Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Zapped by gatso on a NSL road in an HGV at 48 MPH
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? - Cheshire
Date of the offence: - September 2006
Date of the NIP: - 11 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 13 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A5011 LINLEY LANE,ALSAGER>>ALSAGER TOWN CENTRE
Was the NIP addressed to you? - No
Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - NK
If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? - Im the regular driver of the vehicle
How many current points do you have? - 6
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 - On a 60 MPH road I approached area on long downwards gradient, rounded corner and saw Gaso camera, As I was driving an HGV an emergency braking manouve would have been dangerous so I passed the Gatso at 48MPH. The speed linit for HGVs on single carriage ways is 40, I had been doing 40 but the on the gradual downhill gradient I had picked up speed. It was nearly 2 AM and conditions were good.
The Rookie
I'm sure the wizard will have suggested sending the PACE witness statement - so thats what I would suggest as there is nothing to suggest a better route at this time.

The real question you should be asking is how do your [or inded anybody] know what that the speed limit was?

A couple of points to consider with any NIP;

1. Ask for a copy of the Traffic Rgulation Order [TRO], as this is the means by which a speed limit is legal, no TRO no speed limit. The copy they send you should show the seal, again no seal no legality. Check the distances and location of the order. If the Scammers are going to rely on a restricted road defence [30mph and street lights] then you need to check that all the lamp columns are 187metres apart, any more than that [even one set, and one Cm] means that the 30 mph restriction is not correct. However not all 30mph limits rely on street lamps, so don’t assume, ask for the TRO. One final thing if the council rely on street lamps and there are repeater signs on the road then the restriction is incorrect and they need to have a TRO
2. Under Young V Day, this is an example of a good description of a NIP location;
M9 Edinburgh/Perth Motorway, Craigforth District of Stirling at a part near to the A84 Overbridge,
So is this one;
M4 Near Tolls Plaza Rogiet Monmouthshire W/B,
However this is not;
Under Young V Day the Divisional Court [a higher court [House of Lords] so therefore binding on the magistrates court] refused to set aside a decision by the justices that a notice of intended prosecution under the Road Traffic Act 1930 [s. 21] was insufficiently particular where it stated the place of the offence of dangerous driving. Further details can be found []. Whilst the case is about not misleading the defendant, if you don’t live there then how can you be expected to know where they are talking about if the location isn’t precise? Moreover Lord Chief Justice Parker in YvD made clear that he expected distance to be part of the NIP.
3. Remember most Safety Cameras Partnership offices are manned by ‘two men and a dog’ relying on you doing nothing except what they want you to. If everybody who received a scamera ticket were to challenge the ticket even on the basics, the system would melt down especially bearing in mind the various time out opportunities that exist in the law.
Don’t get mad get even

The TRO wont help in this case as the Limit could not have been higher than 40 and he was doing 48.
The locus looks ok to me if the gatso is in Alsager.

I assume the Wizard recommed a PACE w/s statment and that would IMO be a good place to start a fight agaist the ticket.

I think you'll have to rely on PACE statement - it looks to me like they've "got" you whatever else you do since you've admitted an offence of exceeding the speed limit proscribed for the vehicle you were driving sad.gif
QUOTE (nottoobad @ Sun, 15 Oct 2006 - 15:46) *
I think you'll have to rely on PACE statement - it looks to me like they've "got" you whatever else you do since you've admitted an offence of exceeding the speed limit proscribed for the vehicle you were driving sad.gif

I havent admitted it yet.. although I have on this forum. was that a mistake?

When filling in the NIP with a pace letter do I fill in the NIP as normal, sign it and then add that they should see the attatched letter or leave it blank?

Im sorry if this is a pretty obvious (or annoying) question, but I do need my hand to be held a little as im not to familiar with the process.

*edit* Ive expored this site a bit further and found a template for a PACE statement which I should fill out and attatch to the NIP. I have also read that I should send my NIP form back blank apart from "please see attatched letter". I hope ive got that right. Im still finding my way a little!

What is the success rate of this tactic? Surely they will close this "loophole" pretty soon?

One final question, I havent recieved the NIP yet but my employer has recently recieved it and posted it back naming me as the driver. How long do they have to send me a ticket in my name after recieving the filled out NIP from my boss? I dont suppose the 14 day rule applies here too does it? I know its a very very VERY long shot, but im clinging to the slim possibilty that my NIP will dissapear in the system? Ill probably get it tomorrow though sad.gif
QUOTE (Mr-Jinx @ Sun, 15 Oct 2006 - 20:41) *
What is the success rate of this tactic? Surely they will close this "loophole" pretty soon?

Some people get a few bluff&bluster letters, then hear nothing more - see 'success stories' in the 'case files' forum. Others get a summons. If you want to keep fighting it, the best strategy (unless there's a problem with the summons) is probably to get an adjournment till after the O'Halloran/Francis cases (ECtHR looking into the validity of s172).

QUOTE (Mr-Jinx @ Sun, 15 Oct 2006 - 20:41) *
I dont suppose the 14 day rule applies here too does it?

Theres no problem with a summons, although ill probably poo myself on the day. How much more am I likely to be stung by going to court and losing? Would I be going to court for speeding or failure to provide?

Im still waiting for the NIP in my name, Im expecting it tomorrow morning (tuesday)

Thanks for the replies, Im building up a picture of what action to take next and the possible outcomes. Beats just bending over for them!
Well, the long wait is over... Recieved the NIP in my name today, dated 3/11/06.

Next course of action, pace letter to ARRIVE at the scamera offices no later than 28 days? Would you like me to scan and post my NIP on this thread?

Game on! smile.gif
I have sent a pace letter back with 3 days to spare, recorded delivery which they have now recieved. On the 1st I received a reminder giving me another 7 days Doh! More time I could have used.

Anyway, I await their reply. I will post up more info when i recieve it.
Recieved a letter dated 4/12/2006 from the central ticket office giving me a conditional offer of fixed penalty. They havent mentioned my pace letter at all. I was atleast expecting a letter that explained that pace was not a good defence or something similar.

They are now asking for £60 and surrender of my licence unless I want to go to court and face a maximum fine of £1000 and 6 penalty points.

Seems that If I go to court it will be for the speeding offence and not S172 as they have accepted my pace letter as an admission of guilt.

Anyway, just thought id update the forum for anyone who is interested, I know there is atleast one other HGV driver in a similar situation as me.

Is there any new news on PACE in court, has it been shot down in flames yet?
Just recieved a court summons this morning (21/2/2007) I was only thinking about my friends at the speed camera unit yesterday too!

Theres quite a bit of paperwork including my PACE letter which seems to have been photocopied about a million times and is of poor quality.

Theres a statement from the camera operator explaining how he loaded the film then 2 days later unloaded it and took it away

Theres another statement from the person who examines the pictures explaining how one of the frames showed a truck travelling at 48mph on the A5011 and how the speed limit for this road is 60MPH. Does this statement then say I wasnt speeding? The limit for cars is 60, but for trucks its 40mph. This isnt explained on the witness statement. The first page of my court bundle does say that I was exceeding the maximum speed in relation to a vehicle in that class though, i.e exceding 40 mph.

Theres also a "certificate of evidence from computer" signed by a camera technician stating " the speed of the vehicle having been recorded as 48mph. This is in excess of that legally permissible for that road, namely 60 mph". 48 doesnt exceed 60.... hummm.

What next? Fold? icon_hang.gif
The Rookie
I see three choices
1/ Fold now by pleading guilty. Expect only small costs on top of the £60/3 points
2/ Plead not guilty and hope the ECtHR ruling comes through before your trial proper, if not then plead guilty.
3/ Contest it all the way expecting to be found guilty, and then appeal pending the ECtHR
In all cases where fighting try and get an adjournment for the ECtHR ruling (or Burgess-James in the high court...) which could come through fom any time now (upto June -ish)

fourth+ options is the ones I haven't thought of.....

Theyve applied for 35 costs, will my fine and points increase for daring to mess with "the man"?
QUOTE (Mr-Jinx @ Sat, 14 Oct 2006 - 12:21) *
On a 60 MPH road

As I was driving an HGV an emergency braking manouve would have been dangerous

Just one point a 60MPH road? was it a 60 or a NSL single carriage way?

Either way if it was a single carriage way the Limit for HGV's as you well know is 40MPH
QUOTE (V70 @ Wed, 21 Feb 2007 - 22:24) *
QUOTE (Mr-Jinx @ Sat, 14 Oct 2006 - 12:21) *
On a 60 MPH road

As I was driving an HGV an emergency braking manouve would have been dangerous

Just one point a 60MPH road? was it a 60 or a NSL single carriage way?

Either way if it was a single carriage way the Limit for HGV's as you well know is 40MPH

Yes I know but id crept over the limit. Its a fair cop, no excuse for it at all other than lapse of concerntration.

The road was a NSL 60mph single carriageway
Presumably your lorry was fitted with a tachograph and you were using it correctly? It could hang you or clear you. Ask your employer for the original chart. If you weren't using it correctly or not at all, then you are rather silly (or stronger words to that effect).

It seems odd that I have heard of certain cases where VOSA and the police have used tachos to try to convict commercial drivers for breaking the speed limit, but lo and behold, when a commercial driver has tried to use it to clear himself, the tacho has not been allowed!

It may pay to have the chart analysed by an expert witness who could say without reasoable doubt that at that exact time, your speed was below the 40mph prosrcirbed for lorries. The spy in the cab CAN be your friend, sometimes. It's got me off a couple of things in the past!
No, I was doing 48. I remember looking at the speedo as I passed though the speed trap thinking "its ok gatsos cant tell im in a lorry" Famous last words! The tacho will definatley hang me in this case!

I was under the impresson that tacho charts are not admissible evidence in speeding cases on either side?
Ummmmmmm, excuse my stooopidity but, how DO gatso's tell if its a HGV.
QUOTE (Roverboy @ Thu, 22 Feb 2007 - 21:31) *
Ummmmmmm, excuse my stooopidity but, how DO gatso's tell if its a HGV.

That is not stooopid. It is a damn fine interesting question.
I have a feeling that this is something we need to know about.
Aparrently they work on the amount of radar signal reflected back, a small amount=car, alot= the flat large rear end of a lorry, in this case mine! Gatsos have only recently be type approved for detecting more than one speed limit, i.e cars and lorries. If this had happened a while ago the evidence would have been inadmissable.

My Barrister friend seems to think theres milage in the fact that the witness statement from the camera operator and the computer evidence fail to state that this is a single carriage way, infact theres no mention of this at all in any of the correspondance I have. All that is mentioned in the witness statements is that the speed limit is 60MPH and I was exceeding it by doing 48mph. Obviously a generic letter that was designed for use with cars speeding at over 60mph. If I can discredit the evidence, they cant do me- right?
Just come back from court. They were running late so didnt get seen until 3.30pm instead of 2. To be honest it wasnt such a scary experience, everyone who worked at the magistrates was friendly and polite. They asked me to confirm my name and address and read out the charge of speeding then asked me if I pleaded guilty or not Guilty, to which I replied guilty. The prosecution (i.e the police) then dropped the second charge of S172 failure to provide (I was a bit put out, as I had prepared a really good defence!). The Mags asked if I had been sent a conditional offer of fixed penalty to which the prosecution said that because of the PACE letter they didnt send an COFP.This was wrong- they DID send it but I ignored it hoping the offence would time out. I kept quiet about this fact though. The prosecution also said that the limit for HGVS on ANY NSL road was 40- incorrect, only on a single carriageways. she also said I already had points- incorrect, they are expired and didnt like it when she was informed by the clerk! They asked for anything else I would like to say, I then gave them my mitigation letter which caused few raised eyebrows and chin stroking as It was passed around.

When I was sentenced the magistrate gave me 3 points and £60 fine, I think because they believed I hadnt been given a COFP by the police, and so wasnt given the option of "coming clean" earlier on. Because of this foul up by the police I didnt have to pay them the £35 costs they had applied for either! The magistrates definately seemed to be on my side in this case. They looked visably annoyed with the prosecution when they said I hadnt been given a COFP. The prosecution gave me a very dirty stare and I couldnt help but crack a smile.

Basically I ended up in the same situation as I would have been if I had just paid the fine in the first place. I might have gotten away with speeding if they had not pursued it but in the event they did and I was no worse off. A friend in very similar circumstances was given a £90 fine and ordered to pay £35 costs as well as being given 3 points.

Given that the prosecution managed to completey stuff nearly everything up I wonder what would have happened if I had pleaded not guilty....

All in all, it wasnt half as bad as I expected, I was expection a "judge Judy" style battering and harsh sentence but they were very reasonable.

Heres my mitigation letter I gave to them...

Dear Sir/Madam,

In mitigation to the offence I have committed I would like to begin by expressing my deep regret and apologise unreservedly for my actions on the 28th of September. I understand that exceeding the speed limit on that day was contrary not only to the law but also to my duty to other road users and the public in general. What I would like to stress though is that it is also strongly contrary to my usual behaviour.

As you may be well aware my occupation is as a lorry driver for a large haulage company and as such I travel around 1000000 miles every year in the same conditions as I did on the 28th. This is far in excess of what the average driver does but despite this I hold a clean licence. It is something that I have been proud of until now and know I have lost, but I will certainly not make a habit of it and hope to regain in the shortest possible time.

Due to my occupation I believe it is true to say that a licence endorsement has a greater impact on my life than it does others. Although I acknowledge that this makes the offence none-the-less serious, and that indeed it may be unavoidable that I am punished in this way, I would hope that the severity of this part of my sentence is reflected in a lesser such one should I be fined.

I would like to end by once again apologising for my actions and to say that I believe that this was a momentary laps of concentration from me will give me much to think about, and will not be repeated.



Hope this helps the peeps on here some way.
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 © 2001-2020 Invision Power Services, Inc.