Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Tue Apr 21, 2026 01:18

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Board index » News » Road Safety, Speed Camera and Policy News

All times are UTC [ DST ]



Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 15 posts ] 
  Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
Dixie
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 13:20 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
Daily Telegraph

Quote:
Driver beats fine with schoolboy science
By Paul Willis and PA
Last Updated: 1:57am GMT 22/11/2006

A driver falsely accused of speeding on the motorway used a schoolboy formula to prove his innocence.

Gavin Matthews, 20, noticed two flashes as a speeding bus overtook him on the M4 at Port Talbot, in south Wales.

Two weeks later he received a ticket for speeding in the post even though he was certain he had been driving below the limit.

Convinced of his innocence, he wrote off asking for photographs of the incident and used the classroom formula 'speed equals distance over time' to prove he was travelling at 44.8mph in the 50mph zone.

Mr Matthews, who works for steelmaker Corus in Port Talbot, regularly drives the eastbound section of motorway where the camera is sited. The incident took place in March 2005 but Mr Matthews was forced to fight the threatened £60 fine and three penalty points for months.

"I only queried it because I remembered the camera flashing twice and I knew I wasn't speeding at the time," Mr Matthews said today.

"The photographs show the back of my car and the white lines at the side of the road. The second photograph shows that it was taken 0.5 seconds later by which time I had moved five white lines along."

He remembered from school you could calculate speed if you had the correct distance and time. He said he looked on the internet and found an official website stating that lines on the motorway are spaced two metres apart.

"That meant I had driven 10 meters in 0.5 seconds or 20 meters per second. That works out at precisely 44.8mph."

The pictures he received showed a bus racing by on the outside lane, which Mr Matthews said he believed had caused the camera to flash. He wrote to the South Wales Police safety camera unit and received a written apology from the Mid and South Wales Safety Camera Partnership.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
anton
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 13:32 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
This goes hand in hand with my FOI request Extensive FOI requests have failed to get a copy of a hand book or written process for checking photos.

All they do is read the number plate and issue the fine.

_________________
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
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Steve
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 13:38 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
Quote:
"I only queried it because I remembered the camera flashing twice and I knew I wasn't speeding at the time," Mr Matthews said today.

And just how many people don't query this because:
- they didn't notice the flashes
- can't remember the incident
- they were concentrating on the road ahead and not on their speed
- they are too intimidated to question or fight 'the system'


Disgusting!
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dixie
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 13:41 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
Quote:
Mr Matthews was forced to fight the threatened £60 fine and three penalty points for months.


And look what they put him through just to get £60.

Is this worth a PR?

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
anton
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 14:02 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
I think it is time to get the daily mail in on the whole photo checking system... or lack of

_________________
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
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dixie
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 14:08 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
I wonder if they sent a NIP out for the bus as well, £120 thank you.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
semitone
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 14:56 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 15:30
Posts: 643
The newspaper article says that Mr. Matthews was overtaken by a speeding bus. Since he was only doing 44.8 in a 50 limit the bus could easily have passed without speeding.

A gatso near where I live clocked a bus at 89mph in a 30 limit. The bus tacho showed that it had in fact been doing less than 30. Even without the tacho evidence common sense should have been enough to alert the scams to an error since it would be impossible to get a bus up to 89 on that part of the road.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Twister
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 16:58 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 11:05
Posts: 1044
Location: Hillingdon
semitone wrote:
it would be impossible to get a bus up to 89 on that part of the road.


It'd be quite an achievement to get a bus up to 89 on *any* stretch of road...

Cases like this really are worrying, aren't they-we don't know if they're simply the exception to the norm, or just the exposed tip of an entire iceberg of inaccuracies.

_________________
Chris
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Steve
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 17:40 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
Twister wrote:
It'd be quite an achievement to get a bus up to 89 on *any* stretch of road....

What must it be like to be a passenger on this monster... :shock:

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/2006/05/buswheelie.html
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
SafeSpeed
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 17:55 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
smeggy wrote:
Twister wrote:
It'd be quite an achievement to get a bus up to 89 on *any* stretch of road....

What must it be like to be a passenger on this monster... :shock:

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/2006/05/buswheelie.html


Fairly major cheating, I reckon, with oodles of mass behind the back wheels.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
safedriver
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 21:30 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 20:19
Posts: 306
Location: Crewe
We can work it out using mathematics, (I am sure Paul has already done so), We know that around 2 million drivers are 'thumped' every year for exceeding the speed limit and assuming a conservative 0.25% error rate in the cameras and (most importantly), the partnership processing of the camera photos, I make that 4000 drivers who have been wrongly accused and wrongly fined, much to their disgust no doubt. And this is per annum., or... year after year after year.

But what can they do when every single magistrate in the land accepts that the SCPs are always right ? (or is it the fact that the magistrates are part of the partnerships ?)

Perhaps a magistrate would like to comment on this forum. I'll bet none do though!!

_________________
Good manners maketh a good motorist
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Ziltro
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 21:55 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 02:50
Posts: 2868
Location: Dorset
I've seen a gatso triggered because a bus was stationary near it.

All of the "I didn't think I was speeding" gatso photos I have seen on PePiPoo have had a bus, coach or lorry in the frame.

_________________
Andrew.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Steve
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 22:04 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
Ziltro wrote:
I've seen a gatso triggered because a bus was stationary near it.

That sounds like The shutter effect
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
jamie_duff
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 13:58 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 15:14
Posts: 420
Location: Aberdeenshire
A friend of mine got a NIP last week for doing 36mph in a 30mph zone in Nuneaton.

Only trouble is he's never been to Nuneaton :roll:

I have no confidence in cameras at all. :x

_________________
Image
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Steve
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 14:19 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
jamie_duff wrote:
A friend of mine got a NIP last week for doing 36mph in a 30mph zone in Nuneaton.

Only trouble is he's never been to Nuneaton :roll:

I have no confidence in cameras at all. :x

It's not the camera's fault they can't detect a cloned car; however, it is the fault of their policy of use so encouraging people to do so (indirectly).
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 15 posts ] 

Board index » News » Road Safety, Speed Camera and Policy News

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 388 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 can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.053s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]