Speed Cameras

[Steff1965]

I received a letter today of intended prosecution for speeding in my work motor in a place down near the bottom of England I've never heard of never mind been to.

When I phoned they checked the photo and the registration and then said they got it wrong and one letter is a G and not a C as first thought.

It made me wonder how many people have paid fines and have points and it may have been a mistake like mine.

[rewc]

Steff1965 said:

I received a letter today of intended prosecution for speeding in my work motor in a place down near the bottom of England I've never heard of never mind been to.

When I phoned they checked the photo and the registration and then said they got it wrong and one letter is a G and not a C as first thought.

It made me wonder how many people have paid fines and have points and it may have been a mistake like mine.

I doubt very many where the location is nowhere near where they have been to.
The Ticket Office processes must be pretty lax though if they do not check the actual photo against the VRN, car make and model on the info received from DVLA.

[Steff1965]

What about places you do go?

If that had come in saying glasgow i would have just accepted it thinking I must have missed a sign or something, but it wasn't even my car as they had made a mistake.

[Fireblade69]

Come on, safety cameras not speed cameras

[pitmansboots]

Steff1965 said:

What about places you do go?

If that had come in saying glasgow i would have just accepted it thinking I must have missed a sign or something, but it wasn't even my car as they had made a mistake.

That would have bee OK then. What's your point?

[Who me ?]

I think the point ( that you so conveniantly miss ,as you do others ) is that ( and if you read Steff's profile,) you MAY note he says he lives in Scotland, so I'd presume he's regularly in Glasgow. The point the OP is making is that this shows up the failings/ommissions etc of that "infallible " body known as the Scam Punish Coalition, (known as SCP for short, but for far too long), of which PMB ( as usual ommits to tell us he's part & parcel of ).

[Rovinghawk]

pitmansboots said:

What's your point?

The point is that they make mistakes, even though they claim otherwise.

[Pablo68]

pitmansboots said:

Steff1965 said:

What about places you do go?

If that had come in saying glasgow i would have just accepted it thinking I must have missed a sign or something, but it wasn't even my car as they had made a mistake.

That would have bee OK then. What's your point?

I think the point is that official bodies who have the ability to significantly affect someones future should be watertight with regards to making sure the evidence is in fact correct rather than just "ah well we make mistakes"?

It is - IMHO - better that some guilty people get away with it rather than one innocent person is unjustly punished. And not just for "trivial" offences such as speeding.

[pitmansboots]

Pablo68 said:

pitmansboots said:

Steff1965 said:

What about places you do go?

If that had come in saying glasgow i would have just accepted it thinking I must have missed a sign or something, but it wasn't even my car as they had made a mistake.

That would have bee OK then. What's your point?

I think the point is that official bodies who have the ability to significantly affect someones future should be watertight with regards to making sure the evidence is in fact correct rather than just "ah well we make mistakes"?

It is - IMHO - better that some guilty people get away with it rather than one innocent person is unjustly punished. And not just for "trivial" offences such as speeding.

But steff1965 has clearly exampled a case where he would have admitted the case because he thought it was him. If he thought he didn't do what was alleged he could have done the same as he did when he thought it wasn't him.

Nobody is compelled to admit an offence they think they did not commit.

It is clear that steff1965 thinks it likely the speeding would have occurred if it was in a location he was at in the notice; it is also clear that steff1965 would challenge the notice if he thought it wrong.

So what was the point? Simply to illustrate the police are not infallible! If you didn't already know that then you are a ... Make your own mind up on that one.

[XDA]

pitmansboots said:

Pablo68 said:

pitmansboots said:

Steff1965 said:

What about places you do go?

If that had come in saying glasgow i would have just accepted it thinking I must have missed a sign or something, but it wasn't even my car as they had made a mistake.

That would have bee OK then. What's your point?

I think the point is that official bodies who have the ability to significantly affect someones future should be watertight with regards to making sure the evidence is in fact correct rather than just "ah well we make mistakes"?

It is - IMHO - better that some guilty people get away with it rather than one innocent person is unjustly punished. And not just for "trivial" offences such as speeding.

But steff1965 has clearly exampled a case where he would have admitted the case because he thought it was him. If he thought he didn't do what was alleged he could have done the same as he did when he thought it wasn't him.

Nobody is compelled to admit an offence they think they did not commit.

It is clear that steff1965 thinks it likely the speeding would have occurred if it was in a location he was at in the notice; it is also clear that steff1965 would challenge the notice if he thought it wrong.

So what was the point? Simply to illustrate the police are not infallible! If you didn't already know that then you are a ... Make your own mind up on that one.

No, the OP thought that the lowlife scum in the SCP office would be capable (at the very least) of differentiating between a G and a C?

Don't you like to claim SCP's and their process are watertight? If they can't tell the difference between a G and a C, what other mistakes do they make? We all know the answer to that...

[rewc]

XDA said:

pitmansboots said:

Pablo68 said:

pitmansboots said:

Steff1965 said:

What about places you do go?

If that had come in saying glasgow i would have just accepted it thinking I must have missed a sign or something, but it wasn't even my car as they had made a mistake.

That would have bee OK then. What's your point?

I think the point is that official bodies who have the ability to significantly affect someones future should be watertight with regards to making sure the evidence is in fact correct rather than just "ah well we make mistakes"?

It is - IMHO - better that some guilty people get away with it rather than one innocent person is unjustly punished. And not just for "trivial" offences such as speeding.

But steff1965 has clearly exampled a case where he would have admitted the case because he thought it was him. If he thought he didn't do what was alleged he could have done the same as he did when he thought it wasn't him.

Nobody is compelled to admit an offence they think they did not commit.

It is clear that steff1965 thinks it likely the speeding would have occurred if it was in a location he was at in the notice; it is also clear that steff1965 would challenge the notice if he thought it wrong.

So what was the point? Simply to illustrate the police are not infallible! If you didn't already know that then you are a ... Make your own mind up on that one.

No, the OP thought that the lowlife scum in the SCP office would be capable (at the very least) of differentiating between a G and a C?

Don't you like to claim SCP's and their process are watertight? If they can't tell the difference between a G and a C, what other mistakes do they make? We all know the answer to that...

All they have to do is cross check the colour, make and model of the car in the photo against that received from DVLA. They don't because they are arrogant and the signing off of FPN on behalf of the Chief Constable is carried out without due diligence.

[singlecoil]

XDA said:

No, the OP thought that the lowlife scum in the SCP office would be capable (at the very least) of differentiating between a G and a C?

Don't you like to claim SCP's and their process are watertight? If they can't tell the difference between a G and a C, what other mistakes do they make? We all know the answer to that...

You sound as if you've been caught a couple of times.

What sort of mistakes do you think they make, failing to let you off?

[XDA]

singlecoil said:

XDA said:

No, the OP thought that the lowlife scum in the SCP office would be capable (at the very least) of differentiating between a G and a C?

Don't you like to claim SCP's and their process are watertight? If they can't tell the difference between a G and a C, what other mistakes do they make? We all know the answer to that...

You sound as if you've been caught a couple of times.

What sort of mistakes do you think they make, failing to let you off?

You're wrong, very wrong. Never had a single point on my licence. Yet.

[pitmansboots]

XDA said:

pitmansboots said:

Pablo68 said:

pitmansboots said:

Steff1965 said:

What about places you do go?

If that had come in saying glasgow i would have just accepted it thinking I must have missed a sign or something, but it wasn't even my car as they had made a mistake.

That would have bee OK then. What's your point?

I think the point is that official bodies who have the ability to significantly affect someones future should be watertight with regards to making sure the evidence is in fact correct rather than just "ah well we make mistakes"?

It is - IMHO - better that some guilty people get away with it rather than one innocent person is unjustly punished. And not just for "trivial" offences such as speeding.

But steff1965 has clearly exampled a case where he would have admitted the case because he thought it was him. If he thought he didn't do what was alleged he could have done the same as he did when he thought it wasn't him.

Nobody is compelled to admit an offence they think they did not commit.

It is clear that steff1965 thinks it likely the speeding would have occurred if it was in a location he was at in the notice; it is also clear that steff1965 would challenge the notice if he thought it wrong.

So what was the point? Simply to illustrate the police are not infallible! If you didn't already know that then you are a ... Make your own mind up on that one.

No, the OP thought that the lowlife scum in the SCP office would be capable (at the very least) of differentiating between a G and a C?

Don't you like to claim SCP's and their process are watertight? If they can't tell the difference between a G and a C, what other mistakes do they make? We all know the answer to that...

That would be very stupid and when you read the post you quoted you can see I did nothing of the sort. Perhaps you could learn to read and comprehend like you should have done when you were a teenager.

[fangio]

Where's my MTB.......?

[singlecoil]

Motor torpedo boat?

[Rovinghawk]

pitmansboots said:

Nobody is compelled to admit an offence they think they did not commit.

Bullst.

They are all threatened that if they don't just accept the FPN (without the ability to see the evidence before making this decision)they will be taken to court by a large, expensive legal team & will lose, incurring a large penalty than if they just roll over & take it.

For many people this is tantamount to compulsion.

You're a proven liar & this follows a very similar vein.

[Jasandjules]

XDA said:

Don't you like to claim SCP's and their process are watertight? If they can't tell the difference between a G and a C, what other mistakes do they make? We all know the answer to that...

Well, for starters they claim that rigid adherence to an arbitrary number is safe driving......

[singlecoil]

Jasandjules said:

XDA said:

Don't you like to claim SCP's and their process are watertight? If they can't tell the difference between a G and a C, what other mistakes do they make? We all know the answer to that...

Well, for starters they claim that rigid adherence to an arbitrary number is safe driving......

Do they? Anything written to back that up? I'd be very surprised if there was. Not suggesting you are misrepresenting their case, as I'm sure you will produce something.......

[Steff1965]

pitmansboots said:

Steff1965 said:

What about places you do go?

If that had come in saying glasgow i would have just accepted it thinking I must have missed a sign or something, but it wasn't even my car as they had made a mistake.

That would have bee OK then. What's your point?

My point is, I. Nearly got a fine and points and it wasn't even the car I drive as they had made a mistake..

If the letter said it was a street in glasgow I would have assumed I must have missed a speed limit sign and had been speeding and paid up but it wasn't even my motor. It was only because I had never heard of the place and when googled I knew because of where it was it wasn't my work car.

I was also surprised when I phoned them and the woman looked at the picture and admitted it was a G and not a C.

I would also just like to add, my licence is clean and I've never had points on it since my test many moons ago so getting letters for speeding is new to me.

Edited by Steff1965 on Sunday 2nd June 22:25