stubbsy05
Member
Registered: 23rd Oct 02
User status: Offline
|
I was caught by a Safety Camera Van the other morning doing over 60mph.
Anyways I have received a letter 9 days letter, got to now complete it saying it was me driving.
People on here saying about asking for a calibration certificate, in the Q & A leaflet with the letter it says that every camera calibrates itself each time it is switched on.
Doesn't look like I'm gonna get out of this one
|
Paula Corsa
Member
Registered: 2nd Feb 05
User status: Offline
|
They will only produce the calibration certificate in court. Under no circumstances will they give you a copy. Tried it myself and failed.
|
3CorsaMeal
Member
Registered: 11th Apr 02
User status: Offline
|
no point trying to get out of em if you know u were speeding, my mate tryed and got fcuked over
|
Paula Corsa
Member
Registered: 2nd Feb 05
User status: Offline
|
I was told by the camera safety unit, that you only have 21 days to reply to the NIP. This does not include any written communication or telephone calls. After 21 days, the case is automatically turned over to the CPS, who have a year from the date of the alleged offence to prosecute you. The CPS will always prosecute, and if taken to court you could face a fine of up to £1000.
|
Bart
Member
Registered: 19th Aug 02
Location: Midsomer Norton, Bristol Avon
User status: Offline
|
fill it all out, but dont sign it.
I dont think they can prosecute you if you "forget to sign it".
They might re-send it, they mite forget about it. ive heard of cases where people have sent it back unsigned and got away with it
|
Rob H
Member
Registered: 28th Oct 00
Location: Staffordshire Drives: Astra SRi
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bart
fill it all out, but dont sign it.
I dont think they can prosecute you if you "forget to sign it".
They might re-send it, they mite forget about it. ive heard of cases where people have sent it back unsigned and got away with it
That loopholes been signed, and agin it just means you go to court and get bummed  .
|
bradfincham
Member
Registered: 20th Sep 02
Location: East Of England Drives: Clio 172
User status: Offline
|
face upto it,
try and pull a fast one on them and they will make your penalty worse
|
CCA
Member
Registered: 6th Dec 04
Location: Somewhere Drives: Not a bloody Vauxhall!
User status: Offline
|
You no you were speeding so might as well accept it
If you mess around they'll give you a worse punishment but if you admit to your fault makes it better for you (in a way)
|
mwg
Member
Registered: 19th Feb 04
Location: South Lakes
User status: Offline
|
I am expecting the same thing in the next few days. was doing about 70 in a 60 saw the camera and slammed my brakes on but it probably got me, road ahead was clear otherwise I wouldnt have been doing that speed! Been told various ways to get off with it but involves getting a solicitor on board and would end up costing more than the fine  like writing a letter stating all the details they require but putting at the bottom that you do not consent to this information being used as evidence in court as you have not been cautioned. Dunno if it works!
|
mwg
Member
Registered: 19th Feb 04
Location: South Lakes
User status: Offline
|
Advice I was given:
[quote="HondaPower"]I passed the same place with a van sat there about a year ago, but I was doing 85!. Nothing happened, but I have no idea why. Just though I'd let you know that all is not lost.
There is no point complaining that signs were not properly set up or that the van was hiding or not parked where it should have been. These are guidelines that the operators must follow in order to use part of the fines to fund their operations. Once the camera has caught you it is almost irrelevant how it and its sign posts were positioned.
The best way to avoid prosecution from a camera is to know your rights and have a bit of bottle to tough it out.
This is how the law works:
1) You get caught by a camera.
2) Registered keeper gets a Notice of Intent To Prosecute (NIP). This must be sent within 14 days and 1st class or it can be ignored. The law states that the Registered Keeper must name the driver and sign the form.
3) Lets say the registered keeper was the driver so he names himself and sends it back.
4) As soon as the ‘information’ he has provided reaches the scamera operators, it suddenly transforms itself into a signed witness statement!!!!!!!!!!
5) However, a witness statement can only be used in court if the person who signed it was cautioned under the Police And Criminal Evidence Act (PACE, England and Wales only).
6) The first part of a caution is “You have the right to remain silent”.
7) If they had told you that in (2), you wouldn’t have filled in the bloody form!!!!.
As you can see, the law is an ass as it clearly contradicts itself. The way to use it to your advantage is this:
(NOTE: PACE does not apply in Scotland, so this cannot be used north of the border.)
1) You get caught by a camera.
2) If you are not the registered keeper you fill out the NIP as required, naming the driver. The driver will then receive a NIP.
3) If you are the registered keeper, or the driver named by the registered keeper who receives the second NIP do the following:
4) Write on the NIP “Please see the attached letter”, staple it to the following statement written on a separate piece of paper and return them both via Special Delivery. You will have to fill in the gaps with your own details.
[quote="www.pepipoo.com"]
WITNESS STATEMENT
(C.J. Act 1967, s9 MC Act 1980, ss. 5A (3a) and 5B. M.C. Rules 1981, r70)
Name:........................... Occupation:................
D.o.B:........................... Over 18
_____________________________________________________________________
This statement consisting of 1 page and attached NIP/ S 172 Notice is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and I make it knowing that if it is tendered in evidence I shall be liable to prosecution if I have wilfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.
Dated....................... Signed................................
_____________________________________________________________________
Their Ref: NIP reference number
Vehicle registration number
Dear Chief Constable,
Further to the above Notice of Intended Prosecution: I confirm that the following individual was driving the above vehicle at the time of the alleged motoring offence:
ALL OF THE DETAILS REQUIRED ON THE NIP – name, address, date of birth, driver number etc. etc.
I have not received the caution required by paragraph 10.1 of PACE Code C [Mawdesley -v- the Chief Constable of Cheshire [2004] 1 All E.R. 58]. Therefore, it is my understanding that, and this statement and the information in it is submitted subject to the condition that, it may not and will not "be given in evidence to a court in a prosecution".
Yours sincerely,
Signature of driver
Name of Driver
5) You have provided all the information required by the law, but in a manner that cannot be used to prosecute you. One of several things might happen:
a. Nothing, after 6 months and 28 days you have got off scott free!
b. An offer of a fixed penalty arrives. Ignore it and you will either get (a) or (e).
c. ‘Bluff and bluster’ letters. The scammers write back to you with a new blank nip / threatening letters / etc. These should be ignored no matter how tempting it is to torment them. This will probably be followed by either (a), (d) or (e).
d. A copper comes to visit (rare). You say nothing (you have the right to remain silent after all!). This will be followed by (a) or (e).
e. A summons arrives, either for speeding or failing to provide the required information. You know they can prove neither (you provided the required information in a letter, and they cant prove in court that you were speeding as they have no evidence they can use to prove you were driving). Plead not guilty either by post or by going to court. Either (a) or (f) will happen.
f. They try to prosecute (rare). You have pleaded not guilty, so demand disclosure of the evidence (the camera video). It is likely that they won’t provide it, want to charge money for it, will only let you witness it at their premises, will only provide the still photos or will only give you a clip of video. In law, as you have pleaded not guilty you have the right to be given the whole video for free, so when you get to court you claim you have not been allowed to prepare an adequate defence without the video and ask for the case to be dismissed. Hopefuly they will throw the case out there and then. If not, or if they do provide the video you know that you have provided the required information in a letter you sent, and they cant prove in court that you were speeding as they have no evidence they can use to prove you were driving. Hence, you get off scott free (don’t forget to ask how to claim costs).
If you read this thread:
http://www.cruisewestcumbria.co.uk/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1011
you will see that the Cumbria Safety Cameras guy who comes on this forum has no defence for the PACE argument!
I would also advise getting a good lawyer who specialises in traffic cases if you need to go to court. Also, before attempting any of this I advise reading almost every post on the forum at http://pepipoo.com. Most of what is written above is a shortened version of what the guys on the pepipoo forum have found out. These guys have seen it all, and there is loads of advice and experience on this forum that you will find useful.
Hope this helps.
|
vibrio
Banned
Registered: 28th Feb 01
Location: POAH
User status: Offline
|
why not in scotland though. bound by the same rule are we not 
|
mwg
Member
Registered: 19th Feb 04
Location: South Lakes
User status: Offline
|
Dont know why not in Scotland.
Do you think using that PACE argument would work?
|
timmy101
Member
Registered: 3rd Feb 05
Location: halesowen
User status: Offline
|
i have a friend whos dad is a police man and after talking to him he told me to only fill in the top half of the form and send a seperate letter saying that on that day another person was driving the car and you dont know who was at the time when the camera got you.
after this i heard no more but the police are ment to send you a copy of the photo and you reply saying that you dont know who was driving.
if they cant prove who was driving they cant fine anybody
i was doin 50 in a 30 in an accident black spot and that was the responce i got.
|
mwg
Member
Registered: 19th Feb 04
Location: South Lakes
User status: Offline
|
but it was a camera van that got me and if they produce a photo it will clearly show me driving. Also no one else is insured on my car apart from me!
|
Al3X
Member
Registered: 31st Oct 03
Location: Bournemouth
User status: Offline
|
Do the mobile ones have to put a sign up then? I was caught yesterday and there was no sign anywhere
|
Greg_M
Member
Registered: 2nd Sep 03
Location: Grantham, Lincolnshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by timmy101
if they cant prove who was driving they cant fine anybody
they have the right to fine the regestered keeper this loophole, as exposed by the Hamiltons has now been closed also
|
Greg_M
Member
Registered: 2nd Sep 03
Location: Grantham, Lincolnshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Al3X
Do the mobile ones have to put a sign up then? I was caught yesterday and there was no sign anywhere
no they simply have to publish there locations 4 weeks before they are there i believe, but dont take that as gospel
|
BeArDy
Member
Registered: 7th Aug 00
Location: Manchester
User status: Offline
|
- i went threw a red light
- got a fine there filled it out saying i was driving BUT did not sign it
- sent it back, they then sent me a photocopy of what i had sent them asking me to sign it, saying i must sign
- i put that in the bin
- heard nothing since
this was about 2 years ago and since then i have been stoped by the police and PNC'ed and nothing on my record....
what u got to loose?
|
