Eggpie
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 12:41
All,
Not able to start a NIP wizard albeit I said 'YES' for all the question. I see another fellow users was caught on the East bound traffic / Speed camera on A1235 Crane Farm road.
The time of the incident that I was caught speeding (shocked I was speeding on that small stretch) does not seem to be correct. I believe I was at the cinema watching a movie. All times are in BST.
Does anyone know of the link of have the latest calibrations on those cameras ?
regards
Eggpie
peterguk
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 12:43
What is the issue with the NIP Wizard?
Calibration documents are of no use to you. An old pub story.
Date and time on NIP?
Eggpie
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 13:00
QUOTE (peterguk @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 13:43)
What is the issue with the NIP Wizard?
Calibration documents are of no use to you. An old pub story.
Date and time on NIP?
The NIP Wizard is not working on this site for me.
If I type I out:
1. NIP received within 14 days - Yes
2. Are you the keeper and driver - Yes
3. region - England
Incident 3rd June 2017 : 17:32
Jlc
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 13:07
QUOTE (Eggpie @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 14:00)
17:32
Ok, you have the time - there doesn't appear to be any issue about the location.
So this was the time when you couldn't possibly be driving? (One presumes the vehicle was under your control at all times?)
The Rookie
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 13:38
The allegation is that the car was speeding and you are obliged to name the driver, where you were is irrelevant.
andy_foster
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 14:20
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 14:38)
The allegation is that the car was speeding and you are obliged to name the driver, where you were is irrelevant.
The allegation was the the as yet unidentified driver of the car was speeding, and the OP is obliged to name the person driving the car at the time, date and location specified in the notice. The relevance of where the OP was at that time depends on the facts of the case. If as seems to be implied by his posts, he was the only person who would have driven the car, then where he was is entirely relevant. If somebody else was driving, and he was not in the car, where he was (and was not) is relevant to what knowledge he would have, and what steps he could be expected to take.
Eggpie
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 15:49
Thank you all. The reason for the title of time accuracy is because I'm was somewhere else at that time and date.
My fear is the camera timing is wrong what else could be wrong. Thought there could be a website for calibration to check the last update and what changes where made.
Jlc
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 15:53
Speed calibration is unlikely to be an issue. (Speed is measured twice by buried sensors and then a corroboration shot)
Please answer the questions.
Are we talking minutes or hours difference here?
The answers impact how you should respond. Play it wrong and you could end up in court with the potential for 6 points.
The Rookie
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 15:57
QUOTE (Eggpie @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 16:49)
Thank you all. The reason for the title of time accuracy is because I'm was somewhere else at that time and date.
As above, they aren't saying you were there but that your car was....so was the car with you or did someone else have it?
Eggpie
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 16:13
QUOTE (Jlc @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 16:53)
Speed calibration is unlikely to be an issue. (Speed is measured twice by buried sensors and then a corroboration shot)
Please answer the questions.
Are we talking minutes or hours difference here?
The answers impact how you should respond. Play it wrong and you could end up in court with the potential for 6 points.
I was in the cinema from watching a movie and wont be out until 620pm. I have electronic records I was at the cinema just before 4pm.
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 16:57)
QUOTE (Eggpie @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 16:49)
Thank you all. The reason for the title of time accuracy is because I'm was somewhere else at that time and date.
As above, they aren't saying you were there but that your car was....so was the car with you or did someone else have it?
That is correct per my NIP I put up.
I'm seeing if there is a link to see the camera last update and what software was updated(what items are updated in the version)
peterguk
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 16:20
QUOTE (Eggpie @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 17:13)
I'm seeing if there is a link to see the camera last update and what software was updated(what items are updated in the version)
Waste of time.
Could someone else have been driving your car?
Kelevra
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 16:23
The NiP doesn't state what direction you were going in does it
Are you sure it wasn't the west bound one that caught you after you had spent your time in the cinema?
Jlc
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 16:29
I could entertain a GMT/BST 'error' - but we're still light on answer to key question.
The Rookie
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 17:29
QUOTE (Eggpie @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 17:13)
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 16:57)
QUOTE (Eggpie @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 16:49)
Thank you all. The reason for the title of time accuracy is because I'm was somewhere else at that time and date.
As above, they aren't saying you were there but that your car was....so was the car with you or did someone else have it?
That is correct per my NIP I put up.
I'm seeing if there is a link to see the camera last update and what software was updated(what items are updated in the version)
I'm not sure what question your answering but it's not the one you quoted just above. You haven't put a NIP up and the wizard replies you summarised don't answer the question either as they don't ask it.
