Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: [NIP Wizard] Truvelo based NIP
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
Trakannon
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - October 2010
Date of the NIP: - 6 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 7 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A1079 Site Code 955 at bridge over Dunswell Lane, BEVERLEY
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 - There are roadworks on the A1079. It was the second time that I had travelled on the road, reason is that I have recently started to work in Leeds and commuting daily. Was trying out different routes as I have not travelled that far before.
I knew that the road changed to a 30mph zone somewhere on the way home, and it is normally a 60. There was no signs indicating new speed limit ahead (although I knew it was there, just not where it started). There was some worksigns. I was behind a tractor with a large red hopper, travelling at approx 35mph. I thought the road was still 60, and was close to the tractor as I was contemplating overtaking- however I could not see beyond the hopper so simply stayed back near the tractor. I did not notice any speed signs, and then saw a flash which I thought came from the tractor. Then moments later the camera appeared from the left hand side of the hopper and there was a bright flash when I realised it had flashed me. I checked the speedo and I was doing approx 35mph. My speedo reads in Km and was jus over the 50Km/h mark. The satnav was reporting 32mph but this is not reliable. The camera was a truvelo, and was front-facing flashing oncoming traffic. The flash was white, and did startle me. I thought that these forward facing cameras should not flash that bright.


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, 21 Oct 2010 22:24:58 +0000

To follow up on this I went back down the road the following day and took note of the signs. There are a set on either side with a large 30 MPH and camera sign directly underneath, after this I think there is one more 30mph sign and then the camera shortly after - or the camera may be before the second one. I cant quite remember. I was mainly going to look for signs advising of a new speed limit / temporary speed limit ahead.

The road has quite a lot of national speed limit signs, and also one section where it breaks into a dual carriageway.
peterguk
QUOTE (Trakannon @ Thu, 21 Oct 2010 - 23:28) *
There are a set on either side with a large 30 MPH and camera sign directly underneath, after this I think there is one more 30mph sign and then the camera shortly after


Which suggest the sineage is correct.

What speed is alleged?
Trakannon
It states that the speed recorded is 36mph, which ties in with what I checked just after it flashed. I saw the signs the following day, I think that due to oncoming traffic (it was quite busy) and the large hopper on the back of the tractor I managed to miss the signs. I didnt see the camera either until I was on top of it. The hopper was wide, and quite high, to the extent I could only see the top part of the tractors cabin and the flashing light on top of the tractor. My car is rather low down which could have contributed.
peterguk
£6 in 30 should attrat an invitation to a SAC, should they be available, and conditional on your not having done one in the last 3 years. Cost about same as fine, but no points.
Trakannon
Indeed, I have been given (by the looks of it) the option of the speed awareness course.

I am going to take that as a slap on the wrist, however still feel that there should have been a bit more than just the one main signage - especially considering the nature of the road and the abundence of national speed limit signs.

I am sure, had I been aware I was in the 30 mph part of the road I would have been doing less than 30mph. Wrong place wrong time I guess as I keep thinking about it. Had that tractor not been in front of me I would have seen the signs.. had the cars behind me not been so close I wouldnt have been as close to the tractor either.. I could go on all day about what I could / should / would have done I suppose.

Never know.. might see the tractor driver at the same course!
peterguk
QUOTE (Trakannon @ Fri, 22 Oct 2010 - 00:19) *
had the cars behind me not been so close I wouldnt have been as close to the tractor either..


Huh? Were they pushing you from behind?
Trakannon
No they werent "pushing", but they were close enough for me to think I was going too slow for the road, I was still unsure if I was in the 30 or the 60 zone and was esentially stuck behind the tractor.

I know in that situation you should back off and just let them overtake, which on reflection I should have done. Everything always works perfect in theory though.

In the end I cant blame anyone but myself, but you always have that voice in your head trying to analyse what happened - which is how you learn to not make the same mistake next time.
Trakannon
Further to this I have completed the form and sent it back recorded delivery.

That set of speed camera has caught over 3400 people in 25 days, which surely indicates the signing was not adequate? especially if its people who frequent that road.

http://www.thisishullandeastriding.co.uk/n...il/article.html

This article is interesting.. how would I proceed contesting it without having to shell out lots of money..?

The more I think about it the more it does seem the signing wasnt appropriate. This is backed up by the sheer number of people caught in the short time frame.

People who have been caught by it that I know have been driving a lot longer and advised me to contest it. I spoke to the ticket office in Beverly, who advised there was appropriate signing and stated there were 5 sets of signs before the camera.

This cannot be the case as I had been back on the road to check, and looked specifically for these - and I onl found two. The signs have since been removed and the 60mph reinstated.

If I had genuinely been driving like a moron (which I really wasnt and wouldnt do) then yeah I would accept it.. but I wasnt at all and now this makes me question if this, although its going to be an awareness course, is infact fair or even lawful? Thing is I feel too intimidated by the "system" to speak out, even though I really want to.. but then again the cost of doing so is a punishment in its own sense. There is always the risk of the court taking the side of the council too.

I was advised by the ticket office to write a letter of complaint which I intend on doing.. but is there anything else I can do?
BaggieBoy
You said in your first post:
QUOTE
There are a set on either side with a large 30 MPH and camera sign directly underneath...

which in law is all is required (as well as a valid TTRO). Running a defence based on signage sounds likely to fail.
captain swoop
I have driven that road a lot over the lasr few months, I guess you are talking about the roadworks for the new roundabout. that has just been put in\/

Rather than the usual temporary signs they put in posts with fixed speed signs like on a 'permanent' limit. There were also 'advanced' warning signs of the roadworks and temp speed limit. Those Truvelo Cameras have been there for a year or two.

Is this the location you mean? you can see the lines for the camera across the road, that layby is where the new roundabout is located with the new access road for an industrial park running off to the left of the screen.

There is another Truvelo a few hundred yards further up the road covering traffic coming hte opposite way towards Hull.

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&sour...mp;t=k&z=18
Pancras
Another thing you need to be mindful of is that there is no absolute right to go on a SAC. It is offered at the discretion of the police. If 3400 people have been flashed on this road in a few days, then the camera people will be very busy, and the SAC places will be filled up quickly - it is unlikely that they have enough places to cope with such high demand.

Might be worth you replying immediately in this case.
captain swoop
I am always super careful on that road it has several cameras in each direction, When I have a job anywhere in Hull I come down it and then leave on it, I live on the northern edge of the North Yorks Moors. My satnav says A19, A1, M62 but that is 110 miles. I come straight across the Moors and down through Malton, saves 40 miles and I don't lose that much time.
Lynnzer
QUOTE (captain swoop @ Thu, 18 Nov 2010 - 00:18) *
I am always super careful on that road it has several cameras in each direction, When I have a job anywhere in Hull I come down it and then leave on it, I live on the northern edge of the North Yorks Moors. My satnav says A19, A1, M62 but that is 110 miles. I come straight across the Moors and down through Malton, saves 40 miles and I don't lose that much time.

From Peterlee in County Durham I had to drive to Hull too and went the Satnav way. I decided to go back over the moors as suggested and the result was that I did the journey quicker though with slower road speed and managed to get 54.8 mpg out of a BIG Citroen C5.

Sorry can't help with the topic query though. Seems to me if you've been give the chance of a SAC then you really must take it.
I wish I'd taken the one offered to me.....
desktop_demon
I suppose the Truvelo also flashed the tractor too, if it was just in front of the OP's car. I am impressed that a truvelo could "reload" and get two vehicles so close together. Of course I am presuming that the OP's car was being driven at the same speed as the tractor it was following - otherwise it gets difficult to imagine the situation. As a SAC has been offered I suppose it is too late to get sight of the photos, which is a pity.

However the received wisdom is that the SAC is cheaper and less trouble than defending a court case. So that is the recommended option for anyone offered it. Although it grieves me to say it, even if the defence was successful the defendant would never recoup the total cost for time and effort spent.
Trakannon
Thanks for the replies guys,

From the map request - it was not that one, it was one further back if you were driving into Hull.

I have been offered the SAC and I am going to fill the form in and book myself on - however I am curious if you cant fight it at a later date, or if this cannot be overturned at a later date.

There seems to be a lot of people contesting these and I imagine the newspaper article may prompt others to look at contesting it also.

The comments about the tractor - I was not really close (I could have stopped in time if required), its just that the hopper was quite large in terms of both height and width. I could only make out the very top of the tractors cabin and light but this is combined with my car having a low driving position too.

I think im more dissapointed than anything as I considered myself to be a sensible driver, and a few of the other people I know who have been caught by this are also in my opinion sensible drivers who dont go around speeding.

The number of people caught is something that seems out of the ordinary.
peterguk
QUOTE (Trakannon @ Fri, 19 Nov 2010 - 19:05) *
I have been offered the SAC and I am going to fill the form in and book myself on - however I am curious if you cant fight it at a later date, or if this cannot be overturned at a later date.


Once COFP or SAC accepted, that's it, finished, disposed of, done for good.
Trakannon
So its very possible that I accept the SAC and later on down the line someone wins a case based on unlawful signage (Although this has been commented on earlier as being highly unlikely), yet all the convictions / fines etc will still stand?

Seems there is a far rgeater risk involved in fighting this than accepting it - as fighting could result in bigger fine, points and more costs.
peterguk
QUOTE (Trakannon @ Fri, 19 Nov 2010 - 19:29) *
So its very possible that I accept the SAC and later on down the line someone wins a case based on unlawful signage (Although this has been commented on earlier as being highly unlikely), yet all the convictions / fines etc will still stand?

Seems there is a far rgeater risk involved in fighting this than accepting it - as fighting could result in bigger fine, points and more costs.


So far, you've not given any reason for the sineage being unlawful. See BB's post no. 9.

So lots of people caught? Maybe lots of people need to up their awareness....
Trakannon
The only reason for the signage being potentially unlawful was within that newspaper article. I think the core of it surrounds a sign being placed in the wrong area, within the derestricted zone.

I struggle with the numbers of 3400+ people as the ones I know who got caught also know that stretch of road very well wheras I had only travelled on it a couple of times. I thought those numbers seemed high but I dont know the statistics from the other cameras on that same stretch of road for comparison, but I dont want to delve into that.

Ive filled it in and sent it off anyways - thanks for the advice on this all.
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.