Stopped by the police claiming 110 mph while I was not even at the speed limit [Video] |
Stopped by the police claiming 110 mph while I was not even at the speed limit [Video] |
Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:18
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 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 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:18
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:34
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,510 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth 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, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:38
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 6 Jan 2018 Member No.: 95,825 |
|
|
|
Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:38
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,547 Joined: 17 May 2010 Member No.: 37,614 |
|
|
|
Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:41
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,510 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
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, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:47
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 6 Jan 2018 Member No.: 95,825 |
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. 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 |
|
|
Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 17:27
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 761 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.
-------------------- PePiPoo will likely close in October due to issues beyond the control of any contributor to this forum.
You are encouraged to seek advice at https://www.ftla.uk/speeding-and-other-criminal-offences/ where the vast majority of the experts here have moved over to already. |
|
|
Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 19:07
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 6 Jan 2018 Member No.: 95,825 |
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 |
|
|
Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 20:03
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,547 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. |
|
|
Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 20:20
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 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.
|
|
|
Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 21:44
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
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. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 11:03
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,746 Joined: 29 Oct 2008 Member No.: 23,623 |
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. |
|
|
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"? |
|
|
Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 13:06
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 7,235 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 |
|
|
Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 15:10
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,963 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? |
|
|
Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 15:25
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,178 Joined: 1 Jan 2013 From: Glasgow Member No.: 59,097 |
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 ? |
|
|
Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 16:23
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
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 -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 17:13
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,746 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. |
|
|
Sun, 7 Jan 2018 - 19:38
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 6 Jan 2018 Member No.: 95,825 |
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 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 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. 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." 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? |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 02:02 |