So are you saying the car wasn't there or not?
peterguk
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 18:27
QUOTE (Jlc @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 17:29)
I could entertain a GMT/BST 'error' - but we're still light on answer to key question.
That's why i asked date/time...
Eggpie
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 09:45
QUOTE (peterguk @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 17:20)
QUOTE (Eggpie @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 17:13)
I'm seeing if there is a link to see the camera last update and what software was updated(what items are updated in the version)
Waste of time.
Could someone else have been driving your car?
If that is the case , I will have to accept the outcome. I have the photo to assist me and the car and me are in the car. This is where I wish I had a tracker turned on the car.
QUOTE (peterguk @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 19:27)
QUOTE (Jlc @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 17:29)
I could entertain a GMT/BST 'error' - but we're still light on answer to key question.
That's why i asked date/time...
Thanks. I did think that but everything was in BST. I checked my phone and the phones cells nearby and I was elsewhere. I am going to consult a solicitors to understand how this stands and if its worth going to court as this is my first offence/incident ever over 20 year since passing as a teen.
Jlc
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 10:21
If they have a clear picture of you driving then claiming you were somewhere else (e.g. by tracker) doesn't necessarily assist.
So are we to conclude the claimed timestamp is 'wrong'? They may cancel the ticket out of embarrassment if there's an obvious problem.
NewJudge
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 12:57
QUOTE (Eggpie @ Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 10:45)
I have the photo to assist me and the car and me are in the car. This is where I wish I had a tracker turned on the car.
I don't really know how you can argue this matter. I cannot see a court accepting that you were not guilty of the offence if there is a photograph of you in your car and that photograph supports the commission of the offence. Wherever you say you were you were obviously not there at the time the photograph was taken.
If you respond to the request for driver's details by saying you were not driving and/or you do not know who was you will find yourself on the wrong end of a S172 charge. You will find this extremely difficult to defend. If you reply by saying you were the driver (which I believe is your only realistic option) there will be enough evidence to convict you of speeding. If you intend to raise a defence that you were elsewhere at the time of the allegation you will have to put the prosecution on notice of your intention. They will then examine the possibility of a time error with the device and put it right in court as part of their case. If there was no error you will have to convince the court that you were indeed elsewhere. Then it will be for the court to decide whose version they prefer.
Jlc
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 13:26
...the OP doesn't say they were driving. (But I presume they were - if not, they would probably have a good idea who was...)
andy_foster
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 14:17
If the time is substantially incorrect, then the requirement to serve a NIP specifying the time of the alleged offence would not seem to have been met - unless it can be shown that the OP would have been aware of the incident in question despite the error.
The Rookie
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 14:59
QUOTE (Jlc @ Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 14:26)
...the OP doesn't say they were driving. (But I presume they were - if not, they would probably have a good idea who was...)
The OP says
QUOTE (Eggpie @ Mon, 26 Jun 2017 - 14:00)
The NIP Wizard is not working on this site for me.
If I type I out:
1. NIP received within 14 days - Yes
2. Are you the keeper and driver - Yes
3. region - England
But then denies being there at the time which would make him
not the driver, hence why I've asked twice for some sort of clarification.
Jlc
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 15:39
Good point, but I have this feeling of pulling teeth.
andy_foster
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 16:53
Reading between the lines slightly (the requirement to do so is slightly frustrating, but far less so IMHO than the refusal of certain regulars to do the same), it seems that the OP would have been driving whenever it was that the car was 'caught' by the speed camera, but was elsewhere at the time stated on the NIP.
He was the driver, but he was not driving at the time specified on the NIP.
NewJudge
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 17:15
QUOTE (andy_foster @ Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 17:53)
He was the driver, but he was not driving at the time specified on the NIP.
I think (based on the assumption that the OP's contention about the timing issue is correct) that hits the nail on the head. This may help him with the speeding allegation (NIP not specifying the correct time of the alleged offence) but does it do much for his obligation to reply to the S172 request? If he knows where his car was at the time of the allegation (when he was at the cinema) he could, I suppose, respond to the S172 by saying "nobody was driving" (assuming it was parked up somewhere).
The Rookie
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 17:18
Indeed, the obvious reply would be nobody was driving that car at that location at the time in question, the car was parked in xxxx car park and the keys were in my possession.
Signed
Eggpie
Wed, 28 Jun 2017 - 12:42
QUOTE (NewJudge @ Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 13:57)
QUOTE (Eggpie @ Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 10:45)
I have the photo to assist me and the car and me are in the car. This is where I wish I had a tracker turned on the car.
I don't really know how you can argue this matter. I cannot see a court accepting that you were not guilty of the offence if there is a photograph of you in your car and that photograph supports the commission of the offence. Wherever you say you were you were obviously not there at the time the photograph was taken.
If you respond to the request for driver's details by saying you were not driving and/or you do not know who was you will find yourself on the wrong end of a S172 charge. You will find this extremely difficult to defend. If you reply by saying you were the driver (which I believe is your only realistic option) there will be enough evidence to convict you of speeding. If you intend to raise a defence that you were elsewhere at the time of the allegation you will have to put the prosecution on notice of your intention. They will then examine the possibility of a time error with the device and put it right in court as part of their case. If there was no error you will have to convince the court that you were indeed elsewhere. Then it will be for the court to decide whose version they prefer.
It is a hard decision and weighing up the cost factor getting a solicitor, time off work, and having several hearing could be £ draining. I now know how others feel when they backed into a corner and don't have the resource to protest back.
QUOTE (Jlc @ Tue, 27 Jun 2017 - 11:21)
If they have a clear picture of you driving then claiming you were somewhere else (e.g. by tracker) doesn't necessarily assist.
So are we to conclude the claimed timestamp is 'wrong'? They may cancel the ticket out of embarrassment if there's an obvious problem.
From the Police point of view it may not be obvious. I just hope others not in any bad way on that day noticed the issue if got caught by the camera.
Kelevra
Wed, 28 Jun 2017 - 12:53
Eggpie im abit confused.
As The Rookie has pointed out.. If you weren't in the place at the time that the NIP has stated, then what is there to worry about? It seems like a non starter?
If you can clearly prove you were in X place at X time ( in the cinema?) when your car was being flashed, then i dont see why you would need to even consider solicitors, time off work, several hearing etc?
Don't mean to sound cheeky, coz i dont mean it in a bad way, but are you not saying something? Is there an aspect of this that you haven't mentioned?
Personally, if i had been flashed by a camera at 4pm. And i could prove that i was somewhere else with my car parked between 3 and 5 PM, i cant imagine me stressing about anything provided i can actually get access to this proof (CCTV or whatever, not just a ripped cinema ticket that indicated u were at the film)
The Rookie
Wed, 28 Jun 2017 - 14:34
If they have one time wrong, it's very likely the whole session is wrong, they will have up to about 200 people saying the same thing, its not uncommon then for them to drop all cases.
Eggpie
Thu, 29 Jun 2017 - 13:57
QUOTE (Kelevra @ Wed, 28 Jun 2017 - 13:53)
Eggpie im abit confused.
As The Rookie has pointed out.. If you weren't in the place at the time that the NIP has stated, then what is there to worry about? It seems like a non starter?
If you can clearly prove you were in X place at X time ( in the cinema?) when your car was being flashed, then i dont see why you would need to even consider solicitors, time off work, several hearing etc?
Don't mean to sound cheeky, coz i dont mean it in a bad way, but are you not saying something? Is there an aspect of this that you haven't mentioned?
Personally, if i had been flashed by a camera at 4pm. And i could prove that i was somewhere else with my car parked between 3 and 5 PM, i cant imagine me stressing about anything provided i can actually get access to this proof (CCTV or whatever, not just a ripped cinema ticket that indicated u were at the film)
Ive consulted the solicitor and they recommend me to wait for the reply in terms of fines /Points and whether to plead guilty. The arguement the Police needs to prove the camera is working fine. This will likely not be the first hearing but the 2nd if I plead not guilty.
I joined the forum to see if anyone has been in this situation when the time are incorrect what step they did.
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 28 Jun 2017 - 15:34)
If they have one time wrong, it's very likely the whole session is wrong, they will have up to about 200 people saying the same thing, its not uncommon then for them to drop all cases.
I hope that is the case but I have to plead not guilty and go to court as I understand the Police will consult on this matter unless in court per its letter.
peterguk
Thu, 29 Jun 2017 - 14:02
QUOTE (Eggpie @ Thu, 29 Jun 2017 - 14:57)
they recommend me to wait for the reply in terms of fines /Points and whether to plead guilty.
What does this mean?
The Rookie
Thu, 29 Jun 2017 - 14:11
QUOTE (Eggpie @ Thu, 29 Jun 2017 - 14:57)
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 28 Jun 2017 - 15:34)
If they have one time wrong, it's very likely the whole session is wrong, they will have up to about 200 people saying the same thing, its not uncommon then for them to drop all cases.
I hope that is the case but I have to plead not guilty and go to court as I understand the Police will consult on this matter unless in court per its letter.
Your understanding is wrong.
If the Police realise they have made an error (and if they have its likely to be on every NIP from that session and will be obvious) its not uncommon for them to just drop the lot. You would have to take it to court to challenge if they don't drop it though, yes. as for the last bit you say, that makes no sense.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.