PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Flash by a "gantry" camera when no speed limit displayed
fredfox
post Sat, 18 Nov 2017 - 19:53
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 17 Jul 2013
Member No.: 63,667



Hi all

Coming home from Birmingham to Northampton on the M1 tonight at just after 6pm, (it's been many months since I done this trip). The majority of the road works have been removed since I was last on there and the variable speed gantries and matrix road signs have all been installed.

Close to Weedon Beck (well past the road works), I went under a gantry, no speed limit was displayed and a camera flashed twice - I don't know if it was me as there were several cars in front that seemed to be going as fast if not faster than me, however, I had a look at my dash cam when I got home and the shadow of my car is outlined on the central barrier by both flashes I think. First time I've ever been flashed by a camera and it didn't half make me jump !

I was doing 80 - 82, definitely over the limit so I've no sympathy for myself if I do get a fine and points.

Questions I have :-

1. Are gantry cameras active all the time?
2. Will I need to attend court?
3. What's the likely fine - £100 + 50% weekly wage (not sure if this is really the formula)
4. 3 points or more?
5. How long will it take before I know if it was me?

I've a clean license, and the last time I had any motoring issue was July 2013 which resulted in a course, before that was an SP30 in January 1991 when I was young a stupid (or more stupid than I am now smile.gif )

Any advice welcome.

Thanks.

This post has been edited by fredfox: Sat, 18 Nov 2017 - 19:54
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 30)
Advertisement
post Sat, 18 Nov 2017 - 19:53
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
thisisntme
post Tue, 28 Nov 2017 - 21:47
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 516
Joined: 11 May 2014
Member No.: 70,566



QUOTE (mazzer @ Mon, 27 Nov 2017 - 12:09) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Sun, 26 Nov 2017 - 22:17) *
Got any evidence of the different local settings?


Yes, but only personal observations and researched anecdotal evidence. I realise that won't be 'hard' enough for some here, but it's serves me well on the regular routes I take past HADECS3s.


Perhaps you would care to pay the fines and SAC costs for people who follow your advice.

No?

Thought not.


--------------------
I reserve the right to be wrong.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 28 Nov 2017 - 23:25
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,368
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (fedup2 @ Sun, 26 Nov 2017 - 22:17) *
Got any evidence of the different local settings?

Got any evidence to show the NPCC guidelines are followed for every camera maintained by each and every speed enforcement authority in England and Wales?


--------------------
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
southpaw82
post Tue, 28 Nov 2017 - 23:39
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,872
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



Take it elsewhere.


--------------------


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.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mazzer
post Wed, 29 Nov 2017 - 10:18
Post #24


Member


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




[/quote]



QUOTE (thisisntme @ Tue, 28 Nov 2017 - 22:47) *
QUOTE (mazzer @ Mon, 27 Nov 2017 - 12:09) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Sun, 26 Nov 2017 - 22:17) *
Got any evidence of the different local settings?


Yes, but only personal observations and researched anecdotal evidence. I realise that won't be 'hard' enough for some here, but it's serves me well on the regular routes I take past HADECS3s.


Perhaps you would care to pay the fines and SAC costs for people who follow your advice.

No?

Thought not.


My advice, as I said in an earlier post, is to stick to 10%+2. Anything else I've said is an observation. I wouldn't advise anyone to follow my example. wink.gif

This post has been edited by mazzer: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 - 10:17
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fredfox
post Mon, 4 Dec 2017 - 15:26
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 17 Jul 2013
Member No.: 63,667



I know this isn't Northants Police, but it does reference "NPCC (ACPO) guidelines which is 10% + 2mph of the posted speed limit" and is dated June 2017 which was in response to a FOI request.

https://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/14761...ment-guidelines

And this from the AA - https://www.theaa.com/driving-advice/legal/speed-limit

And even more formal, there's this from the CPS - http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/road_tr..._notices/#speed

I'm sure there's more out there if you Google it smile.gif

Given how easily accessible this information is, and the sources, I'd say that pretty much common knowledge biggrin.gif

These two articles have raised a question though, they both say the final decision is up to the Officer, but in relation to static cameras does an Officer review the pictures or are they automatic? I'd always assumed they were automatic.

I've still not receive a NIP, and I think today would have been the cut off, do I'm starting to think I was quite lucky, I'll await tomorrow's post though smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sputnik365
post Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 18:05
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 478
Joined: 10 Oct 2004
Member No.: 1,737



Not strictly relevant to motorways, but the evidence from Theodorus Jansse in Dr. Fielden's (Dr. Science on here) case was that the gatso was set to trigger at 37mph.

This post has been edited by sputnik365: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 18:24
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 21:51
Post #27


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,400
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 27 Nov 2017 - 10:18) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Mon, 27 Nov 2017 - 09:05) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 27 Nov 2017 - 02:13) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Sun, 26 Nov 2017 - 22:17) *
Got any evidence of the different local settings?

It's public knowledge that some forces use 10%+2, others use 10%+4, unless this has been made uniform in the past year or so.

WE dont work on pub knowledge.Lets keep to the facts.Never seen 10 and 4 used ever.

The courts do (although clearly not in this context), it's called judicial notice.


As this thread appears to have run its course (see below), I will bite. The courts are indeed permitted to take judicial notice of some matters which are not proven by evidence. However, such matters must be both sufficiently notorious and non-contentious. And true (Iaciofano v DPP). If you are suggesting that your assertion that some forces starting enforcement at 10% +4mph satisfies all of those criteria, I would politely suggest that we should agree to disagree. I would expect others to be somewhat less polite if/when this thread ends up in the Flame Pit.

QUOTE (fredfox @ Mon, 4 Dec 2017 - 15:26) *
I've still not receive a NIP, and I think today would have been the cut off, do I'm starting to think I was quite lucky, I'll await tomorrow's post though smile.gif


If you were flashed on Saturday 19/11/2017, 14 days would have been Saturday 2/12/2017. Absent delayed/lost post (or the perennial favourite - OP's who are adamant that they are the RK, but the V5C is in someone else' name. or an old address), you would appear to be well in the clear.

QUOTE (sputnik365 @ Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 18:05) *
Not strictly relevant to motorways, but the evidence from Theodorus Jansse in Dr. Fielden's (Dr. Science on here) case was that the gatso was set to trigger at 37mph.


Would that be the same Ted Janssen who admitted perjury in a phone call to a person he thought was Andrew Perry?


--------------------
Andy

If you're going to try to contradict me, please at least try to get your facts straight.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 6 Dec 2017 - 02:44
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,368
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (andy_foster @ Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 21:51) *
As this thread appears to have run its course (see below), I will bite. The courts are indeed permitted to take judicial notice of some matters which are not proven by evidence. However, such matters must be both sufficiently notorious and non-contentious. And true (Iaciofano v DPP). If you are suggesting that your assertion that some forces starting enforcement at 10% +4mph satisfies all of those criteria, I would politely suggest that we should agree to disagree. I would expect others to be somewhat less polite if/when this thread ends up in the Flame Pit.

I was not suggesting that enforcement thresholds meet the criteria for judicial notice, on the contrary it's the sort of thing I'm sure will need to be proven by evidence if a judicial review concerning the matter ever comes up. I was simply pointing out that judicial notice is a thing.

QUOTE (mazzer @ Wed, 29 Nov 2017 - 10:18) *
My advice, as I said in an earlier post, is to stick to 10%+2. Anything else I've said is an observation. I wouldn't advise anyone to follow my example. wink.gif

It's worth pointing out that 10%+2mph is the speed at which enforcement starts. Therefore you really want to do 10%+1mph (there would be nothing worse than going on a long motorway drive and get a bunch of NIPs for doing 79).

On the other hand if you want to be really, really in the clear, you might want to drop the margin of error of the detection equipment (IIRC the home office allows 2mph up to 66mph and 3% thereafter), because if you're doing 78 and plod's speed gun says 79, you'll get a NIP for doing 79 and saying you were actually doing 78 won't help.

This post has been edited by cp8759: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 - 02:44


--------------------
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
sputnik365
post Thu, 7 Dec 2017 - 11:05
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 478
Joined: 10 Oct 2004
Member No.: 1,737



QUOTE
Would that be the same Ted Janssen who admitted perjury in a phone call to a person he thought was Andrew Perry?

Yes, the lying Dutchman ohmy.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Adders1974
post Thu, 7 Dec 2017 - 11:45
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 125
Joined: 23 Feb 2011
Member No.: 44,524



Did the postman drop any bad news on your doormatt?

I was flashed 10 days ago on M1 South at a similar speed and location with VSL signs off and wondering if it might lead to further action. I was hoping 10 days is sufficient time to start to relax a bit as the car is registered to me and all in order address wise
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Thu, 7 Dec 2017 - 13:04
Post #31


Member


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



QUOTE (Adders1974 @ Thu, 7 Dec 2017 - 11:45) *
I was hoping 10 days is sufficient time to start to relax a bit as the car is registered to me and all in order address wise

Fourteen days before you can relax fully (or at least relax sufficiently in the knowledge that you have a decent argument to have the matter discontinued). However, you will still have to provide the driver's details even if the NIP arrives late.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
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: Sunday, 16th December 2018 - 07:09
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.