Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: DONE @ 37MPH ROAD WITH NO SPEED LIMIT SIGNS
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
NICK1969
HI ALL,
Hope some one can help me with this...
I was clocked doing 37 mph by a mobile police camera van, the road involved is a dual carridge way, split into 2 lanes going opposite directions ( 4 lanes total, split in middle ), it is in a residential area, at the time of alleged aofence, and to this day there are no speed limit signs on this road, I entered it from a traffic island, and there is only one, small, white, camera sign as the road starts, and this sign is at such an angle that it can not be seen from certain approches from the traffic island, there are no speed limit signs, no other warning signs of any description, none, till much further down the road, after the point at which the mobile police cam van was parked ( in centre of dual carrigeway by the way), so any one coming on to this road gets no warning of speed limit and no warning of cameras, except for the one small white sign allready mentioned, which cant be seen from certain approches from mentioned traffic island...
Nowi do know in the past this road did have a load of speed and camera signs posted, but not any more, there all gone....
Now surely if they want to prevent speeding then clearly marking the road speed limit would be a great help, it is after all a duel carridge way, so i would assume it not to be a 30mph restriction, and if its a 30mph limit then why dont they make it clear, its an easy misunderstanding to make... Also do they need to have camera warning signs up to warn people of speed trap???
Any advise would be gratefully recieved, ( i would not mind so much if i was being done for 37mph on a normal road in a residentioal area, but on a duel carridge way???)

do i have any grounds for defence here? or should i just shut up and pay up this time???
many thanks for reading
PS the road in question is Welford Road, Wigston, Leicester, so any one using it be aware.....
Also every other road in Leicester has full camera warnings and speed limits posted where the threat of speed cameras apply, they put up nice big white signs, nice big blue and yellow signs, and even put speed limit signs up, but not on the Welford Road, i know cuz i and my girlfriend have been checking, and also took pics of welford road lack of signs....
a2lt16v
i will be interestedin following this one

i got flashedby a gatso in@ 47 and icant find any speed limit signs on the 2 mile stretch of road in either direction. it was a duel carraige way so im presuming it was a 40 i was doing 50 but i slowed a little to be safe

is there a law requireing speed limit signs
Bluedart
You haven't mentioned whether there are street lights, not that that would necessarily mean it is a thirty limit, it would be an indicator though.
NICK1969
yes, there is street lighthing on this road, hope this clarifys things
Bluedart
QUOTE
QUOTE (NICK1969 @ Thu, 28 Dec 2006 - 19:39) *
yes, there is street lighthing on this road, hope this clarifys things


You should be aware of thisfrom the highway code.
103: You MUST NOT exceed the maximum speed limits for the road and for your vehicle (see the table below). Street lights usually mean that there is a 30 mph speed limit unless there are signs showing another limit.

It is not the whole story, you may have to dig out the TO's for that road from the local authority to find the correct speed.
andy_foster
Standard repeater signs are not allowed to be used within a 30mph limit with streetlights.
NICK1969
thanks for that, but also what about the lack of camera signs on the road?
Insider
QUOTE (NICK1969 @ Thu, 28 Dec 2006 - 20:17) *
thanks for that, but also what about the lack of camera signs on the road?


Doesn't make any difference.
Rallyman72
doesn't make any difference I'm afraid.
NICK1969
what do you all mean by "TO" and how would i get this infomation from my council?

Also i was under the assumption that roads with camera traps have to be signed as such? Dont the police have to give clear warning of any cameras or camera vans on a road???
I wasnt the owner of the vehacle will this make any difference?
Bluedart
QUOTE
QUOTE (NICK1969 @ Fri, 29 Dec 2006 - 17:05) *
what do you all mean by "TO" and how would i get this infomation from my council?

Also i was under the assumption that roads with camera traps have to be signed as such? Dont the police have to give clear warning of any cameras or camera vans on a road???
I wasnt the owner of the vehacle will this make any difference?
QUOTE
what do you all mean by "TO" and how would i get this infomation from my council?
Traffic Orders, you get them from the local authority Highways division normally.
If you know what county it is in, then you can find the TO's on their web site.

QUOTE
I wasnt the owner of the vehacle will this make any difference?

The RK will get the NIP first, he will name you as the driver and you will in due course get your bundle of joy.
Rallyman72
QUOTE (NICK1969 @ Fri, 29 Dec 2006 - 17:05) *
what do you all mean by "TO" and how would i get this infomation from my council?
Traffic Order - the local council will have copies of all traffic orders which set speed limits. A written request to your council should produce these.

QUOTE (NICK1969 @ Fri, 29 Dec 2006 - 17:05) *
Also i was under the assumption that roads with camera traps have to be signed as such? Dont the police have to give clear warning of any cameras or camera vans on a road???
The police do not - they can set up a speed check wherever they like. The SCP's are supposed to put up signs if they want to keep the cash instead of sending it straight to central government. Generally this is ignored and anyway it all changes in the new year when the new road safety act starts to be enforced.

QUOTE (NICK1969 @ Fri, 29 Dec 2006 - 17:05) *
I wasnt the owner of the vehacle will this make any difference?
Only in so far as the vehicle owner will receive a NIP and should then name you, leaving it as long as possible, you then receive a NIP in your own name.
NICK1969
ok i got the NIP, i sent it back stating that i could not be sure if i was driving the car at said time of alleged offence.
I then got 2 letters back from the scammers, one with 2 photos attached, allthough of very poor quality, now my scanner isnt working so ill type up the leeters below...

I refer to the notice sent to you in accordance with s172 road traffic act 1988, under the above reference.

the notice legally requires you to supply details of the driver of the vehicle, it also carried a warning that by not complying you would be committing an offence. The implications are, therfore, that failure to provide the requested infomation could result in your being summonsed to appear before a court for an offence which carries a maximum penalty 0f £1000 fine and six penalty points.

To date a fully compleated response has not been recieved form you, therefore to avoid a prosecution as described above, you should provide the requested information immediately. If the reply is not recieved within 14 days of the date on this letter a prosecution will be commenced.

the second leeter with photos attached came at the same time this reads as follows...
I refer to the NIP /section 172 Road traffic act 1988 form sent to you recently in relation to an alleged traFFIC OFFENCE DETECTED BY CAMERA TECHNOLOGY AND SURPORTED BY PHOTOgraphic evidence.
I note from your recent correspondence that you state that you have difficulty in establishing the vehicle driver on this occasion.
Where an individual is concerned as the owner / keeper of a vehicle, failure to supply the infomation required by a notice sent under section 172 seeking the identity of the driver is an offence under section 172 (3) of the act. On conviction, such an offence carries a fine up to level 3, endorsement of his/her driving licence and possible disqualification.
Accordingly as the owner / keeper of the vehicle it is your duty to provide accurate details as to the actual driver on the day in question. If thesae details are not provided your case may be submitted to courts for prosecution.
two photos are attached, one with the speed of the car on it...

my actual letter to the scanners which got these 2 above letters in response is as follows...
Dear Sir,
I reply in reference to the NIP which you have sent to me ref ********.
I can not be sure that I was the driver of vehicle registered BD ** *** on 24/10/06 at 17:10.
As such I am unable to compleate the section 172 statement...
Yours faithfully...........

( damn i hate my scanner for not working, lol)
any waY FROM THE LETTERS THEY HAVE SENT ME THEY SEEM TO BE UNDER THE IMPRESSION IM THE KEEPER/ OWNER OF VEHICLE, im not, i had the car on loan from a crash repair centre, my own car was there for repair work...
If it helps i never signed any thing when the car was handed back to the owners/ crash repair centre...So i could not be sure if it was me driving it or one of there drivers at the time...
also i can see that from the photo, it was me driving the car, but the photo is so bad i think most people would struggle to say its me in the photo...
any ways sorry for the caps locks, lol, hope this info helps some one to help me...
thks for reading
NICK1969
whats the situation with using a PACE statement at the moment? Its confussing as hell, there seems to be cases of good and bad judgements in court cases relating to the use of pace as a defence? whats the general feeling or expierience of using pace as a defence? thanks for looking at what may seem a dumb question? lol
NICK1969
ps i have to respond to the police in 24 hours time now...so gotta decide what to do?
NICK1969
have just been contacted on the phone by police, regarding my entries on this web site, i need some advise on this,
Basically they, got enough details ( yes i know your reading this ,), boy do i feel like im being snooped on, but basically im being told im being done a favour and that i should pay up and name me as the driver etc.....
this sounds bizzare as hell to me
NICK1969
the police have contacted me by phone,
The police have got my details from this web site, and got hold of my mobile phone number and actually phoned me, advising me to comply or face tougher penalties
i find this very threatning, and bizare behavier#
I know this is probably being read by the same policeman that contacted me, so can some one on this website please get hold of me and advise me best action? ( with out the police reading the advice)
NICK1969
The Rookie
If you want to persist with not knowing who was driving, you will have to do a lot better than that! Your legal obligation is to use 'reasonable dilligence' (as you sound like A keeper) to name the driver.....otherwise go with PACE, europe will have come back with a judgement by the time you would get to court.

Simon
NICK1969
SORRY, i must have gave the wrong impression, i was confused by getting 2 letters saying im the keeper of the car etc, so if i go with pace and the pace thing goes bad, can i just pay the fine and take the points or will worse happen to me???
firefly
Firstly, you are under no obligation to accept the COFP. The police will urge you to accept this because if it goes to court then (a) they don't get their ill gotten gains from the fine levied against you, and (b) it usually means that the camera operative has to appear in court, thereby depriving the scammers of yet more revenue when he should be out scamming with impunity.

As for the PACE statement, there is nothing to stop you from using it, despite the threats from scam central.
NICK1969
thks, but what is "COFP" ?
And has any one else had a phone call from the police such as mine after being on this or another website...
And finally is it normal practice for the police to snoop this site and phone up drivers, and is it allowed, or would it predudice the prosecution in any way...
By the way the police officer involved said the advice on this web site is rubbish....lol
But there is something i know that they dont and im not going to say on here where they can read it....ha ha
firefly
QUOTE (NICK1969 @ Wed, 3 Jan 2007 - 19:26) *
By the way the police officer involved said the advice on this web site is rubbish....lol

So rubbish, in fact, that he felt the need to 'phone you up and intimidate you. wacko.gif

The next time you speak to him, direct him to point 6 on my signature and ask the hundreds of people (we know about) that we've helped and had a positive outcome. dry.gif

COFP = Conditional offer of a fixed penalty.
old but funky
The Road Traffic Regulations Act states that when you enter a 30mph zone signs will indicate this fact, then the speed limit will remain at that until another sign signifies otherwise. As there were no speed limit signs and the street lighting was no doubt every 200 yards then the speed limit remains 30mph.
The fact that there are no speed limit signs signifies that the speed limit is 30mph. If it were otherwise then signs would indicate the speed limit on that stretch of road.

The speed camera sign was probably within 1000 yards of the camera, so there is no excuse for tripping the camera. If you feel that the regulations were not complied with in as much as the canmera was obscured from view then I suggest you take a photograph and plead not guilty, which is your right.

You also have the right to plead not guilty if the speed limit signs (mentioned above) were not 'lawfully placed, clearly visible and free from obstruction'.

If I can help further let me know.
nimh999
QUOTE (NICK1969 @ Wed, 3 Jan 2007 - 14:24) *
the police have contacted me by phone,
The police have got my details from this web site, and got hold of my mobile phone number and actually phoned me, advising me to comply or face tougher penalties
i find this very threatning, and bizare behavier#


How have the police got your details and linked them with a speeding offence. Is your surname 1969. Or maybe you were born in 1969 and then with a little detective work they found out you were the only Nick born in 1969 nicked at this location.

I would agree with firefly. If the advice given was rubbish why ring you?
NICK1969
there is only one camera sign on this road b4 the actual camera van, its a small white one, placed near the entrance to the welford rd, and its not actually visible from certain approches....its visible if your coming straight over the island, but not from other approach...
Also there are actually proper camer signs and limits up, but not till you get about a mile into the road, and this is after the point at with the cam van was parked....
Its also a dual carrige way, with houses set well back from the road as you enter this road, only further down does it become 2 lanes ( one each way)
question? is the info on this web site, in particular, my infomation admisable as evidence against me???
Many thks to all who are advising...
my last point is when i observe police vehicles obeying the speed limit then maybe ill mind less when they persecute normal drivers, its shocking the times ive seen cop cars with out lights or sirens blatently breaking traffic laws.
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 © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.