Police Speed Camera Defense Resource

[AJL]

A supposid proven method of defense to speed camera

a resource some may find useful!

The Site

The Forum

[simonr]

I'd be wary of these kind of quick-fixes.

I was going to fight a 'crossing a red light' fine, as both lights were obscured from view when I crossed the line. I took legal advice and they said that although I had a good case (I could prove it with the photographs they supplied), there is a big associated risk involved.

If you fight it, your legal costs (if you loose) are likely to be in the order of a grand or more and you are likely to get double the fine and double the points.

The solicitor said it's worth doing if these points would result in a ban (nothing to loose but money) - but since I had no points to start with, the best course of action is just to pay it and accept the points.

I feel a bit angry that if you fight and loose, the penalties are higher than just accepting it (some legal system!) but wound up just accepting it.

Just a thought.

Si

[Dr Goon]

If you plead Not Guilty to an endorseable traffic offence, take the matter to trial and are convicted you will have lost sentencing credit, which is a technical term for a discount for pleading guilty. This can, at most, amount to one third off any penalty and does NOT apply to penalty points.

If you are convicted you will have to pay a contribution to Prosecution costs and your own legal fees if you instruct a Solicitor to act for you. The contribution to Prosecution costs could run into hundreds of £ but the amount of the fine and order for costs, and the rate at which the Court will expect you to pay will depend on your financial circumstances.

So by taking the matter to trial, you do not risk getting more penalty points than you would had you pleaded guilty. There is always a risk involved in taking a matter to trial but, if you feel you have a good case, then do it, especially if the Prosecution evidence actually supports your defence!

[02GF74]

I was going to fight a 'crossing a red light' fine, as both lights were obscured from view when I crossed the line. I took legal advice and they said that although I had a good case (I could prove it with the photographs they supplied), there is a big associated risk involved.

If you fight it, your legal costs (if you loose) are likely to be in the order of a grand or more and you are likely to get double the fine and double the points.

The solicitor said it's worth doing if these points would result in a ban (nothing to loose but money) - but since I had no points to start with, the best course of action is just to pay it and accept the points.

Si

ah, but with all these X-brakes you are selling, you'll be able to hire the same lawyers as OJ SImpson had

[simonr]

Dr Goon,

The extra points come about because there are 3 for the offence, plus three for not returning the NIC. The fine is likewise the same for each.

If you want to fight the case, you must not complete the NIC - so technically you get the points anyway whether you win or loose. I imagine that if you are found not guilty, the NIC was sent in error and you cannot thus be fined etc for not completing it.

As soon as you complete and return the NIC, it is an admission of guilt.

Si

[SiWhite]

If you don't break the speed limit, you won't run the risk of getting points or fined.

What's so difficult to understand about that?

[Dr Goon]

If it is a speeding matter you would get 3 for failing to return the s172 notice but you would NOT then get 3 for a speeding offence as well. It is one or the other. It is the same if you were convicted of, say, speeding and driving without insurance - two offences committed on the same occasion does not mean that you get two sets of points, you simply get the points for the most serious offence and your licence is endorsed with the other matter(s) but no more points are added.

A conviction for failing to notify the identity of the driver will not mean that you get fined for that offence AND for the sppeding offence either. It is one offence or the other.

I have now had a look at the link referred to in the original post and I cannot at this stage comment on the suggested technique.

[Matt Neale]

If it is a speeding matter you would get 3 for failing to return the s172 notice but you would NOT then get 3 for a speeding offence as well. It is one or the other. It is the same if you were convicted of, say, speeding and driving without insurance - two offences committed on the same occasion does not mean that you get two sets of points, you simply get the points for the most serious offence and your licence is endorsed with the other matter(s) but no more points are added.

A conviction for failing to notify the identity of the driver will not mean that you get fined for that offence AND for the sppeding offence either. It is one offence or the other.

I have now had a look at the link referred to in the original post and I cannot at this stage comment on the suggested technique.

