Speeding Ticket
Discussion
Hey guys, recently got busted by a camera van between Perth and Glasgow. It's a 70 limit dual carraigeway, just before stirling. I was supposedly doing 81mph. Bit gutting since I was driving my Fiancees Fiat 500 and it's my first speeding fine.
Anyway, got the 172 request through and a couple of thing's struck me.
First off it's giving the location as the A9 Edinburgh/Perth, Dunblane, District of Stirling at a part near to Allan Water. I was going to Glasgow, not Edinburgh so unless the road names are old, is this not a wrong location.
Secondly 81 mph is just over the cut off and I know for a fact in my area (Tayside) Fiscals have told the Police not to bother submitting speeding offences for 70mph limits under 85mph.
Should I just suck it up and pay the fine/take the points or should I ask for a court appearance and see what happens??
Anyway, got the 172 request through and a couple of thing's struck me.
First off it's giving the location as the A9 Edinburgh/Perth, Dunblane, District of Stirling at a part near to Allan Water. I was going to Glasgow, not Edinburgh so unless the road names are old, is this not a wrong location.
Secondly 81 mph is just over the cut off and I know for a fact in my area (Tayside) Fiscals have told the Police not to bother submitting speeding offences for 70mph limits under 85mph.
Should I just suck it up and pay the fine/take the points or should I ask for a court appearance and see what happens??
Firstly make sure you were served the nip within 14 days of the incident, if not your alright, one of the few ways you'll get out of this.
Contesting these things can cost a fair bit and waste a lot of your time, reply asking for proof of photograph and calibration of the gun as I think it should be checked daily, other than that there's not much else worth doing, if they have a picture of you and the car (assuming your insured for it) then they won't see the incorrect road name on the paperwork as significant anyway.
Best of luck.
Contesting these things can cost a fair bit and waste a lot of your time, reply asking for proof of photograph and calibration of the gun as I think it should be checked daily, other than that there's not much else worth doing, if they have a picture of you and the car (assuming your insured for it) then they won't see the incorrect road name on the paperwork as significant anyway.
Best of luck.
The location description is pretty much meaningless as the powers-that-be have a get-out-of-jail card for any errors of this type that they might make, and the location you have provided matches the one they use on their website so I'd forget any argument on that basis.
http://www.centralsafetycameras.co.uk/index.php/sa...
If it is your fiancee's car, I'd suggest you haven't received any notification yet. She has 28 days to respond naming you and she should use as much of that time as possible before responding. Then, when you receive your notice in the post, you should also take the maximum time to improve any slim chance of the offence timing out.
The 10%+2 or any other guideline has no legal standing and we all know the government need to raise money somehow. Central Police scamera partnership did me at 80mph - speeding is an absolute offence so they could prosecute at 71mph if they felt like it.
They have their calibration certificates on their website:
http://www.centralsafetycameras.co.uk/index.php/sa...
I was supplied with two photos - the first with the speed shows a car but the plate is illegible. The second pic has no speed but the plate can be read. In both, the driver could be ANYONE in a white shirt - them shooting from a flyover and me with my sunvisor down would make it impossible to identify who had been driving it if had been a pool car, for instance. I dragged mine out for a couple of months but eventually decided the stress wasn't worth it for £60.
http://www.centralsafetycameras.co.uk/
http://www.centralsafetycameras.co.uk/index.php/sa...
If it is your fiancee's car, I'd suggest you haven't received any notification yet. She has 28 days to respond naming you and she should use as much of that time as possible before responding. Then, when you receive your notice in the post, you should also take the maximum time to improve any slim chance of the offence timing out.
The 10%+2 or any other guideline has no legal standing and we all know the government need to raise money somehow. Central Police scamera partnership did me at 80mph - speeding is an absolute offence so they could prosecute at 71mph if they felt like it.
They have their calibration certificates on their website:
http://www.centralsafetycameras.co.uk/index.php/sa...
I was supplied with two photos - the first with the speed shows a car but the plate is illegible. The second pic has no speed but the plate can be read. In both, the driver could be ANYONE in a white shirt - them shooting from a flyover and me with my sunvisor down would make it impossible to identify who had been driving it if had been a pool car, for instance. I dragged mine out for a couple of months but eventually decided the stress wasn't worth it for £60.
http://www.centralsafetycameras.co.uk/
Im sure as soon as you get the actual bumf through once youve admitted you were driving sentral inculde the time/date and location of the calibration along with a description of the area negating any obstacles which may help offer a false reading.
That being saidits always worth asking for proof just in case.
WRT the road name, technicaly you were on the a/m9 and not the 80 so it is really the edinburgh road although now you cross hatches at Bannockburn and leave one motorway to join another to go to edinburgh rather than carry on the motorway which morphs magically into the M80.
The above being said, man up, send it back in your gf's name and fill the returned form in when she's not there and let her take the points, its your man duty!
That being saidits always worth asking for proof just in case.
WRT the road name, technicaly you were on the a/m9 and not the 80 so it is really the edinburgh road although now you cross hatches at Bannockburn and leave one motorway to join another to go to edinburgh rather than carry on the motorway which morphs magically into the M80.
The above being said, man up, send it back in your gf's name and fill the returned form in when she's not there and let her take the points, its your man duty!
The 'Safety' van is often at that layby, even when the roads were an ice rink and a better contribution to safety would have been the operators gettting off their fat arses and gritting the road.
I always find if they are there when I'm heading North, I seem to suddenly see lots of friends I like to flash in greetings......
I always find if they are there when I'm heading North, I seem to suddenly see lots of friends I like to flash in greetings......
munroman said:
The 'Safety' van is often at that layby, even when the roads were an ice rink and a better contribution to safety would have been the operators gettting off their fat arses and gritting the road.
I always find if they are there when I'm heading North, I seem to suddenly see lots of friends I like to flash in greetings......
None of mates were out or if they were, they weren't saying 'hi'!I always find if they are there when I'm heading North, I seem to suddenly see lots of friends I like to flash in greetings......
As such they are all off my Christmas card list!
paulqv said:
yes must be 1st class or recorded or registered. If sent by recorded or registered then irrespective of it arriving it is deemed to have arrived! If 1st then can disprove that it came. Have a case going to the High Court on that point just now!
x
Must keep up to date as that never used to be the case, always had to be recorded or registered, no doubt due to the very reason I'm sure you'll win the high court appeal x
Merry Christmas Paul
johnycarrera said:
paulqv said:
yes must be 1st class or recorded or registered. If sent by recorded or registered then irrespective of it arriving it is deemed to have arrived! If 1st then can disprove that it came. Have a case going to the High Court on that point just now!
x
Must keep up to date as that never used to be the case, always had to be recorded or registered, no doubt due to the very reason I'm sure you'll win the high court appeal x
Merry Christmas Paul
Are you absolutely sure about this Paul? I have been involved as a technical witness in quite a few of these cases in Scotland and unlike England, proof of DELIVERY rather than posting has always been the case. Hence the need for Registered or Recorded. In other words a signature from the recipient proves service. If no signature then it clearly was not served.
The English system is nothing short of bloody disgraceful, as it assumes service on a note from the clerk that they posted the citation. Utterly, utterly ridiculous!
Unfortunately, as the OP has responded in this case then he has entered process and therefore accepted service was diligent.
However, to the OP. In my experience these camera vans are nothing less than a disgrace. The reference to calibration by another poster is something that has to be stopped. These certificates are not issued by the so called Camera Partnerships or even the police, they are issued by the manufacturers of the equipment. The equipment is supposed to be calibrated at the beginning and end of each shift, but seldom is in reality.
Sadly, the use of civilian operators and not trained police officers has now been extended to Scotland, simply because it is more profitable and relieves the police to get on with proper police work instead of alternative taxation.
There is absolutely no independent checking or calibration of this equipment, none whatever.
The company mentioned in the so called calibration certificates was founded by, and is run by an ex traffic cop and it has made him a millionaire; at your expense of course. The worst aspect of all is that it has made not one jot of difference to road safety.
Driving standards continue to decline at an almost exponential rate and the authorities and the police do nothing to improve it. It makes me sick to my stomach.
Incidentally, if any solicitors on here want any technical help with these sort of cases I am only too happy to give it. Only in Scottish courts however. My last experience in an English court was most definitely my last!!
As this is Scotland, the s172 request (when in the right name), can be returned unsigned.
Then simply avoid the police calling round for the next few months (as they can make a verbal request).
Get to six months and all is OK.
As yet no one has been prosecuted in Scotland for failing to sign.
Then simply avoid the police calling round for the next few months (as they can make a verbal request).
Get to six months and all is OK.
As yet no one has been prosecuted in Scotland for failing to sign.
caziques said:
As this is Scotland, the s172 request (when in the right name), can be returned unsigned.
Then simply avoid the police calling round for the next few months (as they can make a verbal request).
Get to six months and all is OK.
As yet no one has been prosecuted in Scotland for failing to sign.
My advice would be to go unsigned as per the previous poster but be aware there's a very good chance the Police may visit you on more than one occassion in attempt to get you to sign the S172 request or there make a verbal S172 request on you, in which case I believe(d) you are stuffed. However, I have read a recent thread on pepipoo where someone going through this process was visited by the local bib and refused to sign the paperwork. He was charged with failing to provide but then received a summons only for the original speeding offence for which there will be no admissable evidence.Then simply avoid the police calling round for the next few months (as they can make a verbal request).
Get to six months and all is OK.
As yet no one has been prosecuted in Scotland for failing to sign.
The PF are obviously very nervy about taking this to court in Scotland but it will happen one day I'm sure, just be aware you may be the test case. In England case law exists and you would receive 6 points for failing to furnish driver details under section 172 of the Road Traffic Act.
I'm no lawyer but I do speak from experience with regards to using the unsigned route in Scotland (if that counts for anything). In short: replied unsigned, further requests via post to sign paper work - returned unsigned again, no known visits from bib, they cheekily sent a COFP which was ignored, summons to court, pleaded not guilty via letter, case dropped from PF 1 day before court date (due to no evidence as s172 unsigned). Always reply as late as possible within the 28 day time frame to tick away as much time as you can.
With regards to the goal of achieving a 6 month time out, I believe failing to furnish under s172 the clock starts ticking 28 days after delivery of the s172 request and not from the date of the alleged offence.
It may not be worth the hassle or stress to most folk but if you're already on 6 or 9 points then I'd give it serious thought. It will take some nerve and the confidence to bin some possibly threatening legal threats from the PF.
The bib are not obliged to offer you any pictures at this stage to "prove" who was driving or calibration certificates. If you do wish to go down this route then word it in a way that you would like a picture to help you identify the driver as you are unsure who was driving the vehicle that day.
Plenty of more information/experiences can be found on pepipoo forums on unsigned in Scotland.
Do not name the wife.
Do not ignore the s172.
Good luck.
jith said:
Johny, I would have to agree with you here.
Are you absolutely sure about this Paul? I have been involved as a technical witness in quite a few of these cases in Scotland and unlike England, proof of DELIVERY rather than posting has always been the case. Hence the need for Registered or Recorded. In other words a signature from the recipient proves service. If no signature then it clearly was not served.
The English system is nothing short of bloody disgraceful, as it assumes service on a note from the clerk that they posted the citation. Utterly, utterly ridiculous!
Unfortunately, as the OP has responded in this case then he has entered process and therefore accepted service was diligent.
However, to the OP. In my experience these camera vans are nothing less than a disgrace. The reference to calibration by another poster is something that has to be stopped. These certificates are not issued by the so called Camera Partnerships or even the police, they are issued by the manufacturers of the equipment. The equipment is supposed to be calibrated at the beginning and end of each shift, but seldom is in reality.
Sadly, the use of civilian operators and not trained police officers has now been extended to Scotland, simply because it is more profitable and relieves the police to get on with proper police work instead of alternative taxation.
There is absolutely no independent checking or calibration of this equipment, none whatever.
The company mentioned in the so called calibration certificates was founded by, and is run by an ex traffic cop and it has made him a millionaire; at your expense of course. The worst aspect of all is that it has made not one jot of difference to road safety.
Driving standards continue to decline at an almost exponential rate and the authorities and the police do nothing to improve it. It makes me sick to my stomach.
Incidentally, if any solicitors on here want any technical help with these sort of cases I am only too happy to give it. Only in Scottish courts however. My last experience in an English court was most definitely my last!!
HiAre you absolutely sure about this Paul? I have been involved as a technical witness in quite a few of these cases in Scotland and unlike England, proof of DELIVERY rather than posting has always been the case. Hence the need for Registered or Recorded. In other words a signature from the recipient proves service. If no signature then it clearly was not served.
The English system is nothing short of bloody disgraceful, as it assumes service on a note from the clerk that they posted the citation. Utterly, utterly ridiculous!
Unfortunately, as the OP has responded in this case then he has entered process and therefore accepted service was diligent.
However, to the OP. In my experience these camera vans are nothing less than a disgrace. The reference to calibration by another poster is something that has to be stopped. These certificates are not issued by the so called Camera Partnerships or even the police, they are issued by the manufacturers of the equipment. The equipment is supposed to be calibrated at the beginning and end of each shift, but seldom is in reality.
