View Full Version : Caught by speed camera
I just heard a friend got a letter about being caught by a speed camera going 51 in a 30 :erm: :Yikes:
Anyone know what he's likely to get? :disturbd:
I just heard a friend got a letter about being caught by a speed camera going 51 in a 30 :erm: :Yikes:
Anyone know what he's likely to get? :disturbd:Exactly what he deserves.:(
I just heard a friend got a letter about being caught by a speed camera going 51 in a 30 :erm: :Yikes:
Anyone know what he's likely to get? :disturbd:
A court appearance, at least 6 points ( maybe even a ban ) and a substantial fine.
To put his speed in perspective it is 70% greater than the speed limit. :Yikes:
So the equivalent on a motorway would be 119mph!!!!!
Exactly what he deserves.:(and what does he deserve, given that you have no idea of the circumstances ?
Graham F
23-09-2004, 18:57
I just heard a friend got a letter about being caught by a speed camera going 51 in a 30 :erm: :Yikes:
Anyone know what he's likely to get? :disturbd:
If your caught going more than 25mph more than the speed limit you get an automatic 6 month ban now...i would of thought they would get 6 points and £100 fine and costs
A court appearance, at least 6 points ( maybe even a ban ) and a substantial fine.
To put his speed in perspective it is 70% greater than the speed limit. :Yikes:
So the equivalent on a motorway would be 119mph!!!!!
From what he says it's all pretty relaxed..., the form says max fine of £1000 and a 3-6 penatly points or a disqualification at the discretion of the courts.
I reckon £100 and 3 points, should we open a book! ;)
Chimaera
23-09-2004, 19:00
and what does he deserve, given that you have no idea of the circumstances ?
I don't think any circumstances come into it - unless you are an off duty policeman or a Premiership footballer! :mad:
How long do points stay on for?
3 years although insurance companies keep them on record for up to 5.
I don't think any circumstances come into it - unless you are an off duty policeman or a Premiership footballer!
Or a man rushing his pregnant wife to hospital as she's going in to labour?
paulyoung666
23-09-2004, 19:08
I don't think any circumstances come into it - unless you are an off duty policeman or a Premiership footballer! :mad:
circumstances must come into it in my case at least , i was caught doing 115mph on a deserted stretch of dual carriageway ( A66 ) in good conditions , the officer who stopped me gave me the option of a £40 fine and 3 points so i took it , i am in no way condoning what i did just pointing out that it happened :erm:
i reckon he will get £60 fine and 3 points
Chimaera
23-09-2004, 19:08
Or a man rushing his pregnant wife to hospital as she's going in to labour?
Nope - I knew someone who got done for that! :Yikes: And he was doing 35 in a 30 zone on an empty road in Somerset at 3 in the morning :afire:
At the end of the day I think it depends on what sort of a day the magistrate has had!
I'm going to buy him one of these for Xmas!
http://www.safeplate.co.uk/
Chimaera
23-09-2004, 19:15
I'm going to buy him one of these for Xmas!
http://www.safeplate.co.uk/
Erm - could that be a tiny bit illegal Caspar? ;) :rolleyes: :p: :D I'm not sure that it actually works either! :erm:
Or a man rushing his pregnant wife to hospital as she's going in to labour?If I was driving my pregnant wife to hospital I would try not to make her condition any worse by driving like a lunatic on the way there.
On second thoughts, I had a vasectomy years ago so I would probably be driving over my pregnant wife at 51 mph.:)
If I was driving my pregnant wife to hospital I would try not to make her condition any worse by driving like a lunatic on the way there.
Driving at say, 90mph on a clear, dry, empty motorway or dual-carriageway isn't quite what I'd call 'driving' like a lunatic...
Driving at say, 90mph on a clear, dry, empty motorway or dual-carriageway isn't quite what I'd call 'driving' like a lunatic...What would you call driving at 51 mph in a 30 mph zone?
Chimaera
23-09-2004, 19:26
Driving at say, 90mph on a clear, dry, empty motorway or dual-carriageway isn't quite what I'd call 'driving' like a lunatic...
Mmmm - best judge of that would be the lady in question, surely? ;)
Having been in that situation I can safely say my eyes were not on the speedo at the time - and it's very rare for a baby to be born that quickly and put in an appearance on the car upholstery! :Yikes:
Erm - could that be a tiny bit illegal Caspar? ;) :rolleyes: :p: :D I'm not sure that it actually works either! :erm:
I dunno, it says it's perfectly legal! :angel:
DrAwesome
23-09-2004, 19:30
I just wonder how many drivers on here reading this thread will admit that it is very hard to keep your speed exactly on 30mph in a 30mph zone.. even using 3rd gear.
I also wonder how many of you have to take your eyes off the road to glance down at your speedometer to make sure you are not speeding (have you ever counted the times)?
IMPO...just about every car driver exceeds the speed limit be it on a dual carriageway, motorway or town street (& im not talking a few mph).
What would you call driving at 51 mph in a 30 mph zone?
Depends on the conditions. If the zone was near a school then yes, complete lunacy. But if it was a wide, open road in a sparsely-populated area then things might be different.
Exactly what he deserves.:(
Yeah, think of the Children :rolleyes:
jellybaby
23-09-2004, 19:43
At the end of the day, speed limits are put in place for a reason...they are law and should be abided by.
I just heard a friend got a letter about being caught by a speed camera going 51 in a 30 :erm: :Yikes:
Anyone know what he's likely to get? :disturbd:
My dad was caught doing 52 in a 30 zone and he had a fixed penalty of 3points and a £60 fine.
At the end of the day, speed limits are put in place for a reason...they are law and should be abided by.
Not a bad point in itself, but when you realise how much scope for discretion there is availble to other offences compared to the cut-and-dried approach to motoring charges, wouldn't you agree it's a little unfair?
I'm going to buy him one of these for Xmas!
http://www.safeplate.co.uk/
if the police look at the negative of the photo and zoom in then they can still read the number plate ;)
jellybaby
23-09-2004, 19:47
I do agree with you. The thing is, most speeding offences are caught be camera's nowadays...so to them you are either speeding or not, simple as that
paulyoung666
23-09-2004, 19:49
Depends on the conditions. If the zone was near a school then yes, complete lunacy. But if it was a wide, open road in a sparsely-populated area then things might be different.
very true , personally i would love to see 20mph limits on every estate road along with ' sensible ' speed humps :tu:
DrAwesome
23-09-2004, 19:49
Another pause for thought....
I wonder just how far out out your car speedometer is after all not all car speedometers are calibrated the same.
If your doing bang on 30mph you might be really doing 32 or even 33mph.
I wonder just how many of you are thinking or thought of buying a radar detector?
I just heard a friend got a letter about being caught by a speed camera going 51 in a 30 :erm: :Yikes:
Anyone know what he's likely to get? :disturbd:
Don't worry too much, I have more points than Nottingham Forest. :p:
paulyoung666
23-09-2004, 20:13
Another pause for thought....
I wonder just how far out out your car speedometer is after all not all car speedometers are calibrated the same.
If your doing bang on 30mph you might be really doing 32 or even 33mph.
I wonder just how many of you are thinking or thought of buying a radar detector?
more likely if your speedo is saying 30 then you are doing 27 or thereabouts :) , mind you , if you mess about with wheel / tyre sizes then your speedo could be well out either way :disturbd:
if the police look at the negative of the photo and zoom in then they can still read the number plate ;)Actually, I think the video cameras used for speed cameras on motorways can see through those sprays.
Now, my views on speeding.
Put simply, people shouldn't speed. Unless there is a family (or other) emergency, such as childbirth. I think allowance can already made for emergencies, but you have to appeal the ticket.
Now, my views on speed limits.
In my view, a lot (not all) full-time speeds are wrong, or are enforced too strictly. Obviously, they can't allow people to bomb around at whatever speed they want, but they could be more flexible. There are a couple of good ideas I have heard about that might help.
Variable Speed Limits
http://www.benefitcost.its.dot.gov/ITS/benecost.nsf/ID/8FD5EA59EFFF390F852569610051E25B
This is an American study of a scheme trialled on the M25 in the mid nineties. Basically, the speed limit is adjusted according to traffic density. As Russ said, there is no point limiting people to 70 MPH if there is 10 miles of clear road ahead. The limit could raise to 80, or drop below 70 if traffic gets quite dense.
Part time speed limits
In other countries, Italy being one example, certain speed limits are not enforced at certain times. For example, the speed limits outside towns could be relaxed in the early hours.
Having suggested those two, I know variable speed limits are already in this country. Not sure if part time speed limits are though.
One thing I will say that slightly goes against any relaxation of speed limits. If you are on a motorway and speeding, even if the road is clear you can still be placed in danger extremely quickly. Driving faster may increase the chances of you being in danger, even on an empty road (mechanical failiure for instance).
Flubflow
23-09-2004, 20:26
Another pause for thought....
I wonder just how far out out your car speedometer is after all not all car speedometers are calibrated the same.
If your doing bang on 30mph you might be really doing 32 or even 33mph.
I wonder just how many of you are thinking or thought of buying a radar detector?
Also depending on how high or low your seat is adjusted it can add or subtract a few mph from the reading (parallax error). Then there's the difference between new and well worn tyres which will affect the reading too. Add all the extreme worst tolerance scenarios together and you could be doing 35mph yet, according to the driver, reading only 30mph on the speedo.
gary_580
23-09-2004, 20:51
I'm going to buy him one of these for Xmas!
http://www.safeplate.co.uk/
Only works if its a flash camera. Doesnt work on Video
How long do points stay on for?
Just had 6 points come of my licence on 8th September mine stayed on 4 years from the date of offence.
Just had 6 points come of my licence on 8th September mine stayed on 4 years from the date of offence.Yes, but curiously, the 12 point limit is over three years, not four.
Many speed limits in this coutry are a joke, I know roads in the middle of nowhere that have 30mph limits, and roads in built up areas with 60mph limits. :rolleyes:
Just had 6 points come of my licence on 8th September mine stayed on 4 years from the date of offence.
Did you get a letter or forewarned that they were coming off at 4 years?
3 years although insurance companies keep them on record for up to 5.
AA insurance ask for 11 years, well they used to anyway.
A number of factors will be taken into account when it appears in court (Normally will cos > 50% above) unless he gets the plead guilty letter and a fine with 6 points.
Factors:
Time of day
Road Conditions
Number of accidents in the area (I.e. Why the camera is there)
Was it a mobile camera
Excuse your mate has
Does he drive for his job
How the judge feels on the day
Age of driver
Any previous convictions (speeding or otherwise)
If he/she is lucky a hefty fine and the 6 points
If they say "I never noticed the speed/signs etc" then it's driving without due care and attention = 9+ points and bigger fine
My advice - Get a good lawyer (yes it'll cost but it could be better than losing the licence or worse being sent down). O and stop speeding!
carlingman
24-09-2004, 00:41
I just heard a friend got a letter about being caught by a speed camera going 51 in a 30 :erm: :Yikes:
Anyone know what he's likely to get? :disturbd:
Edging me bets here but 3-6 points and £100 plus fine plus costs providing the Magistrate is having a good day.
9mph more as over 30mph above the speed limit is classed as reckless driving and would be an automatic ban.
Driving at say, 90mph on a clear, dry, empty motorway or dual-carriageway isn't quite what I'd call 'driving' like a lunatic...
Please elaborate then and tell where and when in the UK are we likely to see an empty Motorway when it is clear implying daylight, is that possible.
What would you call driving at 51 mph in a 30 mph zone?
Unlucky or close to reckless driving in the eyes of the law.
Some time ago I was nabbed doing 80mph plus at 3am in the morning in a 60mph zone.
No junctions on the roads and the road was empty and no junctions joining just a trigger happy policeman with a camera/gun.
The result, well i was given the option to take 3 points and a 30 quid fine but declined and said see you in court and this resulted in argument before even getting that far as i argued about the hand held being calibrated etc and it was dropped.
No fine and no points.
I was in the wrong and will be the first to admit it but if you dont ask you dont get as initially i was prepared to to court and take the punishment but then advised differently and it worked it out well for me in that instance.
:D
Another pause for thought....
I wonder just how far out out your car speedometer is after all not all car speedometers are calibrated the same.
If your doing bang on 30mph you might be really doing 32 or even 33mph.
I wonder just how many of you are thinking or thought of buying a radar detector?
That's why you're given 10% plus 2-4mph discretionary, not so you can speed...
Don't worry too much, I have more points than Nottingham Forest. :p:
Mod Edit (Chris T):Please do not post abuse of other members in the forum.
SMHarman
24-09-2004, 09:44
Depends on the conditions. If the zone was near a school then yes, complete lunacy. But if it was a wide, open road in a sparsely-populated area then things might be different.
A similar thread recently pointed out how councils save money by not increasing speed limits between villages on country roads to save money on signage.
I just wonder how many drivers on here reading this thread will admit that it is very hard to keep your speed exactly on 30mph in a 30mph zone.. even using 3rd gear.
One of the few uses I find for Cruise Control in this country, you cannot use it on motorways, they are too congested, but set to 30-40-50 you stick to the speed limit like treacle.
Another pause for thought....
I wonder just how far out out your car speedometer is after all not all car speedometers are calibrated the same.
If your doing bang on 30mph you might be really doing 32 or even 33mph.
I wonder just how many of you are thinking or thought of buying a radar detector?
The new sat based gatso detectors give you a perfect speed reading, another benefit of them IMHO.
Please elaborate then and tell where and when in the UK are we likely to see an empty Motorway when it is clear implying daylight, is that possible.
M4 through Port Talbot from about 10:30am to around midday, for a start.
Driving at say, 90mph on a clear, dry, empty motorway or dual-carriageway isn't quite what I'd call 'driving' like a lunatic...
Me niether :tu: :tu:
Please elaborate then and tell where and when in the UK are we likely to see an empty Motorway when it is clear implying daylight, is that possible.
M6 north of Preston, past Carlisle, onto the M74 and into Glasgow, any time after about 11pm, but seeing as you want daylight, in the summer any time after about 4am.
M55 Preston to Blackpool, any time of any day outside rush hour.
Mind you, I disagree that it has to be daylight for a motorway to be 'clear'. Any empty rural motorway in complete darkness with no other traffic has good visibility due to lack of dazzle from other headlights. An empty motorway is safer than a crowded one, regardless of the time of day or driving conditions.
