Speed Camera Question Again - Sorry! NB

[sonarbell]

Ok Here goes, Mate just been done for failing to Name the driver at the time, He said it could have been him or his girlfriend. Lincoln Court said we dont care. You have failed to name the driver at the time so as you are the owner of the car you are nicked. 3 points and a £150 fine. Forward facing camera with no chance of IDing the driver.
I have just been done on my motorbike. Forward facing camera with me in my full face crash hat. no number plate showing. (Seen the photos) Man in van(Civilian) wrote down my number as I went past. This is acceptable in court as evidence...
Had a chat with mate who has 24 years in traffic and said how about naming Italian mate. He said Italian mate will get fined and he may get points on his licence or most definitely would if he wanted British licence within 3 years of getting fine. They dont give up so easily these days like they did in the old days..
Just some painful advice that is up to date.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[halcyon]

Why should a civilian in a van write down your number, and who did he give to????

Brian

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://link>www.kddpowercentre.com</A>

 

[Its_Only_Money]

Re: Plod Cars - its our money

Come on, plod have had RR's for longer than gatso's have been around. I understand that one constabulary issued an ITT (invite to tender), but included the requirement that the vehicles for m-way traffic use must be able to tow a 44-tonner a short distance (ie onto the hard shoulder), Toyota et al refused to take part, LR said no problem....

When you consider the weight of kit these guys carry around then the RR or similar starts to make sense, do you fancy doing the speeds they do with that weight onboard??? I wouldn't, certainly in a M*nde* estate, and as for trying to chase anything.....

Not sure that the new RR has "dodgy reliability" though in police maintenance hands most eras of RR have been quite reliable, unless you have figures of course? I follow a forum on LR and its surprising how close the manufacturers are in terms of after-market warranty company ratings for costs - which should be pretty impartial. Perception is everything.....of course!

<hr width=100% size=1>Rgds

Simon
Its Only Money
Fairline Sprint
Solent-based

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Re: Plod Cars - its our money

My service engineers carry loads of heavy stuff about and I give them Transits not Range Rovers and Range Rovers are not suitable as chase vehicles, they're too slow and handle poorly - I doubt if a V8 RR could catch a Golf 1.9 diesel. As for towing 44tonners off the carriageway, what the hell are tow trucks for?
I would make a comparison to other countries. You certainly dont see French, Italian or Spanish Plod running around in pricey German motors or 12mpg 4x4's, they're all driving modest locally made vehicles. As far as I'm concerned, it really sticks in my craw that UK Plod can say that they dont have the resources to catch thieves or muggers but they seem to find the cash to buy a fleet of £60k Range Rovers. Somebody needs to look at priorities here. Its also about perception - what kind of message does this send out to the Public at a time when the Police are supposed to be making an effort to get closer to the community they are supposed to be serving. It certainly does'nt endear them to me and especially so when I see my rates bill ballooning thanks to their bloody pension costs

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[halcyon]

Re: Plod Cars - its our money

The plod do seem to retire early, the rest of the country are being told they will be lucky to retire at 65.


Brian

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://link>www.kddpowercentre.com</A>

 

[Bergman]

Re: Plod Cars - its our money

Don't mind the cars so much - apparently they got a very good price from Volvo, or so I'm told.

The thing that really bugs me is the helicopter -£2k/hour to run - and that price was a few years ago.

And all they do is chase the occasional car thief while air ambulance has to be funded from subscriptions with little or no public money - and they save lives!

Apart from that a bobbycopter nearly took down my aerials a few weeks ago only missed the mast by a few feet - and those masts are expensive!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[petem]

Re: Plod Cars - its our money

Range Rovers, rubbish, this is what the eyetie rozzers have....

Rumour has it the italian coastguard have ordered a fleet of Leopard's to patrol the coast.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.FairlineOwnersClub.com>Fairline Owners Club</A>

 

[tcm]

Re: Plod Cars - its our money

absolutely. Either it wd be utterly feasible for the massive public services to use General Issue motor of the transit/escort variety, or at least most transport wd be fine with a nice reliable Skoda Fab or Pug 205 van thing for carrying dogs. What the hell is the lates t thing with metallic paint plod cars? France simply separates the carcrash thing from actual policing - no flashing argh light - just gettem off the road with a van/truck asap, all payable with a nice credit card.

