What to do when you've got better data?
Discussion
I got the chance to attend the training for Community Speedwatch in my part of Essex...
it was explained that the data was retained to spot patterns of usage - eg if a large number of speeds above the limit was recorded then the police may carry out proper enforcement there. It may also be of use if the the vehicle was 'of interest' to the force already.
We used an older gun which wasn't type approved for actual enforcement, but was regularly tested & calibrated.
Unfortunately, many of the volunteers who partake in these courses do tend to be of a certain age (as they tend to be the only ones with enough free time). A small number may, perhaps, exaggerate speeds if a vehicle fits a certain profile (boy racer/ big exhaust, etc).
it was explained that the data was retained to spot patterns of usage - eg if a large number of speeds above the limit was recorded then the police may carry out proper enforcement there. It may also be of use if the the vehicle was 'of interest' to the force already.
We used an older gun which wasn't type approved for actual enforcement, but was regularly tested & calibrated.
Unfortunately, many of the volunteers who partake in these courses do tend to be of a certain age (as they tend to be the only ones with enough free time). A small number may, perhaps, exaggerate speeds if a vehicle fits a certain profile (boy racer/ big exhaust, etc).
blueg33 said:
Woul dthe fact that this incident has been recorded be taken into account by a court if it was sentencing the op in the future for speeding or other driving offences, perhaps resulting in a more onerous punishment?
Unless the Police knew who the driver had been, how could it? As far as I'm aware these letters are merely sent to the Registered Keeper.
SHutchinson said:
I know this is descending into tin foil hattery now, but, surely no one is holding any data about any actual person. Merely someone now has a record that a vechicle registered to OPs company was apparently recorded in excess of a speed limit.
Agreed. So in the scenario where a car is driven equally by husband and wife, she always sticks to the limit and he gets 3 'warning' letters that are recorded and "may be used in the future". She for the first time is observed exceeding the limit and his previous misdemeanours are taken into account when deciding whether to prosecute and what the sentence might be! Doesn't seem fair does it?I would become a pita, too.I had one of these bored and brainwashed octogenarians yelling at me to slow down as she waved her arms around in a manner which made it look like she was attempting to fly.The limit was 30 mph, yet I was traveling at between 19 and 22 mph.This has happened to me a couple of times now and when you consider I have only passed through four or five of these OAP checkpoints, I'm left wondering if leaving such tasks to people who struggle with T.V remotes, is such a good idea.
Wow I've not seen such baying of the PH hounds for ages. It's all a non event. The letters written for the CSW are just tosh. And wowee, perhaps they got it wrong. It's just trivial tosh. A sense of perspective is needed.
I think Las Liga is spot on...
Do you want a real officer there with the power to issue tickets and ROS, or for there the police to suggest a few people with the concerns do some measurements themselves, resulting in the RK getting a pre-written letter that means practically nothing? Something has gone wrong here, but in general circumstances the community groups are going to be accurate as the guns are really easy to use.
I think Las Liga is spot on...
La Liga said:
Do you want a real officer there with the power to issue tickets and ROS, or for there the police to suggest a few people with the concerns do some measurements themselves, resulting in the RK getting a pre-written letter that means practically nothing? Something has gone wrong here, but in general circumstances the community groups are going to be accurate as the guns are really easy to use.
Personally, I'd be very tempted to write back to plod, if only to advise them that their time is being wasted by inaccurate reports of speeding.
I'd send them something like:
Dear Inspector Knacker,
Thank you for your letter of 1/1/15 which describes an allegation of speeding on 31/12/14 by the vehicle, registration number PI55 TUP, of which I am the registered keeper.
The allegation is that a speed of 37 mph was witnessed on Sausage Close where a statutory speed limit of 30 mph is in force.
The vehicle PI55 TUP is an engineering test vehicle which has been equipped with multiple independent laboratory-precision calibrated speedometers and telemetry equipment. This is used in the course of my work as a consulting engineer to the motorsport industry where I consult on vehicle performance measurement and tuning.
Telemetry records indicate that at 11:31 on 31/12/14, the vehicle travelled North along Sausage close with a maximum speed of 28.7 mph.
I therefore advise you that the speed stated by the complainant is grossly inaccurate, and that the allegation of speeding is false. I sincerely regret that police time has been wasted on this incident. I also ask that you consider giving feedback to the original complainant in the hope of avoiding a similar incident in the future.
I'd send them something like:
Dear Inspector Knacker,
Thank you for your letter of 1/1/15 which describes an allegation of speeding on 31/12/14 by the vehicle, registration number PI55 TUP, of which I am the registered keeper.
The allegation is that a speed of 37 mph was witnessed on Sausage Close where a statutory speed limit of 30 mph is in force.
The vehicle PI55 TUP is an engineering test vehicle which has been equipped with multiple independent laboratory-precision calibrated speedometers and telemetry equipment. This is used in the course of my work as a consulting engineer to the motorsport industry where I consult on vehicle performance measurement and tuning.
Telemetry records indicate that at 11:31 on 31/12/14, the vehicle travelled North along Sausage close with a maximum speed of 28.7 mph.
I therefore advise you that the speed stated by the complainant is grossly inaccurate, and that the allegation of speeding is false. I sincerely regret that police time has been wasted on this incident. I also ask that you consider giving feedback to the original complainant in the hope of avoiding a similar incident in the future.
BertBert said:
It's all a non event. The letters written for the CSW are just tosh. And wowee, perhaps they got it wrong. It's just trivial tosh. A sense of perspective is needed.
I got told they would be "phoning my company".It might be trivial to you, I assure you it's not when you have to prove you didn't do something based on the threats of someone whose "concern" wasn't speed, rather they just didn't like vehicles.Be a pita, please!
WatchfulEye said:
Personally, I'd be very tempted to write back to plod, if only to advise them that their time is being wasted by inaccurate reports of speeding.
I'd send them something like:
Would you not ask for the letter to be removed from the file too? I'd send them something like:
Another following with interest.
Digby said:
I got told they would be "phoning my company".It might be trivial to you, I assure you it's not when you have to prove you didn't do something based on the threats of someone whose "concern" wasn't speed, rather they just didn't like vehicles.
Be a pita, please!
And did they, whoever they is?Be a pita, please!
BertBert said:
And I'm slightly intrigued by the journey of this car. Didn't go over 28.xx mph. I can't imagine a car journey I've made that didn't exceed 30mph. What journey did it do?
Bert
I've been working in exeter recently and have to drive between the city centre and an industrial park on the outskirts (normally at night) everybody seems to stick to the speed limits, and I'm regularly behind a car doing 23mph with a clear road ahead!Bert
Type R Tom said:
I use a speed gun from time to time, they are pretty idiot proof. They need calibrating from occasionally but we check ours with a tuning fork every time so we know it’s accurate. Chances are they with miss read / transposed numbers or were picking up a different vehicle. Either way it’s a bit of a cock up!
Doubt you’ll get anywhere, I doubt the person who “caught†you will remember but will be interesting to see the police response.
No wonder they can go wrong then. A fork is for eating with, not for checking a speed gun's accuracy with.Doubt you’ll get anywhere, I doubt the person who “caught†you will remember but will be interesting to see the police response.
Noob.
S
It's a pre-written letter to appease community groups who have been given this as a substitute for a real police officer doing the speed enforcement (on a side-note, so much for the revenue argument, eh?).
I can't think of any practical consequence with this specific speed example. It's like if someone calls Crimestoppers and says you're a drug dealer. It may be wholly inaccurate and / or malicious. It's graded and recorded appropriately, but even if of little weight it it MAY be used in the future.
People on PH don't like to acknowledge it, as they can't comprehend the views of others in the motoring context, but there are a lot of people who approach the police directly or indirectly about speed enforcement. They'll write to the CC / PCC / MP / LA / attend community meetings in volume etc. The police have to do something about it (especially as there's a statutory 'community trigger' which has been introduced).
Do you want a real officer there with the power to issue tickets and ROS, or for there the police to suggest a few people with the concerns do some measurements themselves, resulting in the RK getting a pre-written letter that means practically nothing? Something has gone wrong here, but in general circumstances the community groups are going to be accurate as the guns are really easy to use.
That's why I suggested the OP take his data to the police. At the very least they can approach the groups and make sure they're not making mistakes so people who weren't speeding don't receive letters.
So what, exactly, is the point of writing such a letter? If it is not to intimidate then what? There is absolutely no reason to infer the recording for future use, which we all know is pretty much b
ks, if it is not meant as a threat!
My real point here is that these letters are being sent out 'willy-nilly' on the mere say so of some third party without any real checks and, in this case (and I'm taking the OP at 'face value' here), erroneous data. Why should anyone put up with that?
La Liga said:
Garvin said:
They can record what they like but the clear indication that such data will be used for future use is, in my book, and, I suspect, most people's, a thinly veiled attempt at intimidation or, as most would call it, a threat.
There's no indication it WILL be used for future use. It's simply a possibility, just as it always with with any such collected data, regardless of the quality and grading. It's a pre-written letter to appease community groups who have been given this as a substitute for a real police officer doing the speed enforcement (on a side-note, so much for the revenue argument, eh?).
I can't think of any practical consequence with this specific speed example. It's like if someone calls Crimestoppers and says you're a drug dealer. It may be wholly inaccurate and / or malicious. It's graded and recorded appropriately, but even if of little weight it it MAY be used in the future.
Garvin said:
To then attempt to intimidate people with erroneous data in this way is just bang out of order. I don't give a flying fk whether it is legitimate or not. There are plenty of 'legitimate' things we can all do which most right minded people would call immoral. Might be legitimate but it doesn't make it right.
I think we have different definitions of a threat. You're taking the word threat and working backwards over the example to justify it. "Then to attempt to intimate people" is a little melodramatic. k whether it is legitimate or not. There are plenty of 'legitimate' things we can all do which most right minded people would call immoral. Might be legitimate but it doesn't make it right.People on PH don't like to acknowledge it, as they can't comprehend the views of others in the motoring context, but there are a lot of people who approach the police directly or indirectly about speed enforcement. They'll write to the CC / PCC / MP / LA / attend community meetings in volume etc. The police have to do something about it (especially as there's a statutory 'community trigger' which has been introduced).
Do you want a real officer there with the power to issue tickets and ROS, or for there the police to suggest a few people with the concerns do some measurements themselves, resulting in the RK getting a pre-written letter that means practically nothing? Something has gone wrong here, but in general circumstances the community groups are going to be accurate as the guns are really easy to use.
That's why I suggested the OP take his data to the police. At the very least they can approach the groups and make sure they're not making mistakes so people who weren't speeding don't receive letters.
ks, if it is not meant as a threat!My real point here is that these letters are being sent out 'willy-nilly' on the mere say so of some third party without any real checks and, in this case (and I'm taking the OP at 'face value' here), erroneous data. Why should anyone put up with that?
TooMany2cvs said:
Garvin said:
TooMany2cvs said:
Garvin said:
I would also move to get them to strike it all from the record as purely malicious and vexatious.
Step away from the daytime TV courtroom dramas!Garvin said:
So what, exactly, is the point of writing such a letter? If it is not to intimidate then what?
To give people a warning about their excess speed. Garvin said:
There is absolutely no reason to infer the recording for future use, which we all know is pretty much bks, if it is not meant as a threat!
If you'll only consider a "threat / no threat" possibility, then you can't consider any other reasons. ks, if it is not meant as a threat!Garvin said:
My real point here is that these letters are being sent out 'willy-nilly' on the mere say so of some third party without any real checks and, in this case (and I'm taking the OP at 'face value' here), erroneous data. Why should anyone put up with that?
All of which are compromises made by choosing this solution rather than having officers who'll issues FPNs and the like. Some police officers do threaten. It's not nice having your name connected to erroneous information on official police letterhead.
'Serial Speeder' is a term that's been used in court, even in connection with an off duty officer caught speeding on his motorcycle. I assume to be a 'serial speeder' there has to be a record of endorsements and fines rather than clipboard forms from an unpaid volunteer that may have an agenda?
'Serial Speeder' is a term that's been used in court, even in connection with an off duty officer caught speeding on his motorcycle. I assume to be a 'serial speeder' there has to be a record of endorsements and fines rather than clipboard forms from an unpaid volunteer that may have an agenda?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff