Caught speeding ?

[Krobar]

if its a works van the police have to prove who was driving at that time.


Ive had 5 speeding convictions first one 1977, last one 2005 in about 1,500,000 miles of motoring, all in works vehicles, never in one of my own.
None of the fleet managers during that time have ever agreed to tell the police that they couldn't identify the driver of the vehicle

I overheard a taxi firm having a discussion about this a few years back. They got a £1200 fine for being unable to identify the driver of the taxi but no points issued to anyone.

 

[Baldylocks]

I'm currently waiting and counting down the days
doing about 35 in a 30 limit, one way road, no houses, just totally empty linking 2 parts of a village. 2 motorcycle cops had set up a tripod and when i rounded the corner one of them was looking down a sight which was pointing straight at me . He seemed to say something to his colleague but didn't attempt to stop me.

question - would this equipment take a photograph to be followed by the dreaded noip in the post or would they have flagged me down there and then

This sounds like it was a laser device and mounted as such would not have camera equipment attached, so had you exceeded whatever threshold the officers were working to then you would have been stopped there and then and dealt with accordingly. ACPO guidelines are that you would only be prosecuted at 36 or above, so an indicated 35 would be very unlikely to cause you to be stopped.

Hope that helps

 

[N7OGP]

Are you sure it was a camera van and not ANPR van. if it was a camera van was the cameras pointing on your side of the road.

 

[Grahamcol]

Are you sure it was a camera van and not ANPR van. if it was a camera van was the cameras pointing on your side of the road.

In my case it was definately a camera van with "speed enforcement" written onto it and yes, I think the camera was pointing on my side of the road.

 

[N7OGP]

On saturday i passed a camera van that was on the grass with the camera facing on coming traffic, i said to my sister look at that there is a camera van and no waring signs. on the way back i came back the same road, but further down the road on the other side the warning signs facing the traffic going the other way, i think he was catching the traffic going from him and not towards him. (hope this makes sence)

 

[Grahamcol]

On saturday i passed a camera van that was on the grass with the camera facing on coming traffic, i said to my sister look at that there is a camera van and no waring signs. on the way back i came back the same road, but further down the road on the other side the warning signs facing the traffic going the other way, i think he was catching the traffic going from him and not towards him. (hope this makes sence)

Interesting that. Actually I also came back along the same route shortly afterwards (very slowly this time) and there wasn't a warning sign present. So it seems there wasn't any warning for traffic in either direction.

 

[st13phil]

I don't think there was a warning sign so maybe they're operating unlawfully

The presence or absence of any camera warning signs is no bar to the detection of or prosecution for an offence of exceeding the speed limit.

if its a works van the police have to prove who was driving at that time.

The Police do not have to prove who was driving at the time. The Registered Keeper (RK) of the vehicle is compelled by law to name the driver, and if they fail to do so (except wthin the bounds of certain limited defences) then they will almost certainly be found guilty of an offence themself - see stevieb15's post, above.

If you were travelling at the speed you think you were then you may have been under the prosecution threshold in which case the RK will hear nothing. The RK of the vehicle must receive a Notice of Intention to Prosecute / request to identify the driver within 14 days of the alleged offence unless the Police have difficulty tracing the RK's details, so you'll have to sweat on it for a fortnight at least

 

[Bellow]

You guys are mistaken I think regarding warning signs. On the entire length of the A96 where there are 2 permanent cameras at one end only (AFAIR) and mobile cameras are also used, there are a handful of signs over its 100 miles, and none anywhere close to the cameras.
That there is a sign anywhere on the road is all that can be expected.

 

[Aoraki]

I belive all that is needed is a sign or signs in the "AREA", who decides on what is the area though is another matter. Here in Mansfield, we seem to have the camera signs on all major roads entering the town and then a couple here and there with minimal reference to the four permanent cameras in town.

 

[st4]

You guys are mistaken I think regarding warning signs. On the entire length of the A96 where there are 2 permanent cameras at one end only (AFAIR) and mobile cameras are also used, there are a handful of signs over its 100 miles, and none anywhere close to the cameras.
That there is a sign anywhere on the road is all that can be expected.

The A96 has a quite high accident rate does it not? suprised there are not more. There is one pointless gatso on the section into Aberdeen on the dual carriage way that can be pointed both ways, presumably to catch boy racers so maybe not a bad idea

 

[N7OGP]

Speed Cameras

 

[India]

I'm currently waiting and counting down the days
doing about 35 in a 30 limit, one way road, no houses, just totally empty linking 2 parts of a village. 2 motorcycle cops had set up a tripod and when i rounded the corner one of them was looking down a sight which was pointing straight at me . He seemed to say something to his colleague but didn't attempt to stop me.

question - would this equipment take a photograph to be followed by the dreaded noip in the post or would they have flagged me down there and then

It's unlikely you'll be done. If there are Police Officers present, they're likely to stop you there and then. If it's a civilian operative in a van, you'll get the ticket within 14 days.

 

[India]

As has already been pointed out, it's up to the RK to identify the driver. Any responsible company director or fleet manager would ensure accurate records are kept.

Bottom line though, is don't speed. It does get tiresome hearing people complain about getting stung when they are, in 99.9% of cases, intentionally speeding. It's rarely something that's done by accident. If you don't know what speed you're travelling at, or what the speed limit is, you're driving without due care, which is worse. I know for a fact, if my daughter were to be hit by a car, I'd rather it was travelling at 30 than 35. a 2mph increase in speed will disproportionately increase stopping distance, thereby increasing the chance of causing injury.

 

[BTB 500]

Bottom line though, is don't speed. It does get tiresome hearing people complain about getting stung when they are, in 99.9% of cases, intentionally speeding. It's rarely something that's done by accident. If you don't know what speed you're travelling at, or what the speed limit is, you're driving without due care, which is worse. I know for a fact, if my daughter were to be hit by a car, I'd rather it was travelling at 30 than 35. a 2mph increase in speed will disproportionately increase stopping distance, thereby increasing the chance of causing injury.

In urban areas (30 limit) I think most people would completely agree.

But at the other end of the scale, I suspect doing 75 or 80 on a motorway makes virtually no difference from a safety point of view. If you exclude limited vehicles (HGVs etc) that's probably the average traffic speed anyway. And it's legal in most other European countries.

 

[India]

In urban areas (30 limit) I think most people would completely agree.

But at the other end of the scale, I suspect doing 75 or 80 on a motorway makes virtually no difference from a safety point of view. If you exclude limited vehicles (HGVs etc) that's probably the average traffic speed anyway. And it's legal in most other European countries.

You're right. Absolutely. Motorways account for only 6% of all collisions, and a smaller percentage yet, of all fatalities. By far the greater proportion of road deaths are pedestrians. Reducing speed would almost erradicate those fatalities overnight. Don't get me wrong, I'm not preaching. My point was simply that all road users are well aware of the consequences, so really have no cause for complaint when they get caught. Just take it on the chin. Good drivers don't get caught because they see the cameras/police behind them.

I also ride a motorcycle, so I speed regularly, only on de-restricted roads.

 

[India]

If you do get done, the police need to calibrate their speed cameras every time they use them, it might be worth checking to see if they have the validation/calibration certificate for that date, my mate got away with one using this but he questioned the officer at the scene rather than waiting for a ticket to come through the post.

The equipment doesn't have to be calibrated daily. The certificate is issued periodically. The officer would have to say that he is trained in it's use and that it was tested at the commencement of the tour of duty. This is often a case of pointing the laser at a fixed point to confirm the distance is measured accurately.

 

[corned]

Ah - I'd forgotten about that. Good point. In that case I hope my, err, garage door opener was working...

 

[Baldylocks]

The problem with speeding is that most people that get caught doing it moan, whinge and whine about it and try anyway they can think of to get off with it. They criticise the Police, ask the inevitable "haven't you got anything better to do" or shouldn't you be out catching rapists" or the other favourite "when my mate got burgled it took you 2 hours to get there".

Until a member of their family is killed by a driver doing 40 in a 30 limit. Please think about it.