Man Spends £30,000 On Failed Appeal Against £100 Speeding Fine
A dad has forked out almost £30,000 ($37k) on a failed attempt to fight a £100 ($123) speeding fine.
Richard Keedwell says he has spent the past three years appealing the charge, using up his son's inheritance in the process.
The 71-year-old has blamed a 'seriously flawed' legal system for dragging out the process, causing him to waste £21,000 ($26k) on barristers' fees and £7,000 ($8,600) in court costs, as well as travel expenses.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said the case was quite complicated and made up of a 'multiplicity of issues' which caused it to take so long to reach its conclusion.
The case dates back to November 2016, when Mr Keedwell was caught doing 35mph in a 30mph zone on a day trip to Worcester.
The retired engineer, from Yate near Bristol, was adamant, however, that he was 'certainly not doing more than 30mph'.
Speaking to the BBC, he said: "I was very surprised when a couple of days later I got the NIP [Notice of Intended Prosecution].
"I really could not believe that I had been speeding. It made a simple day out turn very sour actually."
Mr Keedwell claimed he had no case to answer and recruited the services of a video and electronics expert who testified that the camera's sensors were either set off by a car in another lane or were faulty.
According to reports, the dad made four trips to Worcester Magistrates' Court before his appeal was heard. After losing there, he then lost a further appeal at crown court.
The retiree says he feels guilty that his family will now miss out because of the money he has spent on fighting the speeding charge. He said the whole ordeal has been 'very stressful'.
He said: "I'm sick and tired at the whole system which is steamrolling ordinary people.
"I regret the amount of money. I very simply wanted justice."
A spokesperson for the CPS has said some of the points raised by Mr Keedwell and the defence led to the need for additional hearings, with expert evidence also obtained.
They said: "As the case involved both a lengthy trial at the magistrates' court and subsequent hearings at the crown court to progress an appeal against conviction, the overall length of the case took some time to conclude."
Featured Image Credit: Richard Keedwell