AA insurance ask for 11 years, well they used to anyway.
If you look on your licence it tells you for speeding and all other minor convictions it's 4 years from the date of offence.
Did you get a letter or forewarned that they were coming off at 4 years?
No phoned the dvla up to have them taken off after 3 years and was told that they would be on for 4 years.
SMHarman
24-09-2004, 11:24
M6 north of Preston, past Carlisle, onto the M74 and into Glasgow, any time after about 11pm, but seeing as you want daylight, in the summer any time after about 4am.
M55 Preston to Blackpool, any time of any day outside rush hour.
Mind you, I disagree that it has to be daylight for a motorway to be 'clear'. Any empty rural motorway in complete darkness with no other traffic has good visibility due to lack of dazzle from other headlights. An empty motorway is safer than a crowded one, regardless of the time of day or driving conditions.
Closer to home the M10 is usually pretty clear (though not very long).
The length of time an endorsement stays on your licence depends on what you got it for. 11 years for serious offences (drink driving, reckless driving etc), four years for the rest.
http://www.dvla.gov.uk/drivers/endorsem.htm
However, endorsements only count towards your total number of penalty points for three years.
orangebird
24-09-2004, 11:28
I got 'flashed' the other day on the M42. Does the camera only flash if you're doing above a certain speed?
I got 'flashed' the other day on the M42. Does the camera only flash if you're doing above a certain speed?
Ouch! :( ... you're waiting for your letter now. :disturbd:
orangebird
24-09-2004, 11:30
Ouch! :( ... you're waiting for your letter now. :disturbd:
Yeah, probably - I think I was doing about 58 in a 50 - Is that so bad????
I got 'flashed' the other day on the M42. Does the camera only flash if you're doing above a certain speed?
Yes - but different police forces set them to go off at different speeds. In a 30 zone, it could be 37mph, or in some hard-line, cash-hungry areas they set it to 33mph :rolleyes:. On a m-way (presumably in an area with a 50 limit - there shouldn't be any working cameras on 70mph stretches) the camera probably doesn't go off until you're doing more like 60mph.
Still, there's no guarantee that it had film in it, you may yet get away with it. :D
SMHarman
24-09-2004, 11:58
I got 'flashed' the other day on the M42. Does the camera only flash if you're doing above a certain speed?
Yes - when did it happen, if it's late on a Sunday night you can be pretty confident it has run out of film.
orangebird
24-09-2004, 12:30
Yes - when did it happen, if it's late on a Sunday night you can be pretty confident it has run out of film.
No, it was about 8pm on Weds.... :(
Yeah, probably - I think I was doing about 58 in a 50 - Is that so bad????Why was the limit 50 on the M42 ?
orangebird
24-09-2004, 12:48
Why was the limit 50 on the M42 ?
Roadworks.... :afire:
Roadworks.... :afire:Then if you get the letter it's worth checking that the temporary limit was legally applied for and granted. Remember they also have to mail you within 14 days (assuming you are the registered keeper).
orangebird
24-09-2004, 12:59
Then if you get the letter it's worth checking that the temporary limit was legally applied for and granted. Remember they also have to mail you within 14 days (assuming you are the registered keeper).
No, it was a hire car... thanks for the tips though. :)
Yes - but different police forces set them to go off at different speeds. In a 30 zone, it could be 37mph, or in some hard-line, cash-hungry areas they set it to 33mph :rolleyes:. On a m-way (presumably in an area with a 50 limit - there shouldn't be any working cameras on 70mph stretches) the camera probably doesn't go off until you're doing more like 60mph.
Still, there's no guarantee that it had film in it, you may yet get away with it. :D
As I said earlier, the police add 10% to the limit (33m/h) and the council add 2-4m/h discretionary (35-37m/h) - in a 30 zone...
In a 60 zone obviously it would be 66 (+10%) then 68-70 (+2-4m/h) lol.
This is to cover speedo inaccuracies not so you can speed lol. Besides you should have a rough idea of where 30 is anyway, I've only been driving a few months and roughly know when I'm doing 30 without needing to stare at the speedo- you can look at the road then lol.
No, it was a hire car... thanks for the tips though. :)
So the hire company will get the letter, fill in the part that shops you as the hirer at the time, send it back to the police, who will send a new form to you ... and then you have to decide whether or not it is a breach of your human rights to be compelled to sign a form admitting your guilt :p:
Seriously, if you're pig headed enough you can take it all the way, other drivers have, and have won, because the police cannot compel you to sign a confession. The photo proves that the car was breaking the speed limit in a certain time and place, but it almost certainly doesn't adequately identify the driver.
On the other hand, for doing 60 in a 50 you will get 3 points and a £40 fine, best just put it down to experience ... :)
orangebird
24-09-2004, 14:52
So the hire company will get the letter, fill in the part that shops you as the hirer at the time, send it back to the police, who will send a new form to you ... and then you have to decide whether or not it is a breach of your human rights to be compelled to sign a form admitting your guilt :p:
Seriously, if you're pig headed enough you can take it all the way, other drivers have, and have won, because the police cannot compel you to sign a confession. The photo proves that the car was breaking the speed limit in a certain time and place, but it almost certainly doesn't adequately identify the driver.
On the other hand, for doing 60 in a 50 you will get 3 points and a £40 fine, best just put it down to experience ... :)
I'm kind of hoping the lorry that was between me and the camera (lorry in middle lane, me in outside lane) might block some of the picture... do you know if this is possible?
Lord Nikon
24-09-2004, 15:12
quite possible...
Just remember this - while it is a legal requirement that you fill the form in, it's NOT a legal requirement that you sign it.
Also a document which has not been signed is not legally admissible as evidence in court.
Worth remembering really.
Just remembered too.... if you do end up in court over it, it's worth asking about the calibration of the camera before and after the event, and asking if it had been correctly aligned for use sensing the lane you happened to be in,
do a little research on parallax errors, it may help
I'm kind of hoping the lorry that was between me and the camera (lorry in middle lane, me in outside lane) might block some of the picture... do you know if this is possible?
It would be handy since both pictures are required. ;)
I hate those roadworks on the M42... there is never anyone working there and they go on for miles. :mad:
quite possible...
Just remember this - while it is a legal requirement that you fill the form in, it's NOT a legal requirement that you sign it.
Also a document which has not been signed is not legally admissible as evidence in court.
Worth remembering really.
Yes I remember that case too but the law has been altered so that not signing the document would lead to an 'obstruction of justice' charge.
SMHarman
24-09-2004, 15:25
I'm kind of hoping the lorry that was between me and the camera (lorry in middle lane, me in outside lane) might block some of the picture... do you know if this is possible?
If lorrys are in the frame you can question the accuracy of the reading as the slab side of the lorry gives incorrect radar reflection and thus incorrect speed readings. A lorry can be flashed doing 90 when it is doing 5 mph due to the side reflecting the radar so quickly.