Also, have a look 5ive-O.com for a balanced view from a site moderated by Police officers.

Matt

[nas90]

I have been a biker for many years and have been reading our "comic" (Motorcycle News) for almost as many years. The biking fraternity are being punished by the legal system with Gatso's and mobile camera / radar systems that are inaccurate / not calibrated for motorcycle profiles. As MCN has quite rightly told its readership, the legal system in the UK does not give either 2 or 4 wheel road users any of their normal innocent before proved guilty rights. Various Police forces are effectively taking away your rights when they send you the NIC with usually a load of hogwash about being beaten-up and hung out to dry if you want to plead innocent. Police state or what!

If you have photographic evidence and enough spare time, which is why most people send them the NIC because they are too busy, go to court and if the police photo's support your claim then they will usually back-down. Over the last few months in MCN there have been test cases of riders not being sent photographic evidence, sent photo's where you cannot see the road markings to determine the distance travelled between shots and where large vehicles have been captured by the radar whilst passing the bike.

As a road user I think the UK legal system stinks!

[BogMonster]

Is it true that in the UK if you get popped by four different Gatsos on the same stretch of road within a short space of time you will lose your license?

Ah the bliss of living in a land with no Gatsos, and no traffic lights (and thus no cameras to watch them, obviously)

[GBMUD]

Is it true that in the UK if you get popped by four different Gatsos on the same stretch of road within a short space of time you will lose your license?

Ah the bliss of living in a land with no Gatsos, and no traffic lights (and thus no cameras to watch them, obviously)

If you claim that you maintained a speed in excess of the limit for the whole time then that must be just the one offence. Surely?

Chris

[siggy]

Easy answer is 5 under

And don't go through a yellow traffic light ok if green and turns yellow but not yellow and F**K the numpity trying to tailgate you stop and he'll stop

[simonr]

Si,

It's not always as simple as - if you don't speed, you don't have anything to worry about.

There is often some ambiguity - which if one were dealing with a person with a radar gun, they might be able to resolve on the spot.

Trouble seems to be that if you are photographed, you are guilty regardless of the circumstances.

In my case, the light ahead was obscured by a white van who was overtaking at the time and at the point I passed under the light on my left, it was green - which I could prove based on the speed I was clocked at, and the distances involved. They said the light was yellow for 3.5 sec, which meant it was green for 0.5 sec after I lost sight of it.

I got a stock letter which (correctly or not) stated that if I didn't put my hands up to it, I would get double the points and double the fine if I lost in court. I challenged the decision (within the 28 days) and received a letter saying that that the info I had provided did not change their opinion that I was guilty and that my evidence in fact identified me as the driver which was as good an admission of guilt as completing the NIP. You are guilty of the offence so please send your NIP and driving licence etc.

Just for the record - I do not speed, nor wittingly cross red lights - which is why this is so gauling.

Si

[Turbocharger]

Am I correct in thinking that your licence can be endorsed if two or more police officers "form an opinion" that you were speeding?

[Dr Goon]

I too am a biker and I am running a defence for a client at the moment based on the inaccuracy of the LTI20-20 when used on bikes. It may end up as a test case. I will post the result (if I remember!) although I suspect that the Magistrates will convict at first instance.

If you are flashed by several cameras during one continuous journey along a stretch of road such as the M25, you can argue for it to be treated as one offence, rather than a number of separate offences. Again the success of that argument will depend to an extent on the attitude of the local bench. Some are understanding but others are more inclined to try and treat it as separate offences. The technically correct answer is that it is one continuing offence and I have successfully argued that for a client at least once.

Simonr, I see what you say about the letter you had, implying that if you did not hold your hands up and admit the offence but it is simply wrong to imply that, by pleading not guilty, you are risking double the points if convicted. If that is what the letter says, or clearly implies, then something ought to be done about it. Which Court did that letter come from? I know the Wiltshire letters do not imply that but each Court area's letter is slightly different.