PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

634 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

andy_foster
Posted on: Today, 07:21


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


The maximum possible error due to slip is the length of the slip (measured along the axis of the 'beam') divided by the measurement time. If you increase the measurement time, you decrease the potential error.

  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1501612 · Replies: 48 · Views: 3,175

andy_foster
Posted on: Yesterday, 18:04


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (30064602 @ Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 16:54) *
is there anything we can do to try getting off with it as he's got 6pnts already.


Dunno. Nothing that you have posted indicates a viable defence. There is a slim chance that if you went to court that the prosecution might balls up their case, and a perhaps slimmer chance that you would be able to identify and exploit such a balls up - but you would be likely to be hit with ~£620 costs on top of whatever fine the court imposed and the points if you lose.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1501544 · Replies: 5 · Views: 196

andy_foster
Posted on: Yesterday, 17:56


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


The checking the speed limit signage appears to be somewhat 'generic', and whilst a tad sloppy does not assist you unless you have a spare £10k to drop on the services of Nick Freeman who has been known to discredit police witnesses by using what might be perhaps slightly unfairly described as a Jedi mind trick. The error in the statement is not material - the court will be aware that standard repeater signs are not permitted on restricted roads (30mph by virtue of street lighting).

The law is fairly simple and clear (if you know it), but many regulars seem to forget that many do not understand or recall what they ought to have learned several decades ago.

Unless there is a Traffic Regulation Order to the contrary (which cannot be seen on the road, or for practical purposes, signs to the contrary) the default speed limits (for cars, etc.) are as follows-

Motorways - 70mph
Any road other than a motorway with a compliant system of street lighting - 30mph
Dual carriageway (central reservation or area of land separating carriageways) without a compliant system of street lighting - 70mph
Single carriageways without a compliant system of street lighting - 60mph.

Terminal signs are required where the speed limit changes, not necessarily where any particular road starts or ends.

A compliant system of street lighting requires a minimum of 3 street lights, with each street light no more than 200 yards (183 metres) from the nearest street light. It is very unusual for the spacing to be anywhere near that far apart, so other than looking for possible defences after the event, for practical purposes if there are street lights and it is not a motorway and there are no signs to the contrary, it is a 30mph limit.

Speeding, as with most motoring offences, is a 'strict liability offence'. That means that whether or not you intended to break the law or knew that you were breaking the law is not relevant to the commission of the offence.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1501542 · Replies: 17 · Views: 447

andy_foster
Posted on: Yesterday, 10:13


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (prolaser4lover @ Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 10:42) *
How did you work out my bike has a width of 15cm? - are you assuming it is a block and roated by an angle to show some of the side but not all of it?


Not width, but otherwise yes.

If the operator was offset by 10m perpendicular to your flight path and the reading was taken at 91m (reasonable assumptions from the information you have provided) the rear of the block would be ~ 1.4m x (10m / 90.4m) into the path of the beam. Unless your bike has a very contrived shape, when considering possible slip error, the most favourable approach is to consider the side it is purported that the slip occurred on to be flat.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1501437 · Replies: 48 · Views: 3,175

andy_foster
Posted on: Yesterday, 01:44


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (prolaser4lover @ Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 01:37) *
His hands have to move by 0.115 of a degree to get the laser hitting the back of my bike to the front (as I am almost, but not quite front on).

The maths is simple at 21ms-1 then you times it by the time 0.3 which gives you 6.3m forwards

At 91m 6.3m is 84.7m (y Plane)

officer was at a lateral (x plane) 10m (this is verified by measurement, and has been rounded slightly for simplicity)

Angle of the Y plan to the officer is 83.72 degrees and 83.27 degrees (calculated using basic trig functions)

The length of the bike is 1.4m if you take that away from 84.7 and redo the calculation you get a degree of 83.15 meaning a 0.115 degree of movement in his hands means he hits the entire length of my bike. Even a fraction over and he misses it completely.


Lets assume for the sake of argument that I have degrees in both Law and Physics and have read and heard expert reports from both sides in several cases...

Whilst what you have posted might well reflect some accurate trigonometry, as written it is gibberish - e.g. "At 91m 6.3m is 84.7m". That said, it would be presumptuous to assume that your presentation before an appellate court would be of the same standard as an on-line argument.

The crux of your argument appears to be that if the operator managed to traverse the entire length of your bike during the IIRC 0.328 seconds minimum it takes to obtain a reading (if the device gets a reading at the first attempt), and if the beam is sufficiently narrow that the change in distance recorded from the signal returned (allowing for algorithms concerning signal strength and within the parameters set by the initial 4 pulses) accounted for that length, and if it did this without recording an error, then the speed recorded would represent an over-read of the length of the bike multiplied by the cosine of the angle between the beam and your direction of travel divided again by the 0.328 seconds - in other words an maximum theoretical error (based on several unrealistic presumptions) of an over-read of ~9.3mph

Without knowing what the alleged speed and limit were, I have no idea whether or not whether such a hypothetical over-read would be sufficient to put your speed below the speed limit. If not, I would suggest that your only hope is that the prosecution's very expensive expert witness isn't very bright (and that the judge is somewhat disinterested).

Other than any bias the court may have, there are several other issues that you would need to overcome. Proving that such an over-read is theoretically possible would not be sufficient to create reasonable doubt, you would have to show that there was a real likelihood that it happened on that occasion.

However, perhaps the biggest issue is that if the operator was set back 10m from your flight path and pinged you at 91m, the nominal beam width would be ~27cm, but the length of your bike would equate to ~15cm at that angle from the operator's perspective. I would suggest that even the best military marksman would have difficulty in producing a meaningful over-read in such circumstances.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1501407 · Replies: 48 · Views: 3,175

andy_foster
Posted on: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 - 20:22


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (baroudeur @ Thu, 18 Jul 2019 - 11:07) *
On the other hand, if a penalty is not being returned to the country claiming it then why start a claim? It would seem it's not in the interests of either country to pursue these penalties.


Pour encourager les autres
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1501384 · Replies: 29 · Views: 1,183

andy_foster
Posted on: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 - 20:20


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


Standard rant #46 - it never ceases to amaze me (and clearly I ought to know better by now) the amount of time people are willing to spend trying to distil the precise points of law from vague and often incorrect general advice.

However, if one were to consult VERA, one might readily stumble upon what appears to be the relevant provision(s), in section 29, helpfully entitled "Penalty for using or keeping unlicensed vehicle."

QUOTE
(2C)Subsection (1) does not apply to a vehicle if the vehicle is kept by a motor trader or vehicle tester at business premises.
(section 29 quoted in its entirety below)

I note that "at business premises" appears at first blush to have unduly wide scope, but would seem to readily explain why a vehicle kept by a motor trader at the business premises of another motor trader does not constitute an offence.

QUOTE
29 Penalty for using or keeping unlicensed vehicle.

(1)If a person uses, or keeps, [F1a vehicle] which is unlicensed he is guilty of an offence.

(2)For the purposes of subsection (1) a vehicle is unlicensed if no vehicle licence or trade licence is in force for or in respect of the vehicle.

[F2(2A)Subsection (1) does not apply to a vehicle if—

(a)it is an exempt vehicle in respect of which regulations under this Act require a nil licence to be in force and a nil licence is in force in respect of the vehicle, or

(b)it is an exempt vehicle that is not one in respect of which regulations under this Act require a nil licence to be in force.

(2B)Subsection (1) does not apply to a vehicle if—

(a)the vehicle is being neither used nor kept on a public road, and

(b)the particulars and declaration required to be furnished and made by regulations under section 22(1D) have been furnished and made in accordance with the regulations and the terms of the declaration have at no time been breached.

(2C)Subsection (1) does not apply to a vehicle if the vehicle is kept by a motor trader or vehicle tester at business premises.

(2D)The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision amending this section for the purpose of providing further exceptions from subsection (1) (or varying or revoking any such further exceptions).

(2E)A person accused of an offence under subsection (1) is not entitled to the benefit of an exception from subsection (1) conferred by or under this section unless evidence is adduced that is sufficient to raise an issue with respect to that exception; but where evidence is so adduced it is for the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the exception does not apply.]

(3)[F3Subject to subsection (3A)] a person guilty of an offence under subsection (1) is liable on summary conviction to an excise penalty of—

(a)level 3 on the standard scale, or

(b)five times the amount of the vehicle excise duty chargeable [F4in respect of using or keeping the vehicle on a public road],

whichever is the greater.

[F5(3A)In the case of a person who—

(a)has provided the Secretary of State with a declaration or statement (in pursuance of regulations under section 22) that the vehicle will not during a period specified in the declaration or statement be used or kept on a public road, and

(b)commits an offence under subsection (1) within a period prescribed by regulations,

subsection (3) applies as if the reference in paragraph (a) to level 3 were a reference to level 4.]

(4)Where a vehicle for which a vehicle licence is in force is transferred by the holder of the licence to another person, the licence is to be treated for the purposes of subsection (2) as no longer in force F6... .

F7(5). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(6)The amount of the vehicle excise duty chargeable in respect of a vehicle is to be taken for the purposes of subsection (3)(b) to be an amount equal to the annual rate of duty applicable to the vehicle at the date on which the offence was committed.

(7)Where in the case of a vehicle [F8not being used] on a public road that annual rate differs from the annual rate by reference to which the vehicle was at that date chargeable under [F9section 2(3) to (6)], the amount of the vehicle excise duty chargeable in respect of the vehicle is to be taken for those purposes to be an amount equal to the latter rate.

(8)In the case of a conviction for a continuing offence, the offence is to be taken for the purposes of subsections (6) and (7) to have been committed on the date or latest date to which the conviction relates.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1501382 · Replies: 17 · Views: 990

andy_foster
Posted on: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 - 19:02


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (dino_123 @ Fri, 19 Jul 2019 - 12:51) *
Hi All,

I appreciate this is covered by the NIP Wizard but its dated 2003 so wanted to make sure its still valid.


If you had answered the questions in the NIP Wizard, we might have enough information to provide a meaningful answer - which is why we put questions in the NIP Wizard back in ye olde days.

Please visit the READ ME FIRST section (Click Here), answer all the questions in the NIP Wizard (including the detailed questions reached by clicking on the Additional Questions button on the second page), and the Wizard will then post its output back here to enable us to help you.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1501354 · Replies: 3 · Views: 280

andy_foster
Posted on: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 - 21:19


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 18 Jul 2019 - 21:33) *
As removing the reg plates would be illegal in itself that hardly solves the problem of being illegal!


QUOTE (Foxy01 @ Thu, 18 Jul 2019 - 21:54) *
Is it illegal to remove plates in a private car park?


IIRC the legislation creating the requirement/offence is silent as to where it is committed. IMHO this should men that it should be construed restrictively - e.g. only applying on a public road. If it were to have universal application, an offence would be committed if a mechanic in a workshop removed a bumper.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1501098 · Replies: 17 · Views: 990

andy_foster
Posted on: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 - 16:09


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (aq1 @ Thu, 18 Jul 2019 - 16:19) *
Hi, the car is on lease but i am the registered keeper,


I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that that is bollox - or at least it is bollox for the purposes of the NIP.

The good news is that when you manage to dig out your V5C you will be able to check that your name and address are correctly listed on it and tell me what I can do with my limbs. In the meantime...

QUOTE
all parking tickets and camera fines come directly to me,


Presumably after the lease company received a NIP/NtK and named you.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1501014 · Replies: 10 · Views: 396

andy_foster
Posted on: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 - 17:39


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


A1. Technically there is no such thing as a 'verbal NIP'. The requirement is that you were warned at the time of the offence that the question of prosecuting you for that offence (or some other offence to which section 1 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 applies) would be considered. In other words, you were made aware that you might be prosecuted.

If you had not ben warned at the time of the offence, then they would need to serve you or the RK of the vehicle with a NIP within 14 days.

The statute is sections 1 and 2 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, although the precise meaning of some terms has been 'clarified' by case law.

A2. If you are being reported for 85mph, not the speed he entrapped you into doing, who cares? (Clue: we don't)

A3. See A2. plus do you think that you can convince a court that your account is accurate?
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1500707 · Replies: 4 · Views: 209

andy_foster
Posted on: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 - 17:08


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


Did you receive a NIP, or a 'letter regarding a NIP'?
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1500701 · Replies: 10 · Views: 744

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 - 10:46


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


IMHO "SD&P" and "SD&P including commuting" both include commuting. "SD&P excluding commuting" does not.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1500319 · Replies: 3 · Views: 183

andy_foster
Posted on: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 - 13:18


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (shy @ Mon, 15 Jul 2019 - 06:35) *
Ok. Finally how do I complete the form and what do I need to say to cops if they turn up?


Depends on who "I" is. Do you currently identify as the RK who wasn't driving, or do you identify as the driver?
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1500112 · Replies: 26 · Views: 1,617

andy_foster
Posted on: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 - 23:02


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (percycov @ Sat, 13 Jul 2019 - 20:10) *
My work sent the NIP off stating I was driving, which I was and last week I received a conditional offer of 3 points and £100 fine.


After your employers named you as the driver, did you then receive a NIP/s. 172 in your own name and did you name yourself as the driver, or did they simply send you a COFP after being named by your employers?

edit: My bad. If had had bothered to check to see whether you had multiple threads for the same case (original thread here) I would have seen that you had simply omitted the details from this version of events.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1499798 · Replies: 8 · Views: 886

andy_foster
Posted on: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 - 18:21


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (saunaboy @ Sat, 13 Jul 2019 - 18:15) *
Seriously - any thoughts on the likelihood of this?


Seriously, we don't know (and to be blunt, many of us don't care).
If you actually receive a NIP, we might be able to offer some constructive legal advice, but currently you're just wasting your time and ours.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1499768 · Replies: 17 · Views: 1,134

andy_foster
Posted on: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 - 17:03


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (saunaboy @ Sat, 13 Jul 2019 - 16:48) *
Without any evidence how likely is anything to happen?


About 7
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1499762 · Replies: 17 · Views: 1,134

andy_foster
Posted on: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 - 22:34


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


Have you been caught by this camera, or is merely a random question based on a hypothetical possibility that you might have been caught, inexplicably posted in an active cases forum (again)?
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1499649 · Replies: 6 · Views: 443

andy_foster
Posted on: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 - 17:40


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 9 Jul 2019 - 23:32) *
QUOTE (chawal2 @ Tue, 9 Jul 2019 - 22:33) *
I will read on it on google...

Must... resist... urge...


Just chill out and have a mug of tea in your favourite mug
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1499596 · Replies: 194 · Views: 13,004

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 - 21:52


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (Cosmo101 @ Tue, 9 Jul 2019 - 14:42) *
My question was would they endorse the points from today or from the original speeding offence?


Your licence will be endorsed with the DVLA offence code(s), the number of points, the date of offence and the date of conviction.

Insurance will want to know about the endorsements for either 3 or 5 years from date of conviction.
Points will be relevant for totting up in relation to offences committed within 3 years of the dates of conviction.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1498727 · Replies: 22 · Views: 1,287

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 - 21:33


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


The letter will almost certainly be a Single Justice Procedure Notice, although a Postal Requisition would be more appropriate.

As it was received less than 6 months after the alleged offence, it seems reasonable to assume that it was produced within the 6 months.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1498718 · Replies: 3 · Views: 412

andy_foster
Posted on: Sun, 7 Jul 2019 - 10:24


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (Logician @ Sun, 7 Jul 2019 - 11:00) *
As I said in post #3, Home Office Circular 046/1983 stated that the police will not proceed against any driver with a breath reading of less that 40 micrograms, and the lower of the two readings is used.

As this is a publicly available document, and public bodies can be held to such statements, I would have thought that the prosecution should be asked by the court to re-consider the case if a reading of under 40 was brought to court.


Unless the court in question has supervisory jurisdiction over public bodies, the court could be told to mind its own business.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1497815 · Replies: 88 · Views: 7,503

andy_foster
Posted on: Fri, 5 Jul 2019 - 15:48


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (MOTORDAN @ Fri, 5 Jul 2019 - 09:03) *
Date of the NIP: - 118 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 136 days after the offence


Are you able to elaborate on this?
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1497504 · Replies: 4 · Views: 686

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 - 13:16


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


You might want to hit the "Report" button and ask a mod to move this to the Council forum.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1496660 · Replies: 8 · Views: 1,148

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 - 10:10


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,627
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


The obvious defence would be that it was not reasonably practicable to provide the information (which in this case would be that the OP had no connection with the vehicle) as he did not receive the notice and had no reason to take step to ensure that such notices would have reached him (Whiteside).
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1496624 · Replies: 24 · Views: 2,365

634 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

New Posts  New Replies
No New Posts  No New Replies
Hot topic  Hot Topic (New)
No new  Hot Topic (No New)
Poll  Poll (New)
No new votes  Poll (No New)
Closed  Locked Topic
Moved  Moved Topic
 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Sunday, 21st July 2019 - 14:13
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.