Lord Nikon
24-09-2004, 15:34
I remember an article about a guy who was sent a ticket for doing 90 in his lorry, his not guilty plea was given with the reason that in the photos he was quite clearly unloading the back of his stationary lorry.
orangebird
24-09-2004, 15:35
Thanks all. If I get the letter, then I'll accept it - I was speeding after all. :shrug:
The only thing I'm annoyed about (as Julian posted) was that no work is going on in that section of the M42, and IMO 50 is a ridicluous speed limit for an incredibly busy motorway.... :afire:
Just read this article in the motoring section of the Telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/main.jhtml?xml=/motoring/2004/10/08/emncas09.xml&sSheet=/motoring/2004/10/08/ixmot.html
One part in particular is a bit worrying, just have to hope that Chief Constables use a little common sense.:(
This is the section that I mean.
"Despite these safety improvements, new speed trap legislation will soon make driving one mph over the limit a statutory offence, adds Michael Kemp.
The move, threatening millions more motorists with fines and licence endorsement, was hidden in changes announced by Transport Secretary Alistair Darling on September 1. Mr Darling is preparing to make legal history by setting in law that 21, 31, 41, 51 and 71mph are illegal speeds":Yikes:
i can't believe they are going for zero tolerance. Speedos are woefully inaccurate even after just a couple of years. People are going to be driving 20-25 in a 30 to make sure. We'll never get anywhere.
i can't believe they are going for zero tolerance. Speedos are woefully inaccurate even after just a couple of years. People are going to be driving 20-25 in a 30 to make sure. We'll never get anywhere.
I think, at certain times anyway, people would like to be able to drive fast enough in London to get anywhere near the speed limit...
paulyoung666
09-10-2004, 23:10
i can't believe they are going for zero tolerance. Speedos are woefully inaccurate even after just a couple of years. People are going to be driving 20-25 in a 30 to make sure. We'll never get anywhere.
or driving at 34-35mph and taking a chance on the built in tolerance of the cars speedo :erm: :erm: :erm:
I thought I'd update the thread with the goings on of my friend. To remind peeps...he was flashed by a policeman with a temp radar [positioned in a 30, though it's location is notorious for catching peeps coming down from 60 into a 30...] He was going 51 in a 30 :(...
He finally got a letter from the police about 3 weeks ago... it was actually a court summons :( He pleaded guilty by post to save the trip down south, plus time off work etc...
He phoned up the court after the hearing and was told that he has recieved the minimum penatly for this type of crime.
£60 fine
£35 court costs
3 penatly points
Although, I'm pleased for him to get only the minimum... I know for a fact he has learnt his lesson!... he's a much safer driver now :) ...saying that he says he's getting a Porche Boxter S in the summer, so maybe not!
...live and learn I say... :)
Glad to hear it didn't turn out to badly for your friend ;)
Will he be able to get a baby seat in a Boxter ?
scrotnig
23-02-2005, 17:00
I thought I'd update the thread with the goings on of my friend. To remind peeps...he was flashed by a policeman with a temp radar [positioned in a 30, though it's location is notorious for catching peeps coming down from 60 into a 30...] He was going 51 in a 30 :(...
He finally got a letter from the police about 3 weeks ago... it was actually a court summons :( He pleaded guilty by post to save the trip down south, plus time off work etc...
He phoned up the court after the hearing and was told that he has recieved the minimum penatly for this type of crime.
£60 fine
£35 court costs
3 penatly points
Although, I'm pleased for him to get only the minimum... I know for a fact he has learnt his lesson!... he's a much safer driver now :) ...saying that he says he's getting a Porche Boxter S in the summer, so maybe not!
...live and learn I say... :)
Maybe so.
I wonder when burglars, muggers and rapists will be made to 'live and learn' by being dragged to court though? Seems the only laws that matter are those that generate income for the treasury when broken.
I thought I'd update the thread with the goings on of my friend. To remind peeps...he was flashed by a policeman with a temp radar [positioned in a 30, though it's location is notorious for catching peeps coming down from 60 into a 30...] He was going 51 in a 30 :(...
He finally got a letter from the police about 3 weeks ago... it was actually a court summons :( He pleaded guilty by post to save the trip down south, plus time off work etc...
He phoned up the court after the hearing and was told that he has recieved the minimum penatly for this type of crime.
£60 fine
£35 court costs
3 penatly points
Thats hardly a deterrent :erm:
Was he in a built up/residential area?
The current UK motoring laws are pathetic to say the least.
Fair do's. Someone caught doing 40mph in a 30mph zone outside of a school, or busy residential area... should, IMO be heavily penalised.
However, someone doing 40mph in a 30 zone that isn't heavily pedestriansed should be dealt with very leniently.
I mean, FFS... Our motorways are pathetic. 70mph? These limits were put into place years ago, when car's were far less advanced. Nowadays the brakes on modern cars are ten fold better, the driver assistance should also be taken into account.
Maybe educating the driver is what should be done, rather than screw them. You get idiots driving at 70mph in torrential conditions on the motorway.. yet by the letter of the law, they're driving legally. But, educating motorists costs money.... not educating them - but scamming them makes money.. key difference IMO.
Then again, think of the children. If you hit them at 71mph whilst they're out playing in the middle of the M6 at 3am in the morning... :(
Oh - One final thing. Them bloody speed ad's. At 30mph you stop.... whereas at 40... BANG!. Do they think we're stupid? They blanket the country with crappy motorist laws, without taking any technological advancement into account, (In this case, brakes...)
Glad to hear it didn't turn out to badly for your friend ;)
Will he be able to get a baby seat in a Boxter ?
Who cares it won't be for the baby!...anyway...I'm sure he won't want to wreck the leather seats with some plastic safety seat.... it won't even have a roof rack...so the baby can't even go on there....!...good job his wife has her own car ;)
Thats hardly a deterrent :erm:
Was he in a built up/residential area?
Nope not at all, it was coming off a dual carriage way..in the country side...into an industrial area late Sunday afternoon....
scrotnig
23-02-2005, 17:09
The current UK motoring laws are pathetic to say the least.
Fair do's. Someone caught doing 40mph in a 30mph zone outside of a school, or busy residential area... should, IMO be heavily penalised.
However, someone doing 40mph in a 30 zone that isn't heavily pedestriansed should be dealt with very leniently.
I mean, FFS... Our motorways are pathetic. 70mph? These limits were put into place years ago, when car's were far less advanced. Nowadays the brakes on modern cars are ten fold better, the driver assistance should also be taken into account.
Maybe educating the driver is what should be done, rather than screw them. You get idiots driving at 70mph in torrential conditions on the motorway.. yet by the letter of the law, they're driving legally. But, educating motorists costs money.... not educating them - but scamming them makes money.. key difference IMO.
Then again, think of the children. If you hit them at 71mph whilst they're out playing in the middle of the M6 at 3am in the morning... :(
Oh - One final thing. Them bloody speed ad's. At 30mph you stop.... whereas at 40... BANG!. Do they think we're stupid? They blanket the country with crappy motorist laws, without taking any technological advancement into account, (In this case, brakes...)
The laws themselves are fine, it's just the way they are enforced that annoys me.
I will happily accept all the clampdowns and zero tolerance stuff on motorists when the same is done with burglars, muggers and rapists.
The police and the government pick and choose which laws to enforce based on how much profit they can make out of it.
Oh - One final thing. Them bloody speed ad's. At 30mph you stop.... whereas at 40... BANG!. Do they think we're stupid? They blanket the country with crappy motorist laws, without taking any technological advancement into account, (In this case, brakes...)
