Speeding section 172 question

[Fokker]

I’ve had a section 172 through today but within 4 mins of the time of the alleged offence 12:12pm, I have photos and video on my phone of me running around the garden with the dog. There is no way I could have driven to the camera sight in 4 mins.

In all honesty, I arrived at my destination at about 11:55am so they’ve guessed the time of the offence.

Does this change things?!

Many thanks for any advice

Edited by Fokker on Friday 8th January 15:34

[DartyBistard]

Without wishing to sounds facetious or accusatory, is there a chance that you did speed past that camera roughly at that time?

If not and the photos are timestamped and you've got people to back you up it might be worth getting in touch with the police and take it from there.

Alternatively ignore my input and await for BV, AGT, or someone else with appropriate qualifications, to advise, or seek proper legal advice.

[Fokker]

There is a chance yes but they’re about 20 mins out with their timing.
I just wondered if I send them a letter and pictures what I was doing at the time of the offence whether it would either be taken unhappily on my part or whether they’d throw it out?

20 mins out to me is a guess not an accurate time of a speeding offence.

That’s why I am asking.

[DartyBistard]

In which case it might be worth replying with your evidence to the contrary - though I understand the done thing is to do this after 14 days so they can't reissue a valid NIP.

If I thought the chances were I was speeding and the timings were just out a bit I'd probably cop the fine and take the SAC (assuming you're in the boundary for that), but if you're very sure you weren't speeding then it may be worth pursuing.

[anonymous-user]

How would you demonstrate that the date and time on your phone 'footage' were vaild?

[JNW1]

It feels like the OP knows he's guilty of speeding but is questioning whether he might be able to get off on the basis the time stated on the NIP is slightly out? I've no idea how accurate a NIP needs to be in that respect but I'm sure someone one of our resident experts will be able to clarify!

[Fokker]

Well it’s time stamped and I don’t think you can change it. It’s a case of how far do you go and how they feel about the situation I guess.

[Fokker]

JNW1 said:

It feels like the OP knows he's guilty of speeding but is questioning whether he might be able to get off on the basis the time stated on the NIP is slightly out? I've no idea how accurate a NIP needs to be in that respect but I'm sure someone one of our resident experts will be able to clarify!

That’s about the crux of it.

[DartyBistard]

Fokker said:

That’s about the crux of it.

Right then, if it goes to court they'll see right through that game and slap you like a ginger step child for trying it on. So rather than try and wriggle out on a technicality I'd suggest you face the music, pay the fine and take the points, or the SAC as previously suggested. At the very least you might learn how not to get caught again.

How fast were you (allegedly) going exactly?

[JNW1]

DartyBistard said:

Right then, if it goes to court they'll see right through that game and slap you like a ginger step child for trying it on. So rather than try and wriggle out on a technicality I'd suggest you face the music, pay the fine and take the points, or the SAC as previously suggested.

I think it depends how accurate the time on a NIP needs to be; if you turn-up at court and present evidence that proves you couldn't have been going past the camera at the time stated does that mean you get off or do the police have a certain amount of leeway with the time that goes on a NIP? I've no idea what the answer is but, like I say, probably one for an expert to advise on!

[Fokker]

I’ve no idea how fast I was going. I didn’t see a camera van so he must have been well hidden as I know the road well. Never seen a van here before. Speed could be 70, could be 90, it’s a very quick car and I’m normally careful and vigilant but now and again, you get caught, licence is currently clean. Weather was good and there was no traffic.

If anyone has a more accurate idea please let me know.

Thanks for the replies thus far

[BertBert]

Feels a little like nothing ventured, nothing gained. You could write back in response to the S172 request and say the car was not being driven at the time requested. The upside being they don't take it further, the downside being that you lose the ability to go on a course (if it was eligible). Further downside perhaps that you lose the ability to get an FPN and end up in the SJP process. Worst downside is that you get involved in a failure to furnish accusation. Or maybe PCoJ.

I made up those last things as being possibilities really - obvs. What's the magnitude of your penalty? SAC, FPN, court appearance, likely ban?

[Fastpedeller]

Fokker said:

I’ve no idea how fast I was going. I didn’t see a camera van so he must have been well hidden as I know the road well. Never seen a van here before. Speed could be 70, could be 90, it’s a very quick car and I’m normally careful and vigilant but now and again, you get caught, licence is currently clean. Weather was good and there was no traffic.

If anyone has a more accurate idea please let me know.

Thanks for the replies thus far

Do you mean to say "the can is able to go very quickly if the driver takes the decision?" or similar. Of course, they could always say you managed to drive home at warp speed in a very small time and then created your video. INAL but think you have no defence.

