Safe Speed Forums

Dear Dr L,

Thank you for your enquiry, I appreciate your concern that the Police are not complying with their obligations. There are some issues around this topic that I should perhaps explain.

Under the speeding enforcement rules a person is entitled to specific extracts of the photographic evidence to allow them to review the evidence against them. This is the standard photographic material routinely provided by the enforcement offices. This information is provided under rules outside of Data Protection.

The accused is not entitled to make any subject access request until they have clearly admitted / confirmed that they are the person the evidence relates to. Prior to admitting to being the driver of the vehicle in question, a person cannot make a subject access request for any information relating to the incident. The subject access request would not be valid until the applicant's identity and whether the images are the applicant's personal data has been confirmed beyond doubt by the data controller.

The person is entitled to make a subject access request at any time, I note that the force refer to having provided a subject access form with their letter, normal force procedures will require a subject access form to be completed prior to the subject access request being valid.

Until the driver completes the form and returns it to Police - with any required confirmation of identity, as well as the appropriate fee (understood to be £10) – their request for information is unlikely to form a valid subject access request.

The law specifies that subject access requests are not valid until confirmation of identity and any required fee have been received by the data controller (of the police). The subject access request is then likely to be considered by the Data Protection department within the Police as appropriate. It is not possible for a person to make a subject access request for the information regarding the incident, and then seek to defend the charge by way of denying that they were the driver involved.

Yours sincerely,

Information Commissioner's Office,
Casework and Advice Officer

StephenI have also noticed in several cases I have investigated that the laser speed cameras tend to read a few mph higher than the actual speed of the car, so as to get above the 10% + 2mph threshold for those only just over the speed limit. The suspicion is that the laser speed cameras are being deliberately tweaked in some way to achieve this, so as to entrap more drivers

I have also noticed in several cases I have investigated that the laser speed cameras tend to read a few mph higher than the actual speed of the car, so as to get above the 10% + 2mph threshold for those only just over the speed limit.

The suspicion is that the laser speed cameras are being deliberately tweaked in some way to achieve this, so as to entrap more drivers.

I have seen one of Mr Garretts own speed calculations from road markings and interestingly it was 2mph slower than his camera said.

He insists that on moving objects errors of more than 2mph are highly unlikely. He says the system could display speeds out by "no more than 1mph, if at all, but in any event 2mph is well within the target parameters"

Dr L ,
I hope that you can provide evidence of the allegation that you put forward as to your claim that I and other colleagues like me who use this equipment are committing criminal offences, can you answer me these points.

1.Where have you obtained this evidence.
2.how is this acheived as the LTI 20 /20 can not openly or easily be entered to carry out such deed.
3.If the above is the case then Tele Traffic must be in collaboration with the aforementioned groups to committ these crimes during calibration.

If this is the case then i will have to bring it to the attention firstly of Tele traffic then the correct authorities so that it may be investigated, presumably you will part with the information / evidence that will allow this to take place.
Stephen