Ebized

Moved to correct sub-forum

Remind us again what was changed with the gearbox fix? Did the garage suggest 'wear and tear' any items not changed under warranty should be changed whilst the box was out? Sorry, but I'm suspicious of that work done and noting your latest issue has only cropped up since then and given the non HPC centre that did the work was not eactly on the ball........

Hey, you forgot to tell us it was your birthday Hope it is a good one

Yep, good pics and nice stance with subtle but well chosen mods

And the price differences, with the same spec (or as near as)?

http://www.zeroto60times.com/Nissan-0-60-mph-Times.html But as said above, so many factors can make a difference - the main one being the 'item' not supplied by Nissan

Maybe?

I believe they have to send notification within 14 days from the date of the offence I think that might be an urban myth... but don't quote me on that. There are 14 day/6 month time limits - see here (Sections 6 & 7 apply): http://www.lawdonut....offences-faqs#6

I suggest you think about getting a snooper or similar as although they are not fail safe they do alert you to most 'High Risk Zones' (and fixed cameras) and the one where you have been caught has been flagged up for years now

Many happy returns guys

Credible? Having followed the OP for 5/6 miles and no doubt done the insurance/reg/stolenchecks and couldn't fault the speed/driving behaviour/phone use, they had no doubt made up their minds to to pull the OP over to find something amiss only to find nothing and my guess is that they went for what they use as a fall-back option to justify the pull. Cynical maybe, but if it was really a pull for the seatbelt not being used, why 5/6 miles to act?????? For me this has highlighted a nice little earner, no doubt due the fact those accused have little in the way of proving the accusation false. I will be interested to see if some of our Police members on have any comments as there is a real perception that a loophole is being used to increase revenue at innocent drivers' expense Certainly has made me think again about an in-car camera, if this is what we are now faced with.

You ought to throw up a pic of your front bumper clips - I reckon they would work faster

That's always pleasant. I got cut up by someone who doesn't know how to use their indicators or merge safely, ...I just let it go though because it wasn't worth the aggro. Just another idiot on our roads who doesn't know how to drive courteously or safely. My commute in the evening is frikkin awesome . . I exit my office, turn right in to the kitchen where I fill up . . . a large glass with wine. I can do better than that, June takes pity on my retirement and brings me the wine, knowing how loathe I am to drag myself away from the forum

Hmmmm........ just found out there are no points for not wearing a seat belt and the fixed £100 fine can rise to £500 if it goes to Court. http://www.saferroad...ckets/seatbelt/ In which case it would seem that without clear evidence to contrary swallowing the fine is the better option.......but makes you think eh, what an easy way of making money out of motorists knowing they are unlikely to take issue with the ticket Or you could do this: http://www.motorlawy...hone_advice.php

You are right Dan, but then if had done that these very observant coppers would have either spotted that in the car or the OP undoing it so as not to be caught trying that on?

Mine hangs and sometimes double posts, even on PMs Sent from the golf club... And there's me thinking it was when you had a stiffy as the reason for causing the double posts....

Potentially this could be a good buy looking at the kit it has, and having first verified the obvious and done usual checks. I can't help wondering, noting the seller's details, whether they might be reciting gabbage given to them when they bought it? Or it is a wannabe trader who knows as much about 350's, as I do about bicycles.

If a Brief feels you have a strong case, it is likely he would opt for it not be heard in a Magistartes Court. Not sure if the Scottish legal system is the same though. Edit: Just realised you were not in your home area in Scotland so have deleted that last comment of mine. Apologies.

Shire350z has done the 370 emblem on his:

Curious. You said they pulled you over and had a good look round your car.........before mentioning the seat belt issue? There was no other suggestion of infringement(s) being the reason for stopping you before the seat belt issue was raised? Not, first stating "we have stopped you because you were not wearing a seat belt" and then had a look round the car? And did you stay in the car until the officer approached, or get out before he got to you? And did they at any point see you from the front or the side before pulling you over? And it was nightime? Have you been done for that before or any other car/driving infringement, or an otherwise clean licence? (Maybe you may not wish to reveal that here) Any chance you might have passed a cctv that might verify your wearing the belt, just before the pull? Because as others have said, It would extremely difficult to see through the rear of the car that you were not wearing a seatbelt and putting it on, (or taking it off) immediately upon being stopped. Think this would be the scenario I would raise with a good Brief if you were so minded, as it rather sounds as though they were looking for a 'tug' and that was their fallback option.

Just booked an appointment with the Doc for a check up so hopefully I will be virus free

On the positive side - latest success: http://www.350z-uk.c...-claim-success/ Is the "over thick paint" comment because the garage are intimating repair work has been done in those areas, which may well affect a warranty claim?

Absolutely, any excuse to go through again! There is only one long tunnel on the way back though and a small one with a 30mph limit. That's why we chose the east to west direction