Anyone ever tried these when caught?
Discussion
I was caught doing 85 in a 70 limit by a camera van.... very tempted to see if I can get out of it as I don't think it's right to be penalised for doing such a speed on this type of road to be honest.
http://www.ukspeedcamerafine.com/
Template letters that apparently get you off via a loophole I think.
Are they just a scam? £40 for nothing? I emailed teh guy that runs it and this was his response....
"Thanks for writing. If you were not personally ticketed by an officer and other people have access to your car . . . if they don't work there is a money back guarantee once you send a scanned copy of the RECEIPT for the fine paid.
The letters are sold for informational purposes but have a money back guarantee if you are still forced to pay a fine.
I hope this helps and best of luck"
Anyone ever used them? Or anything like this?
Am I just going to get the book thrown at me for taking the piss if I use these?!
http://www.ukspeedcamerafine.com/
Template letters that apparently get you off via a loophole I think.
Are they just a scam? £40 for nothing? I emailed teh guy that runs it and this was his response....
"Thanks for writing. If you were not personally ticketed by an officer and other people have access to your car . . . if they don't work there is a money back guarantee once you send a scanned copy of the RECEIPT for the fine paid.
The letters are sold for informational purposes but have a money back guarantee if you are still forced to pay a fine.
I hope this helps and best of luck"
Anyone ever used them? Or anything like this?
Am I just going to get the book thrown at me for taking the piss if I use these?!
I'd write your own and save £40. You could ask them to send you the photo, the calibration certificates etc but if you were genuinely caught, and you were definitely driving then it would be easier to accept the fixed penalty unfortunately.
Before the law changed last month then you could have told them that you don't remember who was driving at the time. Now, as I understand it, you would have to be very sure that someone else was driving. Your cousin from Turkmenistan for instance, and give them his name and address, then hope that the Turkmeni police are co-operative in getting to the bottom of this heinous crime.
I know a friend who this happened to, when it turned out that his car was driven by a Greek friend, I know they didn't prosecute my friend whose car it was and I never heard that they had been in touch wtih his friend in Greece either...
Beware of spalshing out in desperation though - I did this on some stupid ebook once in the aftermath of getting a stopped. While none of the information was false, none of it was very useful in my case and nothing I couldn't find out from a couple of hours trawling the internet.
Look around here, pepipoo.com and do a google search. There are ways to challenge speeding tickets, but to get away with it when you were speeding you have to either be very lucky in that the police have messed up, or prepared to outright lie to the police and possibly the courts. You can help yourself be lucky by chasing things like calibration certificates, and knowing all the legal technicalities. I also found a legal helpline quite helpful. Can't find the link now, but it was a premium rate numebr that let you speak to a solicitor.
Be warned though, if it's a fixed penalty and you can take the points and fine without serious disruption then this is usually the easiest way. I wouldn't discourage you from fighting it, because I think the more people do this, the harder and less profitable we make it for them and the less worthwhile it will be for them to carry on with this style of policing.
Good luck, and pick the brains of everyone here as there's a lot of knowledge and experience in these matters on boards like this!
Before the law changed last month then you could have told them that you don't remember who was driving at the time. Now, as I understand it, you would have to be very sure that someone else was driving. Your cousin from Turkmenistan for instance, and give them his name and address, then hope that the Turkmeni police are co-operative in getting to the bottom of this heinous crime.
I know a friend who this happened to, when it turned out that his car was driven by a Greek friend, I know they didn't prosecute my friend whose car it was and I never heard that they had been in touch wtih his friend in Greece either...
Beware of spalshing out in desperation though - I did this on some stupid ebook once in the aftermath of getting a stopped. While none of the information was false, none of it was very useful in my case and nothing I couldn't find out from a couple of hours trawling the internet.
Look around here, pepipoo.com and do a google search. There are ways to challenge speeding tickets, but to get away with it when you were speeding you have to either be very lucky in that the police have messed up, or prepared to outright lie to the police and possibly the courts. You can help yourself be lucky by chasing things like calibration certificates, and knowing all the legal technicalities. I also found a legal helpline quite helpful. Can't find the link now, but it was a premium rate numebr that let you speak to a solicitor.
Be warned though, if it's a fixed penalty and you can take the points and fine without serious disruption then this is usually the easiest way. I wouldn't discourage you from fighting it, because I think the more people do this, the harder and less profitable we make it for them and the less worthwhile it will be for them to carry on with this style of policing.
Good luck, and pick the brains of everyone here as there's a lot of knowledge and experience in these matters on boards like this!
Assuming for just a moment that this is not an advertisement 
, then if it looks like a scam and smells like a scam, then its probably a scam.. And the inference is that this is one which involves making false statements, to boot..
Worse charges than excess speed could be faced for people choosing to venture down that route, IMHO..
, then if it looks like a scam and smells like a scam, then its probably a scam.. And the inference is that this is one which involves making false statements, to boot..Worse charges than excess speed could be faced for people choosing to venture down that route, IMHO..