Sadly, the use of civilian operators and not trained police officers has now been extended to Scotland, simply because it is more profitable and relieves the police to get on with proper police work instead of alternative taxation.
There is absolutely no independent checking or calibration of this equipment, none whatever.
The company mentioned in the so called calibration certificates was founded by, and is run by an ex traffic cop and it has made him a millionaire; at your expense of course. The worst aspect of all is that it has made not one jot of difference to road safety.
Driving standards continue to decline at an almost exponential rate and the authorities and the police do nothing to improve it. It makes me sick to my stomach.
Incidentally, if any solicitors on here want any technical help with these sort of cases I am only too happy to give it. Only in Scottish courts however. My last experience in an English court was most definitely my last!!
Section 1 of the RTO Act 1988 says:
1 Requirement of warning etc. of prosecutions for certain offences.
(1)Subject to section 2 of this Act, [F1a person shall not be convicted of an offence to which this section applies unless]—
(a)he was warned at the time the offence was committed that the question of prosecuting him for some one or other of the offences to which this section applies would be taken into consideration, or
(b)within fourteen days of the commission of the offence a summons (or, in Scotland, a complaint) for the offence was served on him, or
(c)within fourteen days of the commission of the offence a notice of the intended prosecution specifying the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed, was—
(i)in the case of an offence under section 28 or 29 of the M1Road Traffic Act 1988 (cycling offences), served on him,
(ii)in the case of any other offence, served on him or on the person, if any, registered as the keeper of the vehicle at the time of the commission of the offence.
[F2(1A)A notice required by this section to be served on any person may be served on that person—
(a)by delivering it to him;
(b)by addressing it to him and leaving it at his last known address; or
(c)by sending it by registered post, recorded delivery service or first class post addressed to him at his last known address.]
(2)A notice shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1)(c) above to have been served on a person if it was sent by registered post or recorded delivery service addressed to him at his last known address, notwithstanding that the notice was returned as undelivered or was for any other reason not received by him.
(3)The requirement of subsection (1) above shall in every case be deemed to have been complied with unless and until the contrary is proved.
(4)Schedule 1 to this Act shows the offences to which this section applies.
Therefore the notice can be served by any of the forms mentioned. This applies to Scotland and England. There is clear Scottish High court authority which explains the section.
Sub- Section 2 deals with the deeming provisions for RD and RM. SS3 makes different provision for posted mail where the contrary can be proved. that means the defence generally has to lead evidence. Standard case is a notice to admit served by crown with schedules of posted letters, which MAY be sufficient.
I am waiting the stated case from the local court, which I think will be awful or a work of art!!!! Anyway, they never challenged the defence evidence that it was not received. Nor that the second letter was by 2nd class post!!
Remember a 172 failure is 6 points. A fixed penalty speeder is 3 and £60. In Scotland, the police will almost invariably come around and demand the 172 info. The tests for compliance with 172 and Section 1 NIP are different. THEY SHOULD NOT BE CONFUSED. I am aware that the practice of chasing these up in England is quite different and more relaxed. To say that in Scotland they are over zealous is an understatement. I had Traffic cops turn up at a clients on 3 occasions threatening everything for failure. They had no basis for being there for various legal reasons and were eventually sent packing.
The issue of not signing is for people to decide. What significance it ultimately has is of doubt. The risk is that if you do not comply and get it wrong then you are onto 6 points!
In scotland, most of these cases go to local Justice of the Peace courts with lay magistrates. They re advised by a legally qualified clerk. In Kilmarnock, I believe 12 of the 15 magistrates are retired cops. At least that is what the local lawyers tell me! Go figure how easy it is to get acquittals unless you have a knockout legal point.
All equipment is apparently calibrated and one always gets the certificates served. How are you going to prove it wasn't actually done? A whistleblower? Again the law on this can be complex.
My experience of dealing with hundreds of these NIP etc is that in general up here, they are served very quickly and rarely have fundamental errors. I believe my English counterparts have a much easier time on them!!!!!
Paul
johnycarrera said:
If one was to ignore the letters and not answer the door
Is it "still" time barred if court proceedings have not begun within 6 months of the offence??
Except that in Scotland the Crown can certify that they 'only became aware' of the offence on a given date and can get round the time limit. There are possible ways around that, but it will be like pushing water uphill.Is it "still" time barred if court proceedings have not begun within 6 months of the offence??
PS
Johnny, can I start a petition for you to be promoted to Chief Super of traffic??? I honestly dont think you are at the right rank and influence just now! Even prepared to bribe people with bacon rolls!
x
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff