# Speeding Tickets



## senwar (Apr 21, 2003)

Would be grateful of some advice.

In January this year, I received an NIP stating I was doing 36 in a 30 zone. When I was actually flashed, I looked at my road angel and it stated 34mph.

Now I know this is still above the limit (I actually thought I was in a 40 zone), but I do not believe I would have been penalised at 34.

Do I have a case? Should I challenge the speed? Or should I just take it on the chin, as I was above 30 anyway?

Cheers
Paul


----------



## saint (Dec 6, 2002)

If the Police give you evidence of you doing 36 how are you going to even start to prove that you were doing 34? Anyway you are still admitting breaking the law.

And oh "officer I thought I was in a 40" does not really wash well.............. just shows you don't pay attention to road signage.

Take the 3 and FP.


----------



## NIIK_TT (May 7, 2002)

This really takes the piss.... I mean 36 mph on a 30 mph road. You know they are just trying to bring in some cash to the local constabulary.

While on this note I noticed that the adverts on TV showing a car skidding into a kid cos he/she was doing 5 mph over the limit comments that it took x amount more feet to stop cos of the speed. What a load of $hit! If you have ABS that most cars have, this would not be the case!!!!

Sorry this should probably be in the flame room.

:-X


----------



## jonhaff (May 20, 2002)

ask for the evidence by saying that you are not sure who was driving the car that day and need the photograph to prove if it was you or your....wife/partner/brother/....

The NIP always says we wont provide photgraphs until court, but using the above argument they will always find the photo.... well you hope they dont in fact.... once the photo turns up then u need to decide if they can prove its you driving ...

this is a hope they have lost the evidence!

Next you could always ask for them to prove the equipement they were using was calibrated that day as yr device said you were only doing 34.


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

> While on this note I noticed that the adverts on TV showing a car skidding into a kid cos he/she was doing 5 mph over the limit comments that it took x amount more feet to stop cos of the speed. What a load of $hit! If you have ABS that most cars have, this would not be the case!!!!


Are you implying that ABS shortens brake distances, or that if you have ABS you could steer around the child and hence not hit them?
My understanding is that ABS does not significantly alter your stopping ditance - and may increase it - but allows the front wheels to not lock hence you can brake at near maximum efficiency but still steer.



> Do I have a case? Should I challenge the speed? Or should I just take it on the chin, as I was above 30 anyway?


Back to the topic...I would have thought trying to prove your self installed, self set up consumer device is more accurate than a fixed, calibrated and monitored roadside camera would be very difficult indeed, and may prove more costly than, as you say, taking it on the chin.


----------



## phil (May 7, 2002)

> While on this note I noticed that the adverts on TV showing a car skidding into a kid cos he/she was doing 5 mph over the limit comments that it took x amount more feet to stop cos of the speed. What a load of $hit! If you have ABS that most cars have, this would not be the case!!!!


So if your car has ABS, you can stop in the same distance at 35 mph than you can at 30? What are you talking about?

If you're saying it's not fair that crappy old cars have the same speed limits as fancy new ones then you have a point, but you can't set staggered speed limits for different makes/models of cars.

And personally I'd rather all speed cameras were in 30 zones with loads of pedestrians around, rather than in newly downgraded 70-50 zones, like they all seem to be around where I live.


----------



## Nimbus (Sep 20, 2002)

Forget it..
you were speeding
you know you were speeding
you got caught.....
take the points/fine and put it behind you... :

GPS readouts are not 'instant', so even if your roadangel said 34, that was your historical speed, not the speed at that exact moment.. and there is no way you are going to prove otherwise..


----------



## KevinST (May 6, 2002)

Before anyone starts to flame me... I speed as much as anyone else. Sometimes I do it without knowing (tut tut) most times I take a calculated risk and conciously decide to go above the speed limit knowing what the penalty will be if I get caught.

You were speeding, you should have known what the speed limit was (ignorance of the law is not a defence), you were caught... pay the price.



> This really takes the piss.... I mean 36 mph on a 30 mph road. You know they are just trying to bring in some cash to the local constabulary.


so 36 in a 30 is OK?? (this isn't an argument as to if the 30mph limit was correct or not) what about 37 in a 30?? 38? 39? 40? 50 ? where's the limit?
The law (rightly or wrongly) says the speed limit on that part of the road is 30... anything over is illegal.

One day someone will do a study to find out why all moterists the world over believe it's our right to break the law of the land when it comes to speeding... and when we get caught to complain, object, defend etc etc. Wonder why we don't do the same with parking on double yellows???


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

> Would be grateful of some advice.
> 
> In January this year, I received an NIP stating I was doing 36 in a 30 zone. Â When I was actually flashed, I looked at my road angel and it stated 34mph.
> 
> ...


This sounds so similar to my case. I was sent a NIP doing 82mph.

When the laser was reading my speed a friends laser detector device went mad. So I knew that when they were reading my speed and looked at the speedo to see that it was reading 79.

Also via a tracking device with GPS that I have in the TT I managed to see that at this spot I was doing only 76 mph. Which means I wouldn't normally be caught.

This of course is not a defence in the court as the speed limit is 70.

BUT it clearly demonstrates that police readings are not accurate. I believe that they do not calibrate them in purpose correctly so they can catch more people speeding.

So be very careful. Doing 80 mph is still asking for trouble. So aim for 75 mph to be safe.


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

> You were speeding, you should have known what the speed limit was (ignorance of the law is not a defence), you were caught... pay the price.


The problem these days is that the speed limits change every couple of miles and you can lose track on what the limit is.

Senwar said that he thought the limit was 40mph. This has happened to me too before.

The north circular is London keeps changing between 50, 40 and 30 mph every few miles. If you are not local it is very easy to get confused. I was flashed once there as I thought it was 40 mph but it was 30 at the time. I was lucky that I never got a ticket at the time. It was my first flash ever.


----------



## senwar (Apr 21, 2003)

My reason for believing (incorrectly) that the speed limit was 40, was that I was on a dual carriageway, heading out of a residential area. I thought that was the limit.

he fact I also pulled onto the road from a side street (Morrisons), and there isn't a sign around. However, it is only since I have been back that I have noticed the sign just before you turn onto the road. However, i suppose you should always deem it to be the lowest speeds until you see otherwise.

My main concern is the difference in speeds recorded. but as people say, how can I prove this.

Oh well. Live and learn


----------



## KevinST (May 6, 2002)

> BUT it clearly demonstrates that police readings are not accurate. I believe that they do not calibrate them in purpose correctly so they can catch more people speeding.


LOL - you don't seriously believe this do you?? you still think you're never calibrated GPS system and your never calibrated speedo are more accurate than the Police systems ??  :


----------



## bajers (Nov 22, 2003)

Moral of the story is....

Wherever you drive, on whatever road, stick to 30 mph and you will not go far wrong ;D


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

Or the moral could be to be more observant so you see and then obey the speed limit signs.

KevST - perhaps you should heed your own sig advice ;D


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

> LOL - you don't seriously believe this do you?? you still think you're never calibrated GPS system and your never calibrated speedo are more accurate than the Police systems ?? Â  Â :


It is not just me that gets different readings from police equipment.

Don't forget the case last week that the cameras were flashing reflection images of cars and the guy proved this in the court. 

The police are not always right or want to be right. After all they are civilians operating the vans and the more money they make the better off they are.


----------



## L8_0RGY (Sep 12, 2003)

A friend of mine got caught for doing 38 on a 30 zone a couple of years and was equally pissed off.

I drove down the same road with him a couple of weeks later and got flashed also but i was doing 43.

It could be worth appealing but what evidence have you got to back it up?

Nothing.


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

On a road out of Newcastle there were two speed limit signs about two feet apart ,one national limit one fifty the next speed sign said fifty the one on the slip road after this said national limit ,this was like this for about four months .As soon as the national limit signs were removed the speed camera vans were there ,what chance do you stand?


----------



## jonhaff (May 20, 2002)

> Moral of the story is....
> 
> Wherever you drive, on whatever road, stick to 30 mph and you will not go far wrong ;D


What the point of having a TT if you stick to the limit everywhere..... no point having the power if you cant use it  
(flame suit on)


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

> While on this note I noticed that the adverts on TV showing a car skidding into a kid cos he/she was doing 5 mph over the limit comments that it took x amount more feet to stop cos of the speed. What a load of $hit! If you have ABS that most cars have, this would not be the case!!!!
> 
> :-X


If you watch that ad, the same car actually has it's rear brakes disconnected to empahise the effect. The rears keep merrily spinning at the same rate whilst the fronts are locked solid. :-/

Having said that, I am all in favour of 20mph strictly enforced speed limits in residential area and around schools, hospitals etc. The limits could be raised back to 30mph after 10 pm and before 6am.

Gettin ga ticket at 36mph is tight, but still 20% over the posted limit. I thought tolerances were 10%? Although I also here zero tolerance is coming to some areas.

Sort of associated- I do believe some people lose concentration all together from driving too slowly. This am I was going to Maidenhead for an 11am meet. Having plenty of time I did 65mph along the M4, cruise control set, Johnny Cash 'unearthed' in the changer. I was not concentrating as much as normal and drove straight to our offic in Bracknell before I came t oand realised I was in the wrong place :-[ Had I been driving normally I'd have been watching the junctions and exits, the other road users, moving in and out of the lanes etc. Instead I just cruised and relaxed, but certainly did not pay so much attention, hence missing my stop.

Ostensibly I was driving within the speed limit, not bothering other road users and no harm to anyone. Was I any safer than if I'd been doing 90mph and concentring ahead, behind and around? I doubt it. But I was completely legal.

Ramble over.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

> BUT it clearly demonstrates that police readings are not accurate. I believe that they do not calibrate them in purpose correctly so they can catch more people speeding.


And there was me thinking that GPS systems are not accurate that for snap shots because of the way they work and the sampling frequency. Â :

At AMD recently, the Police operator of the camera van had his own Angel in the front. He said to me that even though it displays the speed it's not accurate enough so if he gets an alarm he always checks his speedo and not the GPS displayed speed.

p.s. I totally agree with Kev's posts.

[Edit]

oopps I posted this after only reading page 1.

Npw I've seen page 2 it's really does seem I agree with Kev!! : 

[/Edit]


----------



## jonhaff (May 20, 2002)

> I thought tolerances were 10%? Â Although I also here zero tolerance is coming to some areas.


Its 10% + 2mph so for a 30 you get a ticket at 36 but not at 35 !


----------



## Dont I Recognise You (Oct 10, 2003)

GPS - whilst more accurate than your speedo, are still not accurate.

Or real time.

My Snooper definately lags behind - especially when accelerating hard (well - as hard as is possible in an A4 )

My TomTom is quicker to react - but still not real time.

So yes - if you are holding a constant speed (which is pretty good going), your GPS reading may well be pretty spot on.

But if you're accerating / slowing, there is no garauntee at all.

Cop equipment [GATSO / Laser] (putting aside the whole calibration issue for the moment), when used correctly, WILL give the EXACT speed you were travelling at.

Actually, they will give the EXACT amount of time it took to bounce a wave (light or radar) off you, and just display this as your speed.

No - they are not infalible.
If they say you were doing 237mph, chances are good that you can get the NIP quashed.
If it says you were doing 36 in a 30, you have (IMO) absolutely zero chance.

Final point:
rule of thumb is that you will 'get away' with speed limit + 10% + 2mph Â (ie 35, 46, 57, 79)
BUT this is NOT offical, and is at best an oft used guideline.

phew. ramble over.


----------



## justinp (May 7, 2002)

Hi

Ask for the photo to id the driver, then decide if they can prove it was you or not.

However the mobile scamera vans record a video of the event so although the still photo may not id you the video may. Although I'm not sure that the video evidence is admissible in court.

If you were caught with a GATSO camera then they will have 2 photos to prove you speed.

Alternatively you could go down the not signing the NIP route.

Cheers

JustinP


----------



## BreTT (Oct 30, 2002)

> Alternatively you could go down the not signing the NIP route.


Or just take it on the chin and pay up. :-X


----------



## Nimbus (Sep 20, 2002)

> Hi
> 
> Ask for the photo to id the driver, then decide if they can prove it was you or not.
> 
> ...


Dont bother getting his hopes it...

If you are the registered owner of the vehicle, you have to tell them who was driving it, otherwise you get the fine anyway... 
or get done for not telling them...

All the stuff about not incriminating yourself is in the end BS..

Pay the fine, move on...


----------



## justinp (May 7, 2002)

> If you are the registered owner of the vehicle, you have to tell them who was driving it, otherwise you get the fine anyway...
> or get done for not telling them...


Thatâ€™s not actually true.

With so many speeding fines being handed out they often donâ€™t bother pursuing the awkward cases and simply drop them.

It is a gamble but its up to you, you might get off or you might go to court and get >Â£300 fine and 5 points

Cheers

JustinP


----------



## pas_55 (May 9, 2002)

Ask for a photo. http://aol.photobox.co.uk/album/album_c ... bum=590787


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

> Ask for a photo. http://aol.photobox.co.uk/album/album_c ... bum=590787


 ??? What is this about? A TT parked in front of the house. ???


----------



## Dont I Recognise You (Oct 10, 2003)

think yourself lucky - I got 'you are not signed in to AOL photobox....' :-/


----------



## Nimbus (Sep 20, 2002)

> Thatâ€™s not actually true.
> 
> With so many speeding fines being handed out they often donâ€™t bother pursuing the awkward cases and simply drop them.
> 
> ...


and you know this for a fact, with examples ?
Or did a friend of a friend know someone who did it......

There is nothing awkward here, they have him as the registered keeper, they have the picture, they've issued the NIP in time...

closed case, even if he asks for the picture, or sends back the NIP without signing, they will catch up with him, and he will get done...

Just the same as Vlastan did, despite all his rubbish about it being a police state and they were out to get him..


----------



## jgoodman00 (May 6, 2002)

I asked for the photos then happily paid up. My speed was never in dispute but I wanted the pictures. My pictures were really good, & the background was nice.

I was going to send them a box of chocs as a thankyou, but thought they might then worry that I had mistaken them for a photoservice rather than a police force. In hindsight I guess I should have because thats pretty much all they are...


----------



## justinp (May 7, 2002)

No itâ€™s not a friend of a friend but a direct friend, who I know very well, received a NIP for 100 from a mobile unit. He asked to see the photo and they replied saying they have looked at the photo and are unable to identify the driver from it so they would not be sending it. Would he like to nominate some one to take part in the fixed penalty scheme? He wrote back saying he did not know who was driving again and that is the last he heard. That was 7 months ago. They have 6 months to issue court proceedings and after that they canâ€™t do a thing.

Maybe he was a lucky git, I just wish I had not paid mine so eagerly. I will certainly learn from his gamble.

Regards

Justin


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

> No itâ€™s not a friend of a friend but a direct friend, who I know very well, received a NIP for 100 from a mobile unit. Â He asked to see the photo and they replied saying they have looked at the photo and are unable to identify the driver from it so they would not be sending it. Â Would he like to nominate some one to take part in the fixed penalty scheme? Â He wrote back saying he did not know who was driving again and that is the last he heard. Â That was 7 months ago. Â They have 6 months to issue court proceedings and after that they canâ€™t do a thing.
> 
> Maybe he was a lucky git, I just wish I had not paid mine so eagerly. Â I will certainly learn from his gamble.
> 
> ...


I think that YES he was a lucky git. These days following previous court cases you have to say who was the driver even the picture is not clear. You as the registered owner of the car must identify the driver by law.

It used to be easier to evade this before, but as more and more high court cases go ahead, they are closing all the loopholes.

I was caught by Northamptonshire and after taking advice from a solicitor, I paid. Because the alternative was to go to the court and fight the case and I couldn't handle the stress.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

If you could have handled the stress, what was your defence gonna be?


----------



## BreTT (Oct 30, 2002)

> If you could have handled the stress, what was your defence gonna be?


"I was speeding legally, guv, as everyone knows you can go at 79mph in a 70mph zone. It's an unfair cop, m'lud" - or something like that. :-*


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

The solicitor I was told won a high court case last year about a speeding offence. As he only gave me a 15 mins consultation on what my options were, I didn't have time to discuss the law in detail.

But I am sure there are ways to twist the law like solicitors only know and our IT technical minds know shit about it. 

But he told me that the law was in a mess and he was using this mess to our benefit.


----------



## Nimbus (Sep 20, 2002)

> No itâ€™s not a friend of a friend but a direct friend, who I know very well, received a NIP for 100 from a mobile unit. Â He asked to see the photo and they replied saying they have looked at the photo and are unable to identify the driver from it so they would not be sending it. Â Would he like to nominate some one to take part in the fixed penalty scheme? Â He wrote back saying he did not know who was driving again and that is the last he heard. Â That was 7 months ago. Â They have 6 months to issue court proceedings and after that they canâ€™t do a thing.
> 
> Maybe he was a lucky git, I just wish I had not paid mine so eagerly. Â I will certainly learn from his gamble.
> 
> ...


fair enough, he was one lucky git then !!


----------

