Discussion
Hi been watching and enjoying PistonHeads for years but only just signed up...cos I need some advice, typical eh!
Anyway I got my first speeding NIP this week and was taken completely by surprise as, careful as I am, I usually know when I've had a close shave.
It claims that I was doing 36 in a 30mph zone.
When I logged on, to view the pictures the police had taken, there were 3 images, Only one had any speed/distance figures on it, I'm assuming the 2nd one, taken much closer, only had date and time and the 3rd one was number plate close up.
Would I be right in thinking that the photo with speed and distance was the "damning evidence" and the other two where for number plate recognition.
or are they using some sort of speed/distance calculation?
The reason I ask is that the 1st photo shows that my vehicle is clearly still inside the 40mph zone thanks to the very conveniently painted "30 in a circle" on the road in front of my car.
If I plot the distance quoted on the 1st camera, from the small layby the police website states the mobile camera is situated, into Google Maps it places my car some 60 metres inside the 40 zone.
From what I've read challenging the accusation can prejudice any offer of a Speed awareness course and in the unlikely event that I was over the limit I would like to keep a pointless licence.
Any info will be very appreciated.
John
Anyway I got my first speeding NIP this week and was taken completely by surprise as, careful as I am, I usually know when I've had a close shave.
It claims that I was doing 36 in a 30mph zone.
When I logged on, to view the pictures the police had taken, there were 3 images, Only one had any speed/distance figures on it, I'm assuming the 2nd one, taken much closer, only had date and time and the 3rd one was number plate close up.
Would I be right in thinking that the photo with speed and distance was the "damning evidence" and the other two where for number plate recognition.
or are they using some sort of speed/distance calculation?
The reason I ask is that the 1st photo shows that my vehicle is clearly still inside the 40mph zone thanks to the very conveniently painted "30 in a circle" on the road in front of my car.
If I plot the distance quoted on the 1st camera, from the small layby the police website states the mobile camera is situated, into Google Maps it places my car some 60 metres inside the 40 zone.
From what I've read challenging the accusation can prejudice any offer of a Speed awareness course and in the unlikely event that I was over the limit I would like to keep a pointless licence.
Any info will be very appreciated.
John
You've read it correctly as I understand it. Image one is for proof of the offence, and has the calculated speed/distance from the camera, the zoomed in one shows your face for ID, the 3rd a clear view of your plate. I believe the latter 2 are enhanced images of the 1st.
If the photo evidence shows you were definitely in the 40 zone per the signage then I'd contest it. Perhaps worth a trip back to the area to measure it up? Either way I'd be as polite as possible in your letter - don't forget that the chances that the siting of the van will have anything to do with the poor soul reading your letter is slim.
If the photo evidence shows you were definitely in the 40 zone per the signage then I'd contest it. Perhaps worth a trip back to the area to measure it up? Either way I'd be as polite as possible in your letter - don't forget that the chances that the siting of the van will have anything to do with the poor soul reading your letter is slim.
Haltamer said:
blueg33 said:
First NIP - take the course, the hassle of fighting it isnt worth it
That's not the spirit at all - May as well write "WELCOME" on your forehead and lay infront of shop doors.Thank you all for input so far...
I did revisit the scene to check and the painted circle centres are directly in line with the signposts so there is no doubt that I was still some distance inside the 40 mph zone when the image was taken. My understanding is that they sight the camera on a static target at the start of the session in order to calibrate the distance. I can only assume that they either used the wrong target or their device somehow changed.
If I had any doubt I would put my hand up and take the course.
I do not want to roll over on this one because I am certain that I was not speeding and the Police photo backs this up.
I will be polite and ask nicely for more evidence.
I did revisit the scene to check and the painted circle centres are directly in line with the signposts so there is no doubt that I was still some distance inside the 40 mph zone when the image was taken. My understanding is that they sight the camera on a static target at the start of the session in order to calibrate the distance. I can only assume that they either used the wrong target or their device somehow changed.
If I had any doubt I would put my hand up and take the course.
I do not want to roll over on this one because I am certain that I was not speeding and the Police photo backs this up.
I will be polite and ask nicely for more evidence.
jsmslow said:
If I had any doubt I would put my hand up and take the course.
I do not want to roll over on this one because I am certain that I was not speeding and the Police photo backs this up.
I will be polite and ask nicely for more evidence.
Good to hear you plan to challenge - As above; It's a complete failure of justice to confess to something you've not done, and I'm sure your case would help others who were caught in the same circumstances.I do not want to roll over on this one because I am certain that I was not speeding and the Police photo backs this up.
I will be polite and ask nicely for more evidence.
I'd suggest doing some reading on Pepipoo / Possibly even speaking to agtlaw prior to responding, so you can frame things correctly from the outset and avoid any procedural issues should you need to take things further.
It's been a few years since I did any speed gunning but I remember there being guidelines on being a certain distance inside the first limit signs.
Ie, you couldn't prosecute people for doing 36mph right as they go through the first sign.
Has this changed in recent times?
Or were they just guidelines?
Ie, you couldn't prosecute people for doing 36mph right as they go through the first sign.
Has this changed in recent times?
Or were they just guidelines?
Edited by Trevor555 on Saturday 16th May 13:27
jsmslow said:
My understanding is that they sight the camera on a static target at the start of the session in order to calibrate the distance. I can only assume that they either used the wrong target or their device somehow changed.
It's a laser - they don't need to do that?I recall watching one of those Police TV programmes were they were zapping people from a motorway bridge and I was quite surprised they speed checked at very long distance, then took a snap of the reg plate when the vehicle was much closer - didn't matter that the vehicle had slowed down by then.
Agtlaw may pop up and advise, but perhaps it's worth a gentle query of the evidence if there's some way to do that? My impression is they don't proceed with these things unless they're pretty sure.
[quote=Trevor555]It's been a few years since I did any speed gunning...
The speed camera logged me at 541.8 mtrs. the distance from the small layby to the speed limit sign
is approx. 491 mtrs. this means that my car was 50 mtres or more on the 40mph side of the 30 limit.
So something has gone wrong..I'll post any response I get.
The speed camera logged me at 541.8 mtrs. the distance from the small layby to the speed limit sign
is approx. 491 mtrs. this means that my car was 50 mtres or more on the 40mph side of the 30 limit.
So something has gone wrong..I'll post any response I get.
jsmslow]revor555 said:
It's been a few years since I did any speed gunning...
The speed camera logged me at 541.8 mtrs. the distance from the small layby to the speed limit sign
is approx. 491 mtrs. this means that my car was 50 mtres or more on the 40mph side of the 30 limit.
So something has gone wrong..I'll post any response I get.
Certainly sounds like they've made a mistake then.The speed camera logged me at 541.8 mtrs. the distance from the small layby to the speed limit sign
is approx. 491 mtrs. this means that my car was 50 mtres or more on the 40mph side of the 30 limit.
So something has gone wrong..I'll post any response I get.
Let us know how it goes.
Definitely contest it - I got stopped for doing 36 at 4am (not that the time matters....) and the guy gave me a ticket. My protest that it was a 40 zone fell on deaf and dumb ears. The moron* officer then proceeded to tell me that the court would throw the book at me if I challenged it. His whole statement was a farce and when I went to court the Magistrate agreed and dismissed the case. Stand up for yourself if you were not guilty !
- moron because he told 3 blatent lies in his statement which the Magistrate picked up on in court.
mattwh said:
Definitely contest it - I got stopped for doing 36 at 4am
Thanks again folks. Matttwh 's story certainly gives me some hope that justice is still alive and well.I've taken some advice as suggested here and have sent my response off with the request for driver detail notice.
Very polite and to the point, so it's wait and see time now.
I will post the outcome as it unfolds as i'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who's been caught like this.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff