Hi Guys!

I am writing on behalf of a friend who today got pulled over for doing 49 mph in a 30 limit, any advice greatfully recieved!

He was stopped by a cop on a bike, not wearing any high vis clothing (typical huh!). Shown speed reading on some hand held device as 49mph, he's not sure what it was but thinks it had no video ottached. Have looked on ukspeedtraps.com and he doesnt think it was any of those....anyone any ideas?

Anyway, short conversation ensued:
Cop: Do you know the speed limit?
Mate: No
Cop: Are you from round here?
Mate: No
Cop: Any current points?
Mate: 3 that are due to be taken off

Cop then gave him verbal NIP and issued him with FPN, he had to sign FPN, not sure why and has to hand his licence in to police station, where he is told he will be given a provisional licence. This was not a producer as no HORT on notice.

He was then free to go.

At no time was he cautioned under PACE!! What is the best route to go on this one? Cheers guys he and I will be reading this anxiously!! He has 28 days to get to cop shop I think!

CHeers dudes and dudettes,
Rach

Sounds like the cop was talking out his ass, or you didn't get the full version from your pal.

A verbal NiP may have been given, but arguably this is in breach of Art 6 as matey cannot be sure what was said and therefore cannot obtain adequate legal advice.

What does the signature on the FPN mean, if anything?

I'd write a letter of complaint against the rozzer on the bike, especially if he was riding dangerously / unmarked / low-vis.

It looks to me that your mate has accepted a fpn when signing at the scene.

Hi divbad and thx for prompt reply!

Mate has read the form and said i have written it exactly as it happened, asked about signature and all it says is motorists signature (request only) even tho cop said he had to sign it. This is S Wales so could mean anuything! Anyone any good at letter writing? Whats the best way to go about this....any chance of getting it dropped b4 it gets to court? Less hassle the better really, tho I think he is the type to take it all the way ;-)

Rach

DW,
He has 28 days to hand in his licence so he still has it!!!
Cop told him £60 and 3 points

Rach

Also, forgot to say, he is not a new driver............has held licence nearly 20 yrs!
Rach

That signature (Request Only) is to acknowledge receipt of the FPN. It is also a way of identifying at a later date.

Divbad, unfortunately it seems like you are the one talking out of your ass.

A lot of the advice you have been giving recently is questionable to say the least.

A verbal NIP can be given and goes along the lines of "you will be reported for the consideration of prosecution for the offence of........."

In this case instead of prosecution a FPN has been issued first, but if that isn't paid then a prosecution will follow.

And FGM, if your mate was doing 49 in a (residential ) 30 limit, and has been pulled by a traffic cop doing his job correctly (not a scammer), then he deserves to get his provisional back.

Sorry, but this forum is against victimisation and scams............not road safety.

My signature changes every time I try to write it... but my fingerprints never do :x

It sounds a lot like "a fair cop". Why isn't it?

1. Speed markings / correctly imposed & enforced 30mph limit?
2. Other vehicles at similar speeds not stopped?
3. "high-visibility" driving style?
4. Flashy car - trophy for the officer?
5. How fast did the police bike go? Whas it "unmarked"? Blues & twos, or did it sneak up on matey (>30mph)?

Matey could "not admit" the speeding offence and then the officer would have to prove it; disclosure position is a little "confused" at the moment following Green @ Cardiff, but at least something would have to be disclosed.

The officer's "Expert opinion" without a recording might still be enough if the bike's speedo could be shown (later) to be correct (1930's caselaw!!)

More details of the situation might help - time of day / weather / etc., too.

Divbad wrote:

Hand on divbad.

Edwards was classed as old law recently so 1930s law should have died.

Not only that but according to the original post ...............

HI GUys

OddJOb: 30mph limit, wide road, not residential area, tho leading up 2 one.

Divbad........
Will have to check out road marking etc not sure but lets assume for now that its all properly marked.
Other vehicles were all stopped too, he had to queue and wait to be seen, this made him think it was census or some survey!!
High visibility driving style?? what do u mean??
Unusual megane, bright yellow, but not boy racer style.
Police bike was hidden in a lane and pulled out in front of him, signalled for him to join queue. Whhen he joined queue in lane he also noticed a marked cop car there, but couldnt see it until he was actualy in the lane.

Divbad do u suggest disclosure is the way to go?

Anyone any idea of his chances in getting off?

Rach

I have this mental picture of plod on bikes whipping out there colt 20 20 laser pistol, and zapping the motorist as they wave him to pull over.

Not at the moment.

I guess laser plod zapped you and radioed ahead to waiting bike, he was later shown the laser reading. Or he could have been zapped at full range, the bike was intermediate and led him over to the stationary speeding checkpoint.

We need a lot more detail. what was he got with, where was he zapped, where was he stopped, what was he shown, is there a recording, how many police officers, any other motorists, etc

Peteturbo

DW190, do yuo know of any link that would quash these two cases? "Old law" is that which has been overruled. Age immaterial.



OddJob, sorry you feel that way. Not everyone reads "if" the same way I mean it, and I say "if" an awful lot. Please help me improve & learn by adding your thoughts on those threads where we differ.



This sounds a little rectal from the officer in the situation, to say the least.

A verbal NiP does not allow the recipient to be sure of what was said, and so arguably the recipient cannot get proper legal advice on it. This argument may not go very far, but you never know until you try.

A "high-vis" driving style is one which attracts attention; significantly faster or slower than others, swerving, noisy, skidding, over-revving, fast-slow-fast... usually someone to stay well behind or well in front of!



...and to me, it still does...

What was the limit before the 30? How far into the 30 was matey? Was he slowing to respect the limit, or ignoring it?

[quote="Divbad"]DW190, do yuo know of any link that would quash these two cases? "Old law" is that which has been overruled. Age immaterial.

[quote=pepipoo's Law_Theory_js.htm page]Precedent was set and has never been successfully challenged:
Weatherhogg v Johns (1931) 95JP Jo 364, DC.
Russell v Beasley [1937] I All ER 527, DC. [/quote]

No Idea.

Mika quotes them quite often and there is no reason to to believe any different. I was just using the phrase old law as did some judge when referring to Edwards as being old and thats recent in comparison.

HI Guys,

Divbad,
My mate showed me a copy of the FPN today and it actually says in writing that he will get a provisional licence when he hands it in to police station within 7 days, he then has to pay fine within 28 days, I assume to get his licence back?! Makes no sense to me, but is all in writing.

As for road marking, he had come off a national speed limit (60) round a roundabout onto a 30. However, dont know how 'legal' this is, but the 60 road has a 30 sign on approach to the roundabout and there are no speed limit signs on the road where he got pulled.

Sounds like fair cop but he doesnt think he was going 49 mph!
Anyway he ahs promised me he is gonna register on site and clear up anything that I cant answer.

Rach

Can you scan the FPN - anonymised - and post it?

Gave it back to him today, but will ask him if he can do it and mail it to me so I can upload it tomorrow

This means that the road he approached the rounabout was national then every other road from the rounabout was 30.

Had the signs been placed after the roundabout every road would have required signs. Its cost effective.

The problem with Laser speedmeter devices without a recording device attached is there is no evidence to link the reading temporarily stored on the display with the vehicle that has been stopped. Even with a recording device attached it is possible to record a speed collected earlier with a vehicle image. There was a coruption scandal in South Africa where the Police locked in a speed into the instrument and this then appeared super imposed on images of vehicles. The drivers were shown the "evidence" and invited to give the nice policemen a bribe to lose the image.

In North Yorkshire they are currently having a campaign against bikers who are 30 miles plus over the speed limit and guess what, all of the bikers being pulled are 30 plus over. What a strange co-incidence. :?

Of course in you are a cynical cop you might think that all bikes go at 30 MPH over the limit so every bike is fair game whether you can get a proper reading or not.

In order to have any integrity evidence must mean real evidence. The system is so stacked against the defendant anyway that the lack of any real evidence makes speeding charges based on these devices impossible to defend.

Bob

Rach, Certainly excluding the questionable reliability of the speed measuring device, this is a fair cop.
There would be no need for PACE - the questions asked have no relevance to his guilt or otherwise and it matters not whether his replies are used - he was speeding. A verbal NIP should have been given and was so that is fine. There is certainly no worry about it - it clearly tells him he WILL be prosecuted for speeding - no human rights or other issue here.
The provisional licence bit is that once he takes his licence into the station they will rretain it and give him a piece of paper to carry just in case he gets stopped again. A bit like when you buy a car you keep a very small piece of the logbook while the top part goes to Swansea to have your name added to it.
The only possible way out is if he wants to try and challenge the reading on the gun - but chances are he will be on a loser there as Cardiff showed