Speed Cameras, NIP's & FOI Requests - Surprising Results?
Discussion
Brief backstory.
Sep 2025, unfamiliar car, unfamiliar road, night-time, 40 reducing to 30. I didn't notice. Flash. NIP. 3 points, £100. No argument.
But, given the 'popularity' of illegally spaced digits on number plates, doctored plates or no plates altogether, I was curious as to how many can't be identified within the 14 days for NIP issuance.
So I made an FOI request to the NIP issuer regarding the 3 constabularies local to me which went something like this:
"For the most recent year in which there is an annual total how many incidences have there been of automatic traffic safety cameras not located on motorways being triggered only through the speed limit in that camera location being exceeded? This would be within the geographical boundary of the three Constabularies which are covered by the Camera & Tickets Office, XXXX.
I would like you to provide the specified information in the following manner in either typewritten or spreadsheet format:
The number of incidents of the speed limit being exceeded by month, by County ideally by the first 3 digits of the postcode and the year in which they occurred."
They responded with a PDF containing 2025 county totals, though not by postcode as they are grouped by town.
'My' county totalled almost 48,000 which I was surprised by.
I then sent in another FOI, thanking them for the first response, and asking for further detail of the 48,000.
This said
"Transcribing the PDF into an Excel file and filtering for XXXXshire only, this
seems to indicate there were almost 48,000 incidents where a speed camera was
triggered. Based on those results I would like to ask the following questions:
1) Have I understood and transcribed the data correctly and that figure is correct?
2) Assuming it is how many Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) letters were issued
within the statutory 14 day period in comparison to the number of incidents of the
camera being triggered? This can be an annual total or preferably, by month.
3) How many vehicles did not receive an NIP due to registration plate
modification/absence or other registration illegality thereby rendering them
unidentifiable?
4) What further measures were taken to identify those vehicles, particularly those
with modified or absent registration plates?"
The response was that I hadn't interpreted the data correctly and in fact the total WAS the quantity of NIP's issued!!
They also went on to state that "There were an additional 35,720 rejected images, not all of these would have been offences.
These were rejected due to a variety of reasons: Secondary Image; Rejected at verification; Emergency Vehicles; Stolen etc".
And in response to my question 3 - "The reason mentioned is not one that rejects re(sic - I assume they mean "are") broken down into. They would fall under Rejected at verification."
They won't answer Q4 - Exempt from FOI.
I'm still formulating my follow-up.
Sep 2025, unfamiliar car, unfamiliar road, night-time, 40 reducing to 30. I didn't notice. Flash. NIP. 3 points, £100. No argument.
But, given the 'popularity' of illegally spaced digits on number plates, doctored plates or no plates altogether, I was curious as to how many can't be identified within the 14 days for NIP issuance.
So I made an FOI request to the NIP issuer regarding the 3 constabularies local to me which went something like this:
"For the most recent year in which there is an annual total how many incidences have there been of automatic traffic safety cameras not located on motorways being triggered only through the speed limit in that camera location being exceeded? This would be within the geographical boundary of the three Constabularies which are covered by the Camera & Tickets Office, XXXX.
I would like you to provide the specified information in the following manner in either typewritten or spreadsheet format:
The number of incidents of the speed limit being exceeded by month, by County ideally by the first 3 digits of the postcode and the year in which they occurred."
They responded with a PDF containing 2025 county totals, though not by postcode as they are grouped by town.
'My' county totalled almost 48,000 which I was surprised by.
I then sent in another FOI, thanking them for the first response, and asking for further detail of the 48,000.
This said
"Transcribing the PDF into an Excel file and filtering for XXXXshire only, this
seems to indicate there were almost 48,000 incidents where a speed camera was
triggered. Based on those results I would like to ask the following questions:
1) Have I understood and transcribed the data correctly and that figure is correct?
2) Assuming it is how many Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) letters were issued
within the statutory 14 day period in comparison to the number of incidents of the
camera being triggered? This can be an annual total or preferably, by month.
3) How many vehicles did not receive an NIP due to registration plate
modification/absence or other registration illegality thereby rendering them
unidentifiable?
4) What further measures were taken to identify those vehicles, particularly those
with modified or absent registration plates?"
The response was that I hadn't interpreted the data correctly and in fact the total WAS the quantity of NIP's issued!!
They also went on to state that "There were an additional 35,720 rejected images, not all of these would have been offences.
These were rejected due to a variety of reasons: Secondary Image; Rejected at verification; Emergency Vehicles; Stolen etc".
And in response to my question 3 - "The reason mentioned is not one that rejects re(sic - I assume they mean "are") broken down into. They would fall under Rejected at verification."
They won't answer Q4 - Exempt from FOI.
I'm still formulating my follow-up.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff