Originally posted by DaveB
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Speed Cameras
Collapse
X
-
"A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices," George Orwell -
Originally posted by PaddyThe speed camera issue is a mockery. If it was a safely issue then the council would spend money on maintaining the 30 mph limit signs.
I received a fixed penalty notice for speeding though one of the new forward facing cameras. 35 mph in a 30mph dual carriageway. Being rather peeved, I looked up some helpful information on the Net. As a result I went over my route with a camera and photographed the signs. To my amassment some major signs were missing, other obscured some missing. I now drive over the route regularly to keep a record of those signs that are illegal and not maintained according to the road traffic act that clearly states the phrase 'erect and maintain' It is not enough for speed limit signs to be installed correctly in the first place if they then disappear, become damaged or illegible, or are even obscured from view for example by foliage that is not trimmed back. The Road Traffic Act makes it clear that drivers cannot be convicted of speeding if the signing requirements of subsections (1) and (2) are not met. In fact the 30 mph signs are so covered in foliage they can not be seen and they have been like that for months.
I have decided that although the easy option is to pay up, I will challenge this in Court. Further more, the new style camera is not calibrated on site making potentially inaccurate and also there is a case pending in the European Court regarding the compulsory signing of the evidence form.
I the down side is that I don’t rust solicitors and barristers, I have seen them make such a hash of things and they may not be as aggressive as me in cross examining the prosecution. What to you guys, gals and mixed gender think?
After documenting the evidence that the 30mph signs and marking were outside the Road Traffic Act and also by measuring the white marking at the speed camera that tuned out to be 30 centimetres too short I informed the Police that I will be challenging their evidence. Subsequently they have dropped the case.
Clean licence, no fine"A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices," George OrwellComment
-
Originally posted by PaddyAfter documenting the evidence that the 30mph signs and marking were outside the Road Traffic Act and also by measuring the white marking at the speed camera that tuned out to be 30 centimetres too short I informed the Police that I will be challenging their evidence. Subsequently they have dropped the case.
Clean licence, no fineJohnny Talibani MumbaiComment
-
The easiest way of escaping camera convictions is to say that you cannot remember who was driving at the time. I have got out of six of them to dateComment
-
Comment
-
Originally posted by ForumboreThe easiest way of escaping camera convictions is to say that you cannot remember who was driving at the time. I have got out of six of them to date
Did you have to go to court to do this?Comment
-
Originally posted by Money Money MoneyDid you have to go to court to do this?Comment
-
I thought that if no one puts there hands up to the speeding offence (everyone says they can't remember) the legal owner of the vehicle gets prosecuted.
Am I wrong?Comment
-
Originally posted by Money Money MoneyDid you have to go to court to do this?Comment
-
Originally posted by DimPrawnI thought that if no one puts there hands up to the speeding offence (everyone says they can't remember) the legal owner of the vehicle gets prosecuted.
Am I wrong?Will work inside IR35. Or for food.Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment