Doing 65 in a 30mph, Speeding |
Doing 65 in a 30mph, Speeding |
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 13:49
Post
#1
|
|||
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 26 Nov 2018 Member No.: 101,136 |
Hello everyone
If anyone has any experience please i would like some advice on a speeding fine i recently got I been accused of doing 65 in a 30 mph a road and while i dont deny i couldve been over the 30mph the thought of 65 seems outrageous as i was in a sluggish van. Im yet to recieve anything from the police on my name as its a company car therefore im trying to get my head around it and prepare for court day. Belive me not, seeing thay letter coming thru my employers office has changed the way i drive a vehicle. Im gonna put up a picture which the police has sent out. Ive got doubts as the crosshairs at the time of the alleged offence are on a window of a vehicle behind me so i just want some advice how do radars work. Please someone help Many thanks I just been on that road today to see where it actually occurred . Beacuse its long straight road i assume the police van was in a vehicle behind me rather than stationary . Thats my guess so far. I will try to see if theres any placed that have cctv to get a more broad idea of the situation as its been 3 weeks ago and i hardly remember that day especially the speed i was going This post has been edited by Lmaria: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 13:58 |
||
|
|||
Advertisement |
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 13:49
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 14:01
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
At the moment all you need to do is return the form naming the driver. You must do this regardless of whether you were speeding or not.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 14:07
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,212 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
The image is a still from the Lastec Concept DVD System attached to an LTI 20-20 laser speed meter, almost certainly operated from the back of a van.
The LTI 20-20 calculates the speed of the 'target' by measuring the time of flight of 40-odd laser pulses over approximately 1/3 of a second and overlays the calculated speed and distance data onto the live video for a few frames before adding a 'timeout' message (four white squares). The crosshairs are part of the video system and not part of the LTI 20-20, which is aimed using a dot only visible to the operator. Traditionally the session recording is subsequently viewed by a tubby in the back office who 'decides' which vehicle the operator was targeting. From the photo supplied, it is impossible to say which vehicle was being targeted by the operator, or indeed which vehicle's speed was 'measured' by the device, but I'd be willing to put 50p on the Audi. -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 14:07
Post
#4
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 26 Nov 2018 Member No.: 101,136 |
At the moment all you need to do is return the form naming the driver. You must do this regardless of whether you were speeding or not. Yes i will send all the details today, not trying to get away from it btw. It just seems impossible as i just looked up at the van specs and it takes about 12-13 secs to reach 62... i took a left turn about half a mile before so basically started from 0mph Thanks |
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 14:09
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,300 Joined: 17 Jun 2011 Member No.: 47,602 |
The camera/ speedmeter was 203 meters behind you.
Other posters will have a better understanding of how the radar (more likely laser) works, but it seems to me that if you were really doing 30, or just over, the vehicle behind you was unlikely to be doing 65. |
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 14:13
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,503 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
It's an extract from a video. (It's LASER device and not RADAR)
It's unfortunate they've sent the picture with the red car in as it's reasonable to ask whether this vehicle could have been the measured one. Without seeing the video it's hard to judge. (But the frame is some time after the speed measurement that's for sure) That excess can only be dealt with at court and will almost certainly end up requiring your presence. It's also likely to result in a short ban (weeks) if convicted. I'd be willing to put 50p on the Audi. I think it's worth a shot of the bemused phone call to see if they can review the footage. -------------------- 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, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 14:19
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,572 Joined: 28 Mar 2010 Member No.: 36,528 |
At the moment all you need to do is return the form naming the driver. You must do this regardless of whether you were speeding or not. Yes i will send all the details today, not trying to get away from it btw. It just seems impossible as i just looked up at the van specs and it takes about 12-13 secs to reach 62... i took a left turn about half a mile before so basically started from 0mph Thanks I see no harm in adding a note that you see from the still they supplied that the cross hairs are on the red car, whereas you were driving the grey van. -------------------- |
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 14:22
Post
#8
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 26 Nov 2018 Member No.: 101,136 |
Thanks for all this guys. Very useful, if anyone else has anything to add please do. 👍🏻
|
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 15:32
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,140 Joined: 19 Jun 2004 From: Surrey Member No.: 1,326 |
Thanks for all this guys. Very useful, if anyone else has anything to add please do. 👍🏻 Would agree with Jlc about the 'I think it's worth a shot of the bemused phone call to see if they can review the footage.' remark, if you really don't think you were doing that speed. |
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 16:38
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,306 Joined: 4 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,659 |
If you give the location it's normally possible to make an educated guess at where the van is, and then work out if the 200m is plausible.
It seems likely a mistaken vehicle but then you have to question the competency of someone who can't tell whether a vehicle is doing twice the speed limit or not from a video. We are, after all, reassured someone with functioning braincells reviews the footage. |
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 17:00
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 324 Joined: 13 Nov 2013 From: UK Member No.: 66,671 |
Traditionally the session recording is subsequently viewed by a tubby in the back office who 'decides' which vehicle the operator was targeting. Some operators prepare a list of offending vehicles at the end of the session. The system can 'jump' to the asterix for each offence so the operator doesn't have to watch the whole recording. -------------------- "Truth is ever to be found in the simplicity, and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things" - Isaac Newton
|
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 17:28
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,744 Joined: 29 Oct 2008 Member No.: 23,623 |
It just seems impossible as i just looked up at the van specs and it takes about 12-13 secs to reach 62... i took a left turn about half a mile before so basically started from 0mph Thanks I don't think that will help you much. If you went from rest to 60mph in 12 seconds you would cover 176 yards (assuming uniform acceleration). |
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 19:41
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,195 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
It just seems impossible as i just looked up at the van specs and it takes about 12-13 secs to reach 62... i took a left turn about half a mile before so basically started from 0mph Thanks I don't think that will help you much. If you went from rest to 60mph in 12 seconds you would cover 176 yards (assuming uniform acceleration). Non linearity (accelerate quicker in first than second) would put you further down the road at 60...but I agree that it’s easily possibly in half a mile. -------------------- 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, 27 Nov 2018 - 09:39
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
That doesn't look like a spot where any sensible driver would be driving at 65 mph
Is it possible that the operator swept the beam along the side of the Audi resulting in an error ? |
|
|
Tue, 27 Nov 2018 - 11:05
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 564 Joined: 15 Nov 2017 Member No.: 95,103 |
If the van was doing 65mph I'd expect the leaf litter to the right of it to be airborne.... I reckon they might have had the Audi as others say...
|
|
|
Tue, 27 Nov 2018 - 11:51
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
It does seem a little odd, I'd suggest if/when court papers are served you use Part 8 of the Criminal Procedure Rules to try and get hold of the video.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Tue, 27 Nov 2018 - 12:16
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 294 Joined: 8 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,341 |
If the van was doing 65mph I'd expect the leaf litter to the right of it to be airborne.... I reckon they might have had the Audi as others say... Difficult without Google Street View, but I can't help thinking that if you were doing 65 there, the next shot would have you placed firmly in the advertising board in front of you. If the Audi was still doing anything approaching 65 at that point, and you are travelling within the speed limit, I also find it hard to imagine them not ramming you from the rear. I do accept that this still will be taken some time after the actual ping. Does anyone know how long after it's likely to be? This post has been edited by bill w: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 - 12:23 |
|
|
Tue, 27 Nov 2018 - 21:30
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,212 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
I do accept that this still will be taken some time after the actual ping. Does anyone know how long after it's likely to be? I used to know the answer to this many years ago. The speed and distance data are overlaid at the end of the 'ping' (which lasts about 1/3 sec unless it was a poor initial reading). This data is displayed without a 'timeout' message for a short period of time - IIRC it is somewhere in the region of 1/4 sec - and then the 'timeout' message is added. The idea is that the 'timeout' message is displayed shortly enough after the end of the 'ping' that if the operator pans onto another vehicle, the 'timeout message will already be displayed, so the speed and distance calculations will not be attributed to that vehicle, but the data will be displayed long enough (with the 'timeout' message) for whoever is processing the session recording to be able to read the data. -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Tue, 27 Nov 2018 - 21:35
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,195 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Have a look at this page http://www.pepipoo.com/LTi2020_timeout.htm
-------------------- 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 |
|
|
Sun, 2 Dec 2018 - 21:23
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 2,872 Joined: 17 May 2004 Member No.: 1,213 |
It’s a very long time since I contributed to this forum & I might be out of date.
Back in the day, they wouldn’t issue a ticket if there was another car in the frame, maybe technology has improved. The other big deal was a laser could ‘skid’ off a car, giving a false reading All this is thechincal stuff, and you need a proper techie to support any such argument. Good luck Bill Ps. Hi Andy ! U still batting? -------------------- |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 10:07 |