by the male police officers - mmmmmmmm, wonder why?

RockingRosebud · 26/08/2003 17:30

When I was 9 months pg. My DH went to court after being caught speeding 'again'. He was running his own business, employing 3 others and relied on his car at work.

He was given 12 points and a fine but was not disqualified due to his personal situation. HTH.

RockingRosebud · 26/08/2003 17:31

Oh yes and I'd definitely say I was driving if I was in your situation without hesitation.

Original poster
goodwife · 26/08/2003 17:56

glad I'm not the only "morally bankrupt" person posting on mumsnet

OP posts:
janh · 26/08/2003 19:00

Me too (could you tell?)

Boe · 01/09/2003 14:47

I would most certainly not lie - only because I would be really sacred of getting court - although bread and water for a while would help me shift a few pounds!!

I think speed cameras are ok in certain 'accident blackspots' but they seem to be in far more places than they actually need to be.

Just a little tip - when you are coming up to a speed camera if there is 2 silver discs in the top 2 corners it means that there is not a camera inside - they have to hang the camera on something and this they do by taking out the silver metal dics and hooking the camera over the casing - told to me by a criminal lawyer - he always works for the criminal so sure he must know lots of other tips - will see if I can get in touch and ask about you lying and the consequences.

SoupDragon · 01/09/2003 16:33

Much as I hate being caught by a speed camera (flashed once, no fine though) the point is that you shouldn't have been speeding in the first place. Why does it matter if there are cameras every 500m?

Tinker · 01/09/2003 20:35

Can a speed camera catch you as you approach it or is it always from the rear? I know it sounds a stupid question but passed one yesterday that flashed at the car in front, or me, as passed it on approach but there was no car on the other side of the road.

I can't get that het up about speeding. There is appropriate in inappropriate speeding. Just because you go 80 to 85 on the motorway does not mean you go 40 past a school. I get more annoyed at those who go at 40 to 50 on motorways, I think that they are far more dangerous.

Ghosty · 01/09/2003 20:55

I agree with Soupdragon...
Rather than spending your time working out whether speed cameras are there or arguing whether going over the speed limit at night when there are fewer people around why not drive within the speed limit and think about other road users?
I have been driving for 14 years and I have once had a speeding ticket ... I was mortified ... and felt very bad about it. I may be boring but my reasons for sticking within the speed limit are not for fear of being caught but for fear of hurting someone ...
I can't understand people who only worry about getting caught ...

GeorginaA · 01/09/2003 22:01

The new ones are on approach, Tinker, afaik so they can get a clear picture of the driver to avoid people claiming they weren't driving.

I try very hard to stick to speed limits (except motorways) but 30 limits annoy me because they seem so inappropriately used. Some roads could do with speed bumps and 20 limit because they're heavy residential and/or school others you could safely do 40 on. I'm sure that's why there are people who take a blase approach to speed limits, because often they're so inappropriately used. Speed cameras never are where they're needed either like in those heavy residential areas - they're always on the roads which you could go faster safely (because of course they earn more money).

There have been a couple of instances around here of people getting fined for driving at 32mph which I also think is a bit wrong. It's easy to go a couple of mph over if you're paying proper attention to the hazards on the road rather than having eyes glued to the speedo. I'm always under 35, but occasionally creep to 33 before noticing and dropping speed again. Also, it really annoys me that I always end up with some maniac sitting on my bumper, putting me and ds at risk, just because I'm daring to obey the speed limit.

Boe · 08/09/2003 09:05

What did you do???

SoupDragon · 08/09/2003 09:15

Georgina, I always thought you were "allowed" a 10% margin - ie 33 mph was OK in a 30 zone etc because of inaccuracies in speedos. It's virtually impossibly to see tell if you're doing 30 or 32 MPH! Unless you look at the speedo constantly in which case you're not looking at the road enough!

I agree completely that some speed limits are inappropriate and also that speed cameras are not placed to catch speeders, they're placed to make money.

I also think that they should be obliged to put the speed limit underneath every speed camera warning sign. Then no one can claim ignorance (not that it gets you off!).

Oakmaiden · 08/09/2003 09:25

I think that one of the problems with relying on the 10% thing, is that what if your speedo is actually a bit out? If, for example, you say I'm OK to go at 33mph cos that is withint the 10% but your speedo IS actually 10% out, then you would actually be doing 36mph. So i would have thought that that is a danger to be watched.

And also if you were booked for doing 32mph you could just deny it - I don't think the cameras are able to be quite that accurate, are they? If you said, "No, my speedo said I was doing 30" I think they would find it hard to PROVE otherwise.