Fact is of course, if you talk to (or employ) a real ex-plod, they are utterly car-mad and retirement mad. The plods in Kent used to take out any new motor along the A2, they say, to see what'll it do. The same ex-plod who married a plodette campaigned hard (and won) for his wife to retire on 80% salary because she tripped over her handbag, and the family now resides in South Africa.

Come the revolution, brothers, all state pensions will be paid in cash to the relavent person at your local post office. Can't turn up cos you're in Spain? - you can't have it.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[hlb]

Re: Plod Cars - its our money

I think I could solve the police expence issue at a stroke



Harry has volunteered (For a trial period only).





To replace the range Rover as he's much more reliable






and 40 ton trucks would be a sinch...





Some here may have not met Harry.










Lots have.






He's even stared in the forum panto!!

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

Haydn

 

[Planty]

Have already been through this exact scenario on the A34 near Newbury, but question was me or lady wife driving. 1st reply to summons said we didn't know who was driving, please send photo. 2nd letter said photo no help, definitely agreed car was there and obviously speeding. 3rd letter said whilst we were willing to accept breaking law by not telling who, equally not prepared to break any other law naming somebody who may or may not have committed an offence.

Letter cancelling summons and warning us to keep records of who driving vehicle received by return! RESULT!!!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Thanks, Planty and I'm pleased you won but what law/precedent did you cite for NOT naming either you or your wife as the driver because, as I understand it, Section 172 requires you to name the driver

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[tcm]

the northen lawyer chap says best thing is to keep the car as a compnay car, and then if there's a genuine or genuinish confusion as to who was driving at lest the fine is paid - but the points can't land on any one persons liocence...

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jfm]

Um I'm pretty sure he's worng on that, points go on co secy licence. Of course, in the UK you can (and in this context should) have a corporate company secretary, as the points cant go on the secy of the secy. A foreign incorp company is also good but they cost a few bob in annual maintencae charges

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Planty]

Played that one a bit cagey, as was advised that to quote law could be a) expensive & b) open to interpretation, thus to quote my letter to the Plod " whilst we are aware that to not name the driver may well fall foul of this particular law, to name somone who may well not be the correct person would fall equally foul of some other law, we are not adequately equipped to know which one but feel sure there may be many?"

Sorry its not terribly specific, but then perhaps thats the answer, because in truth their evidence re driver identity is not particularly specific either, is it?

A boaty mate of mine has done this too since and received same result. In fact, twice, second time he had to go to court though, that certainly delayed things and didn't please the beak at all. "CPP wasting court time etc." Hope this helps, P

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jfm]

I spect mike it will be perjury.

If you refuse or cant name the driver it's quite clear the only offence they can get you for is sec 172. That has a reasonable override, in Human Rights law I think

Also the police guy got off becos they didn't know who was driving the patrol car

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Yeah but there's one rule for Pigs getting caught on their own cameras and quite another for us. Methinks, I'll try the Planty route first and then, if they still threaten section 172, finger the Italian

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Thanks, will try this

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[lawrieb]

Dont forget to tell us how you get on..... There are many interested people that is for sure.

Good luck....

A question, in France dont they nick you if you get from one toll to another too quickly.... Now that is a cheap way to prosecute, no need for flashy RR, BMW, or Mercs, just ugly low paid french men or women in toll booths....

Motorcycyle cops down here in Puerto Banus where I live ride Harleys, now that's cool

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Observer]

Mike,

Definitely go for the "ss.4 defence" (aka "Hamilton Defence")

s.172 RTA 1988
(4) A person shall not be guilty of an offence by virtue of paragraph (a) of subsection (2) above if he shows that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was.

Also recommend posting your case on <A target="_blank" HREF=http://aflcharters.co.uk>Dream Dancer

 

[Jim44]

Re: Plod Cars - its our money

Have you ever driven the 4.4 V8 R R?

<hr width=100% size=1>