Safe Speed Forums

Help -

My Wife had a NIP last November, after requesting the photograhic evidence I was a bit concerned over the series of 3 photos supplied (from a mobile unit in South Wales).

Only one of them had the actual speed indicated - the two others had no speed indicated assuming under the limit.

In the one that had the speed shown the car cannot be recognised from the registration due to the distance away. One of the other two contains a close up of my wifes number plate (with no speed shown).

On my Wifes behalf I have so far not signed the NIP but instead sent back a letter highlighting my concerns.

The matter is now going to court next month - given that these photos were from a video (that we have not seen) is there any point fighting this? I feel a bit aggreived admitting guilt tho since the evidence supplied is so far circumstancial but don't want to incur a much larger fine that the original £60 NIP.

Any advice appreciated.

Cheers

the photo with the # is the speed, the other 2 probably id of the car and driver, what distance were you caught at

_________________
now retired

Sounds like you may have already made a few errors of judgement but it's not too late.

You need to ask for a copy of the whole video to prepare your defence, they have to give you it at least 7 days before the trial date.

You also need to get over to Pepipoo for the latest advice regarding mobile enforcement.


By not signing/returning the NIP you may have opened her up to a charge in Section 172 (failing to identify the driver), again you need to get some good advice from Pepipoo on this one.

of course you could pay up a you were caught, admit you were wrong and learn to stik to the legal limit in the future, (just a thought)
Now does helping people get off speeding fines REALLY help road safety I think not.

_________________
Why not put on speed limiters we have the technology only idiots break the speed limit

Ignore the previous poster. He likes seeing ordenary motorist persicuted whilst the drink drivers get away with every thing. Your wife should be allowed to see the evidence. get over to pepipoo to find out how.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

...and by his/her own admission has been done for speeding in the past, so can't really take the moral high ground...

A driver can ask for the video evidence under the data protection act, but must have accepted that they were driving so that it is then personal information held by the police about their movements.

The police are not exempt from providing this, as ruled by the ICO (Information Commissioner's Office)

The police are normally very selective about what photos they send, so as to exaggerate the situation as much as possible, when the video may show the allegation is not enforceable.

If the video shows there was not a continuous view of the car between the speed measurement and identification of the registration then it does not comply with the ACPO code of practice and the speed allegation should not be enforceable.

Thanks for the replies - its all academic now - despite the suspect photos my wife does not want the hassle & stress of going to court and has pleaded guilty by post.

As for the morale do-gooder who posted, please go and stick your head back up your @rse.

It sounds like she did not accept the Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty and pleaded guilty after being summonsed, is that correct?
If so you can at least be pleased that the SCP didn't get your money.

Also, I believe she was caught by a laser speed meter (probably LTI 20/20) and therefore the the photos are not evidence, they are only for identifying the vehicle and sometimes the driver. They are taken from the video and are the best ones to show the vehicle/driver. The video is the evidence.

_________________
Andrew.

You know I am in agreement with TSM on this. I have said before, and I wish it wouldbecome Safespeed policy, this forum is about Road Safety. Giving people advice on how to avoid prosecutions id counter productive and gives people like TSM the best kind of ammunition to belittle what we are doing here.

When someone comes on here looking for legal assistance we would be representing the interests of the Safespeed campaign if we restricted that advice to a link to pepipoo, they are there to do the legal challenges we are here to do the policy challenges.

_________________
Former Military Police Officer and accident investigator

You are right. I like others are helping others get off speeding tickets and present the best mitigation where approriate.

But why? I believe in road safety. I believe that bad driving needs correcting and dreadfull behavior needs punishing.

However the current situation is mad politicians trying to get as much tax as possible and drive the motorist off the road. Over regulation of motoring, diy, passports,parking... well everything!

Then there are the mad scameraships who seem to be exempt from the truth, advertising standards, codes of practice, guidelines, decency, type approval conditions.

I would happily see these cheats in court and have thier pensions removed.

It might come across that I am a vindictive nutter, It couldn't be further from the truth. I want to live and let live, Every day roads that were 60 are 40, cameras stop me changing lane at the safest point, I have to weave round cyclist in a limited space because some madman filled the road with traffic islands, The list goes on and on.

Politics has failed us. So I will use any tactic to cost them money.
So I am one man! It is like a tug of war against 1000 rugby teams...
and we just have to hope that enough join us on the rope untill sense prevails.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

I used to believe this too. however, a car whose driver is on 9 points and whoses eyes are glued to the speedo is IMHO a more dangerous missile than one where such a nonsensical activity is not the norm.

Hmmm, I'm not. Conversely, how exactly does people getting speeding fines help road safety?

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus