Speed trap - help!

Discussion in 'Motoring' started by veryparttimer, Jan 25, 2008.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Caught red handed - Notice of Intended Prosecution received yesterday for allegedly doing 84 on a dual carriageway on the way home from a training weekend in Pompey. I realise there's no plausible excuse (clear dry day, car in fine fettle, little traffic etc etc.) but slightly peeved as I thought I knew the road and there was no visible warnings, camera or painted trap in the road...

    I have heard various things that if requested plod has to produce such as calibration readings of radar and other techno babble, but if anyone has any bright ideas that might help me beat the wrap it would be appreciated!
  2. Erm,

    You've owned up to it mate. Take the punishment.

  3. FlagWagger

    FlagWagger Book Reviewer

    The "best" web-site for this, I think, is PePiPoo or alternatively there is SafeSpeed.

    Speaking from personal experience, 6 points in last 10 years :( , the limit is the legal maximum speed that you can drive at - the current "road safety" philosophy doesn't recognise any mitigating factors like empty road, good conditions, etc. Personally, I'd suggest that you take it on the chin and don't bother fighting - if you get offered a fixed penalty, it will be far easier to pay up and accept the points than embarking on a lengthy stressful legal battle that is not in favour of the motorist.
  4. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    The Notice of Intended Prosecution (or NIP)

    If you receive one of these it means that they're going to prosecute you for the offence. The NIP can take one of two forms:

    a. A written NIP (e.g. if you get a ticket from a speed camera)
    b. Verbal NIP

    Most Constabularies send them out within 14 days of the alleged offence - even if you were spoken to at the time by a police officer (see Verbal NIP). The law was amended in 1994 to allow the police to serve the NIP via ordinary post.

    So, if it's more than 14 days since you were flashed, then they're too late to prosecute you - unless you were driving a company car, hire car or someone else's car. In those circumstances they're allowed more time to track you down and this letter from Staffordshire Constabulary may help you to understand this point.

    If the police failed to meet the 14 day deadline for serving the initial NIP to the Registered Keeper, the following link, which includes advice provided by the RAC's legal team, may help you.

    This link explains the legal position regarding inaccurate NIPs.

    If you were stopped and spoken to by a police officer, they have 6 months to prosecute you because the officer will have issued you with a verbal NIP at the time.

    There are two separate offences under the law:

    a. Not providing the name of the driver (this is covered under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act);
    b. Speeding.

    If you receive a written NIP through the post and you were not spoken to at the time of the alleged offence, you can only be prosecuted for not informing the authorities who was driving your vehicle and, doing so, exonerates you from any prosecution - assuming that it wasn't you who was driving, of course!

    You can not be prosecuted for speeding if you weren't driving the vehicle, but some Constabularies try to bully the registered keeper into accepting liability for the offence. However, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, so, if you weren't driving or honestly can't remember who the driver was, you should "stick to your guns".

    If the vehicle was flashed by a Gatso camera then they'll have two photographs of the rear of the vehicle - so how can they prove who was driving, if the driver doesn't incriminate them self? However, you will be in much more trouble than for a speeding offence if you say that you weren't the driver and they can prove that you were! Take a look at the photographic evidence in our Case File 7, and if they treat you any differently to the citizen involved in this case reported on the BBC News site politely remind them that everyone must be treated equally under the provisions of the Human Rights Act introduced to implement the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

    Inaccurate NIPs - The "Slip Rule"

    There is a "slip rule" that allows the court to modify small errors (such as name/address of the keeper) due to typographical mistakes. Serious errors cannot be modified, and will invalidate the NIP.

    If the registration number is incorrect then the Defendant need only complete the Section 172 Notice attached to the NIP, stating that they are not in fact the registered keeper of the vehicle whose registration number is shown on the Notice.

    If you think that the speed quoted on the NIP is wrong then you should follow this link.

    Naming The Driver

    Under the provisions of Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, the person who is registered as the keeper of the vehicle has a legal obligation to provide the police with the name of the person who was driving their vehicle at the time of the alleged motoring offence.

    If the registered keeper fails to name the driver, then they may be guilty of an offence and could be liable to prosecution. This link has an example of such a case.

    More specific information about obtaining a copy of prosecution evidence against you can be obtained by seraching this site.
  5. Thanks guys - I know I'll have to suck it up but never have been too good at taking my medicine...!

  6. I suppose all you can do is learn from it!
  7. Best advice from plod - accept the ticket - what SPB says is mostly correct.

    You may wish to contact the force who sent you the lovely NOIP and ask them if they offer the driver improvement scheme - if they do, snap their hand off and go for that - It will either save you the fine or the points (cant remember which) - this is the spoon full of sugar to help the medicine go down !

    The worst thing you can do, unless you have lots of money and a very good legal team, is to contest the case - I've had many motorists contest it and lost and the fine has always been higher, plus court costs, plus the time and hassle of them having to take time off work - I have also known penalty points being awarded higher than the 3 you get from the ticket.
  8. Here in Spain if there is a camera warning sign you know that 300 metres further on there WILL be a trap. In the UK there are signs all over the place most of which have no camera attached to them, you simply never know. The UK once again playing free and loose with the regs.
    You have been accused of an offence which could have serious consequences on your finances etc so my advice would be to treat it as that and ensure that those attempting to lighten your wallet have got all their ducks in a line.
    If it is absolutely certain you are guilty then bite the bullet, otherwise challenge it.
  9. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Sussex: What regs? Show where - in accordance with UK road ordinance - that a camera HAS to be in operation where a camera road sign is displayed? If drivers decrease their speed because they are of the belief that a camera MAY be in operation then the objective has been achieved - a reduction in their speed. If people choose to ignore those signs and a camera IS in operation, then that's the gamble they take... :?
  10. we have one gatso on a road that has had no accidents and where we want one they will not put one in even if we have had a couple of deaths in the last few years, :thanks:
  11. Let's face it, getting done for speeding is an occupational hazard for any driver, let alone matelots weekending etc. I do it all the time and, luckily, have not been done in the last 20 months or so weekending between Hampshire & Guzz. Basically that means I'm overdue for one - it's not big or clever and I could argue ad infinitum about speeding vs road deaths etc. etc. - at the end of the day you get caught you take your punishment (and get very very careful if you reach 9 points).
  12. been on one of the speeding awareness courses with somerset filth. youngest one there all the rest were 50plus.

    asked us when did we last speed - i told him on the way there.

    Cue yellow warning,

    Then the ships cock wanted to get into a discussion about the siting of speed cameras, luckily for him I'd bought along some stuff from the motoring god Clarkson motoring column, had a loudish discussuion which eneded when he had finished speaking and wasnt interested in listening. Asked me directly who i believed Clarkson or HM Cuntstabluary. well i said i didnt trust the C8NT.

    Cue very yellow - reddish warning

    refused to talk the rmeinder of the sanctimonious tw8ats lecture. Outside asked him if he believed all the shite he spouted - answer of cause not its the party line and not what the real driver did. he was a biker and regularly exceeded 130 on his bike.

    my crime 44 in a 50 at 2300 hours

  13. Legally you can break the law speeding if:

    You are over taking a vehicle (as long as you reduce your speed as soon as you have passed the obstacle)

  14. In my business experience the UK plays fast and loose with a great many EU regs! but that is another subject.
    It is just that I have found that in the two EU countries in which I drive I most Spain and France a notice of a fixed speed camera is always followed by one; whether this is in response to a regulation I know not.
    Honestly I believe that cameras in certain places are a good thing, though very often sensible re-engineering of the road would reduced both the need for the camera and collisions eg get rid of the need to cross an opposite carriageway to make a turn etc.
    It strikes me as very odd that a country that once defended its freedoms so earnestly has now allowed itself to become just about the most surveyed on earth. Cash or speed cameras are just one example of this and I am pleased that efforts are now being made in the European courts to limit their spread.
    I am not against safe driving, far from it, but am against the surveillance culture and cannot understand how britons have allowed themselves to fall into such a trap.
  15. Yet people still take thirty seconds to overtake a truck on a motorway - makes me cringe the danger they are putting themselves and others in.
  16. I would like to see the bit of legislation that states you can break the speed limit to overtake. Neither the Highway Code or any other item I could locate states this.

    Maybe KLNA or SPB can confirm or deny this statement but IMHO you can only overtake if you will not be breaking the speed limit. Now that may be neither sensible or general practice but as far as I know is the law.
  17. Not sure about legislation, but many years ago when I sat a driving test in Gosport, I was following a Moped that was travelling at the speed limit, I didn't overtake as I didn't want to exceed the speed limit and thus fail my test.
    I was a bit annoyed therefore, when the examiner failed me and stated that I'd shown hesitancy and uncertainty as I didn't pass the said Moped.
    My instructor informed me afterwards, that 'you can exceed the limit to overtake as long as you reduce immediately after the manouevre'.
  18. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Seems pretty clear to me... :wink:

  19. Thanks for that SPB

    I rest my case M'Lud you have heard the evidence from my expert witness.


Share This Page