Cumbria partnership caught lying
Discussion
Soooo - Stevie-babes and his crew are not so clean after all (as if we didn't know!)
www.thenewspaper.com/news/16/1668.asp
www.thenewspaper.com/news/16/1668.asp
TheNewspaper said:
UK: Official Lies About Faulty Speed Camera
A Cumbria, UK speed camera official lies to hide the problems with a camera that went haywire.
Speed cameraAn official representative of the Cumbria, UK Speed Camera partnership was caught lying this week about a ticketing machine that flashed passing motorists, regardless of whether they had been speeding or not. Mourners in a slow-moving funeral procession Wednesday were disturbed by the camera on Salthouse Road in Barrow which left them to wonder whether they would find a ticket in the mail. At first, a spokesman told the North-West Evening Mail newspaper that the flashing was intentional.
"It's a digital camera and we were just checking it was working properly," a spokesman said. "One of our technicians was working the camera to take random pictures so we could check that it was taking pictures properly and they were clear. We were not recording offences just making sure it was all working at certain times."
This turned out not to be true. Spokesman Andy James admitted to the Evening Mail that, in fact, the camera flashing was due to a fault with the camera.
"No-one will be prosecuted during the time the cameras are faulty," Jones said.
Last July, another Cumbria camera went haywire, despite being certified as "100% accurate" by a speed camera vendor. Since the Cumbria speed camera partnership formed in 2003, fatal accidents have increased. The annual death toll in 2002, before cameras, was 49. Last year, 59 died on Cumbria roads.
Source: Top cop caught by flash-happy camera (North-West Evening Mail (UK), 3/23/2007)
A Cumbria, UK speed camera official lies to hide the problems with a camera that went haywire.
Speed cameraAn official representative of the Cumbria, UK Speed Camera partnership was caught lying this week about a ticketing machine that flashed passing motorists, regardless of whether they had been speeding or not. Mourners in a slow-moving funeral procession Wednesday were disturbed by the camera on Salthouse Road in Barrow which left them to wonder whether they would find a ticket in the mail. At first, a spokesman told the North-West Evening Mail newspaper that the flashing was intentional.
"It's a digital camera and we were just checking it was working properly," a spokesman said. "One of our technicians was working the camera to take random pictures so we could check that it was taking pictures properly and they were clear. We were not recording offences just making sure it was all working at certain times."
This turned out not to be true. Spokesman Andy James admitted to the Evening Mail that, in fact, the camera flashing was due to a fault with the camera.
"No-one will be prosecuted during the time the cameras are faulty," Jones said.
Last July, another Cumbria camera went haywire, despite being certified as "100% accurate" by a speed camera vendor. Since the Cumbria speed camera partnership formed in 2003, fatal accidents have increased. The annual death toll in 2002, before cameras, was 49. Last year, 59 died on Cumbria roads.
Source: Top cop caught by flash-happy camera (North-West Evening Mail (UK), 3/23/2007)
Hemibum said:
So, Speedcamera partnerships and local newspapers are incapable of communicating in English?
Excuse me, but WTF was that story meant to be about?
Excuse me, but WTF was that story meant to be about?
Speed camera flashing everyone.Partnership says "No problem, we were testing it" ('cos they are never faulty are they?)Eventually partnership says "Oh OK then,it was faulty but we won't prosecute anyone this time"
I suppose the problem is if this was faulty then how many more have been?And how many incorrect NIPs have been accepted?Why would the partnership lie about this.....(yes,I know...)
esselte said:
Hemibum said:
So, Speedcamera partnerships and local newspapers are incapable of communicating in English?
Excuse me, but WTF was that story meant to be about?
Excuse me, but WTF was that story meant to be about?
Speed camera flashing everyone.Partnership says "No problem, we were testing it" ('cos they are never faulty are they?)Eventually partnership says "Oh OK then,it was faulty but we won't prosecute anyone this time"
I suppose the problem is if this was faulty then how many more have been?And how many incorrect NIPs have been accepted?Why would the partnership lie about this.....(yes,I know...)
It ist not the first time :roll:
Ings was a-flashing all the time last July. People complained. They said they would not prosecute anyone .. und then said they would issue NIPs to all recorded above 40 mph.. but then if it was flashing at everyone .. und had been programmed to ping at the 10% +2 (per another submarinated "story to the papers"
) - then each NIP issued was perhaps unsound anyway 
This ist the guy who complained to Paulie over the use of a smiley graphic icon which came up as Pinocchio on screen .. but you had to type the "L-word" to get it to work
Trouble ist ... everyone around here know the truth about the stats und the location of the revenue points has only one casualty in mind - driving licence und bank balance
There ist nothing actually done to educate tourists as to how to drive und walk around the passes around here - und this ist where the KSI occur - not speed .. but inexperience of a tricksy rural drive und there are so many potholes in the South Lakes too..
which are never repaired - along with silly cycling lanes designed to meet some "target" Interesting story, but I suspect that there was simply a malfunction in the setting controlling at what speed to activate the camera, not the ability to accurately measure speed. In which case it would just mean the Scamera Partnership wading through a load of useless offence records (those marked below, for example, 40mph) and issuing all the rest.
Andrew D said:
Interesting story, but I suspect that there was simply a malfunction in the setting controlling at what speed to activate the camera, not the ability to accurately measure speed. In which case it would just mean the Scamera Partnership wading through a load of useless offence records (those marked below, for example, 40mph) and issuing all the rest.
Wonder how many got sent out and were paid tho'.These things are supposed to be 100% aren't they?How is the NIP'd motorist to know that the camera was faulty?How would the partnership know it was faulty?
Edited by esselte on Monday 26th March 14:30
fluffnik said:
Throw the lying SCP twunts in jail.
Out of interest, how many people have been wrongly accused of speeding? Serious question. I was nicked for speeding, but I was speeding. I don't subscribe to the 100% accrudate by any stretch, but how many people are actually wrongfully accused? Does anyone have any idea?
RichBurley said:
fluffnik said:
Throw the lying SCP twunts in jail.
Out of interest, how many people have been wrongly accused of speeding? Serious question. I was nicked for speeding, but I was speeding. I don't subscribe to the 100% accrudate by any stretch, but how many people are actually wrongfully accused? Does anyone have any idea?
How many drivers actually contest the NIPs? Not many 'cos you're threatened with bigger fines and costs if you're found guilty.How often are we told "the camera doesn't lie"?
esselte said:
RichBurley said:
fluffnik said:
Throw the lying SCP twunts in jail.
Out of interest, how many people have been wrongly accused of speeding? Serious question. I was nicked for speeding, but I was speeding. I don't subscribe to the 100% accrudate by any stretch, but how many people are actually wrongfully accused? Does anyone have any idea?
How many drivers actually contest the NIPs? Not many 'cos you're threatened with bigger fines and costs if you're found guilty.How often are we told "the camera doesn't lie"?
That didn't answer my question.
RichBurley said:
esselte said:
RichBurley said:
fluffnik said:
Throw the lying SCP twunts in jail.
Out of interest, how many people have been wrongly accused of speeding? Serious question. I was nicked for speeding, but I was speeding. I don't subscribe to the 100% accrudate by any stretch, but how many people are actually wrongfully accused? Does anyone have any idea?
How many drivers actually contest the NIPs? Not many 'cos you're threatened with bigger fines and costs if you're found guilty.How often are we told "the camera doesn't lie"?
That didn't answer my question.
What I meant was how would you tell if someone had been wrongly accused?Not many people challenge a NIP,most just pay up.If you'd been done for a speeding offence 12 days ago in an unfamiliar part of the country would you :
(a). Pay £60 to make it go away
(b). Plead not guilty and risk big fine and costs.
I suspect most people go for (a).
Or are you asking people on here if they have been accused of speeding when they knew they weren't?
I suppose what I'm asking is a rhetorical question. No one knows for sure how many people have been falsely accused; but that said, how do we know if any specific driver been falsely accused? That said, we can't call SCP "scum of the earth" if we don't even know for sure whether they are actually falsely accusing people. It's an assumption perhaps; I was asking if there is any proof of wrongful accusations and if so, any idea what percentage?
If it really is a guessing game, is that because the equipment is more accurate than people admit.
For example, I have been nicked for speeding when I actually WAS speeding. I have never been accused of speeding when I WASN'T speeding.
If it really is a guessing game, is that because the equipment is more accurate than people admit.
For example, I have been nicked for speeding when I actually WAS speeding. I have never been accused of speeding when I WASN'T speeding.
RichBurley said:
esselte said:
RichBurley said:
fluffnik said:
Throw the lying SCP twunts in jail.
Out of interest, how many people have been wrongly accused of speeding? Serious question. I was nicked for speeding, but I was speeding. I don't subscribe to the 100% accrudate by any stretch, but how many people are actually wrongfully accused? Does anyone have any idea?
How many drivers actually contest the NIPs? Not many 'cos you're threatened with bigger fines and costs if you're found guilty.How often are we told "the camera doesn't lie"?
That didn't answer my question.
It's not likely to because I don't suppose anybody has the answer. I'd guess at 5% but it's a guess.
Boosted.
Boosted.
Do we know enough about this particular situation? The camera might have been flashing people below the prescribed limit, but that's not to say the measured readings were innacurate. If the limit was 40mph, for example, and the camera was producing photos of people doing 36, and actually saying 36, then the ticket wouldn't get issued. I'd hope.
RichBurley said:
I suppose what I'm asking is a rhetorical question. No one knows for sure how many people have been falsely accused; but that said, how do we know if any specific driver been falsely accused? That said, we can't call SCP "scum of the earth" if we don't even know for sure whether they are actually falsely accusing people. It's an assumption perhaps; I was asking if there is any proof of wrongful accusations and if so, any idea what percentage?
If it really is a guessing game, is that because the equipment is more accurate than people admit.
For example, I have been nicked for speeding when I actually WAS speeding. I have never been accused of speeding when I WASN'T speeding.
If it really is a guessing game, is that because the equipment is more accurate than people admit.
For example, I have been nicked for speeding when I actually WAS speeding. I have never been accused of speeding when I WASN'T speeding.
They only realised people had been unfairly pinged und fined at a Manchester tempo in 20 mph roadwork after one person challenged it.. und with help of local ABD .. they found incorrect signs.
In fairness - the scammers put up a notice in the local papers asking people pinged between certain dates to contact them und fine und points removed from licence but it was up to the driver to contact und some of these drivers may not have been local
Also .. M4 fiasco.. again incorrectly placed scam .. but drivers had to come forward .. und be grudgingly re-imbursed by scammers
But Cumbria once issued SP60 instead of Sp30 und adversely affected insurances. They were not very quick at correcting this by all accounts either.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff