Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: caught again allegedly could cost job.
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
Pages: 1, 2
oneeye1
had a nip doing 36mph in a 30 from a mobile van which i saw from a very very long way away and made sure was not speeding from moment saw it. truly cant say i was nt doing 36 at the moment i first saw it which would of been at least half a mile away but banged on brakes and proceeded at 25.

this could cost me my job.so any advise please would be appreciated.married 2 kids etc would be a disaster.

have to say at the the time i was nt worried and am quite shocked at being done always seems to be 36mph.
justforthepictures
QUOTE (oneeye1 @ Tue, 31 Jul 2012 - 13:37) *
had a nip doing 36mph in a 30 from a mobile van which i saw from a very very long way away and made sure was not speeding from moment saw it. truly cant say i was nt doing 36 at the moment i first saw it which would of been at least half a mile away but banged on brakes and proceeded at 25.

this could cost me my job.so any advise please would be appreciated.married 2 kids etc would be a disaster.

have to say at the the time i was nt worried and am quite shocked at being done always seems to be 36mph.

Have you done a Speed Awareness Course within the past three years?
oneeye1
fraid so
mrh3369
Is it possible that the van saw you before you saw it, the laser has a range of 999m.
oneeye1
it seems so ,how long do they need to see you to detect speed have to say im shocked.
jobo
Do i take it you currently have 9 points ?
oneeye1
no 6 but i drive a cab and the costs of staying in business each year are unbelievable and to get caught again will cripple me.its only a mattter of time
mrh3369
QUOTE (oneeye1 @ Tue, 31 Jul 2012 - 14:03) *
it seems so ,how long do they need to see you to detect speed have to say im shocked.

0.3 of a second I believe.
oneeye1
QUOTE (mrh3369 @ Tue, 31 Jul 2012 - 14:20) *
QUOTE (oneeye1 @ Tue, 31 Jul 2012 - 14:03) *
it seems so ,how long do they need to see you to detect speed have to say im shocked.

0.3 of a second I believe.

jesus christ im working an average 70 to 80 hours a week to keep afloat ine no chance.
mrh3369
My reply was slightly misleading, the operator should observe you first and form a prior opinion that you are speeding before checking the speed with the laser which takes .3 of a second.
oneeye1
so is it worth the work which im willing to do or are they usually right.from the distance he would of seen me there is no way he could of thought i was speeding wether i braked fast enuff or even speeding at that time is debataable im not sure but know i went under speed for a long way
The Rookie
People have been succesfully prosecuted at 760m plus, no way would you spot a van at that distance with the naked eye, you need to drive slower really, no point braking when you see a van, too late.
oneeye1
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 31 Jul 2012 - 15:16) *
People have been succesfully prosecuted at 760m plus, no way would you spot a van at that distance with the naked eye, you need to drive slower really, no point braking when you see a van, too late.


im not saying i was speeding when i saw van just a natural reaction is to brake
The Rookie
Fourth time you've had a NIP suggests less unlucky, more too fast perhaps?
oneeye1
listen i aint no angel and mainly work through the nights on empty roads i aint stupid to be flying like a loony and moments of slight speeding do occur on empty roads nothing extreme we all know how easy it is to feel as you are going slow on an empty road,add the fact of getting to a customer on time etc etc and yes mistakes happen and ive took them on the chin this one took me by surpruise
The Rookie
Sheesh, touchy aren't we? Never accused you of anything, but you had a choice of slowing down or whining about not affording any more points, you chose not to slow down, we don't do shoulders here.
scottishpoet
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 31 Jul 2012 - 14:16) *
People have been succesfully prosecuted at 760m plus, no way would you spot a van at that distance with the naked eye, you need to drive slower really, no point braking when you see a van, too late.


while i don't doubt this, it does pose the question, the police officer has had long enough to see you, "form an opinion" that you are speeding and then check, yet you don;t have long enough to see the van and slow down
The Rookie
The officer/operator isn't using a naked eye..............
justforthepictures
QUOTE (oneeye1 @ Tue, 31 Jul 2012 - 15:41) *
listen i aint no angel and mainly work through the nights on empty roads i aint stupid to be flying like a loony and moments of slight speeding do occur on empty roads nothing extreme we all know how easy it is to feel as you are going slow on an empty road,add the fact of getting to a customer on time etc etc and yes mistakes happen and ive took them on the chin this one took me by surpruise

Depending upon your perspective of such matters, within 18 months there is going to be a significant change to mobile speed enforcement here in the UK.

We can expect to witness an ongoing increased mobile enforcement presence and we are imminently about to see after dark enforcement as standard as new mobile attended kit is about to go 'live' that will record everything even in complete darkness.

I recently attended a meeting that was a real eye-opener regarding what has been prototyped, tested, presented to the type-approval system and is now in production.

Remember, no warning signage is required, day and night, anywhere.

Angel or not, the choice is your's, not the customer's.

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 31 Jul 2012 - 16:12) *
The officer/operator isn't using a naked eye..............

I do, the x2 is highly restrictive unless targets are relatively close.
Transit man
QUOTE (oneeye1 @ Tue, 31 Jul 2012 - 15:41) *
listen i aint no angel and mainly work through the nights on empty roads i aint stupid to be flying like a loony and moments of slight speeding do occur on empty roads nothing extreme we all know how easy it is to feel as you are going slow on an empty road,add the fact of getting to a customer on time etc etc and yes mistakes happen and ive took them on the chin this one took me by surpruise

I also work at any time during the day or night, 1-2,000 miles per week, with customers often on the phone to me for an ETA, they get told what my sat nav says plus 20%. I don't speed for any customer, today's panic for them will be forgotten tomorrow, 3 points have a much longer lifespan to me. I have managed the last 39 years, 3 million miles plus, 10 years of those in a taxi, with just 3 points in total (my error rolleyes.gif) , not because I'm an angel , but I just do not speed, it's not worth the hassle.

My advice would be to simply stop speeding, let the customers wait if necessary, if they ask you to speed because of their desires, ask them if they will pay your wages for the next 3 years biggrin.gif
Pete P
I saw a picture on facebook recently that a friend of a friend put up of them being caught by a laser speed gun. If I remember rightly the range was something like 993m
oneeye1
im still mad as a wasp about this one and feel i wasnt speeding is there any chance of them being wrong and me prooving it

yes or no
mrh3369
A very small chance, do you have the funds to pay for it you fight it are found guilty?
oneeye1
QUOTE (mrh3369 @ Tue, 7 Aug 2012 - 21:30) *
A very small chance, do you have the funds to pay for it you fight it are found guilty?

sorry dont understand you. funds to pay for what exactly ,lawyers or extra fine. what are the concequencies of fighting this ticket.
Logician
If you fight it on some technical defence that the van measured your speed incorrectly, the prosecution will cal an expert witness to explain why it did not. If you lose, which is likely you will have to pay prosecution costs, including the expert. £620 is the set CPS figure for even a simple trial, but if no expert or other witness is called the prosecutor may ask for less. If you use a solicitor you will have to pay that fee, unless you win when you will get a contribution towards it.

Have you replied to the NIP? If not, write back asking for any available photographs to assist in identifying the driver, making no mention of proof or evidence which you are not entitled to at this stage. Most forces will send these or direct you to a website. Then you should be able to and confirm it was you. If you wash off the details and post it up here following the directions in the FAQs, people will be able to tell you if it is a clean ping.

This does not stop the time running on the 28 days you have to respond. Failing to identify the driver is a much more serious offence than speeding, so do not risk that.
ford poplar
Whilst 'requesting avail photos to assist in ID of driver' is reasonable request before returning s172, the Police are not required to respond in time for s172 return, or at all, and they know most pics will be unable to ID driver.
However, NIPs are sent to the DVLA registered DK, who may not have been driver at the time, so a request for avail photos 'to ID vehicle committing the alleged offence' should be provided to RK, if avail, at earliest opportunity. eg cloned VRN on wrong vehicle. The effect is the same, should demonstrate clean ping, speed, distance and poss location. Hand held radar may not have photo capture.
For an alleged speed of 36 your speedo would prob indicate close to 40 but not less than 32. Any recorded speed above posted speed limit is enforceable but most drivers try to drive to the SL + 10% + 2mph tolerance allowed.
Yeah mistakes happen but your foot is on the pedal!
The Rookie
QUOTE (ford poplar @ Wed, 8 Aug 2012 - 02:31) *
For an alleged speed of 36 your speedo would prob indicate close to 40 but not less than 36

Corrected for you, Speedo's may over read by upto 10% they MAY NOT under read.
oneeye1
so basically they re always right and the alleged offender needs deep pockets to prove otherwise,time to join the the great unwashed in this stupid country and let them start giving me money.

for christ sake the punishment for shoplifting is less harsh and certainly less harmfull.
geoffthechef
GO on i will answer that...shoplifting does not have the potential to kill,speeding in a few does.
Logician
Basically since according to your first post you cannot say you were not speeding when you first spotted the van, it is overwhelmingly likely that you were doing the speed alleged.
Mattexmo
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 31 Jul 2012 - 15:16) *
People have been succesfully prosecuted at 760m plus, no way would you spot a van at that distance with the naked eye, you need to drive slower really, no point braking when you see a van, too late.


So how would a camera op form the opinion of reasonable grounds of suspected speeding, if he couldn't see the car, either? rolleyes.gif
Pete D
The equipment has a zoom lense so he can see vehicles at distance. It is the car driver than probably not stop the camera van at 760m. Do try and keep up. Pete D
desktop_demon
Colin Montgomerie was cleared of speeding on appeal in similar circumstances. Observing the vehicle through a zoom lens makes it more difficult to form an opinion due to foreshortening of the field of view. SO if the occifer used the lens to see the vehicle 900 odd metres away then it is arguable that he could not properly form any opinion.
captain swoop
Why? If he has experience looking at cars at that distance through the lens why would he not be able to form an opinion?
sgtdixie
The OP believes he saw the van from 1/2 a mile away. This does not mean it was 1/2 a mile away when he was pinged.

My local pub is 200 yards from my house and I often walk there in a couple of minutes. Strangely when I leave I can see my house but it is a mile away and takes 1/2 an hour to walk there. Perception, a curious thing.
oneeye1
QUOTE (Mattexmo @ Thu, 9 Aug 2012 - 10:18) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 31 Jul 2012 - 15:16) *
People have been succesfully prosecuted at 760m plus, no way would you spot a van at that distance with the naked eye, you need to drive slower really, no point braking when you see a van, too late.


So how would a camera op form the opinion of reasonable grounds of suspected speeding, if he couldn't see the car, either? rolleyes.gif


this is hat im on about seems to be a one sided bias with the the suspect having to proove his innocence.silly me i thought this was britain where you could rest assured they had to prove you were guilty.


QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Thu, 9 Aug 2012 - 13:53) *
The OP believes he saw the van from 1/2 a mile away. This does not mean it was 1/2 a mile away when he was pinged.

My local pub is 200 yards from my house and I often walk there in a couple of minutes. Strangely when I leave I can see my house but it is a mile away and takes 1/2 an hour to walk there. Perception, a curious thing.


sorry but you talk absolute bo11ox. you sir have been brainwashed .

not your fault but you are slightly biased towards the authorities.im so glad thats not me.
I am Weasel
Agreed that they have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that you were speeding. That is why you can reject any offer of a course or fixed penalty and plead not guilty in court. They will then submit in evidence that a trained person using an approved device measured your speed as 36mph along with any photographic and/or video evidence to support this. If you can cast sufficient doubt on the quality of the evidence, then you may be acquitted. May have tried, very few have succeeded
oneeye1
QUOTE (I am Weasel @ Mon, 13 Aug 2012 - 11:32) *
Agreed that they have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that you were speeding. That is why you can reject any offer of a course or fixed penalty and plead not guilty in court. They will then submit in evidence that a trained person using an approved device measured your speed as 36mph along with any photographic and/or video evidence to support this. If you can cast sufficient doubt on the quality of the evidence, then you may be acquitted. May have tried, very few have succeeded


unless you have loads of dough,in which case if you do a good lawyer will come up with something
I am Weasel
QUOTE (oneeye1 @ Mon, 13 Aug 2012 - 12:58) *
QUOTE (I am Weasel @ Mon, 13 Aug 2012 - 11:32) *
Agreed that they have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that you were speeding. That is why you can reject any offer of a course or fixed penalty and plead not guilty in court. They will then submit in evidence that a trained person using an approved device measured your speed as 36mph along with any photographic and/or video evidence to support this. If you can cast sufficient doubt on the quality of the evidence, then you may be acquitted. May have tried, very few have succeeded


unless you have loads of dough,in which case if you do a good lawyer will come up with something


Not always - even Mr Loophole himself doesn't win all his cases. If there is something wrong with the evidence that is presented, then a decent motoring specialist lawyer should spot it. The question is how confident are you actually that you weren't speeding? There are many who come here convinced they were under the limit and you can't even say that you weren't doing the speed alleged.

I understand that you are narked off because you "got caught", but the advice you have been given still stands. If you fancy your chances in court go for it or else accept the FPN (or course) that will likely be offered and be a bit more mindful of the speed limits. We would all love to find some sort of technicality that will "get you off" but these are simply very few and far between nowadays. Short of requesting photos and hoping taht you can find something wrong with them, the only avenue I can see is to look at the Traffic Order that defines the speed limit (if one exists) for any discrepancies between it and the road layout at the time.

If you think you were spotted just inside the 30 limit, it might be worth taking exact measurements in case they pinged you in the higher limit

oneeye1
its not a case of being caught or not,whats narking me is the difficulty in prooving innocence compared with the ease of which tickets are dished out.it seems to me a very easy thing to do ,giving tickets that is and a very difficult thing to even attempt to prove innocence.

as for not knowing if i was speeding or not , its just a truthfull answer genuinly dont know but as stated was shocked when nip dropped through the door.
I am Weasel
Indeed - there is the dilemma. Nowadays with speed awareness courses and fixed penalties available, you can choose to dispose of this matter by one of those means (if offered to you). Before the days of FPNs & SACs, your only recourse would be to see the evidence by pleading not guilty. This has not changed at all in that you can decline any FPN or SAC and take it to court. This option is still open to you, but you must weigh up the chances of success versus the costs of the various outcomes

At least nowadays, you can accept a "punishment" through FPN/SAC and not be required to attend court where (if convicted) will almost certainly result in higher costs - plus the indirect costs of taking time off work to attend, any solicitor's fees ...

I'm sorry we can't be more helpful, but that's the situation you're in and it's pointless going over the same ground again and again, the situation will not change unless/until there is a change in the law (not likely). So no matter how galling it is, your "cheapest" option would be to take it on the chin and pay for the SAC/FPN to avoid a court appearance
Top Cat
You don't have to prove you are innocent and the ticket doesn't prove anything , it's just a means for you to deal with it if you don't want to challenge the allegation at court.

At court the onus will be on the prosecution to prove the offence , if you plead not guilty you will be able to see what evidence the prosecution has before the trial.
oneeye1
i still have nt sent nip of in this case .whats really gaulling me now is that i would actually have been doing 40 mph according to my speedo and im judt not having that.i really do have the inclination to fight this one

ITS ALWAYS 36MPH IT JUST DOESNT STACK UP.
sgtdixie
Consider this
QUOTE
truly cant say i was nt doing 36 at the moment i first saw it which would of been at least half a mile away


The camera operator is looking through an optical device and will have probably pinged you before you saw and recognised what he was. You readily concede you possibly were speeding.

So what is your defence?
oneeye1
well i cudnt say i was nt doing 36 according to my speedo but seeing as 36mph would show at 39/40 i am confident i wasnt doing that.
sgtdixie
You will have to do better than you are innocent because you think you are. The prosecution will produce a speed from an approved device. It is a racing certainty that the various calibration certs/ operators qualifications etc will be correct and a court will normally accept the 'evidence' of speed. This leaves you with 2 possible routes. One is that the speed limit is not enforceable so you need to get a copy of the TRO and check. The other is a technical defence to show that the reading is unreliable.

To be honest, believing you were not speeding is a poor place to start a defence. If you could categorically say you were not then it is worth fighting. If you are not sure I suspect the reading is correct and you should consider an early plea to minimise the penalty.
oneeye1
read it again and you will see i have said i am confident i wasnt doing 39/40
Jlc
QUOTE (oneeye1 @ Thu, 16 Aug 2012 - 20:25) *
read it again and you will see i have said i am confident i wasnt doing 39/40

Yes, we get that but it won't form a defence.
oneeye1
so to form a defence you have to be 1000% sure you were not speeding.that doesnt make sence when relying on technology.
AntonyMMM
QUOTE (oneeye1 @ Fri, 17 Aug 2012 - 10:54) *
so to form a defence you have to be 1000% sure you were not speeding.that doesnt make sence when relying on technology.


No you have to put together a series of arguments that make the prosecution evidence fail the "beyond reasonable doubt" test. Given that they have a measurement of your speed from an approved (and usually reliable) device and statements from the operators it is difficult , but not impossible to fight against.

What you are being told is just saying "I'm sure I wasn't speeding" is not going to be enough .
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.