M4 speed cameras. Completely non boaty.

longjohnsilver · 23 Oct 2003

Sat reading the Times this morning, article on speed camera on M4 near Newport caught my eye. Apparently 2500 peeps done for speeding in 50 limit, usaul 3 points and 60 quid fines. Only it seems the camera was in the wrong place, axshully beyond the 50 limit so most peeps were speeding up to 70 quite legally!

So wot are the authorities going to do about it, refund the fines and rescind the 3 points for all those caught doing less than 70, seems reasonable. Well, no, unless those caught write in and ask for a review, then they'll do absolutely f all!! So far only 10 peeps have done this, suspect a few more will now, including me! Bastards!!

Seems the misplaced camera was operational from July last year till last month.

<hr width=100% size=1>

hlb · 23 Oct 2003

Just serves you right as far as I can see. If you wernt speeding then, you would have been another time. Your all the same. Think you could run the country better. Dont you. How else they going to pay for the war in Irac. Inflated pentions for Govment workers. Speed humps and multy coloured paint for roads. What about the milenium dome. Some one has to pay. Might as well be you. Trouble maker!!

<hr width=100% size=1> No one can force me to come here. I'm a volunteer!!.

Haydn

BrendanS · 23 Oct 2003

Road safety thingies on tv show that you can seriously hurt someone doing 30 mph, so it figures that anyone doing more than that speed has no concept of safety and shouldn't be driving anyway, and should IMHO be locked up in jail for a few years.

What if someone unexpectedly stepped out in front of you on the fast lane of the M4, even if you were doing 50. They'd be dead. Disgraceful driving!

I hope they ban him!

<hr width=100% size=1>

hlb · 23 Oct 2003

Ban him!! Dont know how he managed to get a licence in the first place. He should be made to take an advanced test. Use all the proper hand signals and have a man with a red flag, walking in front. That will slow him down.

<hr width=100% size=1> No one can force me to come here. I'm a volunteer!!.

Haydn

powerskipper · 23 Oct 2003

/forums/images/icons/smile.gifJust curious,/forums/images/icons/wink.gif how fast does your V6 go???? /forums/images/icons/laugh.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>Julie ,

BrendanS · 23 Oct 2003

ha! Bet he doesn't know proper hands out of the windows signals as per highway code..turning right, turning right etc.. The only hand signals they use these days are *expletive*

There's a thought we could teach the raggies the old fashioned highway code hand signals for turning, then we'd have an idea what they're going to do next!

<hr width=100% size=1>

BrendanS · 23 Oct 2003

Bloody hell, how many smilies can you get in one post

It goes faster than most speed cameras consider /forums/images/icons/wink.gif you've been done mate speed

<hr width=100% size=1>

jfm · 23 Oct 2003

LongJohn, I've told yer b4, never pay speed fines. Just follow the gambit. Wiv a camera, you return the NIP filled in correctly but unsigned. There is no law saying you must sign it. Then plead not guilty. The only evidence against you is the photo and the NIP. You say the NIP is inadmissable evidence. There IS a law saying it must be signed to be admissable. This formula cannot fail. It complies fully with the law

<hr width=100% size=1>

BrendanS · 23 Oct 2003

user exerience on uktrafficlaw on yahoogroups suggests this approach is not often successful ...?

<hr width=100% size=1>

jfm · 24 Oct 2003

I looked at that group ages ago, not recently. Most of the people there dont do stuff right.

I have actually used the ID gambit (mentioned in annuver fred) myself. I was alleged to have overtaken a jambutty cop car, got pulled over, Vascared at 73 in a 60, then I pleaded NG, went to court and acquitted using the ID gambit. It cost me 4 grand to find out this gambit from guru Nick Freeman himself, though I got my costs when acquitted. I am using the no-signature gambit right now for a guy who works along the corridor for me and so far so good, not finished yet. but I have read the law and it is clear that (a) there is no requirement to sign and (b) the signature-less NIP is inadmissable. Thus, if you do it right I do not see how it cannot work

I guess what I'm saying is I dont belive much i read on the uktraff law user group......

<hr width=100% size=1>

longjohnsilver · 24 Oct 2003

Oh well messed up again, still wondering where the poor rammed boat babe was wearing the string, presume it was some sort of necklace?

<hr width=100% size=1>

BrendanS · 24 Oct 2003

Well, if I get myself into trouble I'll read up and give it a go, and report back.

<hr width=100% size=1>

cngarrod · 24 Oct 2003

Interesting and i am probably tempting fate here... but if you are pulled over and nicked, can you refuse to sign the form? What powers do the law have at that point in time to make you sign it ot take you in?

Maybe am just being melodramatic?

Cheers,

Craig.

<hr width=100% size=1>Edited by cngarrod on 24/10/2003 08:03 (server time).

telmate · 24 Oct 2003

New electronic signs on the M4 were switched on earlier this week - Tuesday 21st October. The bad news is that they are SPECS speed cameras.

Specs is a computer-camera based system. As you go past the sign a digital camera reads your number plate. When you go past the next sign your number plate is read again. The computer 'knows' how far apart the signs are so it can work out your average speed between the two, or three or four.

The system is fully automatic and will issue a ticket without any form of intervention. It does this for every single vehicle that passes. You will not know you've been caught, as the cameras don't flash.

They work 24/7, 365 days a year, and theoretically, there's absolutely no limit to the number of tickets that the system can issue.

The whole section of the M$ between Theale (J12) and Membury services between J14 and J15 is wired both ways. The system is set to trigger a ticket at 78mph.

Radar detectors will be of no use as SPECS is entirely passive; there is no radar or laser beam to detect.

<hr width=100% size=1>I've only gone and bought it!

KevB · 24 Oct 2003

I think you'll find that a returned form unsigned can still be used as an admission of guilt. What you have to do is get someone else to fill it in for you "your agent", don't sign the form and send it back. plead not guilty and get your agent to write a letter confirming they completed the form. When you go to court take your agents letter with you to prove you didn't fill in the form and hey presto they have no evidence against you. By saying you were driving the car incriminates yourself which in law you don't have to do so they cant force you to say who was driving.

<hr width=100% size=1>

Observer · 24 Oct 2003

The unsigned form route should work but in a high profile case decided as recently as last Monday, Idris Francis was convicted of "failing to provide" by Aldershot Magistrates. They ruled that there is implied right of CC to require a signature (so much for literal interpretation of statute!). Very dodgy decision imo. The verdict will be appealed.

Connected issue is case of Mawdesley and Yorke decided in July in the High Court where Judge Owens ruled that an unsigned form could be admitted as a confession under PACE to support a speeding charge. He ruled that a caution is not required. However, there is argument that rights have to be explained anyway so latest thinking, if NIP received, is to write requiring explanation of rights befoire completing form - which of course will bring the whole system grinding to a halt.

Unsigned form is backup strategy but because of case above, looks likely that other magistrates will follow Aldershot lead although possibly get trial deferred pending outcome of appeal.

PACE argument and other good stuff here http://www.safespeed.org.uk

<hr width=100% size=1>

Observer · 24 Oct 2003

As far as I am aware, only one person (see my post to jfm) has been convicted of failure to provide because of unsigned form. The unsigned form is unquestionably NOT admissible under s.12 RTOA and CPS does not appear keen to use Judge Owen's route of using as a confession under PACE.

<hr width=100% size=1>

Trazie · 24 Oct 2003

Alternatively move somewhere like Portugal where speeding is considered a sport!!!

<hr width=100% size=1>

BrendanS · 24 Oct 2003

Yes, but what about laying yourself open to further litigation?:

"The Judge, quite deliberately, did not address the question as to whether someone who returns the form unsigned has complied with his obligation to identify the Driver under S 172, because that was not an issue in the case. That issue remains open for further litigation"

<hr width=100% size=1>

Observer · 24 Oct 2003

SPEED KILLS - AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW

For those who do not swallow the official "SPEED KILLS" propaganda, see here:
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.cis.org.au/policy/spr03/policy_spring_2003_speed_traps.pdf>http://www.cis.org.au/policy/spr03/policy_spring_2003_speed_traps.pdf</A>

<hr width=100% size=1>

M4 speed cameras. Completely non boaty.

Well-known member

RIP

Well-known member

RIP

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

New member

Active member

Active member

Active member

Member

Well-known member

Active member

Share this page