Received a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty

[jbswagger]

Hi,

I was caught by a fixed camera doing 80mph in a 70, on the A12 near Colchester, on my birthday, in November!!

I've received a Received a Conditional Offer of 3 points

One question I have though, the photographs and speed camera calibration certification are not available as "such evidence is only available in the event of the matter going to court"

My question is, if I accept the Conditional Offer of 3 points, (which I'm minded too) then I won''t get to see the photographs and speed camera calibration certification as I haven't gone to court?

The alternative is to go to court, see the evidence and then the magistrates might impose a higher penalty?

My question is, surely they should provide the photos and calibration cert now, as happened last time? (different county though)?

Thanks for any help.

Edited by jbswagger on Thursday 5th January 14:01

Edited by jbswagger on Thursday 5th January 14:11

Edited by jbswagger on Thursday 5th January 14:17

[randlemarcus]

What's the question?

If you were speeding, c'est la vie.

If you want the calibration certificate, by all means go to court, but it will be a bigger fine, plus victim fees etc.

If you want the photos, you could just ask, after you have paid the fine, but they may view that as slightly frivolous.

[jbswagger]

My question is, surely they should provide the photos and calibration cert now, as happened last time? (different county though)?

[HantsRat]

It is very very very rare to find a police force using camera equipment with out of date calibration. These are checked each day before taking the cameras out on patrol. If out of date, they are sent off and we simply take an in date one out.

If you were speeding though, I would just accept it.

[jbswagger]

HantsRat said:

It is very very very rare to find a police force using camera equipment with out of date calibration. These are checked each day before taking the cameras out on patrol. If out of date, they are sent off and we simply take an in date one out.

If you were speeding though, I would just accept it.

Thanks for the reply.

Just to clarify, it was a fixed camera, not a hand held one.

[wiliferus]

jbswagger said:

My question is, surely they should provide the photos and calibration cert now, as happened last time? (different county though)?

In short, no. Acceptance of the conditional offer is an admission of the offence, thus no need to provide you with evidence. If you don't think you were speeding and wish to contest then you will need to go to court.

[speedking31]

Remember the old tenet of British Law, "Guilty until proven innocent" applies in the case of speed cameras

[untakenname]

80mph is only just over the 10% +2, it's a shame as 70mph cameras only used to be triggered at 90mph plus until recently.

Can't you request the photo's to help you identify who was driving at the time? When I got done last year they sent me a photo and the place it happened though that was with a mobile camera.

[rigga]

Flashed in November and it's now January, I take it the notification arrived in due time?

[longshot]

It does seem to be a bizarre way of doing it.

If you were not driving the car at the time, do they expect you to simply accept that it was you even though you may/do not have recollection of the event?

[jbswagger]

speedking31 said:

Remember the old tenet of British Law, "Guilty until proven innocent" applies in the case of speed cameras

It does seemn to be, doesn't it.

[jbswagger]

rigga said:

Flashed in November and it's now January, I take it the notification arrived in due time?

The NIP did arrive within a week.

[The Surveyor]

longshot said:

It does seem to be a bizarre way of doing it.

If you were not driving the car at the time, do they expect you to simply accept that it was you even though you may/do not have recollection of the event?

Nothing to do with who was driving. The OP is asking if the SCP's should be obliged to present the evidence and certificates before you admit or deny the accusation.

Personally, most people know if they were actually speeding or not when they were flashed so if we are going to have such enforcement, I'd rather they keep the costs down and only issue when there is a genuine disputed case.

[speedking31]

... because the cost of printing the digital photo on the NIP would be prohibitive

[Stoofa]

speedking31 said:

Remember the old tenet of British Law, "Guilty until proven innocent" applies in the case of speed cameras

Don't understand that statement at all.
You receive a NIP. You are accused at this point, but are certainly not guilty.
You're then given the option, do you deny the charge or would you like to deal with it quickly and easily without the need to go to court?
If you truly believe you are not guilty - so you have a speed limiter, you never speed, then take it to court where you would very much be innocent until proven guilty.
If you think that it's highly possibly you are guilty, then save yourself some time and ultimately some money, and take the conditional offer instead.

No guilty until proven innocent at any point.

[Bill]

speedking31 said:

Remember the old tenet of British Law, "Guilty until proven innocent" applies in the case of speed cameras

Really? Don't be a baby about it. If you think you're innocent you can have your day in court. If you know you're guilty you can accept a lesser penalty and save everyone some time.

speedking31 said:

... because the cost of printing the digital photo on the NIP would be prohibitive

Multiplied by however many NIPs it becomes significant.

[The Surveyor]

speedking31 said:

... because the cost of printing the digital photo on the NIP would be prohibitive

And you can indeed have a free copy if you ask for one to assist with any defence, but they won't be free to print, or free to administer will they. So please keep your and have a little think about what you would do with a photograph that you can't do without one.

[Ekona]

I'm guessing you got caught by the average speed cameras along that stretch?

[longshot]

The Surveyor said:

longshot said:

It does seem to be a bizarre way of doing it.

If you were not driving the car at the time, do they expect you to simply accept that it was you even though you may/do not have recollection of the event?

Nothing to do with who was driving. The OP is asking if the SCP's should be obliged to present the evidence and certificates before you admit or deny the accusation.

Personally, most people know if they were actually speeding or not when they were flashed so if we are going to have such enforcement, I'd rather they keep the costs down and only issue when there is a genuine disputed case.

I disagree.

I have been caught speeding by cameras twice and the second time came as a complete surprise.

I accepted the fixed penalty because I am the only person who drives the car in question, but if it was our other car, I would want proof of who was driving.

Back to the OP's question, which is effectively the same thing, why not provide evidence. In our computerized age, it would take seconds and pence more, if that.

How severe does a fixed penalty need to be before you're not going to just bend over?

[The Surveyor]

longshot said:

I accepted the fixed penalty because I am the only person who drives the car in question, but if it was our other car, I would want proof of who was driving.

There are procedures outlined on the NIP if you weren't driving, but realistically it's not that common that you wouldn't actually know who was driving along a named stretch of road on a named date at a specific time. There won't be that many other people and in that case you can ask for the picture to aid identification assuming it's a photo of the front, not rear.

As before, for basic speeding you don't need a photo with the NIP IMHO