Speed camera - No evidence provided.
Discussion
Hi all.
I recently got two NIPs from Devon & Cornwall for 37 in a 30, two mornings running.
I'm usually pretty good about 30 MPH limits, but I guess I must have strayed.
It's frustrating, but with a 30 on a stretch of road with 4 lanes each way, I'm quite prepared to admit I may have been at fault here.
What I thought was unusual (and unfair enough to prompt the post) was that I received the FPN today, but neither included a photograph as evidence.
In the past (luckily only twice in 30 odd years), I've received the photographic evidence - It seems rather unfair that I have to plead not guilty and risk a heftier fine (and presumably waste time and petrol driving to Cornwall), just to see the evidence against me, especially as it's been provided in the past.
Was I speeding? Probably, but exactly the same amount, two days running sounds a bit coincidental and no evidence just seems a case of 'guilty until proven innocent'.
I'll have to suck it up and take my first points, I just feel that they really should demonstrate their evidence rather than just expect me to accept my guilt to avoid paying a heftier fine and getting more points! Honestly, if you'd asked me, I would have said I wasn't speeding either day. I was in no rush, had a lot of heavy gear in the car and am usually pretty good at keeping my speed down in 30 and 40 zones, but am I prepared to risk double the points, a bigger fine and a load of wasted cost just to see that I did make a mistake those days?
Still, we all know most cameras, especially in D&C, are really just revenue generators.
Bitter? Well, a bit, no-one likes being done for speeding, but my real gripe here is that they can simply accuse without evidence and the only way it seems I can see that evidence is to risk a bigger fine and double (at least) the points!
So, my question is - Is it normal not to have the evidence provided these days?
M
I recently got two NIPs from Devon & Cornwall for 37 in a 30, two mornings running.
I'm usually pretty good about 30 MPH limits, but I guess I must have strayed.
It's frustrating, but with a 30 on a stretch of road with 4 lanes each way, I'm quite prepared to admit I may have been at fault here.
What I thought was unusual (and unfair enough to prompt the post) was that I received the FPN today, but neither included a photograph as evidence.
In the past (luckily only twice in 30 odd years), I've received the photographic evidence - It seems rather unfair that I have to plead not guilty and risk a heftier fine (and presumably waste time and petrol driving to Cornwall), just to see the evidence against me, especially as it's been provided in the past.
Was I speeding? Probably, but exactly the same amount, two days running sounds a bit coincidental and no evidence just seems a case of 'guilty until proven innocent'.
I'll have to suck it up and take my first points, I just feel that they really should demonstrate their evidence rather than just expect me to accept my guilt to avoid paying a heftier fine and getting more points! Honestly, if you'd asked me, I would have said I wasn't speeding either day. I was in no rush, had a lot of heavy gear in the car and am usually pretty good at keeping my speed down in 30 and 40 zones, but am I prepared to risk double the points, a bigger fine and a load of wasted cost just to see that I did make a mistake those days?
Still, we all know most cameras, especially in D&C, are really just revenue generators.
Bitter? Well, a bit, no-one likes being done for speeding, but my real gripe here is that they can simply accuse without evidence and the only way it seems I can see that evidence is to risk a bigger fine and double (at least) the points!
So, my question is - Is it normal not to have the evidence provided these days?
M
Hashtaggggg said:
Why is the lesson not to go to Devon or Cornwall?
I would have thought it was to not speed?
Yeah, I knew I was setting myself up there, so I removed it - Just feeling a bit annoyed.I would have thought it was to not speed?
If I was speeding, I shouldn't have been, I just find the lack of evidence rather galling.
Maybe I wasn't - How would I know without huge expense and risk?
My question was whether this is normal practice across the country now? It's been many years since my last one and I definitely got the evidence with the FPN in the past, which is what I expected this time.
SS2. said:
Write and ask if they could send you any photos which may assist with identification of the driver.
It doesn't reset or extend your 28 day response window, but they may well be happy to pop a snap or two in the post for you.
Too late now, as I knew I was driving, but a good suggestion for anyone else in the same boat. Thanks.It doesn't reset or extend your 28 day response window, but they may well be happy to pop a snap or two in the post for you.
M
Edited by marcosgt on Saturday 17th July 12:05
It doesn't matter that you know you were driving - that wasn't really the point.
If time had permitted, writing and asking for photos would have been a zero risk exercise which might have allowed you to see the photos they hold.
And 'to assist with identification' was more likely to have elicited a positive response as opposed to 'I want to see the evidence'.
If time had permitted, writing and asking for photos would have been a zero risk exercise which might have allowed you to see the photos they hold.
And 'to assist with identification' was more likely to have elicited a positive response as opposed to 'I want to see the evidence'.
SS2. said:
It doesn't matter that you know you were driving - that wasn't really the point.
If time had permitted, writing and asking for photos would have been a zero risk exercise which might have allowed you to see the photos they hold.
And 'to assist with identification' was more likely to have elicited a positive response as opposed to 'I want to see the evidence'.
No, fair enough, if I'd known I'd not get to see the photos, I might well have responded differently.If time had permitted, writing and asking for photos would have been a zero risk exercise which might have allowed you to see the photos they hold.
And 'to assist with identification' was more likely to have elicited a positive response as opposed to 'I want to see the evidence'.
I naively thought I was going to see the evidence as I had in the past.
Had I imagined that I could be effectively forced to accept guilt without seeing the evidence, I would have looked into it further and I certainly will in the future.
There have been occasions where I knew I was speeding and I've taken the penalty. On these occasions, I was genuinely surprised to hear I was, but the balance of probability is that I just let my concentration wander a little and the speed creep up.
M
Edited by marcosgt on Saturday 17th July 12:15
I find it annoying that PH has become so infested with people wagging their fingers and looking down their noses saying "well the lesson is not to speed" that we now have to write several paragraphs admitting guilt and saying how we've had a mostly clean licence for 30 years etc. I've been here long enough that we used to be able to state that we'd been caught speeding and ask questions without all the sanctimonious nonsense.
We all know that several speed limits have been reduced for political and environmental reasons which have absolutely nothing to do with road safety. Near me a short stretch of what was NSL for as long as I can remember has now been made a 30 despite not a single accident being recorded at that location. And many local 40s have reduced to 30s. Yet all the Karens in the local Facebook group are campaigning for them to be reduced further because "little Lucas might walk there".
I wish we could go back to the 1990s when there were no fixed cameras, much less traffic, fewer Karens, speed limits were appropriate for the roads they controlled. Yes, we might have to wait for widespread internet access and for PH to exist but that seems an acceptable price to pay.
We all know that several speed limits have been reduced for political and environmental reasons which have absolutely nothing to do with road safety. Near me a short stretch of what was NSL for as long as I can remember has now been made a 30 despite not a single accident being recorded at that location. And many local 40s have reduced to 30s. Yet all the Karens in the local Facebook group are campaigning for them to be reduced further because "little Lucas might walk there".
I wish we could go back to the 1990s when there were no fixed cameras, much less traffic, fewer Karens, speed limits were appropriate for the roads they controlled. Yes, we might have to wait for widespread internet access and for PH to exist but that seems an acceptable price to pay.
LunarOne said:
I find it annoying that PH has become so infested with people wagging their fingers and looking down their noses saying "well the lesson is not to speed" that we now have to write several paragraphs admitting guilt and saying how we've had a mostly clean licence for 30 years etc. I've been here long enough that we used to be able to state that we'd been caught speeding and ask questions without all the sanctimonious nonsense.
We all know that several speed limits have been reduced for political and environmental reasons which have absolutely nothing to do with road safety. Near me a short stretch of what was NSL for as long as I can remember has now been made a 30 despite not a single accident being recorded at that location. And many local 40s have reduced to 30s. Yet all the Karens in the local Facebook group are campaigning for them to be reduced further because "little Lucas might walk there".
I wish we could go back to the 1990s when there were no fixed cameras, much less traffic, fewer Karens, speed limits were appropriate for the roads they controlled. Yes, we might have to wait for widespread internet access and for PH to exist but that seems an acceptable price to pay.
This , +1We all know that several speed limits have been reduced for political and environmental reasons which have absolutely nothing to do with road safety. Near me a short stretch of what was NSL for as long as I can remember has now been made a 30 despite not a single accident being recorded at that location. And many local 40s have reduced to 30s. Yet all the Karens in the local Facebook group are campaigning for them to be reduced further because "little Lucas might walk there".
I wish we could go back to the 1990s when there were no fixed cameras, much less traffic, fewer Karens, speed limits were appropriate for the roads they controlled. Yes, we might have to wait for widespread internet access and for PH to exist but that seems an acceptable price to pay.
I’m not sure if it’s a countrywide thing to not provide any photos for identification in the first instance, it might be.
Photos would only show that you were on the road, though, which you already know you were. They are almost certainly not going to aid you in any kind of defence to the speeding charge, nor prove or disprove that you were in fact speeding.
From the tone of your post it sounds like you could have been speeding. Most people I’d wager might stray over from time to time (or more often for some). On that basis they’ve pretty much got you bang to rights. The fact you’ve received a NIP means their equipment caught you. It is assumed to be working unless proven otherwise, which requires pleading not guilty etc.
You sound a bit hard done by but to be honest doing 37 in a 30 in an unfamiliar area is asking for trouble really. If you’re not local you’re not going to know where the cameras are or where the mobile traps like to hang out.
The only comfort you can really take is that had you been provided with photos in the first place all it would’ve shown is that your car was on the road, which you already know.
Photos would only show that you were on the road, though, which you already know you were. They are almost certainly not going to aid you in any kind of defence to the speeding charge, nor prove or disprove that you were in fact speeding.
From the tone of your post it sounds like you could have been speeding. Most people I’d wager might stray over from time to time (or more often for some). On that basis they’ve pretty much got you bang to rights. The fact you’ve received a NIP means their equipment caught you. It is assumed to be working unless proven otherwise, which requires pleading not guilty etc.
You sound a bit hard done by but to be honest doing 37 in a 30 in an unfamiliar area is asking for trouble really. If you’re not local you’re not going to know where the cameras are or where the mobile traps like to hang out.
The only comfort you can really take is that had you been provided with photos in the first place all it would’ve shown is that your car was on the road, which you already know.
Durzel said:
I’m not sure if it’s a countrywide thing to not provide any photos for identification in the first instance, it might be.
...
The only comfort you can really take is that had you been provided with photos in the first place all it would’ve shown is that your car was on the road, which you already know.
Pretty sure the last one I got showed a recorded speed, too. Two photographs, a few yards apart....
The only comfort you can really take is that had you been provided with photos in the first place all it would’ve shown is that your car was on the road, which you already know.
My wife, who has had far more than me over the years, just said she'd never had a photograph provided, so it seems it's not that unusual.
I guess whichever Police force I had mine from in the past was just a bit more efficient in their processing.
I can only assume I WAS speeding because I've got the NIPs and now FPNs - If you'd asked me if I had sped that day, I would have said I hadn't.
It just seems odd, but clearly not that unusual, that you aren't provided with any evidence before being asked to admit guilt.
The trouble is that, unless you're REALLY sure you weren't speeding (for example, if it had been 50 or 60, I would happily have gone to court because I KNOW I wasn't going fast, but if they'd trooped out an expert to say the camera was calibrated and 100% accurate, I couldn't have proved otherwise), the risk of pleading not guilty is huge.
The boot is firmly on the foot of the accuser, but obviously I'm going to do the course and pay the fine.
M
Edited by marcosgt on Saturday 17th July 12:52
LunarOne said:
I find it annoying that PH has become so infested with people wagging their fingers and looking down their noses saying "well the lesson is not to speed" that we now have to write several paragraphs admitting guilt and saying how we've had a mostly clean licence for 30 years etc. I've been here long enough that we used to be able to state that we'd been caught speeding and ask questions without all the sanctimonious nonsense.
So much this.LunarOne said:
I find it annoying that PH has become so infested with people wagging their fingers and looking down their noses saying "well the lesson is not to speed" that we now have to write several paragraphs admitting guilt and saying how we've had a mostly clean licence for 30 years etc. I've been here long enough that we used to be able to state that we'd been caught speeding and ask questions without all the sanctimonious nonsense.
We all know that several speed limits have been reduced for political and environmental reasons which have absolutely nothing to do with road safety. Near me a short stretch of what was NSL for as long as I can remember has now been made a 30 despite not a single accident being recorded at that location. And many local 40s have reduced to 30s. Yet all the Karens in the local Facebook group are campaigning for them to be reduced further because "little Lucas might walk there".
I wish we could go back to the 1990s when there were no fixed cameras, much less traffic, fewer Karens, speed limits were appropriate for the roads they controlled. Yes, we might have to wait for widespread internet access and for PH to exist but that seems an acceptable price to pay.
I am equally annoyed at PHers use the term ‘Karens’We all know that several speed limits have been reduced for political and environmental reasons which have absolutely nothing to do with road safety. Near me a short stretch of what was NSL for as long as I can remember has now been made a 30 despite not a single accident being recorded at that location. And many local 40s have reduced to 30s. Yet all the Karens in the local Facebook group are campaigning for them to be reduced further because "little Lucas might walk there".
I wish we could go back to the 1990s when there were no fixed cameras, much less traffic, fewer Karens, speed limits were appropriate for the roads they controlled. Yes, we might have to wait for widespread internet access and for PH to exist but that seems an acceptable price to pay.
944 Man said:
LunarOne said:
I find it annoying that PH has become so infested with people wagging their fingers and looking down their noses saying "well the lesson is not to speed" that we now have to write several paragraphs admitting guilt and saying how we've had a mostly clean licence for 30 years etc. I've been here long enough that we used to be able to state that we'd been caught speeding and ask questions without all the sanctimonious nonsense.
So much this.Who was the gent who researched all the data years ago and put up an organised resistence before he died. Was his name Paul Smith, top bloke.
Boosted LS1 said:
944 Man said:
LunarOne said:
I find it annoying that PH has become so infested with people wagging their fingers and looking down their noses saying "well the lesson is not to speed" that we now have to write several paragraphs admitting guilt and saying how we've had a mostly clean licence for 30 years etc. I've been here long enough that we used to be able to state that we'd been caught speeding and ask questions without all the sanctimonious nonsense.
So much this.That an individual was speeding?
The existence of speed limits?
This sub-forum is speed, Plod & the law. Not general motoring & driving skills.
Boosted LS1 said:
Who was the gent who researched all the data years ago and put up an organised resistence before he died. Was his name Paul Smith, top bloke.
Yes, Paul Smith.His argument was geared around enforcement policy, the use of cameras & prosecution thresholds.
Boosted LS1 said:
I remember the days when people didn't roll over and take the points. This place surely has some brake and mumsnet folk on here. The site seems so much less about motoring and driving skills.
The processes involved in prosecuting speeding are pretty well worn at this point. There’s no tricks to getting out of it, at least in England & Wales. All you can really hope for, if you’re not prepared to take responsibility, is a failure in the prosecution process that you can potentially exploit. Other than timeouts this is by no means trivial or cheap though, as the equipment and evidence presented by the CPS will be presumed correct unless proven otherwise.Do Mumsnet or indeed women not speed and/or never fight prosecutions where there is a limited basis for doing so? It seems that it’s commonly used as some kind of pejorative on here in matters of driving offences etc.
marcosgt said:
Bitter? Well, a bit, no-one likes being done for speeding, but my real gripe here is that they can simply accuse without evidence and the only way it seems I can see that evidence is to risk a bigger fine and double (at least) the points!
You will not get double the points for 37 in a 30 (and definitely not more than double as the max points for speeding is 6). Even if you go to court you are still only looking at 3 points for that speed. The fine may be higher depending on your income.Cat
LunarOne said:
I find it annoying that PH has become so infested with people wagging their fingers and looking down their noses saying "well the lesson is not to speed" that we now have to write several paragraphs admitting guilt and saying how we've had a mostly clean licence for 30 years etc. I've been here long enough that we used to be able to state that we'd been caught speeding and ask questions without all the sanctimonious nonsense.
We all know that several speed limits have been reduced for political and environmental reasons which have absolutely nothing to do with road safety. Near me a short stretch of what was NSL for as long as I can remember has now been made a 30 despite not a single accident being recorded at that location. And many local 40s have reduced to 30s. Yet all the Karens in the local Facebook group are campaigning for them to be reduced further because "little Lucas might walk there".
I wish we could go back to the 1990s when there were no fixed cameras, much less traffic, fewer Karens, speed limits were appropriate for the roads they controlled. Yes, we might have to wait for widespread internet access and for PH to exist but that seems an acceptable price to pay.
Or even go back further to 1987 so if you did not ID the driver it was max £50 fine and no power to endorse or disqualify. If ploddy did not catch the driver at the wheel they were off.We all know that several speed limits have been reduced for political and environmental reasons which have absolutely nothing to do with road safety. Near me a short stretch of what was NSL for as long as I can remember has now been made a 30 despite not a single accident being recorded at that location. And many local 40s have reduced to 30s. Yet all the Karens in the local Facebook group are campaigning for them to be reduced further because "little Lucas might walk there".
I wish we could go back to the 1990s when there were no fixed cameras, much less traffic, fewer Karens, speed limits were appropriate for the roads they controlled. Yes, we might have to wait for widespread internet access and for PH to exist but that seems an acceptable price to pay.
Had a similar experience a few years back - I was caught doing 46 in a 40 in the M32 roadworks, when they caught thousands of people. I'm fairly sure I wasn't speeding, so I asked for the camera locations as the speed limit reduced 60 to 50 to 40. The answer was "you have to go to court if you want to see that". With a clean licence up til then (and since) I took the offer of a SAC.
Given the suspiciously high number of tickets issued on a road that's a car park for much of the day, it does nothing for your trust in 'the system'.
Given the suspiciously high number of tickets issued on a road that's a car park for much of the day, it does nothing for your trust in 'the system'.
If you want to know whether it's worth going to court to fight a speed camera offence it's worth googling the success rate before you start.
It's said that fewer than one per cent of UK speeding tickets are contested and only about half of those succeed. The successful defences are almost always about legal technicalities (i.e. how and when the ticket was issued) rather than that the detected speed was wrong.
It's said that fewer than one per cent of UK speeding tickets are contested and only about half of those succeed. The successful defences are almost always about legal technicalities (i.e. how and when the ticket was issued) rather than that the detected speed was wrong.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff