Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: [NIP Wizard] Dartford Bridge - 2 offences within 2 days
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
shergar666
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - May 2016
Date of the NIP: - 35 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 36 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A282 Trunk Road, Dartford-Thurrock Crossing
Was the NIP addressed to you? - Yes
Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - First
If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? - No, Company Car Driver. Car for my sole use - not pool.
How many current points do you have? - 0
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 - Exceeding 50mph (doing either 60 or 64 - explained below)
I travel over the dartford bridge 3 or 4 times a week. The cameras have been there (but I believe mostly inactive) for 2 years.
Indefensibly I never take any notice of this speed limit - normally the bridge is slow so I would normally be restircted to under 50, but over the last 2 years I must have had hundreds of occassions where I (and many others) have been doing between 50 and 65mph as the bridge is clear.
However on 24/05 and 26/5 I was snapped doing 60mph and 64mph.
For the 26/05 offence I have been offered retraining, and for the one on 24/05 I have been offered fixed penalty.


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)? - No
Is the NIP addressed to you personally? - Yes
Although you are not the Registered Keeper, were you 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:
  • The law requires you to provide the information requested in the Section 172 notice within the 28 day period, naming yourself as the driver. If you are considering obtaining formal legal advice, do so before returning the notice.

    You should note that there is nothing to be gained by responding any earlier than you have to at any stage of the process. You are likely to receive a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty (COFP) and further reminder(s). If you want to continue the fight, you should ignore all correspondence from the police until you receive a summons. You need to understand from the outset that while you will receive much help and support from members on the forums, you will need to put time and effort into fighting your case and ultimately be prepared to stand up in court to defend yourself.

Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Fri, 08 Jul 2016 15:00:30 +0000
peterguk
SAC for first offence and 3 points £100 fine for 2nd would be as expected.

Any questions?
shergar666
Hi - thanks for the quick response.

Is there any avenue worth pursuing in relation to the the testing of the cameras or the validity of the signage?

Of course I was speeding, but every single day I see vehicles exceeding 50mph, and dozens (every day) are doing over 60mph. These cameras are not always on, so this is not a deterrent as much as it is a profit initiative.

I am keen to know if any other members have experienced this problem with the dartford bridge approach - particularly that the cameras seem to operate intermittently.

Michael

AntonyMMM
QUOTE (shergar666 @ Tue, 12 Jul 2016 - 11:48) *
Is there any avenue worth pursuing in relation to the the testing of the cameras or the validity of the signage?

Of course I was speeding, but every single day I see vehicles exceeding 50mph, and dozens (every day) are doing over 60mph. These cameras are not always on, so this is not a deterrent as much as it is a profit initiative.

I am keen to know if any other members have experienced this problem with the dartford bridge approach - particularly that the cameras seem to operate intermittently.

Michael


Challenging the accuracy of the cameras, can be potentially very expensive. They are type approved and will be assumed to be accurate unless you can produce evidence to the contrary. Likewise the signage is either there and compliant with the law or not ( you may want to check that, but I'd be amazed if it isn't).

You chose to ignore the limits, as many do, but that is a risk you took. The offer of a course + an FPN is probably the best it going to get.

Only worth fighting if you have a real defence in mind.
Jlc
How do you know the camera's aren't always on? (To my knowledge they are enabled 24/7)

As far as I'm aware the signage is compliant and there's no issues with the cameras or the relevant traffic orders. There is an inbuilt tolerance before enforcement of +10%+2mph.

The actions of others doesn't give you a defence either.
shergar666

Thanks both.

Yes I have no defence and I accept that. The course and 3 points for 2 offences is very fair.

As for the cameras operating constantly, they don't. I know other people who do this trip and like me have come to ignore them as they "appear" not to be enforced.
This is not a defence, however most of the time I will be doing 30 or 40 or 50 due to traffic and other times I will be doing 60 or 65 as the road is clear. And have done so for 2 years.
I have been lucky for 2 years - which means they are not always operating.
Also, I know that the variable speed limit cameras on the M20 are not always on because I see them flash (on the other side of the carriageway) maybe every other month - and lots of cars
are well over the limit. I always stick to them as it is a much more dangerous piece of road. And yes I know I am making a value judgement, but I have travelled this route to essex for 28 years and parts of the route have no real need for lower speed limits, in my opinion of course.
But if my opinion is wrong or irrelevant, so be it. But it's simple - enforce the limit always and then we can have an opening for disputing the need for a reduced limit in certain areas.
I see no reason to have cameras that regularly do not operate. I'd prefer the swedish system where it is enforced and punitive fines/insurance hikes implemented 100% of the time, thereby stopping almost everyone from offending.


Michael
Bengley
The cameras on the A282 are not variable, they're average.

They are always on.
SatNavSam
QUOTE (Bengley @ Sun, 24 Jul 2016 - 18:41) *
The cameras on the A282 are not variable, they're average.

They are always on.



And so many drivers don't seem to know what 'average' means.
peterguk
QUOTE (SatNavSam @ Sun, 24 Jul 2016 - 21:52) *
QUOTE (Bengley @ Sun, 24 Jul 2016 - 18:41) *
The cameras on the A282 are not variable, they're average.

They are always on.



And so many drivers don't seem to know what 'average' means.


That would be keep at an above average speed between cameras, and slam on the brakes down to the limit each time you go past a camera.
Churchmouse
QUOTE (shergar666 @ Sun, 17 Jul 2016 - 20:11) *
But if my opinion is wrong or irrelevant, so be it. But it's simple - enforce the limit always and then we can have an opening for disputing the need for a reduced limit in certain areas.
I see no reason to have cameras that regularly do not operate. I'd prefer the swedish system where it is enforced and punitive fines/insurance hikes implemented 100% of the time, thereby stopping almost everyone from offending.

I'm a very lucky person, and now you want me to get nailed just like everybody else? Where's the fairness in that?!!?

You must have realised by now that this ("These cameras should have caught me many, many more times!") is not a winning argument to present in court. We may find it amusing, but a court probably wouldn't...

--Churchmouse
andy_foster
QUOTE (shergar666 @ Sun, 17 Jul 2016 - 20:11) *
As for the cameras operating constantly, they don't. I know other people who do this trip and like me have come to ignore them as they "appear" not to be enforced.
This is not a defence, however most of the time I will be doing 30 or 40 or 50 due to traffic and other times I will be doing 60 or 65 as the road is clear. And have done so for 2 years.
I have been lucky for 2 years - which means they are not always operating.
Also, I know that the variable speed limit cameras on the M20 are not always on because I see them flash (on the other side of the carriageway) maybe every other month - and lots of cars
are well over the limit. I always stick to them as it is a much more dangerous piece of road. And yes I know I am making a value judgement, but I have travelled this route to essex for 28 years and parts of the route have no real need for lower speed limits, in my opinion of course.
But if my opinion is wrong or irrelevant, so be it. But it's simple - enforce the limit always and then we can have an opening for disputing the need for a reduced limit in certain areas.
I see no reason to have cameras that regularly do not operate. I'd prefer the swedish system where it is enforced and punitive fines/insurance hikes implemented 100% of the time, thereby stopping almost everyone from offending.


There is a school of thought amongst academic lawyers that discretion is wrong. It is a minority view, and many prefer a different view, but it cannot properly be said to be wrong.

However, your opinions are most definitely irrelevant to your case - they do not provide a defence or any kind of mitigation. Potentially they could be considered aggravating factors by a court.

Whilst we are not here to give you a cup of tea, pat you on the shoulder and tell you that everything's going to be ok (see House Rules sticky), traditionally OPs have been allowed a degree of latitude to take their own case off topic by having a little rant. The problem with this is that it often leads to those who can't quite manage to bottle up their judgmentalness taking pot-shots at the OP's rant.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.