PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Stopped by the police claiming 110 mph while I was not even at the speed limit [Video]
go2ready
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:18
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 6 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,825



Hello there, I need help & advice on this one and anything else will also be appreciated.

tl;dr I was pulled over by a met police officer at 30/12/2017 for doing 110 mph on A20 while I was doing 68, I have video evidence.

Here is the frontal dash footage with the speedo reading from my HUD (not very clear tho), I intentionally included 10 mins more driving in the video, before I meet the police officer to show you that I was not speeding at all. Please read the description or comment on the video to skip to the relevant part, but here
is a copy of that,

"Police officers sitting at the side of the road in the bushes, video location 10:35, google map location https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3939669,0...3312!8i6656
stopped me at 14:50 allegate me doing 110 MPH! 16:20 He later told me that “It is easy to not notice your speed in such powerful car.”"

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKySmZeT9NA

Here are some bulletin point that I would like to highlight,

1, I was following the traffic (even fallen behind it) before I meet the police car hiding behind bushes.
2, I was overtaken by another car when I pass them.
3, I handed it my license when pulled over, I did not take any penalty point or fine on the spot, the police office provides verbal NIP to me but states that letter should arrive within 14 days.
4, I signed the reporting ticket to show my acknowledgement but not admittance, he did not give any back to me.
5, I think his device might be set to kmph as 110 kmph was matching the speeding I was doing 68mph as you can see from the video.
6, I have one passenger(my wife) with me on the car, she knows what it feels like to driving 110mph as we have been to the autobahn.

Not here is what I think I might do:

I will wait for any letter to arrive, and appeal anything to me, go to court with my wife and my video, ask for any calibration record of the device and show my video.

However here are my doubt and questions,

1, Was the evidence suffice? I was not speeding either intentionally or unintentionally.
2, I need to change my address 2 times in the coming 6 months, is noticing DVLA enough? I am worrying missing any letter sent to me.
3, Is there anything I can do to ask for justice? Without my dashcam I could left stranged and hand in thousands of pounds in fine and 6 points for something I never committed.

This post has been edited by go2ready: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:21
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
6 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:18
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
JP1978
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:33
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 298
Joined: 6 Jan 2013
Member No.: 59,192



I think that you already know that you will just send the video, or link to it once the letter arrives, or call the ticket office now and explain the situation.

Even without the speed showing clearly, you can see the other traffics speed in relation to yours and if ever it were questioned further can often see the 100yd markers on the edge of the road, speed can be deduced from that if timings are made between points.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:34
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,461
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



That's most bizarre. It would be visually easy to tell the difference between 68 and 110, prior to any measurement.

I would be looking to avoid this going to court and providing proof ASAP.

Updating the DVLA will not suffice as they will use the address they have in their possession right now. They do not routinely recheck the DVLA (PNC) after an event. Either put in place mail forwarding or provide them updated addresses.

If you've received a TOR then you may not hear anything for 5-7 months as that alleged excess would only be dealt with at court. Another reason to contact them in advance.

This post has been edited by Jlc: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:35


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
go2ready
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:38
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 6 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,825



QUOTE (Jlc @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:34) *
I would be looking to avoid this going to court and providing proof ASAP.


I have already filed an IPCC claim aginst the Met, what should I do to contact them? Just pick up the phone?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AntonyMMM
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:38
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,346
Joined: 17 May 2010
Member No.: 37,614



QUOTE (go2ready @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:38) *
I have already filed an IPCC claim aginst the Met


for what ?

This post has been edited by AntonyMMM: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:40
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:41
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,461
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (go2ready @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:38) *
QUOTE (Jlc @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:34) *
I would be looking to avoid this going to court and providing proof ASAP.


I have already filed an IPCC claim aginst the Met, what should I do to contact them? Just pick up the phone?

You need to contact the PC's commanding officer in the first instance. On the basis that they have made a 'mistake' as opposed to anything nefarious.


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
go2ready
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:47
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 6 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,825



QUOTE (AntonyMMM @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:38) *
QUOTE (go2ready @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:38) *
I have already filed an IPCC claim aginst the Met, what should I do to contact them? Just pick up the phone?


for what ?


I believe that are either incompetent in using their device or they are targeting me specifically because to quote the officer “We are sure it was you before you car is distinctive and powerful”. Which I think it is the unfair/discrimination answer when I asked for evidence on the spot.

QUOTE (Jlc @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:41) *
QUOTE (go2ready @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:38) *
QUOTE (Jlc @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:34) *
I would be looking to avoid this going to court and providing proof ASAP.


I have already filed an IPCC claim aginst the Met, what should I do to contact them? Just pick up the phone?

You need to contact the PC's commanding officer in the first instance. On the basis that they have made a 'mistake' as opposed to anything nefarious.


Thank you very much, but please forgive my incompetence as I have never dealt with some issue before. Can I call 101 ask for redirection? Couldn't find any related information online
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Irksome
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 17:27
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 290
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
From: sw11
Member No.: 38,303



I can't see how the officer could be so mistaken, or the speed measurement device (sounds like a laser?). Certainly I'd be making a formal complaint to the Met for the distress and inconvenience caused by the mistaken actions of the officer who appears to require re-training on the operation of the device.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
go2ready
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 19:07
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 6 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,825



QUOTE (Irksome @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 17:27) *
I can't see how the officer could be so mistaken, or the speed measurement device (sounds like a laser?). Certainly I'd be making a formal complaint to the Met for the distress and inconvenience caused by the mistaken actions of the officer who appears to require re-training on the operation of the device.

Thank you, I will do that after the appeal
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AntonyMMM
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 20:03
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,346
Joined: 17 May 2010
Member No.: 37,614



A complaint at this stage is a poor strategy -the IPCC don't deal with this sort of complaint anyway (they have a specific remit), so will pass it down to the Met complaints unit.

Where there is a complaint which essentially is one of "I didn't do it", i.e. of guilt /innocence , the complaints unit will take the view that the proper place for that question to be tested is in court and they will do nothing at all until the court case is complete. In some cases by making a complaint you can force something to court that may otherwise have been dropped at an earlier stage.

Contact the Traffic Criminal justice Unit, who deal with traffic related prosecutions (they are based at Marlow House in Sidcup) and make them aware you have a full video of the events, and invite them to view it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 20:20
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,509
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



As you say, wait for the letter first. They may well have realised they've messed up.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 21:44
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,294
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (go2ready @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 19:07) *
QUOTE (Irksome @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 17:27) *
I can't see how the officer could be so mistaken, or the speed measurement device (sounds like a laser?). Certainly I'd be making a formal complaint to the Met for the distress and inconvenience caused by the mistaken actions of the officer who appears to require re-training on the operation of the device.

Thank you, I will do that after the appeal

Just to clarify, there is no appeal. You have been accused but are presumed innocent until proven guilty. From your video, it looks quite clear that you are not guilty.

Also, at the point where you say you passed the police car, you were still in Kent, not London. Are you sure it was a Metropolitan Police officer?
Police forces can conduct joint operations, patrol each other's areas etc, and legally they have jurisdiction across the whole country, but as a general rule you'd expect routine traffic enforcement in Kent to be carried out by Kent police.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 11:03
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,628
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 21:44) *
Also, at the point where you say you passed the police car, you were still in Kent, not London. Are you sure it was a Metropolitan Police officer?


He wasn’t, actually.

The location is a pull in to a former gatekeeper’s cottage on the edge of Scadbury Park. The road at that point is in the London Borough of Bexley (the cottage itself is in the London Borough of Bromley with the south side of the carriageway being the boundary between the two). Driving towards London along the A20 (Sidcup Bypass) one enters the London Borough of Bromley just west of a footbridge about a mile and a half before the location of the stop. There then follows a short stretch (about 700m) of the A20 which is in Bromley before the boundary with Bexley bisects the road just before Crittall’s Corner. A bit complicated and this map shows the details (go down to zoom level 2). The OP was stopped adjacent to “Spring Shaw” between Crittall’s Corner and Frognall Corner:

http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?x=54550...mp;mapp=map.srf

I do agree, however, that the OP must have been first spotted whilst in Kent. From the east, the earliest opportunity to join the A20 is from the B2173 about three miles earlier. Before that it’s the Swanley interchange, another two or three miles previously. The stretch between Swanley and Sidcup does see activity by Met officers as the London Borough of Bromley extends into the rural areas between Orpington and Swanley and the A20 is their quickest route back to civilisation. Quite why they would want to get involved in a traffic stop, especially one where they seem so clearly wrong, is a bit of a mystery.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mazzer
post Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 12:12
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 110
Joined: 4 Aug 2004
Member No.: 1,486



With the traffic around his car at the time they supposedly measured his speed, I can't see how on earth they could have come up with a figure of 110. Even the fastest car overtaking him clearly wasn't going anywhere near that speed.

Out of interest, what car were you driving ? How is it "distinctive"?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mickR
post Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 13:06
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,140
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
From: England
Member No.: 9,919



Police officer clearly states he "targeted" the OP.
Being mistaken also clearly is not an option here.

There must be another reason for the deliberate stop!

OP what type/make car were you driving?

This post has been edited by mickR: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 13:31
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
roythebus
post Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 15:10
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,293
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
From: Near Calais
Member No.: 9,683



Hmm, a bit of road I drive a long many times a month. the cops were hiding in the exit from the quarry, near the eastbound services. I would suggest that while it's <possible> to do 100mph along there and more, no way was this video done at that sort of speed, otherwise everything else would have been doing well over the limit.

110km/h maybe, 68 mph more like it. Maybe the officer had the machine set to km/h?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
StuartBu
post Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 15:25
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,165
Joined: 1 Jan 2013
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 59,097



QUOTE (roythebus @ Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 15:10) *
Hmm, a bit of road I drive a long many times a month. the cops were hiding in the exit from the quarry, near the eastbound services. I would suggest that while it's <possible> to do 100mph along there and more, no way was this video done at that sort of speed, otherwise everything else would have been doing well over the limit.

110km/h maybe, 68 mph more like it. Maybe the officer had the machine set to km/h?


The one converts to the other 68 - 109.435 Even if this progresses no further because the Cops realise what has happned ( if that is the case ) then it is something I'd want an explanation of if I was the OP and so also does the comment "“We are sure it was you before you car is distinctive and powerful”. although this wording as typed by OP doesn't really make sense . What's that all about ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 16:23
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,294
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (NewJudge @ Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 11:03) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 21:44) *
Also, at the point where you say you passed the police car, you were still in Kent, not London. Are you sure it was a Metropolitan Police officer?


He wasn’t, actually.

Yes he was, I said "at the point where you say you passed the police car", not "the point where you were pulled over"

The boundary is just off the A20, the police car might well have been sitting right on it, but the A20 itself is in Kent at that point: https://ibb.co/ma0tcG


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 17:13
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,628
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



Yes point taken, cp. That entrance to the quarry is indeed in Kent, with the A20 not entering the Met area until a mile or more further west. I was referring (incorrectly) to the point where he was stopped.

In fact that makes the puzzle more intriguing. I know, as I said, Met officers use that stretch of the A20 to get back towards Chislehurst and Bromley following their forays into the country areas of their patch. But I can't see why they would be monitoring traffic there routinely. Perhaps the OP might know.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
go2ready
post Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 19:38
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 6 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,825



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 21:44) *
QUOTE (go2ready @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 19:07) *
QUOTE (Irksome @ Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 17:27) *
I can't see how the officer could be so mistaken, or the speed measurement device (sounds like a laser?). Certainly I'd be making a formal complaint to the Met for the distress and inconvenience caused by the mistaken actions of the officer who appears to require re-training on the operation of the device.

Thank you, I will do that after the appeal

Just to clarify, there is no appeal. You have been accused but are presumed innocent until proven guilty. From your video, it looks quite clear that you are not guilty.

Also, at the point where you say you passed the police car, you were still in Kent, not London. Are you sure it was a Metropolitan Police officer?
Police forces can conduct joint operations, patrol each other's areas etc, and legally they have jurisdiction across the whole country, but as a general rule you'd expect routine traffic enforcement in Kent to be carried out by Kent police.


Yes, he gives a piece of paper states what I need to be expected next, that one have Met Police stamp on it

QUOTE (mazzer @ Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 12:12) *
With the traffic around his car at the time they supposedly measured his speed, I can't see how on earth they could have come up with a figure of 110. Even the fastest car overtaking him clearly wasn't going anywhere near that speed.

Out of interest, what car were you driving ? How is it "distinctive"?


I was driving a m235i coupe, much like this one

QUOTE (roythebus @ Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 15:10) *
Hmm, a bit of road I drive a long many times a month. the cops were hiding in the exit from the quarry, near the eastbound services. I would suggest that while it's <possible> to do 100mph along there and more, no way was this video done at that sort of speed, otherwise everything else would have been doing well over the limit.

110km/h maybe, 68 mph more like it. Maybe the officer had the machine set to km/h?


Yes that is what I thought, but sadly I have no way to say on this matter. And Such claim from the police could easy fine me thousands.

QUOTE (StuartBu @ Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 15:25) *
QUOTE (roythebus @ Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 15:10) *
Hmm, a bit of road I drive a long many times a month. the cops were hiding in the exit from the quarry, near the eastbound services. I would suggest that while it's <possible> to do 100mph along there and more, no way was this video done at that sort of speed, otherwise everything else would have been doing well over the limit.

110km/h maybe, 68 mph more like it. Maybe the officer had the machine set to km/h?


The one converts to the other 68 - 109.435 Even if this progresses no further because the Cops realise what has happned ( if that is the case ) then it is something I'd want an explanation of if I was the OP and so also does the comment "“We are sure it was you before you car is distinctive and powerful”. although this wording as typed by OP doesn't really make sense . What's that all about ?


This quote comes from the police as I question them, "Are you sure it was me Sir?" And they said "Yes, your car is distinctive", I reply "I certainly didn't notice I was going that fast", they replied, "Yes, you can easily not noticing, especially in this powerful car."

QUOTE (NewJudge @ Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 17:13) *
Yes point taken, cp. That entrance to the quarry is indeed in Kent, with the A20 not entering the Met area until a mile or more further west. I was referring (incorrectly) to the point where he was stopped.

In fact that makes the puzzle more intriguing. I know, as I said, Met officers use that stretch of the A20 to get back towards Chislehurst and Bromley following their forays into the country areas of their patch. But I can't see why they would be monitoring traffic there routinely. Perhaps the OP might know.


Sorry I don't, it is my first time there as I just follow the Sat Nav and did not know too much about the surrounding area, but does it matter whether it is Met or Kent police?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

6 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Friday, 14th December 2018 - 06:41
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.