Author Topic: The Speed Camera's finally got me..... (Read 1964 times)

Big Mouse · « **Reply #25 on:** September 04, 2007, 02:25:01 pm »

I think some of you may have got the wrong end of the stick - I'm not advocating lying to the police. Its simply a fact of life that, although you have put your hands up to it and admitted speeding (as I did in the example above), the police don't always have all the documents they should have to get a lawful conviction.

Simply asking for some of the evidence that they are lawfully obliged to present gives you the opportunity - if you're lucky - to legally walk away this time. By all means fall on your sword if you feel it is the right thing to do to disregard that opportunity, I'm just naturally sceptical when people effectively insist on getting a conviction irregardless of whether the police have the evidence to prove it.

If they always had the evidence do you really think they'd even bother to ask you to own up? Can you think of any other offence where they do that?

I take it you'll all voluntarily hand your selves in every time you go over the speed limit?

F Body · « **Reply #26 on:** September 04, 2007, 02:45:34 pm »

Quoting: Giblets

My major worry is that I was flashed the very next day after this for jumping a red light trying to get to Wembley!

Hang him

Quoting: Big Mouse

I take it you'll all voluntarily hand your selves in every time you go over the speed limit?

No but'll we'll Dob Rafe in because he shouldn't have sold the F Body

Gator · « **Reply #27 on:** September 04, 2007, 05:25:43 pm »

Quoting: Fieldy

TBH, My way of looking at it (and I do often speed), is, you were breaking the law, you got caught, just pay up and admit you were in the wrong. As Shifty says, insurance companies don't care due to so many people having them anyway so to me, getting caught simply isn't A big deal, I'm just waiting for when and where...

who says hes broken the law? hes seen no evidence what if they say he was doing 58 in a 30 and want to ban him should he just accept it ?

or maybe he should ask to see the photos they might show another car in the image which would mean the reading is incorect and not valid

is it not worth just finding out

if they got ya banged to rights fair enough

as big mouse said you should go and hand yourself in you know you break the law by speeding or is it just the unlucky sod that gets flashed you consider a criminal

3pts 6pts 9pts ban it doesnt take much but if you are happy to surrender your licence go ahead it make the roads a bit less congested

Allanv · « **Reply #28 on:** September 04, 2007, 06:52:23 pm »

I got 3 points and £60 for Parking so dont feel to bad, i thought you could take some course to stop the points but not the fine.

wanna buy a snooper??

where is my Beer!!!!!

Jamieg285 · « **Reply #29 on:** September 05, 2007, 08:33:45 am »

Advice from a 'friend', who knows a bit about this stuff...

As stated above, request the evidence, verify that they have enough to prosecute or not.

With regard to the red light camera, this is the more serious offence of the two. Try to get the two offences amalgamated before going to court, that way the total penalty will be lower.

yorkshirespud · « **Reply #30 on:** September 05, 2007, 08:43:19 am »

As some may remember I got 'caught' by a Gatso last year, then played the full game of 6 months bluff and bluster paperwork. In the end it got all the way to court in front of the three wise monkeys, and with PePiPoo's help (though representing myself), was acquited due to a technicality in their paperwork (missing witness statement), though I had to fight for it.

I won!!

so it can be done

Fieldy · « **Reply #31 on:** September 05, 2007, 09:12:16 am »

I appreciate what you guys are saying, and I am not saying 'hand yourself in', and by no mean BigMouse am I stating you mean to 'lie' to the police, I know you simply mean you would like to see the evidence that it was you in the first place,but to put it bluntly, I just simply couldn't be arsed to go through the hassle. I'd rather pay the fine, forget about it, and go eat some dinner

As I have already stated, If it was between keeping and losing my license I would fight for everything it was worth, but just say I got flashed tomorrow for my 1st offence, I would wait for the paper work to come through the post, then pay it.

In regards to the red light run-through

The lights in London are un-forgiven when it comes to these, and I know so many people caught out by this. Good luck getting that one sorted because that would be shitty

yorkshirespud · « **Reply #32 on:** September 05, 2007, 09:21:27 am »

It's never been the fine that bothered me, would pay that in an instant if that was all there was, it's the points that are the problem.

To quote PePiPoo, you should fight every set of points. Sure, you have a clean license now and don't fight the first 3 points. What happens down the line when you might have 9 points, and get another 3 that you cannot possibly get out of, won't you be regretting not figthing that first 'easy' set of 3 points from before??

Fieldy · « **Reply #33 on:** September 05, 2007, 09:26:06 am »

I know what you mean, But my simple answer would be, If you have 9 points on your license, why speed again and risk losing your license?

If I had 9 points on my license, I would drive like A saint, at least until the 1st lot of points were deducted back off (The 5 year rule).

yorkshirespud · « **Reply #34 on:** September 05, 2007, 09:29:30 am »

Quoting: Fieldy

I know what you mean, But my simple answer would be, If you have 9 points on your license, why speed again and risk losing your license?

Oh dear. I do believe you'd made the fatal schoolboy error in assumuing the system is fair and just

F Body · « **Reply #35 on:** September 05, 2007, 11:11:48 am »

Quoting: Fieldy

I would drive like A saint, at least until the 1st lot of points were deducted back off (The 5 year rule).

Well I've been driving like a Vicar for over 5 years now

Gator · « **Reply #36 on:** September 05, 2007, 04:41:46 pm »

Quoting: yorkshirespud

As some may remember I got 'caught' by a Gatso last year, then played the full game of 6 months bluff and bluster paperwork. In the end it got all the way to court in front of the three wise monkeys, and with PePiPoo's help (though representing myself), was acquited due to a technicality in their paperwork (missing witness statement), though I had to fight for it.

I won!! so it can be done

hey up spud i remember your case it was running at the same time as mine we both won so it can be done +1

Fieldy you will come up against the authorities at some point me old mate then you will see the reality beleive me the system is not just at all in my own case i suffered several serious breaches of process one of which was extremely out of order

i too drive like a vicar but variable speed limits and driving in unfamiliar areas can catch you out

the red light one sounds the hardest to beat

Kenny · « **Reply #37 on:** September 06, 2007, 07:34:40 am »

Quoting: Gator

the red light one sounds the hardest to beat

Why would you want to 'beat' it? Just dont go through red lights

I recently 'aquired' tomtom 6. its really usefull for the unfamilier roads, because it has the speed limits programmed into it and lets you know if your over.

cant help with variable ones though

Incursus · « **Reply #38 on:** September 06, 2007, 10:38:58 am »

Quoting: Kenny

I recently 'aquired' tomtom 6. its really usefull for the unfamilier roads, because it has the speed limits programmed into it and lets you know if your over.

Ditto, tells you where the cameras are as well including the traffic light ones

Got an SP30 about ten years ago, didn't fight it but I was very young and didn't even consider it as an option...was only £30 back then

Gator · « **Reply #39 on:** September 06, 2007, 05:04:04 pm »

Quoting: Kenny

Quoting: Gatorthe red light one sounds the hardest to beat

Why would you want to 'beat' it? Just dont go through red lights

I recently 'aquired' tomtom 6. its really usefull for the unfamilier roads, because it has the speed limits programmed into it and lets you know if your over. cant help with variable ones though

coz i dont want points but i wasnt talking about me as i dont jump lights

lets hope tha canera is as accurate as your tomtom and wont help with mobile vans so your no better off

theres been several casses of truckers getting accused of speeding but their tachos say they are under both systems are ministrry approved and so say infallible which one is wrong, the tacho which reads directly from the vehicle or the lazer a quater mile away

Kenny · « **Reply #40 on:** September 06, 2007, 05:20:32 pm »

Because the tachos cannot be gaurenteed to be 100% accurate all speed traps have to be 10% plus 2mph over ther speed limit of the road. so nobody can use that excuse. though all the cars i have had gps in have actually indicated about 3-5 mph over actual speed.

and if you want you can make update the tomtom with mobile cameras, as the cops have to publish all mobile camera locations in advance

F Body · « **Reply #41 on:** September 06, 2007, 07:40:28 pm »

Top Gear presenter Jeremy Clarkson has been acquitted of a motoring offence.
Clarkson had been accused of failing to name the driver on a speeding ticket sent to him by car company Alfa Romeo.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/6982514.stm

Gator · « **Reply #42 on:** September 06, 2007, 07:53:07 pm »

Quoting: Kenny

Because the tachos cannot be gaurenteed to be 100% accurate all speed traps have to be 10% plus 2mph over ther speed limit of the road. so nobody can use that excuse. though all the cars i have had gps in have actually indicated about 3-5 mph over actual speed.