AJS- said:
Before the law changed last month then you could have told them that you don't remember who was driving at the time. Now, as I understand it, you would have to be very sure that someone else was driving. Your cousin from Turkmenistan for instance, and give them his name and address, then hope that the Turkmeni police are co-operative in getting to the bottom of this heinous crime.
What recent change in the law ?Edited by SS2. on Monday 22 October 12:27
My post wasn't an advert ....far from it!
I'm guessing that site and its letters are based around the laws before the recent change.
I'm thinking more of going down the route of getting them to send the photo and the calibration certificates, as I was genuinely suprised to see that the speed recorded was 85MPH.
I saw the van a good half mile away and I'm sure that although I know I was doing over 70MPH at first it was only by about 5MPH....
Yes, still speeding and I'm guessing they'd still give me the points, but I mean really?! Prosecuting people for driving at 75MPH? That's just madness....
....far from it!I'm guessing that site and its letters are based around the laws before the recent change.
I'm thinking more of going down the route of getting them to send the photo and the calibration certificates, as I was genuinely suprised to see that the speed recorded was 85MPH.
I saw the van a good half mile away and I'm sure that although I know I was doing over 70MPH at first it was only by about 5MPH....
Yes, still speeding and I'm guessing they'd still give me the points, but I mean really?! Prosecuting people for driving at 75MPH? That's just madness....
D2x said:
My post wasn't an advert ....far from it!
I'm guessing that site and its letters are based around the laws before the recent change.
There has not been a recent change to the laws regarding attempting to pervert the course of justice. ....far from it!I'm guessing that site and its letters are based around the laws before the recent change.
I suspect what AJS- is thinking of is the recent increase from 3 penalty points to 6 penalty points for anyone convicted of failing to provide driver details, contrary to s.172 Road Traffic Act 1988.
D2x said:
I'm thinking more of going down the route of getting them to send the photo and the calibration certificates, as I was genuinely suprised to see that the speed recorded was 85MPH.
They may send you what you require, but note that they are under no statutory obligation to do so at this stage.Edited by SS2. on Monday 22 October 13:01
I'm guessing you were driving towards the van in which case they'll have a very nice video of your smiling face as you drove past. So that's defence one knackered unless you have a twin who is willing to take the rap.
As for the speed you were actually doing as long as the camera is correctly calibrated then you've got no chance.
If its a pro-laser that got you, I've been with a traffic officer who caught someone from 1080yards away. So you might not have seen the van before he saw you.
Could be time to take it on the chin and remember that cameras operate there for next time.
As for the speed you were actually doing as long as the camera is correctly calibrated then you've got no chance.
If its a pro-laser that got you, I've been with a traffic officer who caught someone from 1080yards away. So you might not have seen the van before he saw you.
Could be time to take it on the chin and remember that cameras operate there for next time.
Bugger 
So looks like even if I could prove that I was doing teh 75 MPH that I think I was, I'd still get done anyway.......
If I ask for certificated, photos etc, will I get hassle... or extra fine and points if guilty?
Any magic get out of jail free suggestions also gratefully considered
So looks like even if I could prove that I was doing teh 75 MPH that I think I was, I'd still get done anyway.......
If I ask for certificated, photos etc, will I get hassle... or extra fine and points if guilty?
Any magic get out of jail free suggestions also gratefully considered
D2x said:
Any magic get out of jail free suggestions also gratefully considered
No guarantee of any get out of jail free cards, but why not pop along to www.pepipoo.com ?I understand that returning a s.172 notice completed but unsigned continues to place the Scottish authorities in somewhat of a quandary..
(Assuming, of course, that the alleged offence did occur north of the border..)
Edited by SS2. on Monday 22 October 18:44
If you are sure that you were doing less than they have said, request a copy of the video. You may not get it until you have admitted you were driving and told them that you intend to plead not guilty. At this point disclosure rules mean they have to give it to you. I had a one all draw with Bedfordshire camera partnership last year but didn't realise the relevance of the video until it was too late.
The video I was sent showed me driving my car with the speed display overlaid. This was supplied, presumably, so I couldn't claim that somebody else was driving. Had I realised earlier, I would have got back to them and requested a copy of the video showing the point at which the speed had been measured. The important thing to look out for is the 'slip effect'. This occurs when the laser is not targetted on the same point of the vehicle while the speed is measured. If the crosshairs are on your windscreen when the trigger is pulled and then move down to your number plate, the relative distance over time is shorter, therefore the speed reading will be high. The crosshairs must remain on the same point of the vehicle, ideally the front numberplate, for the duration of the measurement. This can be seen by playing back the video in slow motion or frame by frame.
If, upon receiving the video, you can't find fault with it, you can then change your plea to guilty and roll over.
The video I was sent showed me driving my car with the speed display overlaid. This was supplied, presumably, so I couldn't claim that somebody else was driving. Had I realised earlier, I would have got back to them and requested a copy of the video showing the point at which the speed had been measured. The important thing to look out for is the 'slip effect'. This occurs when the laser is not targetted on the same point of the vehicle while the speed is measured. If the crosshairs are on your windscreen when the trigger is pulled and then move down to your number plate, the relative distance over time is shorter, therefore the speed reading will be high. The crosshairs must remain on the same point of the vehicle, ideally the front numberplate, for the duration of the measurement. This can be seen by playing back the video in slow motion or frame by frame.
If, upon receiving the video, you can't find fault with it, you can then change your plea to guilty and roll over.
paul001 said:
the best way of getting off - dependant on how good the photo is etc is just to write back saying you don't know the driver and that your car was up for sale and this must have happend during the test drive. I've used that one 3 times and so far it's worked every time for me.
Not good advice, IMO - worse charges than excess speed could follow if they have reason to believe that an accused is telling porkies..
If you pay for the service I suspect they will on several sheets of paper point you to S172 (3) of the RTA88
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/ukpga_1988005...
which gives you a defence to the S172 charge, if successful the CPS don't have a driver and therefore can't proceed with the speeding charge.
Things to note
1) S172(3) can only be decided by a judge so it will go to court
2) You have to convince the judge that you didn't know who was driving
3) If you fail to convince them you will by defination be guilty of S172 (to get to court CPS will charge you with S172 as well as the speeding)
4) If found guilty of S172 you will now receive 6 points. This is a direct and obvious attempt to dissuade you not to use the defence provided to you in law
5) This isn't the same as perverting the course of justice referred to in previous posts. In those cases, RK haven't claimed they don't know who was driving. On the contary they know exactly who was driving, normally their 2nd cousin three times removed who has borrowed the car while staying with them on holiday and has now returned to Belarus.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/ukpga_1988005...
which gives you a defence to the S172 charge, if successful the CPS don't have a driver and therefore can't proceed with the speeding charge.
Things to note
1) S172(3) can only be decided by a judge so it will go to court
2) You have to convince the judge that you didn't know who was driving
3) If you fail to convince them you will by defination be guilty of S172 (to get to court CPS will charge you with S172 as well as the speeding)
4) If found guilty of S172 you will now receive 6 points. This is a direct and obvious attempt to dissuade you not to use the defence provided to you in law
5) This isn't the same as perverting the course of justice referred to in previous posts. In those cases, RK haven't claimed they don't know who was driving. On the contary they know exactly who was driving, normally their 2nd cousin three times removed who has borrowed the car while staying with them on holiday and has now returned to Belarus.
bluepolarbear said:
1) S172(3) can only be decided by a judge so it will go to court
Minor point, but the defence is provided by s.172(4)..bluepolarbear said:
2) You have to convince the judge that you didn't know who was driving
And why, after exercising 'reasonable diligence' (if the accused is the vehicle's keeper), the driver's identity remains unknown.bluepolarbear said:
3) If you fail to convince them you will by defination be guilty of S172 (to get to court CPS will charge you with S172 as well as the speeding)
Possibly. And that's despite a speeding prosecution having no chance of success in the absence of any admissible evidence of driver identity.bluepolarbear said:
4) If found guilty of S172 you will now receive 6 points. This is a direct and obvious attempt to dissuade you not to use the defence provided to you in law
Maybe. Although they would say that its a proportionate penalty considering the severity of some of the offences which failing to provide can prevent being prosecuted.bluepolarbear said:
5) This isn't the same as perverting the course of justice referred to in previous posts.
It could be if you knowingly tell porkies.Edited by SS2. on Monday 22 October 20:35
SS2. said:
bluepolarbear said:
1) S172(3) can only be decided by a judge so it will go to court
Minor point, but the defence is provided by s.172(4)..172 Duty to give information as to identity of driver, etc., in certain cases (1) This section applies—
(a) to any offence under the preceding provisions of this Act except—
(i) an offence under Part V, or
(ii) an offence under section 13, 16, 51(2), 61(4), 67(9), 68(4), 96 or 117,
and to an offence under section 178 of this Act,
(b) to any offence under sections 25, 26, 27 and 45 of the [1988 c. 53.] Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, and
(c) to any offence against any other enactment relating to the use of vehicles on roads.
(2) Where the driver of a vehicle is alleged to be guilty of an offence to which this section applies—
(a) the person keeping the vehicle shall give such information as to the identity of the driver as he may be required to give by or on behalf of a chief officer of police, and
(b) any other person shall if required as stated above give any information which it is in his power to give and may lead to identification of the driver.
In this subsection references to the driver of a vehicle include references to the person riding a cycle.
(3) A person who fails to comply with the requirement of subsection (2)(a) above is guilty of an offence unless he shows to the satisfaction of the court that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle or, as the case may be, the rider of the cycle was.
(4) A person who fails to comply with the requirement of subsection (2)(b) above is guilty of an offence.
bluepolarbear said:
SS2. said:
bluepolarbear said:
1) S172(3) can only be decided by a judge so it will go to court
Minor point, but the defence is provided by s.172(4)..SS2. said:
bluepolarbear said:
SS2. said:
bluepolarbear said:
1) S172(3) can only be decided by a judge so it will go to court
Minor point, but the defence is provided by s.172(4)..
damn, you trumped me!Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff