Well done Cumbria Safety Cameras

Well done Cumbria Safety Cameras

Author
Discussion

james_j

3,996 posts

254 months

Monday 4th October 2004
quotequote all
KenC said:

Cooperman said:
Don't give the Cumbria Cash-Collection Partnership the 'thumbs-up' too readily.
They are currently nicking people with their Talivans for 80 mph on the M6 in daylight, in light traffic and in the dry.
A road safety contribution - don't make me laugh!



Yes - I am one of those. Done for 80mph exactly, at 9 am in the morning, excellent weather conditions. Travelling from Scotland to Kent in a diesel Audi with my family on board.

Apparently I was a safety risk and it was my fault for not looking at the website in advance of my journey to check the location of the mobile camera.

Of course, I was not allowed to see the evidence in advance of accepting the fixed penalty. That is only available if you go to court and, in their words, risk more points and a higher fine. Given I drove 460 miles that day I cannot say I was doing 80 at precicely that point. So I have to plead guilty for something I do not know I was guilty of.

Fair?

Ken


... but you could have been doing 60mph on black ice and they wouldn't have done anything about it. Bl00dy fools acting as revenue-gathering useful idiots.

baz1985

3,598 posts

244 months

Monday 4th October 2004
quotequote all
cumbria scamera partnership. they state that they have the right to change a pre determined locationif the operator feels like it. so beware of that. 80mph so dangerous! I used to cruise through jct 36-40 at 90-100, now i set the cruise to 75 and fall asleep that's safer isn't it your ignorant, insolent & incompetent partnership would do well to acknowledge that. Mind you you are also adding an extra 20-30 mins on journey time- hardly good for the economy. in fact just during the last week i've used that stretch 3 times checked the scam's locations , i know which bridges they use anyway and the stretches without bridges so guess what i floored it between the slip roads and you can do nothing. hahahah. oh and i forgot at night its all clear anyway so you can floor it once more. if you do bump into traffpol as long as you under the ton and safe you'l get a chat not a fpn from your scamera brigade. anyway snap a letter of both your no plates and you'll be laughing.
nothing personal steve callaghan i appreciate that you are just carrying out your job and earning a living so please don't take any offence, but you could set the threshold to at least 85 on the M6 please
rant over.

baz

8Pack

5,182 posts

239 months

Tuesday 5th October 2004
quotequote all
Agree with you baz, My journey to Scotland and back the other week took 1 hr more each way. Driving the northern end of the M6 used to be a pleasure with few accidents (in clear weather at least)now it's very reminicent of the US in the 55mph days, hypnotic, slow, boring and sleep inducing. It really CAN'T be better for safety. But hey! safety isn't the issue is it? Just think of the money!

MMmmh! Speaking of which. I wonder if SteveC would care to share with us how much revenue he raises in 12 months average activity? or failing that: How many prosecutions of Mr average driver per year?

Ooh! By the way Steve, You missed me again! saw you though. Still "No Points" 8Pack.



>> Edited by 8Pack on Tuesday 5th October 01:01

Themoss

256 posts

237 months

Tuesday 5th October 2004
quotequote all

Hiya 8Pack, had exactly the same thing on M6 coming back from Jockland the other month. Completely clear road, van on bridge. However, it was clearly marked and i had vision well raised as always so i couldn't miss it really, unlike Mondeo family man who was trying to race me, (fed you that one mate, sorry!) Still nil points for me also (kiss of death saying that, no doubt will be done tomorrow at 140 in Kent!)

The Scottish Highlands seem to be the only place to go for 'real' driving now. Awesome roads! Had the roof down in the pi**ing rain and didn't care. Sheer driving heaven!

8Pack

5,182 posts

239 months

Tuesday 5th October 2004
quotequote all
Great Stuff Themoss! Go with the flow, Hast Ye back to Scotland now! The only sane place in these Islands GRRRreat Roads though hey!!

Ooh! Hope you're careful on the A9 and the roads to Aberdeen though! My advice (for what it's worth) drive fast - but sensible, and the umarked car MAY have sympathy

>> Edited by 8Pack on Tuesday 5th October 02:33

Themoss

256 posts

237 months

Tuesday 5th October 2004
quotequote all
I'd move there tomorrow if i could. Shame it's a nine hour drive away (in middle of night doing reasonable speed). Missus spent most of the journey puking up out the window (dodgy ruby, not my driving!) Went to Oban hospital. Unbelievable, immaculate with fantastic staff, seen immediately and given coffee!

Gotta be said though that the locals ARE complete maniacs up there though. Some of the overtakes i saw on blind bends! So many locals meet their demise that way......

They do have speed camera signs which i took heed of, but saw no cameras at all. I'm always a very careful, but it was such a breath of fresh air for someone who lives to drive cars, just fantastic. Dreaming of those NSL signs now......

8Pack

5,182 posts

239 months

Tuesday 5th October 2004
quotequote all
Yeah! We should have somewhere in these islands for "speed tourism". It would be the most popular place in the UK. Certain roads could be designated: "limit free" and Scotland is the ideal place. They'd be beating them off with sticks!

cen

593 posts

234 months

Tuesday 5th October 2004
quotequote all
SteveCallaghan said:


kevinday said:
Steve, would you release the video evidence then? I would also be asking which BiB had the initial impression the speed was over the limit, as this is a requirement for primary evidence, the laser reading is only secondary evidence and cannot be used in isolation can it?



We don't release it but you can come and see it.




Steve, then you are guilty of "Abuse of Process" If the defendant requests full disclosure then he/she is entitled to it. Disclosure of the video under the Criminal Procedure and Investigation Act 1996. (Section 35)

The precident was set in Lee v Police June this year when Mr. Lee was awarded full disclosure.

Then the argument would turn to the speed detection device used and if it is on video the it would be the Speedscope LTi 20-20. Another precident as been set that the device gets it wrong 30 to 40 % of its use. That precident set by Speedscope`s own sales director Mr. Garret.

Lets make facts perfectly clear.

I am not against the use of speed detection devices/cameras. They should be mounted outside all of our schools etc.

What I am against is the misuse of the said devices and the legal rights attached.

When you send your officers and civilians out to create revenue are you advising them of APCO regulations? Furthermore, are you stopping the use of the speedscope device knowing of its inaccuracy?
Obviously not. Therefore, you will eventually become the brunt of civil litigation being the head of a regional partnership for abuse of unrealiable and uncalibrated equipement.

The writer looks forward to pursueing matters in such a way.



>> Edited by cen on Tuesday 5th October 09:41

KenC

691 posts

234 months

Wednesday 6th October 2004
quotequote all
SteveCallaghan said:

KenC said:


Cooperman said:
Don't give the Cumbria Cash-Collection Partnership the 'thumbs-up' too readily.
They are currently nicking people with their Talivans for 80 mph on the M6 in daylight, in light traffic and in the dry.
A road safety contribution - don't make me laugh!




Yes - I am one of those. Done for 80mph exactly, at 9 am in the morning, excellent weather conditions. Travelling from Scotland to Kent in a diesel Audi with my family on board.

Apparently I was a safety risk and it was my fault for not looking at the website in advance of my journey to check the location of the mobile camera.

Of course, I was not allowed to see the evidence in advance of accepting the fixed penalty. That is only available if you go to court and, in their words, risk more points and a higher fine. Given I drove 460 miles that day I cannot say I was doing 80 at precicely that point. So I have to plead guilty for something I do not know I was guilty of.

Fair?

Ken


Ken
I am very surprised that you have been refused the photographs as it is my policy to provide them immediately upon request.
We will also allow you to view the video evidence that contains the measurement of your vehicle speed, you just need to make an appointment and I will personally arrange this for you.
Just visit:
www.cumbriasafetycameras.org/contacts.php

Steve Callaghan
Manager
Cumbria Safety Cameras


I will check when I get home tonight, but what I said was contained in the documentation sent to me.

Gievn I live in Kent a visit to see would not have been the easiest thing in the world to organise. As I had to plead guilty within a few weeks of receipt of the notification, I have already done so and paid my £60.

It is the feeling of unfairness that will not go away.

Ken

KenC

691 posts

234 months

Wednesday 6th October 2004
quotequote all
kevinday said:

KenC said:


Cooperman said:
Don't give the Cumbria Cash-Collection Partnership the 'thumbs-up' too readily.
They are currently nicking people with their Talivans for 80 mph on the M6 in daylight, in light traffic and in the dry.
A road safety contribution - don't make me laugh!




Yes - I am one of those. Done for 80mph exactly, at 9 am in the morning, excellent weather conditions. Travelling from Scotland to Kent in a diesel Audi with my family on board.

Apparently I was a safety risk and it was my fault for not looking at the website in advance of my journey to check the location of the mobile camera.

Of course, I was not allowed to see the evidence in advance of accepting the fixed penalty. That is only available if you go to court and, in their words, risk more points and a higher fine. Given I drove 460 miles that day I cannot say I was doing 80 at precicely that point. So I have to plead guilty for something I do not know I was guilty of.

Fair?

Ken



Ken, Are you sure it was you driving at that time, might it not have been your wife, considering how far you were travelling it would be reasonable to share the driving. This being so you would need to request the photographic evidence to see who was driving at the time, otherwise you could not fill in the NIP correctly could you?

If they refuse to provide the photograph or video evidence plead not guilty, you can happily go to court as the case will likely be dismissed for lack of evidence.


Good suggestion, but as I was driving I was asked by my employer to advis ethem who was driving. The consequencies of lying to your employer are not worth considering, so it had to be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Ken

andytk

1,553 posts

265 months

Thursday 7th October 2004
quotequote all
And another thing. That map on the cumbria cash camera partnership webshite is crap.

Its the vaugest map I've even seen. I could have drawn a better map with a set of crayons.

It gives away practically no useful information.

But of course thats the idea isn't it.

Andy

8Pack

5,182 posts

239 months

Friday 8th October 2004
quotequote all
One map I'd like to see is a map of serious accident sites overlaid with Scamera activity sites! I wonder if there's any correlation?

ratpit

229 posts

235 months

Friday 8th October 2004
quotequote all
It would be interesting to see someone suitably qualified go through Cumbrias interpretation of the guidlines and the actual Law, as laid down by an Act of Parliament, and see if they are acting in full compliance.

From what has been posted on here, the operatives are either insufficiently trained, incompetent, or deliberatley misinforming members of the public as to their legal rights to view evidence. If all that has been posted is also a true report of events and information being handed out by this Partnership.

It would seem a misguided use of budget and technology to be prosecuting someone for driving at 80 mph on a relatively clear motorway in good conditions in the supposed aim of increasing road safety. What about the numpties who speed in built up areas, past schools, in the fog,tailgaters, lane hoggers, left lane undertakers, etc., etc.

I believe, from the evidence of others experiences and from my own observations, that a good opportunity to increase road safety and target the irresponsible and dangerous elements of the driving community has been squandered by going for the easy option. The motives for this could be many and varied. To raise revenue?? To achieve a false sense of success by gaining high figures for prosecution which are later pedalled as "evidence" of their efficiency??? A genuine desire to make our roads safer does not seem to be amongst these motives in a lot of instances.

The net result appears to be to alienate and annoy the normal average driver thereby losing all credibilty for, and support of, any initiatives which may actually be to the benefit of road safety.

KenC

691 posts

234 months

Friday 8th October 2004
quotequote all
KenC said:


SteveCallaghan said:



KenC said:




Cooperman said:
Don't give the Cumbria Cash-Collection Partnership the 'thumbs-up' too readily.
They are currently nicking people with their Talivans for 80 mph on the M6 in daylight, in light traffic and in the dry.
A road safety contribution - don't make me laugh!







Yes - I am one of those. Done for 80mph exactly, at 9 am in the morning, excellent weather conditions. Travelling from Scotland to Kent in a diesel Audi with my family on board.

Apparently I was a safety risk and it was my fault for not looking at the website in advance of my journey to check the location of the mobile camera.

Of course, I was not allowed to see the evidence in advance of accepting the fixed penalty. That is only available if you go to court and, in their words, risk more points and a higher fine. Given I drove 460 miles that day I cannot say I was doing 80 at precicely that point. So I have to plead guilty for something I do not know I was guilty of.

Fair?

Ken




Ken
I am very surprised that you have been refused the photographs as it is my policy to provide them immediately upon request.
We will also allow you to view the video evidence that contains the measurement of your vehicle speed, you just need to make an appointment and I will personally arrange this for you.
Just visit:
<a href="http://www.cumbriasafetycameras.org/contacts.php"><a href="http://www.cumbriasafetycameras.org/contacts.php">www.cumbriasafetycameras.org/contacts.php</a></a>

Steve Callaghan
Manager
Cumbria Safety Cameras




I will check when I get home tonight, but what I said was contained in the documentation sent to me.

Gievn I live in Kent a visit to see would not have been the easiest thing in the world to organise. As I had to plead guilty within a few weeks of receipt of the notification, I have already done so and paid my £60.

It is the feeling of unfairness that will not go away.

Ken



Steve

Unfortunately I did not keep all the papers after I received my licence back. Perhaps you could check the papers you send out and confirm one way or another. I'm certain the wording is something like "If you wish to se the photographs you will have to elect to go to court (therby foregoing the chance to accept the 3pts/ £60) as the fixed penalty procedure is not part of the jucicial proceedings when papers have to be made available to all parties. Plesae note that if you do so you mayreceive more than 3 points and the fine may be up to £1,000."

Ken


>> Edited by KenC on Friday 8th October 08:48

andytk

1,553 posts

265 months

Friday 8th October 2004
quotequote all
baz1985 said:
just during the last week i've used that stretch 3 times checked the scam's locations , i know which bridges they use anyway and the stretches without bridges so guess what i floored it between the slip roads and you can do nothing.

baz



Don't suppose you could post which bridges they regularly use as I commute twice a week on the M6 (from Scotland to Blackpool).

It'd be handy to know.

Cheers

Andy

>> Edited by andytk on Friday 8th October 13:15

baz1985

3,598 posts

244 months

Friday 8th October 2004
quotequote all
Going north after j36 uphill stretch theres two bridges. Once you've been past them its clear until you reach the summit then on the immediate downhill stretch they are there on the pair of bridges, then its all clear until jct 37 after you've past the twistie section. Once you hit the straights after jct 37 watch out for the bridges. Then its a case of slowing down when you're within a couple of miles either side of jct 38, 39 & 40. Once your past jct 40 floor it til the end of the m6. But then chill when you hit the a74 cos there's often a van at todhills or metal bridge. Then you're onto the M74. Unfortunately Dumfries and Galloway partnership don't give the locations of where they are on the M74, but usually around Lockerbie. Wait until you're past Johnstonebridge services then within a few miles you see the south lanarkshire board they don't use scam vans on the m74, so floor it all the way to glasgow if you like. Just watch the sliproads at the junctions for vascar and laser and you're fine.
Sos for the vagueness and lack of coherence in the description of the locations (I'm from yorkshire). But a local PHer will see you right.

Baz

Mark in Ireland

315 posts

247 months

Friday 8th October 2004
quotequote all
Steve Callaghan
Manager
Cumbria Safety Cameras

Not that I agree with scameras especially on sections of roads which are clear and straight, but as you keep promoting safety how about you move your safety vans to places where they would be more benefitial to road safety, like the section of road just going by Bothel on the A595. The fact that the village has flashing Reduce Speed signs doesn't do anything to get drivers to slow down. A reduction in the speed limit to 40mph would be more appropriate as the near misses I witness on a regular occasions will eventually end in a fatality.