help me, speeding ticket today.

M

micra-mad

Guest
Hi all, i have been sent a 'notice of intended prosecution - request for information to identify driver of vehicle'.

at 11.12 hours on 15/06/2005 motor vehicle LADA SAMARA L

registered H733 ETY was photographed at CHURCH BANK, WALLSEND.

i was following my mam in her renault 19 (she has also been sent a notice of intended prosecution), its saying she was doing 40 in a 30 zone, and i was doing 38. The road is a hill down and back up, there are NO warnings/signs about cameras in the area, the camera is a hidden one. i wouldnt mind giving my details, and i dont mind the £60 fine, but i am applying for jobs as a delivery driver, so i cant have the 3 points on my licence (99% of driving jobs want clean licences). is there anyway of getting around this notice.
(this was the same day as i sold the bloody lada)

many thanks in advance
 
as said bot all you can do :(, pay the fine get the points. least then you don't go to court lumbered with the bills for that to
 
hidden camera? speed cameras, mobile or otherwise should be visible from 200m I thought.

It's seriously not worth contesting tho, you will get lumbered with a more hefty fine, court fees and potentially more points if it went to court. If you were already a delivery driver and your job depended on it a court appearence could work in your favour.
 
Take it on the chin and learn from it, I got caught doing close to 60mph in a 30mph and feel lucky to have not been done for doing nearly double!
 
my dad got a ticket and was offered 3 points or a days training on road safty...
 
ah well, looks like your screwed then mate,

you could always appeal and say that it wasn't properly signed but if you loose then it ends up costing more.

go take some photos showing how it's not signed and send them off and you might be off the hook...

but it does suck,

the thing is that hidden speed cameras don't slow traffic they just make money it's the signs that make people slow down...
 
MA12:) said:
hidden camera? speed cameras, mobile or otherwise should be visible from 200m I thought.
Click to expand...

I also thought this, until I spoke to my OB uncle, who told me that nowadays, a cnut sorry copper can be hidden as much as he likes. :(
 
stokefan said:
MA12:) said:
hidden camera? speed cameras, mobile or otherwise should be visible from 200m I thought.
Click to expand...

I also thought this, until I spoke to my OB uncle, who told me that nowadays, a cnut sorry copper can be hidden as much as he likes. :(
Click to expand...

what does OB mean, is it old bugger :D
 
i got caught doing 40 in a thirty by an orifice-er in a car but he just let me go and told me not to do it again.
hard luck mate, but agree, its easier just to pay the fine than try t fight it, you always end up worse off.
sorry
 
i am going to ask for both photos, and calculate the mileage from them, then see from there.
 
Not signing the NIP worked a few times, now it doesn't as you are still legally obliged to tell the courts who was driving the car. They also don't have to show you the photographic evidence until you are in court. There have been very few cases where the speed camera has been proved to be wrong - the radar simply triggers the flash, they check the actual speed using the lines on the road. Just let it rest, and don't speed if your job relies on driving...
 
if you was already in a job that needed you to drive,then you could get a letter from work saying this,,and that werks in court
 
I have been told be a mate (a copper) that a NIP (notice of intended prosecution), mean you go to court. Its the FPN (fixed penalty notice) that is a £60 fine and 3 points on your licence. so it looks like i will be going to court :(
 
mobile cameras have to be visible from 100m away. and fixed camers must be totaly visable. so let the court or police aware of this and your charges will be dropped.
 
Not if he cannot prove it. And NO a NIP does definately not mean youll goto court, unless you are above the FPN limits.
 
the police need to prove that it was 100m visable he doesnt need to prove anything, he can just claim it wasnt 100m visible.
 
RIK said:
if you was already in a job that needed you to drive,then you could get a letter from work saying this,,and that werks in court
Click to expand...

Back In 2003, I was a courier for DHL, I had 9 points and I went thru a red light.

Had to go to court, DHL backed me up and my boss came to court with me, saying that If I was to get banned, My employment would be at risk and would be out of a job!!

The fu***rs still banned me for 6 months!!! Luckly I did not get the sack but moved into sales which was office based.

Shows that with the help of a major company as back up still did not get away with it.
Should of got the number for Michael Jacksons defence team!!!

I have now a Road Angel - just in case!!!!
 
Beachboy said:
the police need to prove that it was 100m visable he doesnt need to prove anything, he can just claim it wasnt 100m visible.
Click to expand...

It's just a guideline, not law. No one has had a prosecution dropped because of this, AFAIK.
 
speed cameras, mobile or otherwise should be visible from 200m I thought
Click to expand...

only if the council decides to. it's a bugger near me. you have oldham which do. tameside which don't and manchester city centre which does.

also did the gov close the loop hole to claim who was driving?

few months back my mum got a lovely picture of the rear of her car, but you can't see who was driving. however it was my dad who was driving and claimed they couldn't remember as it was a long joruney and they changed drivers etc etc - police wrote back saying they were dropping the charges.

worth a try if they haven't closed it!
 

Similar threads

Spike
  • Locked
speeding
Replies
25
Views
2K
wilsonian
wilsonian
Kamarley
Speeding!
2
Replies
53
Views
3K
Kamarley
Kamarley
Spike
result of my speeding
Replies
35
Views
2K
odienoo
O
Ceirwan
Nearly a speeding fine!
Replies
6
Views
878
jim_bling
jim_bling
Davey C
caught speeding!
Replies
19
Views
2K
Arnold
Arnold
Back
Top