[anonymous-user]

What's to stop anyone just manually re-setting the phone's date and time to that of the offence, then recording some 'time-stamped' activity as counter-evidence?

[sociopath]

JNW1 said:

DartyBistard said:

Right then, if it goes to court they'll see right through that game and slap you like a ginger step child for trying it on. So rather than try and wriggle out on a technicality I'd suggest you face the music, pay the fine and take the points, or the SAC as previously suggested.

I think it depends how accurate the time on a NIP needs to be; if you turn-up at court and present evidence that proves you couldn't have been going past the camera at the time stated does that mean you get off or do the police have a certain amount of leeway with the time that goes on a NIP? I've no idea what the answer is but, like I say, probably one for an expert to advise on!

They counteract with a photo from their speed camera showing the car going past the camera at the time stated, so it becomes a question of who's clock will they believe.

Who do you think they'll side with?

OP take the pain and move on

[Far Cough]

JNW1 said:

It feels like the OP knows he's guilty of speeding but is questioning whether he might be able to get off on the basis the time stated on the NIP is slightly out? I've no idea how accurate a NIP needs to be in that respect but I'm sure someone one of our resident experts will be able to clarify!

It has to be 100% and able to withstand scrutiny in a court of law. The same applies to your alleged alibi.

If it were me , I`d write back and query the time of offence stating that the car was not in use at that time. They will get a technician to check the camera and if it is found out of tolerance, fingers crossed you`ll hear nothing more.

[Fokker]

Far Cough said:

It has to be 100% and able to withstand scrutiny in a court of law. The same applies to your alleged alibi.

If it were me , I`d write back and query the time of offence stating that the car was not in use at that time. They will get a technician to check the camera and if it is found out of tolerance, fingers crossed you`ll hear nothing more.

I think that’s a fair idea. My thoughts are that if the timing is wrong on the NIP then I’ve a fair reason to question the equipment. Happy to take the pain otherwise but 20 mins out is fair reason in my mind to bring it up without sounding too cocky.

[JNW1]

sociopath said:

JNW1 said:

DartyBistard said:

Right then, if it goes to court they'll see right through that game and slap you like a ginger step child for trying it on. So rather than try and wriggle out on a technicality I'd suggest you face the music, pay the fine and take the points, or the SAC as previously suggested.

I think it depends how accurate the time on a NIP needs to be; if you turn-up at court and present evidence that proves you couldn't have been going past the camera at the time stated does that mean you get off or do the police have a certain amount of leeway with the time that goes on a NIP? I've no idea what the answer is but, like I say, probably one for an expert to advise on!

They counteract with a photo from their speed camera showing the car going past the camera at the time stated, so it becomes a question of who's clock will they believe.

Who do you think they'll side with?

OP take the pain and move on

But if they've got the correct time on their speed camera where has the incorrect time come from on the NIP?

It sounds like there's little doubt the OP committed the offence, just not at the time stated on the NIP; therefore, the question is would that administrative error on the NIP be sufficient to get the OP off should he decide to contest it? Personally I've no idea what the answer is but I daresay the likes of agtlaw or Breadvan would be able to provide an informed opinion!

[DartyBistard]

JNW1 said:

sociopath said:

JNW1 said:

DartyBistard said:

Right then, if it goes to court they'll see right through that game and slap you like a ginger step child for trying it on. So rather than try and wriggle out on a technicality I'd suggest you face the music, pay the fine and take the points, or the SAC as previously suggested.

I think it depends how accurate the time on a NIP needs to be; if you turn-up at court and present evidence that proves you couldn't have been going past the camera at the time stated does that mean you get off or do the police have a certain amount of leeway with the time that goes on a NIP? I've no idea what the answer is but, like I say, probably one for an expert to advise on!

They counteract with a photo from their speed camera showing the car going past the camera at the time stated, so it becomes a question of who's clock will they believe.

Who do you think they'll side with?

OP take the pain and move on

But if they've got the correct time on their speed camera where has the incorrect time come from on the NIP?

It sounds like there's little doubt the OP committed the offence, just not at the time stated on the NIP; therefore, the question is would that administrative error on the NIP be sufficient to get the OP off should he decide to contest it? Personally I've no idea what the answer is but I daresay the likes of agtlaw or Breadvan would be able to provide an informed opinion!

Indeed, as you say the question boils down to whether 20 mins is far enough outside the window to make this worth trying on. For that I would want expert advice from someone who knows the law.

[sociopath]

I'd argue that while it should accurate, in real life they wouldn't need to prove the time is accurate, they'd just need the NIP to agree with the camera, and the magistrates will decide thats enough

Not from a legal perspective, but from an evidential POV.