Jump to content

Bullsh*t speeding ticket: what now?


MarkW
 Share

Recommended Posts

If you have the right box's ticked google can draw your location history.


Can you get the speed from this and would this be sufficient evidence? In the case you describe it should not be hard to prove a 25% difference in speed.

Was your Satnav logging data you could use?

Google doesn't provide speed. This would only work if you were accused of stealing knickers of a line in Kent when you were in Newcastle giving it large in the Bigg Market.


Me? Being nicked for speeding is a hazard drivers and riders face. I'd pay up and get on with life.

I'd rather confess to nicking knickers in Kent than admit giving it large in the Bigg Market! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But by challenging the ticket and going to court you risk greater punishment. Is that correct?? .

 

Who told you that? The fundemental principle of the legal sysytem in this country is that you are allowed to contest any allegation made against you, and whilst is may not seem like it, there is still the policy of innocent until proven guilty. However, the majority of speed offences are banged to rights and the whole idea of the fixed penalty system is to save time in the courts and speed the process up.


Those alleged of an offence only tend to have penalties increased when they employ delaying tactics or it is so obvious that they are guilty of an offence they are clearly wasting the courts time and therefore increase the possibility of paying a heavier penalty.

 

And what defence do you have against a calibrated radar gun? Even with video evidence of your own speedo showing 40mph they would simply point out that theirs is calibrated and yours isn't.

 

Contrary to popular myth, the Police service is still held in this country to be honest, and to be honest, in 40 + years of being involved in the Law, I have yet to come across anyone serving or retired who is or was prepared to lie for 1 poxy speed offence.


Most if not all of the loopholes have been closed, and I am not saying or suggesting that all coppers are beyond reproach, but for the potential grief it will cause should they get caught out, I don't think there are that many that would perjur themselves.

 


I don't approve of speed trap detectors and have never owned one, but this sort of b*llshit makes me sorely tempted to buy one.

 

No such thing as a trap. Only people who call it a trap are those who break the speed limit and get caught? :wink:

 


I don't approve of speed trap detectors and have never owned one, but this sort of b*llshit makes me sorely tempted to buy one.

 

May I suggest you don't. If it just detects speed cameras or other speed detection devices, they you leave yourself open to further prosecution as speed detectors are actually illegal here. If it is part of a sat nav indicating where a camera is, then perfectly legal.


As I said, you ony have to put reasonable doubt into the mind of the magistrates, and whilst a lay magistrate is unqualified in law, they are advised on procedure and points of law by the Magistrates clerk who is a qualified lawyer.


So for example if you can prove using time over distance that the speed claimed could not be achieved in the distance claimed by the prosecution, or you can get an expert to ask the right questions, then you would have a chance of success.


If you have legal cover on your insurance policy or through your breakdown, might be worth speaking to them as they often provide legal representation as part of the policy cover. They should at least be able to advise you.


If all else fails, I can put you in touch with someone who is a lawyer specialising in these sorts of cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All good info as always... I never contested any of mine - just had some friendly banter with the police and took the points and fines because everyone knew i was speeding and to try to say otherwise would have just been silly!!

Had a clean licence for many years now, but it seems everyone seems to be getting points these days..

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I don't approve of speed trap detectors and have never owned one, but this sort of b*llshit makes me sorely tempted to buy one.

 

May I suggest you don't. If it just detects speed cameras or other speed detection devices, they you leave yourself open to further prosecution as speed detectors are actually illegal here. If it is part of a sat nav indicating where a camera is, then perfectly legal.


.

 

Are you sure about that?

I thought detectors and GPS based systems were both still legal.

Halfords still sell GPS camera warning devices and loads of places sell laser/radar detectors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Are you sure about that?

I thought detectors and GPS based systems were both still legal.

Halfords still sell GPS camera warning devices and loads of places sell laser/radar detectors.

 

If they are part of a sat nav, it is legal, (I have camera warning on my sat nav)


If it is a lazer or radar detector it is not illegal to sell one, it is the use of which is illegal.


But then it is illegal to speed, but that doesn't stop people :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Are you sure about that?

I thought detectors and GPS based systems were both still legal.

Halfords still sell GPS camera warning devices and loads of places sell laser/radar detectors.

 

If they are part of a sat nav, it is legal, (I have camera warning on my sat nav)


If it is a lazer or radar detector it is not illegal to sell one, it is the use of which is illegal.


But then it is illegal to speed, but that doesn't stop people :wink:

 

When did laser/radar detectors become illegal to use? I know the jammers are illegal but thought detectors were still legal.


Edit: is this outdated info??

http://www.halfords.com/advice/technology/buyers-guides/camera-detectors-buyers-guide

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When did laser/radar detectors become illegal to use? I know the jammers are illegal but thought detectors were still legal.


Edit: is this outdated info??

http://www.halfords.com/advice/technology/buyers-guides/camera-detectors-buyers-guide

Halfords (at least used to) sell road angel units with radar/whatnot detectors.


I'd be surprised if they were illegal if a large chain was openly flogging them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My apologies. Legality is on hold at the moment.


It was illegal under the 1949 Wireless & Telegraph Communications Act.


However, a couple of cases are currently going throug the court of appeal, and so they are legal pending the final ruling which is likely to be sometime next year.


Brexit may influence the final decision because of the illegality of possesing such devices in many european coutries.


I was not intending to decieve anyone, although I do know of a couple of cases where possesion and use f such devices was deemed to be an attempt to pervert the course of justice, which is not really the issue here. However, if you do use a device, just be aware that might still be an issue.


I will keep you posted as soon as I receive an update

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was not intending to decieve anyone

I don't think that would ever have crossed our minds TC old chap. :thumb:

Exactly, just getting all our ducks in a line so to speak :cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must admit I've always struggled with the idea that speed cameras are for safety rather than revenue generation. Apparently the UK has some of the safest motorways in Europe, despite the fact that they are also among the most congested, and that something like 70% of motorway users admit to regularly driving at 80+. Merely exceeding the motorway limit doesn't appear to be all that dangerous.


I'm no expert in these things, but having been a high-mileage motorist for 27 years I know what I find the more dangerous. It's not people cruising along at 80 or even 90 mph: it's the tailgaters; it's the ones who get right up behind you and try to bully you out of the way; the ones who undertake aggressively and squeeze back in front into a space that's patently too small; the ones who join and leave the motorway by crossing all three lanes in one diagonal slice; the ones who are completely oblivious to everything around them - even when there's a police car or an ambulance trying to get past them; the ones with no anticipation skills or common sense, who sit right in the blind spot of a car that is clearly going to have to pull out any second to overtake, and who slam their brakes on or swerve out into the next lane when it happens because they couldn't be seen; the ones on their phones or fiddling with their satnavs; the ones who are tired or drunk; the ones who drive whilst clearly having a row with the wife and kids - the list goes on and on. And not one of these things can be caught by a speed camera, only by a traffic officer. And yet as the pestilence of speed cameras grows exponentially, the number of traffic officers seems to be being decimated. One of the parents at my kids school is a police officer, and told me that 40% cuts in traffic officers are not uncommon, and that some forces have lost their traffic guys altogether.


I'm happy for all of the above to be shot down in flames of course, but as far as I can tell it doesn't add up to road safety being more important than revenue generation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I'm happy for all of the above to be shot down in flames of course, but as far as I can tell it doesn't add up to road safety being more important than revenue generation.

 

You are bang on with your assessment :thumb:


I had lunch with old crewmate yesterday who after 31 years service and 12 years as a civillian has told the Police service what they can do with themselves because it is becoming equally frustrating for those serving, but not helped by the calibre of recruit, i,e poor with a capital P.


He told me about a fatality he was called to where the deceased had been squashed to a pulp and what remained was hardly recognisable as human. So before anyone arrived, he got a sheet or blanket abd covered the remains so that nobody else could see.


Local Plod arrived and my old mate asked the young crew to go and see if they could find any witnesses and cop a name and address and if they had the time, possibly take a statement?


At no time did they see or look at the remains.


They then made a complaint to their Inspector about being made to deal with an incident they were not prepared for.


Pete was called in to see the local Inspector and was gobsmacked at what he heard and the nature of the complaint. As he said, if that was their attitude, what were they doing in the job in the first place? Apparently his reply was neither polite or complimentary :D


He finished on the driving school and had people coming on advanced courses who could not cut the mustard as drivers, or, passed the course got posted to Traffic and quit after a few months becuase they did not realise that they would be required to deal with fatal crashes or see sights that were not pleasant....WTF? :shock: Anyway, I digressed, sorry for that :oops:


Traffic policing is no longer considered main stream or front line despite the fact that we used to make more crime arrests than anyone else, deal with more dead bodies than anyone else on a regular basis, and the cost of a fatal crash is now exceeding £1.5million per fatality. The number of fatals has dropped but still too many are occuring.


Pete told me how before he became a civillian he was dealing witha fatal where the deceased was squashed to a pulp. What remained was pretty hard to recognise as human so when he got there, he placed a blanket over it to hide it before anyone else arrived and to protect the public.


Driving standards on Motorways are pretty poor, not helped by the fact that there is no longer the Police patrols we used to have, and this is unlikely to change anytime soon.


Tailgaiting, poor lane discipline a lack of understanding of how to drive on Motorways is an issue, and even if after the consultation, Learners are allowed to be trained on a Motorway, it will not have any safety bearing unless the instructors themselves have the knowledge. Most don't, in fact most have no idea of how to drive on a motorway.


We used to run fog convoys back in the day. In real pea soupers, we would escort groups of around 40 vehicles at a time close together at a constant speed as it kept everything bunched up and bangs were minor rather than catastrophic, but a few years ago a study was carried out on the section of the M4 I used to work on.


Between the M25 and junction 8/9 crashes tend to be minor bangs because of the level of congestion and relative slow speeds. From 8/9 down to 12, the severity would increase from minor injury up to fatal because at 8/9 traffic tends to thin out and speeds increase, and then from 12 onwards, crashes are often catastrophic because speeds significantly increase.


When I think back, this is a pretty accurate assessment and the presence of a marked Traffic car made a difference to drivers behaviour as we always had 3 crews on the motorway and at peak hours 5 cars covering from Heathrow down to Membury plus a fully equipped accident unit.


Now you might just see a couple of traffic wombles who have no authority as such and probably little interest and can do nothing to enforce regulations or standards.


In my force during my day, there were about 250 of us full time traffic cops, 42 of us were full time motorcyclists. It is now around 100 and there are about 6 part time motorcyclists covering 3 counties. Says it all really.


Training is now non existent for traffic crews. I did 16 weeks driver training to get my class 1 car, and then the same again for my class 1 bike and on top of that a 12 week traffic law course, now they do an advanced course in 3 weeks, and their law course is 1 maybe 2 weeks.


So, yes, I pretty much agree with everything you say, and things are unlikely to get any better in the future especially with the funding cuts being made all the time.


I will get off my soap box now :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a self perpetuating problem. Less police means more bad driving, so instead of increasing police presence they lower the speed limits in the hope the advances in safety systems will mean for the same number of accidents less people will die.

Somebody somewhere must be making a lot of money as more and more speed cameras are appearing but clearly the revenue collected isn't put back into making the roads safer by dealing with the tailgaters and bad driving.


Being a police officer must be both quite rewarding but also often a thankless task, but if the new recruits complain to management when they need to deal with something messy, they really shouldn't be in the job.

I blame the "cotton wool bubble wrap society" that makes people think they shouldn't have to deal with difficult situations and if they do they are entitled to stress leave... And these are the people tasked with keeping us safe from terrorists and others who will gladly cut an innocent persons head off in the middle of a busy shopping center.... Sleep safe everybody!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somebody somewhere must be making a lot of money as more and more speed cameras are appearing but clearly the revenue collected isn't put back into making the roads safer by dealing with the tailgaters and bad driving.

 

Well therein lies some of the problems.


Once upon a time back in the day, if a local authority wanted a change in a speed limit or a camera to be placed, they had to consult the Police.


The Police would conduct what is called an 85 percentile check over a period of several days, they would get the average speed data over that time (15% was disregarded because you would always get the blatant offenders hence the 85%) check accident records and then make recommendations.


In some cases there would be a justification for a reduction in speed limits, in some case no justification and in a few it was argued that limits should actually rise.


With consultation, an agreement would be reached, the regulations amended and advised in the London Gazete (still a requirement) and the new regs would come into force.


If the Police said there was no case for a reduction or a camera but the council insisted, then the Police could and often did say "Fine, but we will not enforce" or "You can place your camera but as the authority responsible for operating said camera, we will not be putting any film in it!" This usually had the desired affect, and in fact in my area they learnt qite quickly to listen to what we said after they reduced the speed limit and the crash rate increased by about 70% :roll:


But then it was decided that the Councils were no longer required to consult the Police and off they went and did their own thing. They decide where cameras go, they decide what speed limits apply and what other regulations are applicable which is why I mention in a previous thread that if you get a parking ticket check the traffic order at the library because invariably it is wrong and unlawful because there is no Police Traffic management epartment to check the traffic order against the signs and lines in place.


So, the local authorities have (and excuse the pun) become a law onto themselves, safety is not their priority but money making, and traffic engineers having to justify their existance and big salaries.


And you are right about the cotton wool society. I joined the service knowing that I would see some pretty horrible things, I am sure Firemen and Ambulance crews are the same. You accepted that there would be days when you really would wish you had not gone to work that day and you accepted it, it was part of the job. But not once ever did I or any of my colleagues ever consider going off sick with stress or PTSD. We developed black humour which to outsiders might have seemed disrespectful, but that was the way we dealt with things.


This year is the 30th anniversary of the Hungerford massacre


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungerford_massacre


I was there, it was carnage. Roger Brereton (aka Gobby) was my buddy and that affected all of us traffic officers because we lost one of our own (the insurance company also tried to put the patrol car back into service :x ) and there were bodies everywhere but not once dd any of use consider PTSD, stress or counselling.


Following year I was first on scene at the M4 crash when 25 burnt to death same again, it was one of those things.


But then you look back further and in my early days, I had colleagues who had fought in the war. What must they have seen as young men?


So, I totally agree with you, the generation today is a different breed in all the emergency services. and like you rightly say, some of these are supposed to be contributing to or safe keeping?


NB. I would add, that I am not tarring everyone with the same brush, because there are some good people serving, but they seem to be few and far between these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely you get the option to view photographic proof? I know I did when I got caught speeding and I wasn't sure how.

Its been known for the police camera to tag another vehicle, be it in the distance or along side and the camera confuses whom was driving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so running a police force with all the sensitive young petals who faint at the sight of a broken fingernail must be an HR nightmare... I bet thats a huge contributing factor to the decision to scrap traffic cops because as you say the traffic officers would regularly have to deal with some gory roadkill...

so rather than have the majority of officers off on stress-leave, just use cameras instead that are far enough away that the operators dont see the actual gore...

what a world eh!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely you get the option to view photographic proof? I know I did when I got caught speeding and I wasn't sure how.

Its been known for the police camera to tag another vehicle, be it in the distance or along side and the camera confuses whom was driving.

 

If there is photographic evidence then the Police are not obliged to disclose it until it goes to court depening on the plea, and there is not always photographic evidence. Some do it when and if requested, but it is not a requirement.


People, please get it out of your heads about photographic evidence all the time. It is not a legal requirement to prove the offence, it is a recent introduction in relative terms and all the loopholes were by and large closed a long time ago which included the possibility of tagging another vehicle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im just commented from personal experience.

I've been caught twice in the last 3 years and both times they said I could request to see photographic evidence, if so required before making a formal declaration as to whom was driving.


This might just be a humberside police thing but it did happen and on one occasion I did ask for proof as I wasn't even sure how I'd been caught, as I wasn't intentionally speeding, well I thought i wasn't lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it would make sense as some people share cars and wouldn't necessarily know who was driving at a certain time on a certain date, so seeing a photo would clarify that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im just commented from personal experience.

I've been caught twice in the last 3 years and both times they said I could request to see photographic evidence, if so required before making a formal declaration as to whom was driving.

 

Which might be appropriate if caught be a camera, but there are other ways of enforcing speed.


As I said, you can ask, but there is no formal obligation or requirement. Usually people know who was driving at a particular time or place, but like everything else there are always exceptions to the rule, so it woud be reasonable in these cases to ask.


Some forces do send out photos with the paperwork. There is no standard parctice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well that's stage one completed: form filled in and returned to confirm that I was the driver at the time of the alleged offence. I considered including a short note to say that whilst I know damn well that I wasn't doing above the 42 mph indicated on the speedo, and was probably closer to the 40 indicated by the satnav, I don't intend to fight it because I have nothing whatever with which to defend myself other than a witness who wouldn't be considered impartial in any court. But then I figured that it wouldn't change anything, and doesn't exactly conform to the contrite and remorseful naughty boy you have to appear if you want to be offered a speed awareness course and avoid the points. And won't that be ironic? I'll be sitting there knowing that I have a considerably better awareness of what my speed was than the sodding detector did. :evil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

So, there was a great moment on the speed awareness course this morning. During the hazard perception section they put up a picture of a road that bends off to the right in the distance and said "No matter how good a driver you are we can guarantee that not one of you knows what's around that corner."


I did: it was taken outside the Mr Kipling factory in Newcastle-under-Lyme, and my mother's house is around that corner. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, there was a great moment on the speed awareness course this morning. During the hazard perception section they put up a picture of a road that bends off to the right in the distance and said "No matter how good a driver you are we can guarantee that not one of you knows what's around that corner."


I did: it was taken outside the Mr Kipling factory in Newcastle-under-Lyme, and my mother's house is around that corner. :lol:

Sounds like the kind of place you need exceedingly good brakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, there was a great moment on the speed awareness course this morning. During the hazard perception section they put up a picture of a road that bends off to the right in the distance and said "No matter how good a driver you are we can guarantee that not one of you knows what's around that corner."


I did: it was taken outside the Mr Kipling factory in Newcastle-under-Lyme, and my mother's house is around that corner. :lol:

Sounds like the kind of place you need exceedingly good brakes.

I don't know whether to laugh or to despair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Welcome to The Motorbike Forum.

    Sign in or register an account to join in.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Please Sign In or Sign Up