Pulled for speeding, told I was doing 90 but wasn't.pls help

[lb323]

Hi,

I was pulled for speeding about a month ago on the motorway. He told me I was doing 90 when I wasn't. He provided no proof. I didn't ask for any as I was shocked at being pulled. He gave me a ticket - 3 points and £60 fine. I took it on the chin and paid the fine and sent my licence off.

Now, I've just had an interesting conversation with a friend who said they're pretty sure the police are supposed to provide proof under these circumstances. None was offered and, not knowing this at the time, I didn't think I was entitled to ask.

I'm trying to find out if there is anything I can now do to see if they actually do have evidence as I do not believe I was doing 90. I thought you guys were the best to ask about this so any advice you can give me will be appreciated.

Cheers

E

[Greendubber]

How fast do you think you were you going?

[Toni896]

lb323 said:

Hi,

I was pulled for speeding about a month ago on the motorway. He told me I was doing 90 when I wasn't. He provided no proof. I didn't ask for any as I was shocked at being pulled. He gave me a ticket - 3 points and £60 fine. I took it on the chin and paid the fine and sent my licence off.

Now, I've just had an interesting conversation with a friend who said they're pretty sure the police are supposed to provide proof under these circumstances. None was offered and, not knowing this at the time, I didn't think I was entitled to ask.

I'm trying to find out if there is anything I can now do to see if they actually do have evidence as I do not believe I was doing 90. I thought you guys were the best to ask about this so any advice you can give me will be appreciated.

Cheers

E

you were willing to take it on the chin then, now a month later you prove they didn't show you evidence ?

live with it !

[darren_S2]

Can you prove you were not doing 90mph and doing less than the speed limit, hence not speeding?

Since it seems that you settled the fine and received the 3 points, it is probably too late unless new evidence had come to light and doubt the court would revoke the charge since in a way you have already accepted it. If you had concerns at the time and/or evidence then you should of gone to court and contested the case. I don't know if you could appeal and on what grounds you would appeal.

Could be wrong as I am not a profesional in this area so could stand corrected.

If it were me, just take it on the chin and take it as one of lifes lessons. Besides if you go back to court and are unsuccesful you could end with more.

[lb323]

Well to be honest, thats why I decided to just accept it because its always worse punishment if you go to court and dont win and I was alone hence can provide no evidence.

My point is, how does the law stand in this matter? If there is anyone on here who knows about the legal position in these circumstances, I'd really appreciate your input. I thought I had no choice but to just accept it but now I'm told if they dont have evidence then they cannot prove it - hence, if I employed a solicitor, they could not find me guilty for it. I need to clarify if that is the case and, if so, if there is anything I could do about it at this point as I was unaware at the time.

Cheers

[JustinP1]

darren_S2 said:

Can you prove you were not doing 90mph and doing less than the speed limit, hence not speeding?

Since it seems that you settled the fine and received the 3 points, it is probably too late unless new evidence had come to light and doubt the court would revoke the charge since in a way you have already accepted it. If you had concerns at the time and/or evidence then you should of gone to court and contested the case. I don't know if you could appeal and on what grounds you would appeal.

Could be wrong as I am not a profesional in this area so could stand corrected.

If it were me, just take it on the chin and take it as one of lifes lessons. Besides if you go back to court and are unsuccesful you could end with more.

Yes, yes, yes, yes..... and yes.

You have the right to argue an FPN after the fact however, there is a time limit.

It also sounds like the OP knows he was speeding, but doesnt think he was doing 90 as accused. Either way the punishment will be the same. On the other hand, id the OP were to risk going to court and plead not guilty (even though he knows he might me guilty) then the risk of being found guilty at court would be 4,5 or 6 points and a fine maybe three times as much.

To answer the question though, although it can be seen as 'best practice' for example in cases where a laser device is used, there is no need to produce any evidence.

Indeed, this is the reason why the officers opening question is "Do you know why I have pulled you over?" as this is an easy way of getting the driver to admit that they at least think they are speeding. In legal terms the OP has been offered the chance to admit his guilt before court, and he has accepted.

[lb323]

Besides, this is a good point to raise I feel for all users of this forum for future reference as it could happen to someone else....:-(

[lb323]

Thanks for that. I didn't admit I was speeding though, e asked me if I knew why I had been pulled and I said No

[lb323]

I dont think I was speeding. If I was, I was doing no more than around 78 as I rarely do but obviously everyones speed creeps up for short periods sometimes.

The thing is, I had not passed them or anything, they just flew up the motorway from miles away. I saw them when they were prob about a quarter of a mile behind me and moved over to the inside lane to get out of their way. They then followed me to the inside lane, sat there for a bit then pulled me. When I saw them, it looked as if they were on their way somewhere as they were flying!

If all that counts in court is a verbal statement from the officer then surely its never worth going to court to contest these things no matter what as unless you use a tacho, its impossible to prove your speed. That surely means unscrupulous officers could pull people, if they so wished, and give them points for speeding whether they had been or not if they should choose to do so.

With all the european laws and stuff around these days, and also the stringent rules applied when it comes to speeding tickets from gatsos (to do with calibration and stuff I believe), it seems ridiculous that this should be the case....

Edited by lb323 on Sunday 1st July 23:22

[CommanderJameson]

lb323 said:

I dont think I was speeding. If I was, I was doing no more than around 78 as I rarely do but obviously everyones speed creeps up for short periods sometimes.

You don't think you were speeding but you were?

Not the strongest defence in the known universe.

BTW, although ACPO guidelines say 10% + 2, you can actually be done at 71.

[Mattt]

CommanderJameson said:

lb323 said:

I dont think I was speeding. If I was, I was doing no more than around 78 as I rarely do but obviously everyones speed creeps up for short periods sometimes.

You don't think you were speeding but you were?

Not the strongest defence in the known universe.

BTW, although ACPO guidelines say 10% + 2, you can actually be done at 71.

Or 70.0000000000000000000...00001 if they could prove the equipment was accurate.

[JustinP1]

lb323 said:

I dont think I was speeding. If I was, I was doing no more than around 78 as I rarely do but obviously everyones speed creeps up for short periods sometimes.

The thing is, I had not passed them or anything, they just flew up the motorway from miles away. I saw them when they were prob about a quarter of a mile behind me and moved over to the inside lane to get out of their way. They then followed me to the inside lane, sat there for a bit then pulled me. When I saw them, it looked as if they were on their way somewhere as they were flying!

If all that counts in court is a verbal statement from the officer then surely its never worth going to court to contest these things no matter what as unless you use a tacho, its impossible to prove your speed. That surely means unscrupulous officers could pull people, if they so wished, and give them points for speeding whether they had been or not if they should choose to do so.

With all the european laws and stuff around these days, and also the stringent rules applied when it comes to speeding tickets from gatsos (to do with calibration and stuff I believe), it seems ridiculous that this should be the case....

Edited by lb323 on Sunday 1st July 23:22

When they sat behind you for a bit what speed were you doing?

[JustinP1]

Mattt said:

CommanderJameson said:

lb323 said:

I dont think I was speeding. If I was, I was doing no more than around 78 as I rarely do but obviously everyones speed creeps up for short periods sometimes.

You don't think you were speeding but you were?

Not the strongest defence in the known universe.

BTW, although ACPO guidelines say 10% + 2, you can actually be done at 71.

Or 70.0000000000000000000...00001 if they could prove the equipment was accurate.

Agree and disagree.

It has been my argument in other threads that the 10% + 2 guideline for thresholds is there not to allow the driver some leaway (although this is a side effect) but to make the operators or officers opinion of excess speed believable and reaslistic to hold it's weight in court.

In these cases, the operators opinion is the PRIMARY evidence which is only backed up by the supposedly independant corroboration of a device or other officer.

For example, if an officer was to swear on oath that he saw and calculated with the naked eye that a driver was driving at say 72mph in a 70 limit and just by chance the device he used backed this margin of error up, it would be laughed out of court. However, it is more believable to expect an officer to be able to notice the difference between 70 and 80 and this was the reason why the evidence was chosen to be backed up with a measuring device.

Of course there is also the factor that most measuring devices have a +- 1 or 2mph tolerance anyway but thats another issue!

[doc3]

ib323 said:

If I was, I was doing no more than around 78 as I rarely do but obviously everyones speed creeps up for short periods sometimes.

Edited by lb323 on Sunday 1st July 23:22

Sounds like you were doing a reasonable speed 'everyones speed creeps up for short periods sometimes.' I'm sure every petrolhead takes the risk sometimes, but this time you got caught out., Take it on the chin (as you already have!).

[bryan35]

" he protesteth.............not at all?"

if you'd been religiously under the limit there isn't any way you'd just pay the fine, and parallel to this, there isn't any way you'd be pulled for speeding!!!!

sounds like you were, and got pulled for it!

isn't life s**t !!

[lb323]

I drive 75 miles to work and 75 back every day. Believe me, its not just petrolheads that take the risk sometimes, its about 70% of the motorway users between 7-9am and 5-7 pm every day! (traffic flow permitting).

I've heard many rumours of people contesting gatso tickets and if the machine hasnt been correctly calibrated or if police procedure hasnt been followed to the letter of the law, they get thrown out of court. If your posts are correct, does that mean these rumours are all false then?

[vonhosen]

lb323 said:

I drive 75 miles to work and 75 back every day. Believe me, its not just petrolheads that take the risk sometimes, its about 70% of the motorway users between 7-9am and 5-7 pm every day! (traffic flow permitting).

I've heard many rumours of people contesting gatso tickets and if the machine hasnt been correctly calibrated or if police procedure hasnt been followed to the letter of the law, they get thrown out of court. If your posts are correct, does that mean these rumours are all false then?

It depends by what method the evidence was gained.
There is a difference between say a GATSO & an officer in a car stopping you.
The car doesn't have to be video equipped etc. You can be convicted on the opinion of an officer, supported by speedo reading.

[doc3]

Blimey, that's quite a way to work. You should move closer then you'd be able to drive a bit slower... HTH

[lb323]

I'm not asking for anyones opinion on my actions but yeah great, thanks anyway.... I'm looking to clarify the legal position. If the people who have posted here are sure your comments regarding the legal position are correct (which I'm sure they are) then my question is answered and I thank you.

[lb323]

well I'm contracting. If I was a hobo, then I'd move all the time depending where I'm contracting but I'm not so have to do the mileage mate :-(.

Good suggestion tho, nice one