Speeding fines

[Beefy198]

Lets hope they offer your or your wife a speed awareness course. Set payment fee and no points! Sorted!

His wife already has points, so unless they're not for speeding I don't think she'll be offered it.

[Beefy198]

It is the speed limit on the other side, and was the speed limit for the last at least 10 years.

I think that's the side I'm talking about - your second link? There's a big green sign right before the speed camera that warns you that traffic will be merging ahead.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

Anybody know how to wrangle out of them?

Either me or my wife (using one car last week) have been caught ripping up the roads doing 40 in a 30 on a local dual carriageway. Wife has already got 6points - all 40mph on a 30mph road.

Although if travelling in the opposite direction of the same road the speed limit is 40 mph - and 30 mph in the direction with the speed camera - which confuses the hell out of you anyhow.

Am totally pee'd off with being "fined", "taxed", "robbed", call it what you will, more and more by this tuliphole government and made feel like a bloody criminal.

So has anybody here tried to wrangle out of them?

You did the crime now do the time - end of. Speeding is optional, I do it too, but it's against the law so no point whining if you get caught 6 points should be enough for her to get the message.

[Bagpuss]

Most insurance companies allow for 3 points these days i.e. it wont adversely effect the premium. Just charge your client an extra hour to cover the cost

[NickNick]

So just to get things straight, you were travelling at 33% over the speed limit on a road with a school on it, past a static safety camera and you winge about getting caught?

[scaramanga]

Get yourself over to www.pepipoo.com and fill out the NIP Wizard. If you genuinely can't remember whether it was you or your wife driving you may be able to put the onus on the camera operators to prove who it was.

Bear in mind this is a risky course of action - if they don't think you showed reasonable dilligence in trying to find out who was driving then you will get 6 points for failure to furnish. You must check mobile records etc and attempt to obtain the photo from the camera. If it is a Gatso it may be difficult to tell from the picture who was driving.

And don't listen to the holier than now nonsense that inevitably follows a post like yours. I recently faught a case where plod pulled me over just after a limit changed downwards. Unfortunately for them they were standing too close to the start of the limit which did not give them enough time to take a valid reading on their device, as outlined by ACPO. The sheriff said, when pronouncing me not guilty, that there was a clear breach of police procedure. I had to put up with all the "don't do the crime if you can't do the time" crap initially but if plod are prepared to break the rules and try to catch people out rather than actually make the roads safer then I don't see why you shouldn't fight back using all available mechanisms.

As an aside, I have a clean license held since I passed my test 9 years ago. By taking my case to court I risked 6 points, but it is worth it if you have a sound defence.

[Beefy198]

Get yourself over to www.pepipoo.com and fill out the NIP Wizard. If you genuinely can't remember whether it was you or your wife driving you may be able to put the onus on the camera operators to prove who it was.

One would expect that would be a tough argument in his circumstances - it's not like he hires the car out regularly (I presume).

And if he did... you would expect him to keep records of who has the car when.

Didn't they change the rules of the road so that the registered owner is culpable unless they suggest someone else?

[Beefy198]

And don't listen to the holier than now nonsense that inevitably follows a post like yours. I recently faught a case where plod pulled me over just after a limit changed downwards. Unfortunately for them they were standing too close to the start of the limit which did not give them enough time to take a valid reading on their device, as outlined by ACPO. The sheriff said, when pronouncing me not guilty, that there was a clear breach of police procedure. I had to put up with all the "don't do the crime if you can't do the time" crap initially but if plod are prepared to break the rules and try to catch people out rather than actually make the roads safer then I don't see why you shouldn't fight back using all available mechanisms.

This appears to be different circumstances. Static camera, long straight road.

[Tru64]

ENGLAND football star Jermain Defoe is among thousands of motorists caught speeding in Essex who could escape fines and points due to a police blunder.

Millions of pounds could be handed back to motorists caught speeding since March 2007 after Essex Police admitted there may have been an administrative mistake in which documents – forming a vital part of prosecutions – were signed by a civilian employee without proper authorisation.

The mistake means that those who contested evidence of the cameras in court and were subsequently found guilty may have been convicted on unsafe evidence.

Lawyer Nick Freeman, known as Mr Loophole for helping high-profile clients including Jeremy Clarkson, Alex Ferguson and Wayne Rooney escape motoring convictions, said the problem could run much deeper.

Mr Freeman, who represented Tottenham star Defoe at Chelmsford Magistrates Court last week, said: "In my view, anyone who has been given a ticket, even if they accepted and paid up without challenge, could have a case for challenging the conviction.

"Because of what has happened, they could potentially claim they pleaded guilty on the basis that they were presented with false evidence."

The blunder could mean police are left footing a bill of millions for reimbursement and compensation.

John Mannerings, of Tavistock Road, Chelmsford, is one of the thousands who could be affected after he was flashed by a camera in Chelmsford.

He said: "I accepted it and paid the fine at the time – I knew I was going a little bit over the limit and had just forgotten about the camera."

The self-employed security guard was responding to an alarm call to a premises he was guarding at the time.

He said: "I will certainly be looking to see if I can get it overturned – the police should have checked they were following all the procedures properly.

"I will wait and see how this develops then see if I can get the points taken off my licence."

A spokesman for the Crown Prosecution Service in Essex said that hundreds of cases may have to be reviewed, and any cases where the defendant is waiting for adjudication or sentencing may now be put on hold.

However, a police spokesman said that after investigating the circumstances, they are confident that all convictions are safe.

A spokesman said: "Essex Police has examined the issues surrounding the Section 20 certificates and taken counsel's advice.

"Essex Police is content its procedures are lawful and appropriate and will robustly defend any challenge on this issue."

The employee at the centre of the storm, a courts officer working with the Safer Roads Bureau in Billericay, has now received the correct authorisation, so any fines issued since the mishap came to light last week are now valid.

Defoe has been told that sentencing on his conviction for speeding has been adjourned while a potential clerical error is investigated.

The Tottenham star was caught by cameras on the M11 near Chigwell travelling at around 81mph in his Land Rover on June 6 last year, and then again on April 16.

He denied the offences in court, but was found guilty of two charges of speeding and one of failing to identify the driver of a vehicle registered in his name.

He was due to be sentenced on Friday, June 26, but the hearing was adjourned when the Crown Prosecution Service contacted Mr Freeman to say there could be a problem with the conviction.

Mr Freeman said it is not possible to know if Defoe's challenge was what brought the blunder to light, but he did challenge the validity of the footballer's section 20 certificate in court.

[RichardCranium]

... Unfortunately for them they were standing too close to the start of the limit ...

I've seen the buggers parked up immediately (within 10 feet) of a 30 mph sign.

(One classic is a road from Swansea to Neath, up a long hill dual carriageway, then round a sharp right hand bend and down to two lanes with 30 mph sign and a lay-by where the camera van used to live. If you didn't know the road, it was a guaranteed nick.)

(Another is a steep downhill in Leeds between Bramley and the cricket ground. From 40 on the flat to 30 on a steep downhill and the buggers hide in the back of an unmarked estate car. You have to brake sharply on a bend.)

How close is too close?