Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: [NIP Wizard] Speed signs painted out with grey paint - can they prosecute?
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
Kpars
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - November 2019
Date of the NIP: - 4 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 5 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - O/S Ref 443968 447595, Wetherby Road, Walton, Junc School Lane, UNITED KINGDOM
Was the NIP addressed to you? - Yes
Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - Not known
If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? - n/a
How many current points do you have? - 3
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 - Driving along a national speed limit country road at approx 50mph.

Change of speed limit signs on both sides of road had been painted out with grey paint and were not readable.
Automated speed camera 200m later - flashed me at 37mph.
No pre-warning signs of change of speed limit.
No street lights, no repeaters at all.
Marking on road level with damaged speed signs said 30 but not seen at time of event due to distraction of painted out speed signs.

I have photographic evidence of all of this.

Returned to the site exactly a week later having received NIP. Now the signs are no longer painted out and they have put in place a new repeater sign between the speed change signs and the camera.

I feel I have a case for appeal, but am unsure what to do or what to expect. Any advice would be appreciated. Can anyone point me in the direction of legislation as to adequate signage for speed limits that might help? Thanks


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)? - Yes
Did the first NIP arrive within 14 days? - Yes
Although you are the Registered Keeper, were you also 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: Sun, 24 Nov 2019 21:16:55 +0000
cp8759
Let's see the photographic evidence you say you have of the signs. Also, have there been any roadworks in the area?
Kpars
Here is a photo - its a still from a video Click to view attachment

Click to view attachment and closer up of what both speed signs were like.

No roadworks going on.
cp8759
That's fairly compelling evidence if it was recorded at the same time as the alleged offence. I suspect there might have been roadworks and a temporary limit, and someone forgot to restore the original signs when the road works ended. If the video was taken later on, it would be best to get records from the highway authority as to what maintenance has been performed don those signs and when the new repeater was put in.

There is a roundel printed on the road, but with the terminal signs being obscured in this way you might reasonably infer that the lower limit is not in effect for whatever reason. However to be honest, before I commit to any particular view I'd like to see the video, and a link to the location on google street view.
Kpars
Thanks.
Recorded 5 minutes after alleged offence.
Roundel on road difficult to see in real life, especially given obscured terminal signs being dominant.

Struggling to upload video rolleyes.gif





Click to view attachment Walton near Wetherby
cp8759
use youtube, vimeo or some similar site.
mdann52
GSV: here

Looks like there did used to be a repeater there, which vanished sometime between 2015-2018.

There are streetlights starting after the camera, but no sign on any before.

As said previously, the video will be key here.
Kpars
https://youtu.be/-psUQzxqH_k

Apologies for delay!


QUOTE (mdann52 @ Mon, 25 Nov 2019 - 17:19) *
GSV: here

Looks like there did used to be a repeater there, which vanished sometime between 2015-2018.

There are streetlights starting after the camera, but no sign on any before.

As said previously, the video will be key here.


Thank you. Went back to the site yesterday and there is now a new repeater in the same place as you have pointed out in 2015.
As you can see from the video definitely wasn't there on day of alleged offence, so has been put up in the last week.
cp8759
See what others say but I think this is worth fighting. A diligent motorist could reasonably conclude the highway authority has dis-applied the previously posted speed limit for whatever reason.
Logician
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 25 Nov 2019 - 22:43) *
See what others say but I think this is worth fighting. A diligent motorist could reasonably conclude the highway authority has dis-applied the previously posted speed limit for whatever reason.


I agree, I think the police might even drop it if they see this evidence.

The Rookie
Another in agreement, the evidence is pretty compelling and I'd expect them to drop it (and getting onto the council).
speedfighter23
QUOTE (Logician @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 00:41) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 25 Nov 2019 - 22:43) *
See what others say but I think this is worth fighting. A diligent motorist could reasonably conclude the highway authority has dis-applied the previously posted speed limit for whatever reason.


I agree, I think the police might even drop it if they see this evidence.


how would the police see this evidence? at the time of the trial?
southpaw82
QUOTE (speedfighter23 @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 09:47) *
QUOTE (Logician @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 00:41) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 25 Nov 2019 - 22:43) *
See what others say but I think this is worth fighting. A diligent motorist could reasonably conclude the highway authority has dis-applied the previously posted speed limit for whatever reason.


I agree, I think the police might even drop it if they see this evidence.


how would the police see this evidence? at the time of the trial?

A normal person would give it to them in advance so that they’re not prosecuted in the first place.
666
QUOTE (Logician @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 00:41) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 25 Nov 2019 - 22:43) *
See what others say but I think this is worth fighting. A diligent motorist could reasonably conclude the highway authority has dis-applied the previously posted speed limit for whatever reason.


I agree, I think the police might even drop it if they see this evidence.

Agreed that it's worth fighting, and the OP should win.

However, I think our hypothetical 'diligent motorist' should wonder why the signs have been blacked out, and so proceed with extreme caution. It seems extremely unlikely that the hazards associated with a built-up area (which originally necessitated the limit) would simply have disappeared, and much more likely that other hazards such as roadworks would have been added.
The Rookie
QUOTE (666 @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 11:08) *
QUOTE (Logician @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 00:41) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 25 Nov 2019 - 22:43) *
See what others say but I think this is worth fighting. A diligent motorist could reasonably conclude the highway authority has dis-applied the previously posted speed limit for whatever reason.


I agree, I think the police might even drop it if they see this evidence.

Agreed that it's worth fighting, and the OP should win.

However, I think our hypothetical 'diligent motorist' should wonder why the signs have been blacked out, and so proceed with extreme caution. It seems extremely unlikely that the hazards associated with a built-up area (which originally necessitated the limit) would simply have disappeared, and much more likely that other hazards such as roadworks would have been added.

The OP was caught at 37, what should the limit have been? 40 looks reasonable, may even have been 50. None the less Coombes still prevails.
cp8759
QUOTE (666 @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 11:08) *
However, I think our hypothetical 'diligent motorist' should wonder why the signs have been blacked out, and so proceed with extreme caution. It seems extremely unlikely that the hazards associated with a built-up area (which originally necessitated the limit) would simply have disappeared, and much more likely that other hazards such as roadworks would have been added.

As I understand it, the diligent motorist is not required to second guess or go behind the reasons for a speed limit being in place, this must work both ways. There is of course an overarching requirement not to drive too fast for the conditions, but if the highways authority has deliberately obscured the speed limit signs, as long as you don't drive carelessly or dangerously no court could blame you for exceeding a speed limit that was previously posted but no longer is.

I would also agree that if you share this footage with the police it is likely the case will be dropped, I would also expect them to drop all detections that took place before the signage was fixed.
The Rookie
I'd certainly be asking the relevant highways authority for the history here..... vandalism or road works, when done/known about and when corrected.
Kpars
Thank you everyone for your time taken to reply and advice.

Would this be a case of replying to the NIP confirming I was the driver and then going through the process of formal appeal, or worth contacting West Yorkshire Police separately?

southpaw82
By “formal appeal” do you mean rejecting any offer of a course or fixed penalty and go to court?
cp8759
I'd be minded to send the NIP, a covering letter and a copy of the video, all in the same envelope.

There is no appeal process as you've not been convicted of anything, however the police should see sense and simply drop it.
Kpars
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 19:52) *
By “formal appeal” do you mean rejecting any offer of a course or fixed penalty and go to court?

yes.
southpaw82
QUOTE (Kpars @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 20:08) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 19:52) *
By “formal appeal” do you mean rejecting any offer of a course or fixed penalty and go to court?

yes.

Why would you do that when you can just put your evidence to the police (presumably "informally")?
cp8759
QUOTE (Kpars @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 20:08) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 19:52) *
By “formal appeal” do you mean rejecting any offer of a course or fixed penalty and go to court?

yes.

Do you want to get this resolved as quickly as possible, or do you fancy a trip to court just for the fun of it? Cos I promise you Magistrates' Court hearings are pretty dull.
Kpars
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 20:50) *
QUOTE (Kpars @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 20:08) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 19:52) *
By “formal appeal” do you mean rejecting any offer of a course or fixed penalty and go to court?

yes.

Do you want to get this resolved as quickly as possible, or do you fancy a trip to court just for the fun of it? Cos I promise you Magistrates' Court hearings are pretty dull.



laugh.gif Absolutely not! I just wondered the best route of action to do this - a trip to the police station with evidence, or a cover letter with the NIP as suggested above. I don't know the systems, which is why I appreciate your responses.
cp8759
QUOTE (Kpars @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 21:09) *
laugh.gif Absolutely not! I just wondered the best route of action to do this - a trip to the police station with evidence, or a cover letter with the NIP as suggested above. I don't know the systems, which is why I appreciate your responses.

Cover letter with the NIP, and (this is crucial) a CD or DVD with the footage.
Kpars
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 21:41) *
QUOTE (Kpars @ Tue, 26 Nov 2019 - 21:09) *
laugh.gif Absolutely not! I just wondered the best route of action to do this - a trip to the police station with evidence, or a cover letter with the NIP as suggested above. I don't know the systems, which is why I appreciate your responses.

Cover letter with the NIP, and (this is crucial) a CD or DVD with the footage.


Thanks so much for your help. Police have dropped the case on receiving cover note and evidence as above. I really appreciate your responses and advice.
The Rookie
Well done.
cp8759
To their credit, the police are known for not pursuing hopeless cases or where it would be unjust to do so, unlike local councils. I do ask myself whether the fact that the money from any fine doesn't go to the police has any bearing on this.
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.