Average speed NIP - 2nd Camera image blurred

Average speed NIP - 2nd Camera image blurred

Author
Discussion

LivLL

Original Poster:

10,870 posts

198 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
Can anyone enlighten me for this one.

An NIP dropped in the post for 57mph in a 50 zone. Registration correct, could have been me as I was all over the area on the day in question.

However, in the supporting evidence there are two images. One crystal clear passing the first camera, one completely blurred passing the second.

For both they're somehow picked out a perfect clear snip of my number plate and pasted them into the evidence above both camera shots.

This is the second camera image.



No amount of zooming and enhancing enables me to pull the same crystal clear shot of the numberplate they have.

Is it safe to assume this will mean the alleged offence can be contested or are the images just nice to have and won't mean anything in the eyes of the Met Police?

Sebring440

2,022 posts

97 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
LivLL said:
One crystal clear passing the first camera,
So it was you then? What would be your mitigation if you attempt to contest?



LivLL

Original Poster:

10,870 posts

198 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
Sebring440 said:
So it was you then? What would be your mitigation if you attempt to contest?
Perhaps the car the second image isn’t mine that’s what.

90 seconds passed between images and it’s a very busy road.

Dave Finney

404 posts

147 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
LivLL said:
This is the second camera image.
Thanks for the image.
It confirms that, where they have them, the "L" markings on the road are exactly where the cameras start and end the timings for your average speed.
We already knew that, but nice to see confirmation. smile

tupak798

56 posts

3 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
Grounds to challenge for sure, never just roll over and pay the tax. Was your au pair driving before she returned back to Lithuania?

Evanivitch

20,128 posts

123 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
LivLL said:
No amount of zooming and enhancing enables me to pull the same crystal clear shot of the numberplate they have.

Is it safe to assume this will mean the alleged offence can be contested or are the images just nice to have and won't mean anything in the eyes of the Met Police?
Did you not just shout ENHANCE like in CSI? Shame.

My understanding is that the evidence photo isn't the one that captures your plate. The ANPR device is separate, and the "gotcha" camera is there to take a photo of your car and, often, the variable speed limit displayed above in a wide shot.

No form knowledge, just speculation.

Alex Z

1,139 posts

77 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
If there are multiple pictures of the same vehicle, taken seconds apart, why would it matter if the number plate is illegible on most of them.

As long as it’s clear on one of them so the car can be correctly identified that should be sufficient. Unless you want to claim it’s a different vehicle in the other pics?


LivLL

Original Poster:

10,870 posts

198 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
That's the question Alex.

Is the prosecution purely on the numberplate recognition or is it from the image and plate recognition.

If it's both, I'd expect the 2nd image to be clear else its quite possible the car is a different one and the NPR has cocked up.

Unlikely I know but it's a question.

Why would I pay out and take points on flimsy evidence?

lancslad58

560 posts

9 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
LivLL said:
Can anyone enlighten me for this one.


No amount of zooming and enhancing enables me to pull the same crystal clear shot of the numberplate they have.
They have far better camera software than you for processing images

Pit Pony

8,643 posts

122 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
LivLL said:
Why would I pay out and take points on flimsy evidence?
Because you know you were speeding?

LivLL

Original Poster:

10,870 posts

198 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
They must have to pull out something this clear from the 2nd image



Partial plate because PH.

Maybe they take more than one photo and just send out the potato one.

LivLL

Original Poster:

10,870 posts

198 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
Pit Pony said:
LivLL said:
Why would I pay out and take points on flimsy evidence?
Because you know you were speeding?
I don't, this way the 4th April (9 days ago) and I know the cameras are there so am normally very careful. Maybe your memory is better than mine?

BTW, you've been a great help with your informative posts, thanks for the help.

lancslad58

560 posts

9 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
LivLL said:
That's the question Alex.

Is the prosecution purely on the numberplate recognition or is it from the image and plate recognition.

If it's both, I'd expect the 2nd image to be clear else its quite possible the car is a different one and the NPR has cocked up.

Unlikely I know but it's a question.

Why would I pay out and take points on flimsy evidence?
Well fight it then, just don't forget to report back as to how you get on.

OutInTheShed

7,666 posts

27 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
lancslad58 said:
They have far better camera software than you for processing images
They also have a video stream to work with in real time.

That enables some information to be taken from one frame, some from the next and so on.

Also their camera is probably a lot more pixels than the compressed image they send to the mugs.

LivLL

Original Poster:

10,870 posts

198 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
Thanks for that, it's the kind of info I was after. Much appreciated.

Super Sonic

4,900 posts

55 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
Iirc, the first letter is asking you to identify the driver. You only need one picture for this.

LivLL

Original Poster:

10,870 posts

198 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
I've just popped that in the post, clearly from the first photo it was my car and I was driving on the day.

Weirdly the Met give you a website the send the info and when you get the end it says you still need to post the NIP back.

martinbiz

3,096 posts

146 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
LivLL said:
That's the question Alex.


Why would I pay out and take points on flimsy evidence?
Because it's not that flimsy and the only alternative option is to challenge it in court with the most likely outcome of losing and receiving a large dent to your wallet to the tune of a grand or so rather than a 100 quid FP and 3 points or possibly a course if eligible. Sometimes pragmatism can be the better option however annoying it may seem at the time.

Was this on a motorway or A road?

BertBert

19,070 posts

212 months

Saturday 13th April
quotequote all
Just nonsense, why bother? You aren't going to try to take it to court (as you'll loose), so what's the point of all this nonsense?