Court or no court for £100? Options

[9ca0]

Hi all,

I have been caught doing 48 in a 40 variable on the M1 in the Bedfordshire Police Area. The NIP bounced around a leasing company, then to my company and then to me about 3 months after the incident. I filled out the NIP and sent a letter objecting to the charge. My issue is that the variable speed limit signs on the gantry changed as I passed under them from 50 to 40. The next gantry was also 50mph still but changed as I approached. Bedfordshire police claim that it was 2m31s before I reached it. The photograph they have replied with is so bad quality I cant make out individual cars, let alone identify my car specifically. They have also said they will no longer respond to my messages. The have told me they included the record of calibration, which they have not done.

I can easily pay the fine but am wanting to take it to court out of principle. How costly is this to do and what is the potential fine that the magistrates can give me?

Thanks,

[Advertisement]

[Jlc]

The fine isn't the issue. Prosecution costs are - even more so if any expert witnesses are called.

A contested trial is listed at £620.

It's still only 3 points. The fine is income related, around 50% weekly earnings - and a surcharge of 10% of the fine (min £30).

What's your defence? The picture may not be the evidential one. They don't have to provide any 'evidence' at this stage.

You have confirmed the driver?

There is a period of suspended enforcement for a failing limit. (But not as long as 2m31s)

[9ca0]

Thanks for the info, Very detailed!!!! The charges definitely make it nor worthwhile contesting.

I have agreed I am the driver, but my defense is that the sign was 50 but changed literally seconds before I got to it. They claim it changed 2m31s before as that i what is stated on the photograph. That is just wrong. If they provided a higher quality photograph the next gantry with signs would be visible which i am sure would read 50. Their non-inclusion of the calibration (even though they said they had) makes me think they are withholding evidence that they cannot prosecute.

Do formal complaints to the police commissioner ever have an effect?

[peterguk]

Their non-inclusion of the calibration (even though they said they had) makes me think they are withholding evidence that they cannot prosecute.

An out of date calibration certificate would not automatically invalidate any speed readings. And calibration has nothing to do with your proposed defence.

[southpaw82]

All of the relevant orders I’ve seen for the M1 say the limit becomes active 10 seconds after the sign is displayed.

[9ca0]

The letter I have says they activate after 1 minute. This is absolutely not correct in this case though. I would have said it was about 3-5 seconds. I am feeling very cheated!
Never the less. Thank you so much for your advice. the costs of court are definitely too high to risk it!

[Jlc]

All of the relevant orders I’ve seen for the M1 say the limit becomes active 10 seconds after the sign is displayed.

Yes, that is the minimum stated on the order but actual enforcement is longer (but indeed not 2 minutes).

The letter I have says they activate after 1 minute. This is absolutely not correct in this case though. I would have said it was about 3-5 seconds. I am feeling very cheated!
Never the less. Thank you so much for your advice. the costs of court are definitely too high to risk it!

Without a dashcam your task is uphill.

[The Rookie]

There is the difference between what is legally enforceable via the order wand what they do by policy.

[Jlc]

There is the difference between what is legally enforceable via the order wand what they do by policy.

Yeah, it's often magic.

[notmeatloaf]

If you don't mind me asking how are you sure it changed that close to the gantry?

If you could give convincing testimony to that fact then there might be a chance, it would be unusual to notice such an event and so if you did notice it then that suggests an uncommon event occured. Obviously it would have to be clear that you were not mistaken reading the digits.

Obviously the CPS will say computer, pre-set, infallible but you can obtain the error log for the system by FoI which will be a long, long list over a month.

The limit on the next gantry is an irrelevance as, by nature, it could vary.

[Largechris]

I'd have thought there is plenty of time and opportunity to challenge the prosecution to present the evidence before any court appearance? My own case (I won) took 8 months before the court hearing for example. They will beg, cajole, bully to get you to pay up but if you know you are right then at least get hold of the speed limit sign log as above. Also (just going off my fairly limited experience) the more documentation you ask them for the more inconsistencies, fibs and procedural errors you can catch them in. They had two different locations of the alleged offence listed on my paperwork for example.

[peterguk]

I'd have thought there is plenty of time and opportunity to challenge the prosecution to present the evidence before any court appearance?

Maybe there is, but the offer of a SAC or CoFP will be distant history.

[southpaw82]

I'd have thought there is plenty of time and opportunity to challenge the prosecution to present the evidence before any court appearance? My own case (I won) took 8 months before the court hearing for example. They will beg, cajole, bully to get you to pay up but if you know you are right then at least get hold of the speed limit sign log as above. Also (just going off my fairly limited experience) the more documentation you ask them for the more inconsistencies, fibs and procedural errors you can catch them in. They had two different locations of the alleged offence listed on my paperwork for example.

Using a single case as an example to extrapolate general principles from is unwise.

1. Presentation of the evidence will, normally, be done in accordance with the law. There is no need to "challenge" anyone to produce it.

2. They will not beg, cajole, or bully anyone into paying up. Once the time to accept a SAC or FPN is gone they will simply feed the file into the system where nobody really gives a stuff about it - just like the thousands of other speeding files.

3. I’m not sure what inconsistencies etc are relevant here. The question is quite simple: was the prevailing limit displayed for the requisite amount of time or not? That is a binary question with only two possible answers. If it is raised as part of the defence then the prosecution will either prove that it was or they won’t. Simple.