NIP received - advice needed
Discussion
I have received a NIP from a mobile speed camera, 40 in a 30. There a number of things that bug me about it:
1.The camera was hidden so that it could not be seen until after you had passed it.
2.The van was parked on a different road, again out of site, due to the fact, that it was set up at the exit of a tunnel. I have read that the operator has to have reasonable suspicion that someone is speeding in order for the camera evidence to be backed up in court.
3.By my calculation in the 1/2 second between the readings I would have had to of travelled 8.94 meters to have been travelling at 40mph, as there were no road markings only white lines this is hard to judge but appears to have been less than this.
4.And why does the speed reading just so happen to be exactly 40mph, is this because they round to whole figures?
This just smacks of scamming and nothing to do with road safety on a piece of road that does not allow pedestrian access nor cycles!
Any constructive comments greatly appreciated.
Paul
1.The camera was hidden so that it could not be seen until after you had passed it.
2.The van was parked on a different road, again out of site, due to the fact, that it was set up at the exit of a tunnel. I have read that the operator has to have reasonable suspicion that someone is speeding in order for the camera evidence to be backed up in court.
3.By my calculation in the 1/2 second between the readings I would have had to of travelled 8.94 meters to have been travelling at 40mph, as there were no road markings only white lines this is hard to judge but appears to have been less than this.
4.And why does the speed reading just so happen to be exactly 40mph, is this because they round to whole figures?
This just smacks of scamming and nothing to do with road safety on a piece of road that does not allow pedestrian access nor cycles!
Any constructive comments greatly appreciated.
Paul
zzr said:They have breached guidelines, but that’s all they are – guidelines; these are not rules of law.
I have received a NIP from a mobile speed camera, 40 in a 30. There a number of things that bug me about it:
1.The camera was hidden so that it could not be seen until after you had passed it.
zzr said:Again is only a guideline
2.The van was parked on a different road, again out of site, due to the fact, that it was set up at the exit of a tunnel. I have read that the operator has to have reasonable suspicion that someone is speeding in order for the camera evidence to be backed up in court.
zzr said:Lidar (the favoured method for mobile speed enforcement) do not use lines on the road. The gun takes a series of readings over 0.3 seconds – and that’s it. No other corroborating evidence is required (apart from that of point 1, which is ignored).
3.By my calculation in the 1/2 second between the readings I would have had to of travelled 8.94 meters to have been travelling at 40mph, as there were no road markings only white lines this is hard to judge but appears to have been less than this.
zzr said:If you meant 40.000mph:LTI Lidar guns are claimed to be accurate to plus/- 1mph, hence it’s meaningless to note down decimal figures.
4.And why does the speed reading just so happen to be exactly 40mph, is this because they round to whole figures?
If you meant 30/40/50.....mph: no, PHers have been done at a variety of (unfair) speeds (76 on a motorway
)) All you can do is request a full copy of the video to confirm your measured speed and that they carried out the calibration procedure at the beginning and/or end of the video. Good luck!
The only chance you have of getting a copy of the full session video is to ignore any Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty (and reminders) they send you, wait for a summons and then plead not guilty. Then you request disclosure of the video 'document'.
If you are going to fight it to that extent, then you might want to consider responding to the NIP with a PACE witness statement - see pepipoo. This satisfies the S172 request for information and can have the added bonus of taking the scammer's eye off the ball such that they cock up the paperwork needed for a successful prosecution. And that's assuming they ever release a copy of the full session video....which is unlikely....
If you are going to fight it to that extent, then you might want to consider responding to the NIP with a PACE witness statement - see pepipoo. This satisfies the S172 request for information and can have the added bonus of taking the scammer's eye off the ball such that they cock up the paperwork needed for a successful prosecution. And that's assuming they ever release a copy of the full session video....which is unlikely....
smeggy said:
I have received a NIP from a mobile speed camera, 40 in a 30. There a number of things that bug me about it:
1.The camera was hidden so that it could not be seen until after you had passed it.
They have breached guidelines, but that’s all they are – guidelines; these are not rules of law.zzr said:
2.The van was parked on a different road, again out of site, due to the fact, that it was set up at the exit of a tunnel. I have read that the operator has to have reasonable suspicion that someone is speeding in order for the camera evidence to be backed up in court.
Again is only a guidelinezzr said:
3.By my calculation in the 1/2 second between the readings I would have had to of travelled 8.94 meters to have been travelling at 40mph, as there were no road markings only white lines this is hard to judge but appears to have been less than this.
Lidar (the favoured method for mobile speed enforcement) do not use lines on the road. The gun takes a series of readings over 0.3 seconds – and that’s it. No other corroborating evidence is required (apart from that of point 1, which is ignored).
This wasn't a radar gun it was a portable gatsometer, it flashed twice like a normal fixed gatso, it was painted black and was on a tripod out of site until it had been passed. The pictures and paper work talk of a half second reading.
smeggy said:
4.And why does the speed reading just so happen to be exactly 40mph, is this because they round to whole figures?
If you meant 40.000mph:LTI Lidar guns are claimed to be accurate to plus/- 1mph, hence it’s meaningless to note down decimal figures.
The reading was exactly 40!! Very odd as I was de-accelerating as I passed through it.
smeggy said:
If you meant 30/40/50.....mph: no, PHers have been done at a variety of (unfair) speeds (76 on a motorway
All you can do is request a full copy of the video to confirm your measured speed and that they carried out the calibration procedure at the beginning and/or end of the video. Good luck!
Will there be a video when using a gatso?
Paul
>> Edited by zzr on Tuesday 13th September 11:43
BliarOut said:
Paul, I think Cooperman told you all you need to know 
Cooperman said:
Go to Pepipoo, go straight to Pepipoo, do not pass any more speed cameras and be prepared to fight them all the way!
I agree. From experience Peripoo offer excellent advice. What you should consider though that even though they have not followed guidelines they dont have to. With regard to calibration all that has to happen is a PC to say 'yeah i did it' and write a statement.
There *is* a chance that somewhere on the video there will be evidence that the camera was producing obviously wrong results. You are entitled to see the *whole* video of the recording session. However the CPS are notoriously unreliable in doing this by throwing up smokescreens. You dont have to go to court until you get it though, but be prepared for a long and protracted fight to get it though, and probably the assistance of a specialist solicitor, as well as a lot of time following it up.
The good thing is that a number of these cases have been dropped after people have stood their ground and repaeated that they want to see the whole video. Also a number of people have had their solicitor watch the video and show how the camera was set up wrongly.
Another point to consider that if you *were* doing 40, a cheaper and easier way out would be to accept the points and fine. It depends on the depth of your pockets and the amount of time you ahve to spend on the case!
While the PePiPoo site is good, I don't think it is going to help me this time, as you've said the guidelines allow such flexibility that we really don't stand a chance. So much for promoting road safety!!
Oh well!! hopefully I'll get no more than 3 points and a £60 fine.
Thanks for your input.
Paul
Oh well!! hopefully I'll get no more than 3 points and a £60 fine.
Thanks for your input.
Paul
zzr said:My bad. I assumed it was a Lidar (laser) trap.
This wasn't a radar gun it was a portable gatsometer, it flashed twice like a normal fixed gatso, it was painted black and was on a tripod out of site until it had been passed. The pictures and paper work talk of a half second reading.
zzr said:I would think that’s just coincidence. They shouldn’t round up/down because the severity of the penalty depends upon the extent of your excess speed.
The reading was exactly 40!! Very odd as I was de-accelerating as I passed through it.
zzr said:I don’t know much about porta-gatsos, but I would not have thought a video is required - just like a normal fixed gatso. Perhaps they do just for driver identification purposes?
Will there be a video when using a gatso?
Re-reading your initial post:
zzr said:Breach of guidelines, they don’t care.
1.The camera was hidden so that it could not be seen until after you had passed it.
zzr said:Operator not required. The camera acts like a normal fixed gatso; the two photos corroborate the opinion formed by the radar sensor.
2.The van was parked on a different road, again out of site, due to the fact, that it was set up at the exit of a tunnel. I have read that the operator has to have reasonable suspicion that someone is speeding in order for the camera evidence to be backed up in court.
zzr said:You’ll have to go back and measure them properly, assuming they are still there.
3.By my calculation in the 1/2 second between the readings I would have had to of travelled 8.94 meters to have been travelling at 40mph, as there were no road markings only white lines this is hard to judge but appears to have been less than this.
If you were decelerating a lot, the speed you enterred radar detection was 40, the speed at the first picture was 40 or maybe less and the speed at the 2nd picture less than 40. You'd have to be hanging on the brakes, but if that 2nd speed was 20 and you decelerated at a constant rate, your average speed as derived from the photos is 30 - bingo no show. But I doubt you were doing that kind of hammer stop by the sound of it. Funny enough, this is another dangerous way though to avoid a ticket when you see a camera at the last minute whereas the safe response is not to brake. Ho Hum.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff