Pretty sure I'm going to get a NIP, thoughts?

[TheLoraxxZeus]

Was on my way home and may or may not have been going over the legal limit of the road (motorway, 70mph). Came around a bend and a speed van was present.

Didn't look like they were deployed yet, they were not there 30 minutes prior. Windows closed on back of van.

What we think? Assuming I was speeding of course.

[CanAm]

TheLoraxxZeus said:

Was on my way home and may or may not have been going over the legal limit of the road (motorway, 70mph). Came around a bend and a speed van was present.

Didn't look like they were deployed yet, they were not there 30 minutes prior. Windows closed on back of van.

What we think? Assuming I was speeding of course.

You'll find out soon enough. Finger crossed that you were mistaken, and were not actually exceeding the limit, or by only a tiny amount. You should be safe up to a genuine 78, so if indicated speed was over 80 it's squeeky pants time, the level of squeekiness being dependent on your speed.

If you end up in Dire Straits, AGTLAW who posts on here regularly is definitely your man.

[Mammasaid]

CanAm said:

TheLoraxxZeus said:

Was on my way home and may or may not have been going over the legal limit of the road (motorway, 70mph). Came around a bend and a speed van was present.

Didn't look like they were deployed yet, they were not there 30 minutes prior. Windows closed on back of van.

What we think? Assuming I was speeding of course.

You'll find out soon enough. Finger crossed that you were mistaken, and were not actually exceeding the limit, or by only a tiny amount. You should be safe up to a genuine 787, so if indicated speed was over 80 it's squeaky pants time, the level of squeakiness being dependent on your speed.

If you end up in Dire Straits, Mark Knopfler who posts on here regularly is definitely your man.

Edited by Mammasaid on Wednesday 5th March 16:02

[Super Sonic]

Mammasaid said:

CanAm said:

TheLoraxxZeus said:

Was on my way home and may or may not have been going over the legal limit of the road (motorway, 70mph). Came around a bend and a speed van was present.

Didn't look like they were deployed yet, they were not there 30 minutes prior. Windows closed on back of van.

What we think? Assuming I was speeding of course.

You'll find out soon enough. Finger crossed that you were mistaken, and were not actually exceeding the limit, or by only a tiny amount. You should be safe up to a genuine 787, so if indicated speed was over 80 it's squeaky pants time, the level of squeakiness being dependent on your speed.

If you end up in Dire Straits, Mark Knofler who posts on here regularly is definitely your man.

Who's Mark Knofler?

[TheLoraxxZeus]

Thank you for the input, it's very unlikely I was speeding so I should be fine. I'm also making an assumption the window of the van must be open for the camera to work correctly, so even if I was speeding (again, unlikely) then I expect no NIP. Would that be correct?

[trails]

Super Sonic said:

Mammasaid said:

CanAm said:

TheLoraxxZeus said:

Was on my way home and may or may not have been going over the legal limit of the road (motorway, 70mph). Came around a bend and a speed van was present.

Didn't look like they were deployed yet, they were not there 30 minutes prior. Windows closed on back of van.

What we think? Assuming I was speeding of course.

You'll find out soon enough. Finger crossed that you were mistaken, and were not actually exceeding the limit, or by only a tiny amount. You should be safe up to a genuine 787, so if indicated speed was over 80 it's squeaky pants time, the level of squeakiness being dependent on your speed.

If you end up in Dire Straits, Mark Knofler who posts on here regularly is definitely your man.

Who's Mark Knofler?

Someone who is taking the P...

[cuprabob]

Super Sonic said:

Mammasaid said:

CanAm said:

TheLoraxxZeus said:

Was on my way home and may or may not have been going over the legal limit of the road (motorway, 70mph). Came around a bend and a speed van was present.

Didn't look like they were deployed yet, they were not there 30 minutes prior. Windows closed on back of van.

What we think? Assuming I was speeding of course.

You'll find out soon enough. Finger crossed that you were mistaken, and were not actually exceeding the limit, or by only a tiny amount. You should be safe up to a genuine 787, so if indicated speed was over 80 it's squeaky pants time, the level of squeakiness being dependent on your speed.

If you end up in Dire Straits, Mark Knofler who posts on here regularly is definitely your man.

Who's Mark Knofler?

Surprised you don't know him, he's a Local Hero around these parts.

[zalrak]

These cameras seem to be able to get money for nothing with these situations

[mgtony]

zalrak said:

These cameras seem to be able to get money for nothing with these situations

There should be a website
where you can check for free...

[Mammasaid]

trails said:

Someone who is taking the P...

[Mammasaid]

mgtony said:

zalrak said:

These cameras seem to be able to get money for nothing with these situations

There should be a website
where you can check for free...

If the OP gets a ban, then it's the Walk of Life for him!

[BertBert]

Seems that the edit up above has managed to get the famous guitarist s name right. Unfortunately it has incorrectly changed the 78 to a 77 which is incorrect.

The poster who said you should be safe up to a genuine 78 was correct.

And what on earth is this thread about anyway?

[TheLoraxxZeus]

BertBert said:

And what on earth is this thread about anyway?

Basically boils down to that if I was speeding (I was not) the van requires the window to be open for the camera to function, right?

[omniflow]

TheLoraxxZeus said:

Basically boils down to that if I was speeding (I was not) the van requires the window to be open for the camera to function, right?

This doesn't match up with the title of the thread. What's changed?

[zalrak]

Don't reckon you have much of a chance of getting away with this. I think the dice was loaded from the start to be honest.

[TheLoraxxZeus]

omniflow said:

This doesn't match up with the title of the thread. What's changed?

Typed it when I was flustered, pretty sure I wasn't speeding. I'm basically asking that if I was speeding, the van rear window need to be open for the cameras to work right?

[Tighnamara]

TheLoraxxZeus said:

Typed it when I was flustered, pretty sure I wasn't speeding. I'm basically asking that if I was speeding, the van rear window need to be open for the cameras to work right?

No, cameras now work through closed windows, usually double points when caught in a closed window scenario

[TheLoraxxZeus]

Tighnamara said:

No, cameras now work through closed windows, usually double points when caught in a closed window scenario

Ah good, just as well I was not speeding. Thanks!

[MustangGT]

cuprabob said:

Surprised you don't know him, he's a Local Hero around these parts.

Could be Money for Nothing unless he is Sailing to Philadelphia.

Could change transport method and Skateaway

[cuprabob]

MustangGT said:

cuprabob said:

Surprised you don't know him, he's a Local Hero around these parts.

Could be Money for Nothing unless he is Sailing to Philadelphia.

Could change transport method and Skateaway

Why worry?