Speeding fine

[DonDonson]

Speeding fine
Has anyone any ideas what to do??
I've got a speeding fine doing 37 in a 30. 
I'm not disputing it was me however, where you used to get photographic evidence to back up the camera, you don't any more!! Just a letter saying you were caught. And the safer roads bureau say they dont have to give photographic evidence any more, So what happens if someone uses my reg number and decides to speed through loads of cameras? Do I just agree and hold my hands up and pay the fine as well as penalty points, as they told me that if I want to dispute it then I will have to go to court which will incur court fees And the loss off a days work.
If you see photographic evidance and can easily recognise your van then you have no argument!!
It's a no win situation!! Why can't they still provide photographic evidence ??

 

[joe-90]

Simple really. If the photo evidence was poor then people would challenge it and get off even though they knew that it was them. If you don't get to see the evidence and go to court and the evidence is produced and shows your ugly mug and you are telling lies - then you are in trouble.

 

[kirkgas]

Speeding fine
Has anyone any ideas what to do??
I've got a speeding fine doing 37 in a 30. 
I'm not disputing it was me however, where you used to get photographic evidence to back up the camera, you don't any more!! Just a letter saying you were caught. And the safer roads bureau say they dont have to give photographic evidence any more, So what happens if someone uses my reg number and decides to speed through loads of cameras? Do I just agree and hold my hands up and pay the fine as well as penalty points, as they told me that if I want to dispute it then I will have to go to court which will incur court fees And the loss off a days work.
If you see photographic evidance and can easily recognise your van then you have no argument!!
It's a no win situation!! Why can't they still provide photographic evidence ??

if you know you were speeding why do you need evidence?
if you are honestly not sure it was you then as the owner you need to supply the name of the driver, if you are sure it wasnt your vehicle then refuse the fixed penalty and demand your day in court to clear you name

 

[seco services]

Why can't they still provide photographic evidence ??

You can request the photo.

The photograph does not need to identify the driver, merely the vehicle. Consequently, on many occasions, the photograph will not actually show the driver at all.

 

[DonDonson]

I have spoke to the safer roads bureau and they said that they no longer have to provide photographic evidence, unless you take it to court where you will have to pay the court fees, my point is that even though the camera is down the road from me and I do pass it on a daily basis but do not remember getting flashed, so what's to say that someone with a grudge could in theory put your reg on there same vehicle and go through a camera near to you?? I know this may seem far fetched but why should I just except? There options are take three points and a £60 fine, do a speed awareness course costing approx £90 and a day off so loss of money, or go to court to see evidence, just seems bizarre as having been caught years ago and seeing the pic of my van I paid without question. This is more a matter of principal, when I called the bereau earlier the lady I spoke to asked for my ref number and she looked at the pic on her computer, why can't they just send the pic.

 

[AronSearle]

EDIT:

why can't they just send the pic.

I see.

Why don't you ask them, "We don't have to" isn't an answer why they won't/cant and you should argue with them. Point out to them that by not supplying the picture they just waste everyone's time if you decide to fight it.

I could be wrong, but I very much doubt they won't show it you if you push for it.

 

[chapeau]

They won't show it unless forced to and they will show the pictures when you are just about to attend court. It's not how it works when it comes to speeding and other trivial motoring offences.

 

[Inky Pete]

Any evidence which the prosecution intends to introduce in a court case MUST be shared with the defence in advance. So, if you don't think it was you then you simply decline the fixed penalty and the discounted £60 fine and ask them to forward to you all the evidence they have so that you can prepare your case to defend yourself. This includes the calibration records for the speed camera and the names and training records of any officers operating speed gun type speed traps.

If the photo is of you when it arrives, and if all of the other evdience is in order - including the strict time limits the police must abide by - then you just plead guilty by letter before the court date and you'll get a pretty much the same penalty.

 

[noseall]

Does witholding the photo fall under disclosure law?

 

[Inky Pete]

If the prosecution intend to introduce it in court then yes, it must be disclosed to the defence in advance of the case.

And if it's a fixed and un-manned speed camera then I can't see that they'll have ANY other evidence to present.

 

[joinerjohn]

When I worked for the council, one of my workmates was flashed by a speed camera (the ones that face the traffic) A few weeks later he's called into the office and the gaffer told him he'd have to pay the fine. "I wasn't driving the van that day." he pleads. Our gaffer reached into his desk drawer and pulls the photo evidence out, asking him "Who the f*** is this then?"
Apparently with fleet vehicles they have to send the photographic evidence so the driver is identified.

 

[chapeau]

Speeding tickets are different.

First, he hasn't got a ticket, he got a Notice of Intended Prosecution. This includes a Section 172 part where the registered keeper has to grass on the driver as the police cannot be arsed to do their job and find this out themselves.

So the OP first has to dob himself in or risk getting into serious trouble ala Chris Huhne and his (ex) mrs.

Asking for the picture just pees them off as you are expected to send in your licence with sixty quid. All this "I've got rights and go read the Magna Carta if you don't believe me" doesn't apply to trivial motoring offences. You are guilty and they are not interested in you trying to prove your innocence, they have their jobs to protect and they want your sixty quid.

Don't expect the magistrates to be interested, they see guilty people all the time and they think everybody who stands up in front of them did it. Wasting your time going there, it will just pee them off and you are only risking a condescending lecture and a bigger fine to pay for somebody elses job.

You need to be a paedophile to have rights like "innocent until proven guilty" or the right to not self incriminate, or showing you the evidence in advance (if they are sure it will not get you off) They took those rights away from you as soon as you get in your car and turn your ignition key when you want to use your car to pop down the shops for a chinese takeaway.

 

[Whitespirit66]

Funniest thing I saw a while back was the photo of a speeding driver that the speed camera had taken.

Not only was the driver's ugly mug clear as day............................but he was on his mobile.

 

[EFCLee1]

Shame you got caught, slap ya on the face for not being on the ball in the first place so no sympathy from me, I speed 24/7 and know where all the cameras are in my area plus I can see far enough ahead to spot any mobile unit, round a shady corner I would not be so lucky


60 quid is a lot of money so why not make a hoax call to the police something big enough to get an all units alert in retaliation, ying yang kind of thing cost them some money instead


maybe they would think twice about these victimless crimes if this is what happened as a result!!

 

[misterdubya]

So OP, you cant read speed limits? You've been caught. Pay your bloody fine and dont do it again.