My view of this kind of thing always keep to the limit and if you ever do hit anyone...then there's no blame on you....if you are over the limit by even a few mph all the blame is on you for speeding...and driving dangerously etc..
So to protect yourself from hitting anyone....keep to the limit!
Nope not at all, it was coming off a dual carriage way..in the country side...into an industrial area late Sunday afternoon....So basically the police shouldn't have even been there..........ffs......why can't they target speeding in residential areas instead? :rolleyes:
Oh - One final thing. Them bloody speed ad's. At 30mph you stop.... whereas at 40... BANG!. Do they think we're stupid? They blanket the country with crappy motorist laws, without taking any technological advancement into account, (In this case, brakes...)More to the point, if people didn't put themselves in front of cars you wouldn't hit them at 30 or 40 .....
More to the point, if people didn't put themselves in front of cars you wouldn't hit them at 30 or 40 .....True, but we don't have a death penalty for stupidity yet.
True, but we don't have a death penalty for stupidity yet.
No we call that 'Marriage' ;)
True, but we don't have a death penalty for stupidity yet.
No we call that 'Marriage' ;)
Now there's a post to back away from :erm: :Sprint:
etccarmageddon
23-02-2005, 17:53
I thought I'd update the thread with the goings on of my friend. To remind peeps...he was flashed by a policeman with a temp radar [positioned in a 30, though it's location is notorious for catching peeps coming down from 60 into a 30...] He was going 51 in a 30 :(...
He finally got a letter from the police about 3 weeks ago... it was actually a court summons :( He pleaded guilty by post to save the trip down south, plus time off work etc...
arent they supposed to contact you within 14 days? i.e. after 14 days it's too late for them to accuse you. or does that rule only apply to unmanned speed cameras.
arent they supposed to contact you within 14 days? i.e. after 14 days it's too late for them to accuse you. or does that rule only apply to unmanned speed cameras.
IIRC they have 14 days to post the NIP, and up to 6 monthes for it to get to you..
50mph is only a stupid limit because we live in a age where we have to be here and there NOW, 20minutes later is not acceptable, we have such a essence on speed and being here now now now, and with more and more poweful cars we want to go faster and faster, well I am the annoying git who does 50mph dead on in those zones.
scrotnig
23-02-2005, 18:48
I see people's understanding of the automated fines system is not great.
From the date of offence, if a camera zaps you (or any other case where a police officer is not involved at the time), the police have 14 days to SEND a 'Notice of Intended Prosecution' (NIP). So they can send it on day 14 and that's ok. It doesn't matter if you receive it or not, as long as the police can prove they sent it within the time.
Then, there is a further SIX months in which time the summons has to be issued. The case doesn't have to be dealt with in that time, only a summons issued. However, if the police were to leave it 'til right at the end of the six months, a good solicitor would argue that this was an 'abuse of process' and ask the police to justify why they took so long. If they have no valid reason, the magistrates MAY agree to throw the case out.
paulyoung666
23-02-2005, 18:50
50mph is only a stupid limit because we live in a age where we have to be here and there NOW, 20minutes later is not acceptable, we have such a essence on speed and being here now now now, and with more and more poweful cars we want to go faster and faster, well I am the annoying git who does 50mph dead on in those zones.
same here , the A66 thru middlesbrough is a notorious unmarked car zone :disturbd: :disturbd: :disturbd:
Chimaera
23-02-2005, 18:51
Will he be able to get a baby seat in a Boxter ?
Nope! ;) Nothing will fit as far as I know! Hope wifey has a nice Focus or Renault! :D
I agree with unmarked zones especially near Wales with the training school, bloody Volvo's coming past at 140mph at times..bloody go train somewhere else.
I am 21 and I have personally seen the result of speed injuries and I drive at 30mph or even 28mph to play extra safe for the chance of that one stupid kid and my speedo saying 30mph when I am doing 34mph due to inaccurate speedo's.
Speaking of which anyone know a cheap place to pick up a Micra or something pm me.
I see people's understanding of the automated fines system is not great.
From the date of offence, if a camera zaps you (or any other case where a police officer is not involved at the time), the police have 14 days to SEND a 'Notice of Intended Prosecution' (NIP). So they can send it on day 14 and that's ok. It doesn't matter if you receive it or not, as long as the police can prove they sent it within the time.
Then, there is a further SIX months in which time the summons has to be issued. The case doesn't have to be dealt with in that time, only a summons issued. However, if the police were to leave it 'til right at the end of the six months, a good solicitor would argue that this was an 'abuse of process' and ask the police to justify why they took so long. If they have no valid reason, the magistrates MAY agree to throw the case out.
What about the time between the offender sending back the NIP, denying or accepting the charge...cause they took about4 months to get back to him... :(....
All started May 04 and concluded Feb 9th 05....what a waste of time! :( :dunce:
Then, there is a further SIX months in which time the summons has to be issued. The case doesn't have to be dealt with in that time, only a summons issued. However, if the police were to leave it 'til right at the end of the six months, a good solicitor would argue that this was an 'abuse of process' and ask the police to justify why they took so long. If they have no valid reason, the magistrates MAY agree to throw the case out.
Just a thought, if it takes over 6 months to get to court, and you are someone who drives for a living and are facing a ban.... Then that gives you 6 months to resign and find another (non-driving) job as sort of insurance against losing your license after...
Lord Nikon
21-03-2005, 23:50
[snip]
Oh - One final thing. Them bloody speed ad's. At 30mph you stop.... whereas at 40... BANG!. Do they think we're stupid? They blanket the country with crappy motorist laws, without taking any technological advancement into account, (In this case, brakes...)
I remember that ad, where the car is trying to stop before hitting the kid...
Anyone seen that ad and looked CLOSELY?
The car (While braking heavily enough to cause smoke from it's nearside rear tyre as can be seen by the smoke from the locked up wheel, even though you can't see the wheel itself) has the other wheels still turning..
That accident wasn't caused by speed, it was caused by having only 1 working brake on the car. no smoke from the front of the car on the far side, only from the rear, and both offside (drivers side) wheels are still turning - conclusion, only the rear passenger wheel locked on.
Before someone mentions ABS - the purpose of ABS is to stop the wheels from locking up, which obviously didn't happen on the passenger rear wheel, conclusion - defective ABS system
Either way you look at it, the car had defective brakes and that would have been more of a contributory factor in the crash than anything else.
I hear that the government is looking to ban the little gadgets that tell drivers when the upcoming so called speed camera isn't even working,or there is a working speed camera within range....
However they may have trouble with the GPS ones...not easy to ban for some reason.. :erm:
ScaredWebWarrior
22-03-2005, 00:27
I hear that the government is looking to ban the little gadgets that tell drivers when the upcoming so called speed camera isn't even working,or there is a working speed camera within range....
However they may have trouble with the GPS ones...not easy to ban for some reason.. :erm:
Because the GPS ones are not detecting the cameras themselves - they're merely correlating your position against a database of locations.
Now if they made that illegal, then basically they'd be making navigation software illegal.
Sometimes, the fact that the law is so anal is to our advantage :)
Lord Nikon
22-03-2005, 00:32
I still wonder where the money from the fundraising scameras goes.
I drive a lot, I use GPS navigation to find my way to sites, it's simple, redirects me if I make a wrong turn etc. yet I see Police, ambulances, and even fire crews on occasion studying A-Z maps, surely for these people who others are reliant on attending as quickly as possible, GPS navigation isn't a luxury, it's a necessity, especially one tied into the trafficmaster system so they can avoid traffic problems.
ScaredWebWarrior
22-03-2005, 00:51
I drive a lot, I use GPS navigation to find my way to sites, it's simple, redirects me if I make a wrong turn etc. yet I see Police, ambulances, and even fire crews on occasion studying A-Z maps, surely for these people who others are reliant on attending as quickly as possible, GPS navigation isn't a luxury, it's a necessity, especially one tied into the trafficmaster system so they can avoid traffic problems.
Yup - I've often wondered that too.
The last time I needed the AA I could almost have provided them with a Grid Ref for my location (OK - so I left the GPS at home, so I couldn't) instead I had to guess my location - even though I drove on the road every day, I actually didn't know what it was called!
So even deciding whether you're on the west-bound or east-bound side of a motorway can be important. That's right at the limit of what GPS can do for you. And even if you tell the ambulance that the crash is on the east-bound side, but the casualty is on the west-bound side - they'll still drive right past you and go to the crash site rather than where you've told them they're needed! (Yup - I was there for that one too! And they asked me 3 times. And I told them, and still they drove right past!)
I actually don't know if any of the emergency services could actually use a reference from a GPS system (i.e. Grid Ref or UTM or w.h.y.) to help them. (and I include the 4th in this ;))
I'd hate to be dialling 999, quote a Grid Ref at them only to be asked where that is...
Oh - One final thing. Them bloody speed ad's. At 30mph you stop.... whereas at 40... BANG!. Do they think we're stupid? They blanket the country with crappy motorist laws, without taking any technological advancement into account, (In this case, brakes...)
Brakes have improved. Human reaction times haven't.
paulyoung666
22-03-2005, 09:41
Yup - I've often wondered that too.
The last time I needed the AA I could almost have provided them with a Grid Ref for my location (OK - so I left the GPS at home, so I couldn't) instead I had to guess my location - even though I drove on the road every day, I actually didn't know what it was called!
So even deciding whether you're on the west-bound or east-bound side of a motorway can be important. That's right at the limit of what GPS can do for you. And even if you tell the ambulance that the crash is on the east-bound side, but the casualty is on the west-bound side - they'll still drive right past you and go to the crash site rather than where you've told them they're needed! (Yup - I was there for that one too! And they asked me 3 times. And I told them, and still they drove right past!)
I actually don't know if any of the emergency services could actually use a reference from a GPS system (i.e. Grid Ref or UTM or w.h.y.) to help them. (and I include the 4th in this ;))
I'd hate to be dialling 999, quote a Grid Ref at them only to be asked where that is...
i had cause to ring the police on 999 once on the A1 , from the way they were talking they knew exactly where i was without telling them :disturbd: :D :D :D
Yup - I've often wondered that too.
The last time I needed the AA I could almost have provided them with a Grid Ref for my location (OK - so I left the GPS at home, so I couldn't) instead I had to guess my location - even though I drove on the road every day, I actually didn't know what it was called!
So even deciding whether you're on the west-bound or east-bound side of a motorway can be important. That's right at the limit of what GPS can do for you. And even if you tell the ambulance that the crash is on the east-bound side, but the casualty is on the west-bound side - they'll still drive right past you and go to the crash site rather than where you've told them they're needed! (Yup - I was there for that one too! And they asked me 3 times. And I told them, and still they drove right past!)
I actually don't know if any of the emergency services could actually use a reference from a GPS system (i.e. Grid Ref or UTM or w.h.y.) to help them. (and I include the 4th in this ;))
I'd hate to be dialling 999, quote a Grid Ref at them only to be asked where that is...
i had cause to ring the police on 999 once on the A1 , from the way they were talking they knew exactly where i was without telling them :disturbd: :D :D :D
I don't know if it's true, but I was told that if you call them on a mobile phone, they can triangulate your position based on what signal strength your local mobile phone masts are reporting (similar sort of idea to how GPS works, but GPS triangulateas your position based on a time signal from around three satellites).
If you call from one of the roadside emergency phones (or a payphone) they can look up where it is.
For those concerned about road safety.... http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=137 :)
Yup - I've often wondered that too.
The last time I needed the AA I could almost have provided them with a Grid Ref for my location (OK - so I left the GPS at home, so I couldn't) instead I had to guess my location - even though I drove on the road every day, I actually didn't know what it was called!
So even deciding whether you're on the west-bound or east-bound side of a motorway can be important. That's right at the limit of what GPS can do for you. And even if you tell the ambulance that the crash is on the east-bound side, but the casualty is on the west-bound side - they'll still drive right past you and go to the crash site rather than where you've told them they're needed! (Yup - I was there for that one too! And they asked me 3 times. And I told them, and still they drove right past!)
I actually don't know if any of the emergency services could actually use a reference from a GPS system (i.e. Grid Ref or UTM or w.h.y.) to help them. (and I include the 4th in this ;))
I'd hate to be dialling 999, quote a Grid Ref at them only to be asked where that is...
i had cause to ring the police on 999 once on the A1 , from the way they were talking they knew exactly where i was without telling them :disturbd: :D :D :D
I don't know if it's true, but I was told that if you call them on a mobile phone, they can triangulate your position based on what signal strength your local mobile phone masts are reporting (similar sort of idea to how GPS works, but GPS triangulateas your position based on a time signal from around three satellites).
If you call from one of the roadside emergency phones (or a payphone) they can look up where it is.
Yep they've used that technique to pinpoint (within a certain distance) people who have claimed that they haven't been somewhere when they have ;) As long as your mobile is on it can be seen on the network, if it can be seen on the network it can be triangulated off 3 base stations to give a rough location. Don't know how exact it is though but I would guess they can locate you to within 1/2 mile of your position.
SMHarman
22-03-2005, 10:07
Yep they've used that technique to pinpoint (within a certain distance) people who have claimed that they haven't been somewhere when they have ;) As long as your mobile is on it can be seen on the network, if it can be seen on the network it can be triangulated off 3 base stations to give a rough location. Don't know how exact it is though but I would guess they can locate you to within 1/2 mile of your position.
They did this in the Soham trial to indicate that he or she was in a certain area at the time - I think she claimed she was at her mothers - when she was not.
If you're on the motorway, there are marker posts along the side which can be referenced to exactly where you are, and they also should point you to the nearest emergency telephone (which should always be lesss than 1/2 mile away)
They did this in the Soham trial to indicate that he or she was in a certain area at the time - I think she claimed she was at her mothers - when she was not.
Maxine claimed she was with him at the time of the murders, but she was out partying in Clethorpes while staying with her mother.
Some info on mobile phone triangualtion here
http://www.where-ru.com/how.php
not that it's strictly on topic ;)
Closer to home the M10 is usually pretty clear (though not very long).
true indeed, although last week someone managed to drive right off the edge of the clear motorway into a field!!! in this situation I reckon excessive speed has the potential to exponentially increase the damage to the car + occupants!
