Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sun Dec 17, 2017 07:19

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 16:13 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 15:45
Posts: 1
Hi All

I have received a letter of intended prosecution for doing 62 mph in a 50 mph zone which is monitored with average speed cameras on the M62
I have logged in to the west yorkshire Police website to view the photographic evidence which does support the prosecution, although it doesn't show who was driving the vehicle as it was dark.

Although i was driving above the mandatory speed limit, There was no roadworkers at that time of night and I don't believe I was driving at an excessive speed.

Is there any way I can get out of this ?

I have had a simalar case like this with a rear facing gatso, but I appealed stating that I did not know who was driving at the time of the offence and the appeal went in my favour and the case was dropped.

Could I use the same loophole in this case with it being a forward facing one (although you cant identify the driver) or is there any other loophole i could use?

Also, I was told that with average speed cameras on a motorway, to prosecute you, the vehicle must remain in the same lane, so it the camera can measure between point a and point b in one continuous flow. is this true ?

Any advice would be appreciated , as we have just had our second child and need all the money we can get !!

Thanks in advance


Last edited by banaaana on Wed Feb 16, 2011 00:48, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 18:19 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
Not staying in the same lane is a myth - it only applied in the very early days.

If you attempt the "Cannot identify the driver" tack, especially having apparently got away with it before, the authorities will take a dim view, and say you should have been more careful about who you allowed to drive you vehicle - and should have kept a log.
They might even have a photo from another camera within the system which DOES show who was driving.

Unfortunately the lack of any hazard to warrant the reduced limit is not grounds to get off!

I would pay up, and join the campaign to get rid of the fixed speed cameras - and go easy on the nappies for while - don't give the nipper anything which might give them the runs!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 19:47 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
If you say you don't know who was driving when you clearly know you were and you are found to be doing this you could end up doing time. Your description of your earlier loophole tactic could be interpreted as you knew at that time that you were driving but chose to say you did not know. Again this is an offence for which you could lose your liberty.
Describing this on Internet forums (I read you post on another forum a few minutes ago) isn't an example of brilliant wisdom.
If you intend to look after your children instead of risking them living on benefits while you wear clothes provided by HMP, you should use the testicles you created them with and consider admitting the offence and not being so silly by placing yourself at risk.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 20:01 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3427
Banana, :welcome:

Don't take Greenshed's slating as the typical response that you will get from members of this site, we are mainly sympaphetic to people caught doing speeds in excess of the limit, when the limit is set unneccessarily low.

He's the resident troll and only surfaces to cause mischief from time to time. His advice usually isn't worth the toilet paper he normally drafts it on but he may have a point in advising you, to admitting to your wrongs, this time.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 23:24 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
I suspect I'm not the only one who has no problem with folks fighting a penalty resulting from a technical infringement, by using a technical loophole to "get out of it".

However, greenshed does have a point - in this case at least.

Giving a legal statement that contradicts with what has been said elsewhere is extremely ill-advised, especially when the offender (evidently not merely 'alleged') has given enough details to allow their case to be traced (an edit is too late for you).

banaaana,

People of significance watch this forum - people you really didn't want to give that kind of case detail to.
I believe you would be taking a really bad gamble if you now try to fight your case on your proposed loophole.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 23:52 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7347
Location: Highlands
:welcome: banaaana

The previous posts have identified many good points.

You should consult a solicitor, as I am a lawyer and so cannot advise you.
see : pepipoo.com and their forums where several legal advisors visit or any of the criminal solicitors who specialise in road traffic law ...
banaaana wrote:
I have received a letter of intended prosecution for doing 62 mph in a 50 mph zone which is monitored with average speed cameras ....
I have logged in to the west yorkshire Police website to view the photographic evidence which does support the prosecution, although it doesn't show who was driving the vehicle as it was dark.[/quote]You are legally obligated to provide 'every best effort' to try to provide the ID of the driver.
banaaana wrote:
Although ... driving ...There was no roadworkers at that time of night and I don't believe ...an excessive speed.
Is there any way ... ?
Be cautious about how you phrase things on a public forum, even adding the time and location will not take much for the prosecution, were they to see this, to help them 'prove' their case. Be aware that many legal persons do visit this site as with many road safety forums. Some editing of your post is advised.
We disagree with speed cameras for many reasons, but to start with see our negative camera effects page here. We don't ever 'encourage' people to disobey the law, but we recognise that the real world and the research shown clearly demonstrates that when some travel faster than the posted limit it might be still safe. We need proper research and science to help form the best road safety policies.
We do recognise the 'fact of life' that when people consult a good lawyer they might be able to help them in Court.
The Council and authorities may make mistakes including providing the correct road Orders to set the legal speed limits and signage which can render all fines illegal, and so on.
Since the ruling was made a requirement to fill in the NIP and return - if it arrived within the 14 day minimal time frame, (6mths if your car is registered to a Company), sadly an EU ruling backed the signing of said documents but Hong Kong agreed with the UK case and ruled in favour, so no NIPS can be sent in Hong Kong.
banaaana wrote:
I have had a simalar case like this with a rear facing gatso, but I appealed ...and the appeal went in my favour and the case was dropped.
(see above posting advice) I hope that this was the case. If it later evolved that someone had previously lied to a Court, that is perjury and a serious offence. Always be honest or state as much as you know or can be sure of and if you are not sure say so. :)
banaaana wrote:
Could I use the same loophole in this case with it being a forward facing one (although you cant identify the driver) or is there any other loophole i could use?
It is never good to just look for loopholes, but to ensure that you observe everything on the road in the first place and learn from mistakes. You absolutely need to ask this of a solicitor to discuss the case in full and in as much detail as you can honestly provide.
banaaana wrote:
Also, I was told that with average speed cameras on a motorway, to prosecute you, the vehicle must remain in the same lane, so it the camera can measure between point a and point b in one continuous flow. is this true ?
The original L1 SPECS could only prosecute vehicles that remained in the same lane by there are few L1 models about now as they have been superseded with L3 which can use any lance over any camera within the system. Whoever told you that is now out of date, and the fact that you have a NIP shows that they have evidence against your vehicle.
I would ask to see all the evidence immediately and continue to ask too.
banaaana wrote:
Any advice would be appreciated , as we have just had our second child and need all the money we can get !!
Sadly unless you are in Court only then can welfare be taken into consideration, which might see your fine be paid off slowly.
Some solicitors will give some initial advice to help you to decide if you wish to go ahead with a case.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.233s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]