Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: [NIP Wizard] NIP, Traffic Light Camera or Speeding
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
FedUpSteve
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - December 2009
Date of the NIP: - 11 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 12 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A23 J/W Manor Royal, Crawley
Was the NIP addressed to you? - Yes
Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - First
If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? -
How many current points do you have? - 0
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 - I was travelling along the road,
Lights changed from green to amber but I continued. Camera Flashed.

Received NIP for speeding (51 in a 40) then few days later received a revised NIP for Contravening Red Traffic Light (Camera) along with an apology for any inconveince caused and that an incorrectly sent NIP doesnt waive the offence.


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: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 11:58:51 +0000





Afternoon all,
As you can see from the Wizard, I recieved TWO NIPS both for the same camera but different offences,
First one was for speeding (51 in a 40)
Second was for contravening a Red light.


Which is worse?
I was pretty annoyed with myself at the time obviously.
I know that crossing a red light is wrong - either did it or didnt do it no grey area. Speeding is also wrong 11mph over is something you would notice unlike 1, 2 or 3mph over.

I'd rather have been done for the speeding than the light.

Am I right in thinking that for a camera to be installed, it has to be in a documented accident blackspot, and HAS to have documented evidence that the camera has made a significant reduction in those accidents?

Is it easy to find that infornmation from the Council, or who would I find it from please?
Or should I just shut up and take the points and fine?

Thanks for any advice you can offer.

S
Gan
Did the revised NIP arrive outside 14 days ?
FedUpSteve
QUOTE (Gan @ Thu, 31 Dec 2009 - 12:03) *
Did the revised NIP arrive outside 14 days ?


Wow, that was fast,
Sadly no, the revised one arrived within 12 days. (original one was received either 8 or 11 days, I dont remember)

thanks
S
BaggieBoy
QUOTE (FedUpSteve @ Thu, 31 Dec 2009 - 11:58) *
Am I right in thinking that for a camera to be installed, it has to be in a documented accident blackspot, and HAS to have documented evidence that the camera has made a significant reduction in those accidents?

There is no such requirement, speed and redlight cameras can be installed anywhere.
FedUpSteve
QUOTE (BaggieBoy @ Thu, 31 Dec 2009 - 12:27) *
QUOTE (FedUpSteve @ Thu, 31 Dec 2009 - 11:58) *
Am I right in thinking that for a camera to be installed, it has to be in a documented accident blackspot, and HAS to have documented evidence that the camera has made a significant reduction in those accidents?

There is no such requirement, speed and redlight cameras can be installed anywhere.


Hi Baggie - is this really true??
I'm convinced I've seen somewhere on the web, and this site too that there needs to be justification and reasoning for placing a camera?


Also, I've looked on the Police website for my area and it states...
QUOTE
The Partnership is part of a national government scheme where money collected from speeding and jumping red light fines is reinvested in more safety cameras.
    Aims:
  • To reduce road deaths and casualties by enforcing speed limits and reducing red light jumping.
  • To educate the public about how dangerous and anti-social it is to speed and jump red lights.
Money from fines is used solely to fund cameras and any left over is returned to the Treasury.
    Camera Facts:
  • Safety Cameras are designed to remind motorists to drive within the speed limit.
  • The cameras are in highly visible yellow boxes and take a photograph of a number plate if a vehicle exceeds the speed limit.
  • We operate mobile cameras at problem sites around Sussex.
  • Cameras are installed at traffic lights to stop people jumping red lights.


Now, as it mentioned Red Light cameras AND Speed cameras in the first sentence, is the sentence hightlighted in red applicable to Red as well as speed cameras?

Only asking as the camera in question is NOT highlighted in yellow, and it is also obscured by trees to some degree (I'll try to get out today and get a photo or video of it.)
If the camera is not highly visibile yellow, is it installed unlawfully?

Thanks again everyone

Steve
nemo
The snappily named 'Handbook of Rules and Guidance for the National Safety Camera Programme for England and Wales 2006/07' provided guidance on the siting, visibility, conspicuity (etc) of speed enforcement.

The handbook required compliance by any SCP wishing participate in the scheme which allowed them to reclaim their operating expenses (aka 'netting off'). Even then, the guidelines were never a statutory requirement and did not comprise a defence for or mitigation of any offence which was detected by 'non-compliant' methods.

But this is all largely irrelevant since the netting off scheme (and the guidelines) was phased out in April 2007 and was replaced by a new funding scheme for the SCPs.

QUOTE (FedUpSteve @ Sat, 2 Jan 2010 - 13:05) *
Also, I've looked on the Police website for my area and it states...

Rule #1.

QUOTE (FedUpSteve @ Sat, 2 Jan 2010 - 13:05) *
If the camera is not highly visibile yellow, is it installed unlawfully?

They can be painted any colour.
desktop_demon
The standard advice might serve some purpose here - write to the ticketing office and ask for "any photos that might help identify the driver". Do not use words like proof or evidence. Do this ASAP. The camera office may send some photos that show the circumstances of the alleged offence. Having seen these the OP would be in a more informed position to make any decisions.

Either way the Op should respond to any s.172 request to identify the driver. The response should be sent on the signed form (or in a letter) and a copy of the completed form kept. The written response should be sent by special delivery on (say) the 24 days after receipt. The OP has a 28 day period to respond. Failure to do so would incur a big fine and 6 points.
FedUpSteve
Cheers Nemo,

Time to stand up and take the rap then by the sounds of it.

Cheers for all your help,
I'll ask for a Camera Awareness Course if such a thing exists in my area, and I'll feedback when I know more.


S
nemo
QUOTE (FedUpSteve @ Sat, 2 Jan 2010 - 13:44) *
I'll ask for a Camera Awareness Course if such a thing exists in my area,

Whilst speed awareness courses may be offered in Sussex, part of their qualifying criteria is that the excess speed is not greater than [ limit +10% +6mph ], not to mention that, at the last time of asking at least, courses were only offered to drivers whose alleged offences occurred within 30mph limits.

Sorry if I am the bearer of bad tidings..
FedUpSteve
Hi Nemo...

What about Red Light Camera Awareness Courses?? Another post on this site mentioned such a thing, but also mentioned they are rare.
I guess I'll see what Sussex offer, and if theres a course for Red Light course, I'll take it - otherwise I'll be resigned to accepting points on my clean licence! sad.gif

Cheers

S
nemo
QUOTE (FedUpSteve @ Sat, 2 Jan 2010 - 15:42) *
What about Red Light Camera Awareness Courses?? Another post on this site mentioned such a thing, but also mentioned they are rare.

I'm not aware if Sussex is amongst one of the few areas which offer Traffic Light Awareness courses - a 'non-identifiable' phone call / email may confirm.
FedUpSteve
Desktop_Demon.

What could i gain from asking for the photos? I know I was driving the car.

Nemo - I'll call from a whitheld numbe ron Monday when offices are open again, and I'll report back with the findings.

cheers

S
desktop_demon
QUOTE (FedUpSteve @ Sat, 2 Jan 2010 - 16:02) *
Desktop_Demon.
What could i gain from asking for the photos? I know I was driving the car.


Yes, accepted. But do you agree you were speeding and that you "jumped the light"- is the evidence of the speed/red light camera reliable? One could perform the secondary check and make sure the speed is close to that stated. Maybe you were not speeding and the camera was confused....

However if you think "its a fair cop" then by all means ignore the request for pictures and continue down the fixed penalty (or summons) route. IMHO it is always better to make a decision having considered as much of the evidence as can be obtained.
FedUpSteve
QUOTE (desktop_demon @ Sat, 2 Jan 2010 - 18:10) *
QUOTE (FedUpSteve @ Sat, 2 Jan 2010 - 16:02) *
Desktop_Demon.
What could i gain from asking for the photos? I know I was driving the car.


Yes, accepted. But do you agree you were speeding and that you "jumped the light"- is the evidence of the speed/red light camera reliable? One could perform the secondary check and make sure the speed is close to that stated. Maybe you were not speeding and the camera was confused....

However if you think "its a fair cop" then by all means ignore the request for pictures and continue down the fixed penalty (or summons) route. IMHO it is always better to make a decision having considered as much of the evidence as can be obtained.


Ahh, thanks DD, I see where you're coming from.

I think the only remaining issue is the visibility of the camera. Its almost completely hidden from view by a tree. Is this of any use - or am I still busted?

Cheers

S
Hotel Oscar 87
If I have read the original post correctly then the OP has received 2 NIP's/S.172 requirements but there would appear to be a concentration on dealing with the latter. Whether the first NIP was sent in error or not could well be irrelevant unless there is an explicit waiver contained within the second stating that the OP was under no obligation to reply to first. If this is not the case then he will also need to deal with the first NIP/s.172 and reply to that accordingly in case, some months from now, an SCP staff member discovers a s.172 unreplied to and decides to initiate failure to furnish proceedings. It would be wise to attach a letter to the response to the first NIP/s.172 stating that it was understood that this had been raised in error.
desktop_demon
QUOTE
I think the only remaining issue is the visibility of the camera. Its almost completely hidden from view by a tree. Is this of any use - or am I still busted?


If the tree obscured the taking of the picture there might be some argument in the point. Hence my suggestion to see the evidence on which the charge is based.

However if the camera was merely obscured (hidden?) by the tree from the drivers view then that would not be a strong point to argue. There is no statutory obligation for the camera to be visible to any given driver who may be approaching it and IMHO no useful defence could be based on that specific point.
FedUpSteve
HotelOscar87,

There were indeed 2 NIP's.
THe second came with a letter aplogising for the error.
It starts...
"I write in referecnce to the enclosed NIP which serves as a correction to the notice already sent to yourself"

It then apologises for any inconvenience or confusion, and states that clerical errors such as this do not invalidate the notice.

After reading your post, I will return a copy of that letter and the original NIP when I submit the correct NIP, thanks for the advice.



D_D,

Thanks again. Seems then that the camera is lawful as the camera itself is obscured from the drivers view, and the NIP stands. I'll fill it in and take it on the chin.




thanks everyone for your input. was worth a shot.
Cheers

S
FedUpSteve
Morning Folks,

Hopefully the last questions.
I've read on a number of other Red Light offence threads that the alledged offender has been told how many seconds into the red they were.

My NIP never stated any time, just speed.

Mine simply says....
"In accordance with Section 1 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, I hearby give you notice that it is intended to take proceedings against the driver of the above motir vehicle for the alledged offence of CONTRAVENING RED TRAFFIC LIGHT (CAMERA) (automatic camera device/speed detection device) travelling at 51mph on 18/12/2009 in A23 J/W Manor Royal, Crawley at 18.13 hours"
(the road is a 40mph limit by the way, not 30)

Is this unusual? Does it matter?

Would it make a difference if only 1 or 2 seconds into the red?

I'm thinking of adding a letter with the NIP, expressing my embarrassment for wasting their time, commiting such an offence etc, Worth it or not?

Finally (at last I hear you cry)
Can I assume that once they receive the completed NIP, they will then decide whether to summons me, or issue a Fixed Penalty?

Thanks again

S


nemo
QUOTE (FedUpSteve @ Thu, 7 Jan 2010 - 10:18) *
I've read on a number of other Red Light offence threads that the alledged offender has been told how many seconds into the red they were.

My NIP never stated any time, just speed.

There is no statutory obligation for that information to be provided at this stage.

QUOTE (FedUpSteve @ Thu, 7 Jan 2010 - 10:18) *
Mine simply says....
"In accordance with Section 1 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, I hearby give you notice that it is intended to take proceedings against the driver of the above motir vehicle for the alledged offence of CONTRAVENING RED TRAFFIC LIGHT (CAMERA) (automatic camera device/speed detection device) travelling at 51mph on 18/12/2009 in A23 J/W Manor Royal, Crawley at 18.13 hours"
(the road is a 40mph limit by the way, not 30)

Is this unusual? Does it matter?

Its not unusual.

Does it matter ? Probably not. You are aware of the incident and know that you were a second or two into red. This is unlikely to be deemed as sufficiently excessive for the matter to be proceeded straight to summons.

QUOTE (FedUpSteve @ Thu, 7 Jan 2010 - 10:18) *
I'm thinking of adding a letter with the NIP, expressing my embarrassment for wasting their time, commiting such an offence etc, Worth it or not?

By all means add it, but I doubt that it will have any bearing on their next course of action.

QUOTE (FedUpSteve @ Thu, 7 Jan 2010 - 10:18) *
Can I assume that once they receive the completed NIP, they will then decide whether to summons me, or issue a Fixed Penalty?

Yes.
FedUpSteve
Thanks Nemo, much appeciated

S
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.