[NIP Wizard] Speed signs painted out with grey paint - can they prosecute? |
[NIP Wizard] Speed signs painted out with grey paint - can they prosecute? |
Sun, 24 Nov 2019 - 21:16
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 24 Nov 2019 Member No.: 106,774 |
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? - Date of the offence: - November 2019 Date of the NIP: - 4 days after the offence Date you received the NIP: - 5 days after the offence Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - O/S Ref 443968 447595, Wetherby Road, Walton, Junc School Lane, UNITED KINGDOM Was the NIP addressed to you? - Yes Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - Not known If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? - n/a How many current points do you have? - 3 Provide a description of events (if you know what happened) telling us as much about the incident as possible - some things that may seem trivial to you may be important, so don't leave anything out. Please do not post personal details for obvious reasons - Driving along a national speed limit country road at approx 50mph. Change of speed limit signs on both sides of road had been painted out with grey paint and were not readable. Automated speed camera 200m later - flashed me at 37mph. No pre-warning signs of change of speed limit. No street lights, no repeaters at all. Marking on road level with damaged speed signs said 30 but not seen at time of event due to distraction of painted out speed signs. I have photographic evidence of all of this. Returned to the site exactly a week later having received NIP. Now the signs are no longer painted out and they have put in place a new repeater sign between the speed change signs and the camera. I feel I have a case for appeal, but am unsure what to do or what to expect. Any advice would be appreciated. Can anyone point me in the direction of legislation as to adequate signage for speed limits that might help? Thanks NIP Wizard Responses These were the responses used by the Wizard to arrive at its recommendation: Have you received a NIP? - Yes Are you the Registered Keeper of the vehicle concerned (is your name and address on the V5/V5C)? - Yes Did the first NIP arrive within 14 days? - Yes Although you are the Registered Keeper, were you also the keeper of the vehicle concerned (the person normally responsible for it) at the time of the alleged offence? - Yes Were you driving? - Yes Which country did the alleged offence take place in? - England NIP Wizard Recommendation Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:
Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Sun, 24 Nov 2019 21:16:55 +0000 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sun, 24 Nov 2019 - 21:16
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sun, 24 Nov 2019 - 21:29
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Let's see the photographic evidence you say you have of the signs. Also, have there been any roadworks in the area?
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Sun, 24 Nov 2019 - 22:27
Post
#3
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 24 Nov 2019 Member No.: 106,774 |
|
|
|
Sun, 24 Nov 2019 - 22:31
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
That's fairly compelling evidence if it was recorded at the same time as the alleged offence. I suspect there might have been roadworks and a temporary limit, and someone forgot to restore the original signs when the road works ended. If the video was taken later on, it would be best to get records from the highway authority as to what maintenance has been performed don those signs and when the new repeater was put in.
There is a roundel printed on the road, but with the terminal signs being obscured in this way you might reasonably infer that the lower limit is not in effect for whatever reason. However to be honest, before I commit to any particular view I'd like to see the video, and a link to the location on google street view. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Sun, 24 Nov 2019 - 22:53
Post
#5
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 24 Nov 2019 Member No.: 106,774 |
|
|
|
Sun, 24 Nov 2019 - 23:06
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
use youtube, vimeo or some similar site.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 25 Nov 2019 - 17:19
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 274 Joined: 19 Aug 2016 Member No.: 86,499 |
GSV: here
Looks like there did used to be a repeater there, which vanished sometime between 2015-2018. There are streetlights starting after the camera, but no sign on any before. As said previously, the video will be key here. |
|
|
Mon, 25 Nov 2019 - 19:51
Post
#8
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 24 Nov 2019 Member No.: 106,774 |
https://youtu.be/-psUQzxqH_k
Apologies for delay! GSV: here Looks like there did used to be a repeater there, which vanished sometime between 2015-2018. There are streetlights starting after the camera, but no sign on any before. As said previously, the video will be key here. Thank you. Went back to the site yesterday and there is now a new repeater in the same place as you have pointed out in 2015. As you can see from the video definitely wasn't there on day of alleged offence, so has been put up in the last week. |
|
|
Mon, 25 Nov 2019 - 22:43
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
See what others say but I think this is worth fighting. A diligent motorist could reasonably conclude the highway authority has dis-applied the previously posted speed limit for whatever reason.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 00:41
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,581 Joined: 28 Mar 2010 Member No.: 36,528 |
See what others say but I think this is worth fighting. A diligent motorist could reasonably conclude the highway authority has dis-applied the previously posted speed limit for whatever reason. I agree, I think the police might even drop it if they see this evidence. -------------------- |
|
|
Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 07:43
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,265 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Another in agreement, the evidence is pretty compelling and I'd expect them to drop it (and getting onto the council).
-------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 09:47
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 477 Joined: 29 Jul 2019 Member No.: 104,999 |
See what others say but I think this is worth fighting. A diligent motorist could reasonably conclude the highway authority has dis-applied the previously posted speed limit for whatever reason. I agree, I think the police might even drop it if they see this evidence. how would the police see this evidence? at the time of the trial? -------------------- Police Speeding Fines - Police 1 - speedfighter23 0
TFL traffic contraventions 0 - speedfighter23 2 Kensington and Chelsea 0 parking contraventions - speedfighter23 1 Brighton and Hove parking 0 - speedfighter23 1 Private PCN - Private Parking Solutions Limited 0 - speedfighter23 1 Tyre Puncture Pothole Claims: 0 Buckinghamshire Council - speedfighter23 1 0 TFL - speedfighter23 1 Result Pending: 1 Islington Council tyre puncture claim |
|
|
Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 10:33
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,634 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
See what others say but I think this is worth fighting. A diligent motorist could reasonably conclude the highway authority has dis-applied the previously posted speed limit for whatever reason. I agree, I think the police might even drop it if they see this evidence. how would the police see this evidence? at the time of the trial? A normal person would give it to them in advance so that they’re not prosecuted in the first place. -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 11:08
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,318 Joined: 17 Jun 2011 Member No.: 47,602 |
See what others say but I think this is worth fighting. A diligent motorist could reasonably conclude the highway authority has dis-applied the previously posted speed limit for whatever reason. I agree, I think the police might even drop it if they see this evidence. Agreed that it's worth fighting, and the OP should win. However, I think our hypothetical 'diligent motorist' should wonder why the signs have been blacked out, and so proceed with extreme caution. It seems extremely unlikely that the hazards associated with a built-up area (which originally necessitated the limit) would simply have disappeared, and much more likely that other hazards such as roadworks would have been added. |
|
|
Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 12:33
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,265 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
See what others say but I think this is worth fighting. A diligent motorist could reasonably conclude the highway authority has dis-applied the previously posted speed limit for whatever reason. I agree, I think the police might even drop it if they see this evidence. Agreed that it's worth fighting, and the OP should win. However, I think our hypothetical 'diligent motorist' should wonder why the signs have been blacked out, and so proceed with extreme caution. It seems extremely unlikely that the hazards associated with a built-up area (which originally necessitated the limit) would simply have disappeared, and much more likely that other hazards such as roadworks would have been added. The OP was caught at 37, what should the limit have been? 40 looks reasonable, may even have been 50. None the less Coombes still prevails. -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 12:49
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
However, I think our hypothetical 'diligent motorist' should wonder why the signs have been blacked out, and so proceed with extreme caution. It seems extremely unlikely that the hazards associated with a built-up area (which originally necessitated the limit) would simply have disappeared, and much more likely that other hazards such as roadworks would have been added. As I understand it, the diligent motorist is not required to second guess or go behind the reasons for a speed limit being in place, this must work both ways. There is of course an overarching requirement not to drive too fast for the conditions, but if the highways authority has deliberately obscured the speed limit signs, as long as you don't drive carelessly or dangerously no court could blame you for exceeding a speed limit that was previously posted but no longer is. I would also agree that if you share this footage with the police it is likely the case will be dropped, I would also expect them to drop all detections that took place before the signage was fixed. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 13:18
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,265 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
I'd certainly be asking the relevant highways authority for the history here..... vandalism or road works, when done/known about and when corrected.
-------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 19:42
Post
#18
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 24 Nov 2019 Member No.: 106,774 |
Thank you everyone for your time taken to reply and advice.
Would this be a case of replying to the NIP confirming I was the driver and then going through the process of formal appeal, or worth contacting West Yorkshire Police separately? |
|
|
Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 19:52
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,634 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
By “formal appeal” do you mean rejecting any offer of a course or fixed penalty and go to court?
-------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 19:58
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I'd be minded to send the NIP, a covering letter and a copy of the video, all in the same envelope.
There is no appeal process as you've not been convicted of anything, however the police should see sense and simply drop it. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Wednesday, 17th April 2024 - 18:02 |