and if you want you can make update the tomtom with mobile cameras, as the cops have to publish all mobile camera locations in advance

cobblers you can be prosecuted from tacho data thats the whole point the minsitry of transport use them for their accuracy, it cant be questioned

and that figure you quote for speed traps is a calculation added after the event why is it there if speed cameras are 100% accurate 31mph 32mph its the same crime in a 30 zone

55starchief · « **Reply #43 on:** September 06, 2007, 08:10:24 pm »

Northamptonshire is zero tolerance on a lot of its cameras

Allanv · « **Reply #44 on:** September 06, 2007, 08:39:57 pm »

Quoting: Gator

Quoting: Kenny
Because the tachos cannot be gaurenteed to be 100% accurate all speed traps have to be 10% plus 2mph over ther speed limit of the road. so nobody can use that excuse. though all the cars i have had gps in have actually indicated about 3-5 mph over actual speed.

and if you want you can make update the tomtom with mobile cameras, as the cops have to publish all mobile camera locations in advance

cobblers you can be prosecuted from tacho data thats the whole point the minsitry of transport use them for their accuracy, it cant be questioned

and that figure you quote for speed traps is a calculation added after the event why is it there if speed cameras are 100% accurate 31mph 32mph its the same crime in a 30 zone

Tachos are calibrated every year, failure to have a calibration cert = fine.

when i was a trucker many years ago pulling the limiter fuse would not register on the tacho but allowed the true speed on the odometer. they got wise to that...

now for my post there must be BEER...

that ends my post

Flip Martian · « **Reply #45 on:** September 06, 2007, 09:46:00 pm »

Northants is especially hard on speeding I think. I got done driving through Roade (a 30 zone) for doing 35 on xmas eve 2005. As I was within 5mph of the limit I got the option to attend a speed awareness course OR go to court. As it was the 3rd time in 8 years I'd been caught, I went on the course... Quite enlightening actually - in built up areas I'm probably far more careful now.

I've always just paid up before now. Mind you, the first time was in Sth Wales - rather than a fixed penalty they took it to court...and the court fined me only 40 quid and charged the costs to the police...

2nd time was in Leighton Buzzard and I just paid the fixed penalty.

Its ironic that the Camaro is easier to drive at 30 through the villages round here than my old Honda Civic is, thanks to the cruise control...

I took my Dad out in the Camaro for the 1st time the other week - we were on an empty stretch of straight road and the speedo mysteriously climbed to 135mph before I backed off...

I blame the euro km/h speedo - takes longer to read the mph speed...

Oh, and my Dad totally loved the car (everyone seems to).

Kenny · « **Reply #46 on:** September 07, 2007, 07:37:33 am »

Quoting: Gator

cobblers you can be prosecuted from tacho data thats the whole point the minsitry of transport use them for their accuracy, it cant be questioned

Sorry my bad, got my tachos and speedo's mixed up

i was just taking about car speedometers in general.

Quoting: Gator

and that figure you quote for speed traps is a calculation added after the event why is it there if speed cameras are 100% accurate 31mph 32mph its the same crime in a 30 zone

as i said, the reason they add the 10% +2mph is to counter the posibility that your speedometer is reading under the actual speed.

F Body · « **Reply #47 on:** September 07, 2007, 08:48:40 pm »

Quoting: F Body

Top Gear presenter Jeremy Clarkson has been acquitted of a motoring offence.

Update :

Using the lawyer known as Mr Loophole, Clarkson goes free :

The £10,000 per day solicitor Nick Freeman managed to get the charges against Clarkson dropped after he was caught doing 82mph in a 50 zone. He was driving an Alfa Romeo Brera, on loan to him from the company, on the A40 in Ruislip.

Alfa sent Clarkson the penalty notice when it arrived last year, but he declined to name the driver and so proceedings were delayed. When it finally came before the Magistrates Court, he employed the services of 'Mr Loophole', the man who has previously acquitted David Beckham, Alex Ferguson and Colin Montgomerie. He exploits police oversights and points to flaws in the legal handling of the charge, which usually results in the case collapsing.

Clarkson did not appear in court, and the prosecution withdrew its case before the hearing had even started.

Big Mouse · « **Reply #48 on:** September 08, 2007, 09:36:35 am »

I rest my case - proof (if it were needed) that the police rely on people saying yes on the NIPS because they usually have no legal case to proceed against you if you don't.