Safe Speed Forums

Camera truths
From Stuart Clarkson

I WOULD like to clear up the misunderstandings that your correspondents have of safety cameras and speed enforcement (Letters, May 19, 2005).

Andrew Fowler-Hall claims motorists are being prosecuted by the Cambridgeshire Safety Camera Partnership outside of prosecution guidelines. This is simply not the case.

The Association of Chief Police Officers guidelines recommend that motorists should not be prosecuted below 10 per cent+ 2mph of the speed limit.

No vehicles detected by Safety Cameras are prosecuted below those levels. His suggestion of the Safety Camera Project being a fraudulent scam could not be further from the truth. We only prosecute people who break the law. Donald MacKay should also familiarise himself with the law before quoting incorrectly.

The photographic evidence obtained by safety cameras only exists to identify the vehicle committing an offence from its registration number. In some instances it can be possible to identify the driver, but it is the legal obligation for the registered keeper of a vehicle to supply information as to who was driving it at any given time to the Chief Officer of Police.

Failure to supply such information can result in a prosecution under section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.

In addition, the police do not add points to licences - it is the magistrates' courts who have this power. If the registered keeper is unable to provide information of the driver then the matter is dealt with by a court rather than by Fixed Penalty Notice.

Public Relations Manager
Cambridgeshire Safety Camera
Partnership
Huntingdon