*sigh* Rough, Mike B and anyone else living in or driving near Swindon should be careful when driving underneath motorway bridges.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1565657,00.html
Actually,I would have thought that driving while tired is more of a hazard on Motorways than speeding. After all, as has been pointed out before, you are hardly likely to get pedestrians wandering out into the road, or have a sudden set of traffic lights to contend with. You just have a nice, wide, straight (usually), clear (hopefully) road.
Having said that, it's entirely possible that the tw*t in the next lane will pull into your lane just in front and then you hit him because you are going slightly faster than him and don't notice until it's too late. If you are tired, your reactions may not be as quick.
Note, not aiming this at anyone in particular. It's possible (especially when tired) that ANYONE could do that.
ian@huth
12-04-2005, 14:25
*sigh* Rough, Mike B and anyone else living in or driving near Swindon should be careful when driving underneath motorway bridges.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1565657,00.htmlThere is an interesting quote in that article.The proportion of cars exceeding the 70mph limit was 57 per cent in 2003, up from 54 per cent in 2002I don't know how they came to that conclusion because every motorway that I have driven on would see 95% of cars passing me if I was doing exactly 70 mph.
If ever you wanted a blatent example of revenue raising then this is it.
Anyway if anyone is caught by the camera you can argue that the motorway did not display any camera warning signs as they are required to do by law. - Even for mobile cameras.
zoombini
12-04-2005, 15:47
My wife got caught by a mobile camera a couple of weeks ago :(
Problem is when she bought her car, the idiots at the salerooms put my name down on the registration document.
So the NIP came to me.
I have just sent it back denying it is anything to do with me & that they should contact my wife.
Prior to that I had sent the reg doc back to DVLA to get it changed.
I'm not having points on my license for her speeding... :D
__________________
Oh BTW, are pics from the front acceptable too?
Oh BTW, are pics from the front acceptable too?
Yes. Pics from the front are quite acceptable ... actually only Gatso cameras take pics of your rear end, Truvelo cameras, and manned mobile cameras, catch you as you drive towards them.
Just wondering if anybody knows how long it normally takes to recieve your warning by post that you had commited a speeding offence?
I only ask because on a recent journey Im 50% sure I was snapped by one and I may have been slightly over at the time, Im normally very careful and I know my speedo is slightly out (i.e. it shows faster than I am actually doing) so I dont think I was caught but Im wondering how long I have until I can be certain that I wasnt caught?
Im rather worried about it actually because isnt it true that I would lose my liscence straight away since im still under the 2 year probationary period? or would I still have another chance after that?
Just wondering if anybody knows how long it normally takes to recieve your warning by post that you had commited a speeding offence?
I only ask because on a recent journey Im 50% sure I was snapped by one and I may have been slightly over at the time, Im normally very careful and I know my speedo is slightly out (i.e. it shows faster than I am actually doing) so I dont think I was caught but Im wondering how long I have until I can be certain that I wasnt caught?
Im rather worried about it actually because isnt it true that I would lose my liscence straight away since im still under the 2 year probationary period? or would I still have another chance after that?
If the vehicle's registered keeper hasn't heard from them within 14 days, you got away with it.
If the vehicle's registered keeper hasn't heard from them within 14 days, you got away with it.
Damn, 4 down 10 to go :(
I didnt think I would have heard from them this quick since it was at the weekend when it happened, though I was hoping it would be quicker than that, oh well fingers crossed :) im pretty sure I was safe anyway but i am slightly paranoid about this sort of thing.
There is an interesting quote in that article.I don't know how they came to that conclusion because every motorway that I have driven on would see 95% of cars passing me if I was doing exactly 70 mph.
Probably because they include the M25 & the M60, the only time you could exceed those speeds on the M60 near here is at midnight.:rolleyes:
So the myth that speed camera's are about safety is finally blown away - this is a money making excercise and nothing more. :mad:
So the myth that speed camera's are about safety is finally blown away - this is a money making excercise and nothing more. :mad:
I don't think anyone with a grain of common sense thought anything different ;)
Just read this article - the words pot, kettle & black kinda spring to mind :D
http://www.pistonheads.com/speed/default.asp?storyId=10382
Scarlett
19-04-2005, 14:15
Im rather worried about it actually because isnt it true that I would lose my liscence straight away since im still under the 2 year probationary period? or would I still have another chance after that?
No you won't lose you license for a first offence, you'll get 3 points on it and a fine If they do you that is...
Just wondering if anybody knows how long it normally takes to recieve your warning by post that you had commited a speeding offence?
I only ask because on a recent journey Im 50% sure I was snapped by one and I may have been slightly over at the time, Im normally very careful and I know my speedo is slightly out (i.e. it shows faster than I am actually doing) so I dont think I was caught but Im wondering how long I have until I can be certain that I wasnt caught?
Im rather worried about it actually because isnt it true that I would lose my liscence straight away since im still under the 2 year probationary period? or would I still have another chance after that?
Whilst you're still a 'probationary driver', you can only accrue 6 points before a ban, as opposed to 12 for someone who has been driving longer than that.
Just read this article - the words pot, kettle & black kinda spring to mind :D
http://www.pistonheads.com/speed/default.asp?storyId=10382
I read elsewhere that it was a 40mph limit? Anyway, what I can't understand is how he got only points. In my youth I was caught speeding and pleaded guilty. Because I exceeded the limit by more than 30mph I got an automatic ban. I was told then, and also recently, that bans are pretty much automatic for speeding ny more than 30mph.
And how/why in Hell's name did he get it reduced from 6 points to 3??!!!
I read elsewhere that it was a 40mph limit? Anyway, what I can't understand is how he got only points. In my youth I was caught speeding and pleaded guilty. Because I exceeded the limit by more than 30mph I got an automatic ban. I was told then, and also recently, that bans are pretty much automatic for speeding ny more than 30mph.
And how/why in Hell's name did he get it reduced from 6 points to 3??!!!
Don't know about an automatic ban. A friend of mine got caught doing 100 in a 60, he already had 8 points on his license. He pleaded to the judge that losing his license would cost him his job. The judge was going to give him 6 points but reduced it to 3 and gave him a big fine.
scrotnig
19-04-2005, 14:49
Don't know about an automatic ban. A friend of mine got caught doing 100 in a 60, he already had 8 points on his license. He pleaded to the judge that losing his license would cost him his job. The judge was going to give him 6 points but reduced it to 3 and gave him a big fine.
You can plead 'exceptional hardship'.
Thing is, I find the whole concept of begging a magistrate to be allowed to continue doing nothing more sinister than earning a living is repulsive when we couldn't care less about burgalrs running riot and terrorising people in their oiwn homes.
It's all about money. We only enforce laws when it's profitable to do so. Burglars aren't profitable, motorists are.
Whilst you're still a 'probationary driver', you can only accrue 6 points before a ban, as opposed to 12 for someone who has been driving longer than that.
Thats a relief, I thought it was just 3 points during the probationary period. Anyway I just have to get by until this saturday and then the 14 days will be up so I think im safe :) .
Thanks to Both Nugget and Scarlett for that.
Thats a relief, I thought it was just 3 points during the probationary period. Anyway I just have to get by until this saturday and then the 14 days will be up so I think im safe :) .
Thanks to Both Nugget and Scarlett for that.
urm... what 14 days??
I lost my license for 6 points in my probabtionary period- two bloody tickets within 4 days of each other... was not a happy bunny!!
urm... what 14 days??The 14 day period in which they must send the NIP to the cars registered keeper.
The 14 day period in which they must send the NIP to the cars registered keeper.
I thought it was 28 days, i am pretty sure it was when i got mine...
I thought it was 28 days, i am pretty sure it was when i got mine...
It is definitely 14 days. And if you do not respond, they have to instigate proceedings within 6 months of the alleged offence.
scrotnig
20-04-2005, 08:54
It is definitely 14 days. And if you do not respond, they have to instigate proceedings within 6 months of the alleged offence.Not quite. They have to instigate proceedings within six months regardless of whether you respond or not.
And they also have to do it expediently. If they simply wait five and a half months before bothering, it could be argued that this is an 'abuse of process'. I have seen several thrown out of court like that.
Not quite. They have to instigate proceedings within six months regardless of whether you respond or not.
And they also have to do it expediently. If they simply wait five and a half months before bothering, it could be argued that this is an 'abuse of process'. I have seen several thrown out of court like that.
If you don't reply, they are more likely to prosecute for "Failure to provide evidence" which carries much the same penalty; they consider proceedings instigated when they send the letter which states "no satisfactory response has been received".
ScaredWebWarrior
20-04-2005, 15:55
It's all about money. We only enforce laws when it's profitable to do so. Burglars aren't profitable, motorists are.
Quite!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/southern_counties/4463961.stm
A temporary speed trap at roadworks has led to motorists being fined £750,00 0 in two months.
Hi...On a slightly different note...but not hijacking this thread...move if you wish...
On ONE site...dual carraigeway with roadworks...A27,East Sussex...
£750,00 0 has been netted in.....2MONTHS.....from speeding motorists caught by a mob camera.....
Could be why some are not being banned...Gives us a chance to be caught again!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry...beaten to it...not fast enough..... :dunce:
Hi...On a slightly different note...but not hijacking this thread...move if you wish...
On ONE site...dual carraigeway with roadworks...A27,East Sussex...
£750,00 0 has been netted in.....2MONTHS.....from speeding motorists caught by a mob camera.....
Could be why some are not being banned...Gives us a chance to be caught again!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry...beaten to it...not fast enough..... :dunce:
Bit of a loophole in the law...
If a temporary speed limit is in place, then exceeding that limit but not the original limit will get you a fine, but no points. However this only applies to non-motorway roads.
scrotnig
20-04-2005, 17:11
If you don't reply, they are more likely to prosecute for "Failure to provide evidence" which carries much the same penalty; they consider proceedings instigated when they send the letter which states "no satisfactory response has been received".
Not wuite, they still have to send an actual summons to instigate proceedings.
The offence is 'failing to supply information'.
A leading magistrate once referred to it thus:
"You must confess to this offence. If you do not do so, we will prosecute you for failing to confess".
Not wuite, they still have to send an actual summons to instigate proceedings.
The offence is 'failing to supply information'.
A leading magistrate once referred to it thus:
"You must confess to this offence. If you do not do so, we will prosecute you for failing to confess".
It's a bit fuzzy... the courts told me last month that the intention to prosecute has to be within 6 months?
scrotnig
20-04-2005, 22:47
It's a bit fuzzy... the courts told me last month that the intention to prosecute has to be within 6 months?
Nope, and that's a good example of courts speaking crap to protect their own vested interests.
14 days for the notice of intended prosecution, six months to actually 'instigate proceedings'. This doesn't necessarily mean the actual issue of the summons though. It's all a bit grey. But basically if they sit on their backsides for 5 months then try and issue a summons, it's potentially an abuse of process. If it's a complex case that takes five months to prepare, then it isn't.
know and web site i can check my car reg for being caught speeding??
Raistlin
04-07-2005, 14:06
know and web site i can check my car reg for being caught speeding??
There isn't one.....they wouldn't be able to post that on the internet without falling fowl of the DPA.
:welcome: to CF by the way :)
know and web site i can check my car reg for being caught speeding??
You should get a piece through the post called a NIP - Notice of Intended Prosecution, with 14 days. If it doesn't arrive in 14 days, then you should be in the clear. AFAIK there's no other way of checking quicker.
You should get a piece through the post called a NIP - Notice of Intended Prosecution, with 14 days. If it doesn't arrive in 14 days, then you should be in the clear. AFAIK there's no other way of checking quicker.
Having said that though - I have heard of some people not getting a NIP until three months after a speeding offense.
Having said that though - I have heard of some people not getting a NIP until three months after a speeding offense.
They should have got off that charge then. Do you know if they did mate? Or did they still get done for it?
Having said that though - I have heard of some people not getting a NIP until three months after a speeding offense.
I believe that the limit is 14 days, with a small amount of leeway for the post, however if you drive a company car, or they have difficulty tracking you down (recently purchased car with the new owner not yet confirmed with the dvla, etc) then they can have longer.
#
Q : I have recently been flashed by a Gatso camera, what happens next?
A: The Police have 14 days to send you a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP). They also get an allowance of a couple of days for the post to deliver it. So if its more than 17days since you were flashed they are too late to prosecute you, unless you were driving a company car, hire car or someone elses car. In these circumstances they are allowed more time to track you down. See below for further details.
Q: I have received a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) through the post and I want to know what to do?
#
A:
# If you know that you broke the speed limit and its inside the "14" day rule, then its easier to accept the offer of a £60 fine and 3 points. If you feel strongly enough about the abuse of Gatso's as revenue generating tools - rather than safety tools - then you could go to court. If enough people did this then it would totally clog up the system and it would fall over - however being British and too reserved - this is unlikely to happen. If you already have points on your licence and the points from this will take you to 12 points or more, then you could get banned and we would suggest that you take legal advice to prevent/mitigate this.
# The Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) arrived outside of the "14" day period. You should be able to get the prosecution dropped - get our lawyers to write you a legal letter and it should go away. This is assuming that you are the registered owner of the vehicle.
# The NIP arrived outside of the"14" day period, as they had my address/details incorrectly recorded or not upto date.
Section 1(1) Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 requires that Notices of Intended Prosecution must be served within 14 days if a prosecution is to be successful.
However, s2(3) of that Act provides an escape clause for the police. It says:
"failure to comply with the requirement of s1(1) of this act is not a bar to the conviction of the accused in case where the court is satisfied:-
(a) that neither the name and address of the accused nor the name and address of the registered keeper could with reasonable diligence have been ascertained in time for the notice to be served in compliance with s1(1)"
In the case of Clarke -v- Mould (1945)the police approached what was then the Motor Licences Department (now DVLA) in good time but were given wrong information from the Department which resulted in failure to serve the NiP in time. The defendant argued that because the Department had given out wrong details and the Department were, like the police, a government department, surely he should not be blamed for the police failure to serve. The Court disagreed. The Court said that the police only had to make reasonable and diligent enquiry as to the registered keeper. They did this, therefore they had complied with the rules of the relevant Act at that time. The above has not been challenged and we feel that in the current climate there is no merit in clients pursuing a defence on this basis.
They should have got off that charge then. Do you know if they did mate? Or did they still get done for it?
Still got done for it IIRC.
Still got done for it IIRC.
see the cop out clause in my previous post...
As long as they have made an effort to find the owner within the 14 days, they can prosecute...
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.